Terminal Evaluation of Capacity-building for the strategic planning and management of natural resources in Belize

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2017-2021, Belize
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
05/2019
Completion Date:
08/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
No
Evaluation Budget(US $):
14,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 4917_CCCD_Belize_UNDP GEF TE ToR 19 Feb 2019 .pdf tor English 393.44 KB Posted 44
Download document 4917 Belize CCCD TE final signed.pdf report English 2916.47 KB Posted 5
Title Terminal Evaluation of Capacity-building for the strategic planning and management of natural resources in Belize
Atlas Project Number: 80643
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2021, Belize
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 08/2019
Planned End Date: 05/2019
Management Response: No
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.4.1 Solutions scaled up for sustainable management of natural resources, including sustainable commodities and green and inclusive value chains
Evaluation Budget(US $): 14,000
Source of Funding: Project
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 15,236
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Jean-Joseph Bellamy Mr.
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Capacity-building for the strategic planning and management of natural resources in Belize
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: MSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 00090265
PIMS Number: 4917
Key Stakeholders: Miniistry of Fisheries, Forestry and Sustainable Development, Ministry of Natural Resources and Agriculture, Ministry of Public Service, MInistry of Economic Development
Countries: BELIZE
Lessons
1.

A good design leads to a good implementation, which in turn leads to good project results. There is more
chance for a project well designed to be a success. Every steps of the way count in the success of a project;
it is a lot easier to succeed when all these steps are relevant and clear to be implemented.


2.

A project that is a response to clear national needs and priorities is often highly relevant for beneficiaries and its chance of being implemented effectively are maximized.


3.

Adaptive management is a key management instrument for this type of project, providing the necessaryflexibility to review and reinvent the approach to implement the project as needed to secure project deliverables while maintaining adherence to the overall project design.


4.

Strong leadership from the national executing agency and a project board with all similar projects facilitate collaboration and cooperation among projects and government entities as well as engaging stakeholders resulting in more effective interventions.


5.

Despite not being a GEF requirement for such small size project, the completion of PIRs using the GEF template is a good management practice. It is a tool to measure – and record - the progress made by the project. Over time, it becomes the “memory” of the project, particularly when there are project staff turnover, and it provides good accountability for what the project has achieved.


6.

The application of the UNDP NIM modality is an effective management tool to develop national ownership of projects funded by international donors.


7.

In order to ensure mainstreaming of gender considerations in a project, it is critical that gender-based expected results be part of the project strategy to become part of the implementation of activities as well as part of reporting project progress.


8.

CSOs are often engaged in managing/monitoring natural resources, particularly protected areas and biodiversity protection and conservation. They play a key role in the collection of environmental data. They should be key stakeholders in any initiative strengthening the collection of environmental data.


9.

Reforming the environmental monitoring function in a country is complex and it is not a linear process. It is often mixed with political agendas and a certain resistance to change in existing institutions. A 3-year project timeframe is too short; it does not provide any time contingency for operational and political risks linked to elections, change of government, but also no time to consolidate project achievements before the end of the project.


Findings

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org