- Evaluation Plan:
- 2019-2023, Philippines
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 09/2019
- Completion Date:
- 08/2019
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 45,000
Terminal Evaluation of the Indigenous Communities Conservation Areas Project
Share
Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
tor | English | 1390.93 KB | Posted | 1038 |
![]() |
report | English | 803.62 KB | Posted | 1307 |
Title | Terminal Evaluation of the Indigenous Communities Conservation Areas Project | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Atlas Project Number: | 00090663 | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Plan: | 2019-2023, Philippines | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||
Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
Completion Date: | 08/2019 | ||||||||||||||
Planned End Date: | 09/2019 | ||||||||||||||
Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||||
SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||
SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||
Evaluation Budget(US $): | 45,000 | ||||||||||||||
Source of Funding: | Project funds | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 45,000 | ||||||||||||||
Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
Key Stakeholders: | Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (DENR – PAWB), National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Koalisyong ng Katutubong Samahan ng Pilipinas (KASAPI), Philippine Association for Intercultural Development (PAFID) | ||||||||||||||
Countries: | PHILIPPINES |
Lessons | |
---|---|
Findings | |
1. | The Project follows a logical process that articulates at least 10 years of UNDP- GEF support to create and strengthen PAs in the Philippines. The Project design was in alignment with the Philippine Development Plan (2017-2022) strategic actions under Subsector Outcome 1: Strengthen sustainable management through the issuance of appropriate tenure and management arrangement. Tenurial instruments were proposed to clearly establish the accountability of communities in the management of forestlands and PAs. It is also consistent with the strategic actions outlined in the Philippine Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (2015-2028). The Project conforms closely to the GEF’s Operational Strategy, objectives and eligible activities under the Biodiversity Focal Area (FA) Strategy. More specifically, it supports directly Strategic Objective 1, “To improve the sustainability of protected area systems”, mainly through Outcome 1.1: Improved management effectiveness of existing and new protected areas. Tag: Strategic Positioning Indigenous people Site Conservation / Preservation Effectiveness Relevance Programme/Project Design Results-Based Management |
2. | 3.1.2 Assumptions and Risks Tag: Relevance Global Environment Facility fund Programme/Project Design Results-Based Management Risk Management Indigenous people |
3. | 3.1.3 Lessons from other Projects Tag: Environment Policy Site Conservation / Preservation Knowledge management Capacity Building Indigenous people |
4. | 3.1.4 Planned stakeholder’s participation Tag: Sustainability Bilateral partners Country Government Indigenous people |
5. | 3.1.5 Replication Approach Tag: Site Conservation / Preservation Bilateral partners Country Government Capacity Building Indigenous people |
6. | 3.1.6 UNDP Comparative Advantage Tag: Relevance Strategic Positioning Country Government UN Agencies |
7. | 3.1.7 Linkages Between Project and Other Interventions Within the Sector Tag: Coherence Impact Bilateral partners International Financial Institutions |
8. | 3.1.8 Management Arrangements Tag: Implementation Modality Procurement Coordination |
9. | 3.2 Project Implementation 3.2.1 Adaptive management Tag: Human and Financial resources Implementation Modality Monitoring and Evaluation Procurement Project and Programme management |
10. | 3.2.2 Partnership arrangements Tag: Bilateral partners Country Government |
11. | 3.2.3 Feedback from M&E activities used for adaptive management Tag: Monitoring and Evaluation |
12. | 3.2.4 Project Finance Tag: Efficiency Global Environment Facility fund Human and Financial resources Operational Efficiency Project and Programme management |
13. | 3.2.5 Monitoring and Evaluation Overall Quality of Monitoring & Evaluation is rated as: Moderately Satisfactory M&E Design at entry is rated as Moderately Satisfactory Tag: Human and Financial resources Monitoring and Evaluation Project and Programme management Results-Based Management |
14. | 3.2.6 UNDP and Implementing Partner implementation / execution coordination, and operational issues Tag: UN Agencies Coordination |
15. | Quality of the Implementing Partner Execution is rated as: Moderately Satisfactory Tag: Implementation Modality Ownership Country Government |
16. | Overall quality of Project outcomes: Moderately Satisfactory 3.3.1.1 Outcome 1: Policy Harmonization and Implementation Tag: Effectiveness Rule of law Procurement Results-Based Management Country Government UN Agencies |
17. | 3.3.1.2 Outcome 2: Capacity building for effective governance and management of ICCAs Tag: Natural Resouce management Protected Areas Effectiveness UN Agencies Capacity Building |
18. | 3.3.2 Relevance Relevance is rated as: Relevant Tag: Relevance Strategic Positioning Country Government UN Country Team Capacity Building Agenda 2030 Biodiversity Protected Areas |
19. | 3.3.3 Effectiveness & Efficiency Effectiveness is rated as: Moderately Satisfactory
Despite the fact that indicators 1.4, 2.3 and 2.5 have not been assessed yet, progress achieved by Outcome 2 is evident; two out of its 5 indicators have reached and even exceeded their targets. In the case of Outcome 1, only one if its four indicators were able to reach the expected target by the end of the Project. This could be also explained by the relative higher complexity involved in introducing policy changes whose timing and decision making usually falls out of the control of the PMU. Tag: Effectiveness Efficiency Policies & Procedures |
20. | Efficiency is rated as: Satisfactory Since the beginning of implementation, the Project was not able to achieve the yearly budgets as presented in Figure 8, the absorption capacity never achieved 100%, considering that it only received half of the original expected budget. Outcome 2 proved to be more efficient in the use of resources, with the highest percentage of budget execution to date. Notwithstanding, the value for money of this Project is remarkable considering what has been achieved with such limited resources and the capacity demonstrated to mobilize additional funding from different sources. Tag: Efficiency Project and Programme management |
21. | 3.3.4 Country Ownership Tag: Relevance Sustainability Ownership Civil Societies and NGOs Country Government |
22. | 3.3.5 Mainstreaming Tag: Poverty Reduction Protected Areas Site Conservation / Preservation Sustainability Country Government Capacity Building Indigenous people Jobs and Livelihoods |
23. | 3.3.6 Sustainability Tag: Strategic Positioning Indigenous people Site Conservation / Preservation Sustainability |
24. | Socio-Economic Risks: Likelihood that benefits will continue to be delivered after project closure: Moderately Likely By the time this report was issued, the Project did not have a clear exit strategy. Considering the time lost during the startup process, the team efforts were oriented towards achieving the expected outputs. Capacities developed at the site level mostly addressed ICCA registration, leaving a gap for capacity building related to implementing the CCPs and further consolidating the newly created ICCAs in areas such as governance, reporting, patrolling, sustainable livelihood opportunities. Therefore, there is a risk that after the momentum reached by the Project these communities’ loose interest, as they do not see concrete benefits or change, and forget about the ICCAs over time. This is precisely why sustainability is highly dependent on mainstreaming ICCAs in CLUP and CDP, which only so far has only happened in few Project sites. In this context, most of the short-term sustainability relies in LRPs commitment and capacities to identify new opportunities to further collaborate with IP´s in CDP consolidation and implementation. Tag: Impact Sustainability Risk Management Capacity Building Jobs and Livelihoods |
25. | Institutional Framework and Governance Risks: Likelihood that benefits will continue to be delivered after project closure: Moderately Likely Tag: Biodiversity Site Conservation / Preservation Sustainability Ownership Country Government |
26. | Environmental Risks: Likelihood that benefits will continue to be delivered after project closure: Likely The Project worked with national agencies for the issuance of polices addressing gaps in recognizing and supporting ICCAs. The studies and technical inputs supported by ICCA Project resources produced the revised ADSPP guidelines, HLURB supplemental guidelines interfacing Community Conservation Plans in the LGUs Comprehensive Land Use Plans, DENR guidelines on NIPAS recognizing ICCAs in Protected areas. These outputs are either in draft form or in final stages of preparation. The ICCA Project will complete the guidelines and manuals including drafts of the directives, circulars or administrative orders but actual issuances of the official directives to implement the policies may not be feasible by the end of Project and would need continuous accompany until they could be realized. Tag: Environmental impact assessment Natural Resouce management Protected Areas Site Conservation / Preservation Indigenous people |
27. | Financial resources: Likelihood that benefits will continue to be delivered after project closure: Moderately Likely The most critical barrier for CADTs to achieve an ICCA will be financial, only those benefited from donors and international cooperation Projects may be able to undertake an ICCA registration. This is a reason to stress the need to ensure the approval and adoption of the guidelines proposed by the Project, which are key to scale up in a more efficient manner by facilitating that planning for ICCAs and CCPs are incorporated in the ADSDPP process. Financial sustainability for ICCAS is still uncertain, and the Bill could facilitate mobilizing funding from national and local budgets. It has been confirmed that DENR-BMB are interested in incorporating ICCAs in regional budgets starting 2020, but this would need further lobby support to realize it. On the other hand, it has been confirmed that NCIP would not have a budget in the short and mid-term to support sustainability and replication. Key spaces such as BUKLURAN currently depend on the Project for funding and there are no perspectives to ensure basic means for operation in the short and midterm. Tag: Effectiveness Efficiency Human and Financial resources |
28. | 3.3.7 Impact Tag: Protected Areas Site Conservation / Preservation Impact Results-Based Management Capacity Building Indigenous people |
Recommendations | |
---|---|
1 | 1. The ICCAs sustainability plan should be a long-term planning exercise involving a larger constituency, proposing strategic targets, implementation costs and concrete commitments to move the process forward. |
2 | 2. Consider a closing event targeted to donors and key government agencies to present the sustainability plan and achieve commitments. |
3 | 3. Achieve a political agreement to clarify who will take the lead after the Project ends. |
4 | 4. Find opportunities to include in new Project´s and donor´s budgets resources to keep alive key spaces such as BUKLURAN, Project Board, RIAC. |
5 | 5. Mainstream the ICCA establishment process (resource inventory, IKSP, mapping and boundary setting, community mapping, documentation, registration), in the line budgets of NCIP and DENR. Look for support from BIOFIN to prepare a business case and provide support for mainstreaming ICCAs in governmental budgets. |
6 | 6. There is a need to achieve an inter-institutional commitment to take the lead after the Project is over, to follow up on key decision-making processes such as the ICCAs Bill, ADSDPP guidelines, ICCAs Registry. |
7 | 7. The different participation spaces such as the Project Board and RIAC should be kept alive and operational to ensure Projects sustainability. This suggest the need to institutionalize these spaces and handle the lead to governmental authorities. |
8 | 8. The exit strategy should consider the need for continuous support and follow up to realize the different guidelines, manuals as well as the Bill. Assuming these will be politically approved, there should be a period to generate capacities, teams and institutional structures for supporting implementation. |
9 | 9. Engage the Biodiversity Friendly Enterprises Program to explore scaling up and sustainability opportunities for the livelihood initiatives. |
10 | 10. Continue to link the ICCAs to other BMB Projects that facilitates the establishment of Payment for Ecosystems Services (PES) for Projects included in the CCPs. The revenue flows from PES offers opportunities to sustain or expand the conservation and protection of ICCA areas. |
11 | 11. Continue M&E of the implementation of the Community Conservation Plans including the priority livelihood Projects supported by the Project or incorporated in the plans/budget of the LGUs or supported by national government agencies, and NGOs/CSOs. |
12 | 12. Avoid last minute execution of livelihood funding in sites where resources were not allocated. Assist the local community in Dipaculao, Aurora to enter into partnership with private sector or NGO partner for the planned livelihood project (coffee production). |
13 | 13. Mobilize PMU to provide hands-on site-based support to ensure quality reporting and delivery in less advanced LRPs. |
14 | 14. CCPs would need to be upgraded to become adequate negotiation tools, providing a proper budget for implementation as well a description of the sectors benefitting from the environmental services produced by these territories. |
Key Action Update History
1. The ICCAs sustainability plan should be a long-term planning exercise involving a larger constituency, proposing strategic targets, implementation costs and concrete commitments to move the process forward.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/27] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
1. Agree with Recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.1 DENR Conference on Institutionalizing ICCAs
[Added: 2019/12/27] |
DENR Regional and Field Offices, Local Responsible Partners (LRPs), and Partner Communities | 2019/04 | Completed | The PMU organized this conference precisely for the purpose of discussing possibilities and strategies for institutionalizing ICCAs as an effective area-based conservation measure in addition to the existing protected areas estate of the Philippines. This is in light of the fact that this Project is limited in scale and time. There is no guaranty that the DENR, NCIP, and other concerned agencies will approve the draft policy recommendations submitted to them. The project implementation is due for completion in August 2019 and there is no assurance of continuity for the services and activities initiated under this Project. To address these issues, the Project initiated this Conference to pursue local actions that would de facto institutionalize ICCA activities in the DENR Regional and Field Offices. The DENR regional and field personnel, together with their respective partner communities and Local Responsible Partners (LRPs), crafted sustainability plans to continue the partnerships on ICCA and even expand to new sites and partners. |
2. Consider a closing event targeted to donors and key government agencies to present the sustainability plan and achieve commitments.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.1 Third National ICCA Conference
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
Local Responsible Partners, Partner Communities, PMU, CSO partners | 2019/07 | Completed | As early as 2018, the PMU has already planned to hold the 3rd National ICCA Conference as a culminating activity of the Philippine ICCA Project (PICCAP). This activity was conducted on 09 – 11 July 2019. Key project stakeholders participated in the conference. These include the IP leaders from BUKLURAN; government representatives from NCIP, DENR, and HLURB, NEDA, and DILG; non-government organization partners from PAFID, PEF, NTFP-EP, KEF, CIFP, ANGOC, FPE and Forest Foundation Philippines; congressional staff from the House of Representatives and the Senate; and representatives from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), among others. They all expressed willingness to support the community’s sustainability efforts in various capacities even after the project formally PICCAP formally closes in August 2019. The conference was held at the Pearl Hall of SEAMEO Innotech. It opened with a ribbon cutting ceremony led by UNDP Country Resident Representative Titon Mitra; Commissioner Norberto Navarro of NCIP; DENR-BMB Division Chief Norma Molinyawe; and BUKLURAN President Giovanni Reyes. The first day of the conference was devoted to presenting the project accomplishments and best practices. There was also a symbolic turnover of the enhanced draft of the Philippine ICCA Bill to the representatives from the Senate and the House of Representatives. The second day of the conference concluded with a donors’ forum. It was attended by a number of donor and support agencies and organizations including the PEF, FPE, FFP and the CIFP. The last day of the Conference focused on BUKLURAN’s planning activities and steps moving forward based on the results of Days 1 and 2 discussions. Mr. Giovanni Reyes facilitated the discussion on conference assessment, specifically the identification of opportunities for engagement and ways forward regarding the sustainability of existing ICCA sites and the documentation of other ICCAs. This was followed by the formalization of the Philippine ICCA Working Group; presentation of the Communications and Strategic Plan for the Lobbying and Advocacy of the ICCA Bill, courtesy of Ms. Kate Galido of NTFP-EP; and discussion facilitated by PAFID and BUKLURAN to create mechanisms for the interagency working group for ICCA policies. The three-day conference covered a lot of ground in terms of agenda and objectives. |
3. Achieve a political agreement to clarify who will take the lead after the Project ends.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.1 9th Project Board Meeting
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
Philippine ICCA Project Board, PMU | 2019/09 | Completed | During the 9th Project Board (PB) Meeting on 11 September 2019, the PB has agreed that the NCIP will be taking the lead after the Project. The rest of the partner agencies will just play the supporting roles. | |
3.2 Formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
NTFP – EP, BUKURAN, PAFID, ANGOC, FPE, ALG, KAISAHAN, PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | In December 2019, the PMU has initiated a series of meetings with its Civil Society partners to explore the possibility of forming a working group that will continue to push for the institutionalization of ICCAs in the Philippines after the closure of the Philippine ICCA project. The formation of the working group was supported by the Forest Foundation of the Philippines (FFP). The group is comprised of representatives from the Asian NGO Coalition (ANGOC), BUKLURAN, PAFID, NTFP-EP, Haribon, Alternative Law Group (ALG), KAISAHAN, Conservation International Philippines Foundation (CIFP), Foundation for the Philippine Environment (FPE), and the Global ICCA Consortium, among others. The group agreed to have Mr. Teddy Baguilat as the Convener, and the NTFP as the Secretariat. Ms. Kate Galido of NTFP-EP was also chosen as coordinator. The Philippine ICCA Working Group was formalized during the 3rd National ICCA Conference where the group presented its Communications and Strategic Plan for the Lobbying and Advocacy of the ICCA Bill and the other related policies, courtesy of Ms. Kate Galido of NTFP-EP. |
4. Find opportunities to include in new Project´s and donor´s budgets resources to keep alive key spaces such as BUKLURAN, Project Board, RIAC.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
4.1 Formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
NTFP – EP, BUKURAN, PAFID, ANGOC, FPE, ALG, KAISAHAN, PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | The PMU initiated and organized meetings with CSO partners to explore the possibility of establishing partnerships to continue providing support to BUKLURAN in the advocacy for institutionalizing ICCAs in the Philippines. After a series of meetings, the Philippine ICCA Working Groups of CSOs has been formed to support BUKLURAN. The members of the working group include the Asian NGO Coalition (ANGOC), KAISAHAN, NTFP – EP, ALG, FFP, FPE, PAFID, and BUKLURAN. The Convener of the group is former Rep. Teddy Baguilat, who is also the incumbent President of the Global ICCA Consortium. NTFP-EP has also accepted the challenge of being the lead organization in the advocacy for the Philippine ICCA Bill. The formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group was reaffirmed on the last day of the 3rd National ICCA Conference on 11 July 2019. | |
4.2 DENR Conference on Institutionalizing ICCAs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR Regional and Field Offices, Local Responsible Partners (LRPs), and Partner Communities | 2019/04 | Completed | Part of the sustainability plans that were crafted during the DENR Conference was the commitment to continue hosting and holding the meetings of the RIACs. The DENR Regional offices has expressed that the RIAC has been instrumental in coordinating the partnerships with indigenous peoples and other agencies. | |
4.3 Inter-Agency Working Group on ICCAs (IAWG)
[Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2021/03/25] |
DENR, BMB, DILG, NEDA, HLURB, DA-BFAR, NCIP, PMU | 2020/12 | Completed | Special Order has been signed and is being tapped for the finalization of the ICCA bill. History |
5. Mainstream the ICCA establishment process (resource inventory, IKSP, mapping and boundary setting, community mapping, documentation, registration), in the line budgets of NCIP and DENR. Look for support from BIOFIN to prepare a business case and provide support for mainstreaming ICCAs in governmental budgets.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
5.1 Training on ICCA Documentation for DENR Personnel
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR, BMB, PMU | 2019/08 | Completed | This training was conducted on 12 – 18 August 2018. A total of 25 DENR regional and field office personnel were provided with the skills to properly conduct an effective and culturally sensitive ICCA mapping and documentation. They were trained on the various PRA tools and methodologies that could be useful and appropriate for community profiling and a comprehensive discussion of the history, practice and ethics of community-based participatory mapping. These include the whole cycle of a community mapping exercise and technical inputs on the proper data input and lay-out of maps, resources inventory, and IKSP documentation. The objective of the training is to enable the DENR personnel to respond should there be any requests from IP communities for the documentation and mapping of their ICCAs. | |
5.2 Training on ICCA Documentation for NCIP Personnel
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
NCIP, PAFID, PMU | 2019/09 | Completed | This training was conducted on 01 – 06 September 2018. A total of 22 NCIP regional and field office personnel were provided with the skills to properly conduct an effective and culturally sensitive ICCA mapping and documentation. They were trained on the various PRA tools and methodologies that could be useful and appropriate for community profiling and a comprehensive discussion of the history, practice and ethics of community-based participatory mapping. These include the whole cycle of a community mapping exercise and technical inputs on the proper data input and lay-out of maps, resources inventory, and IKSP documentation. The objective of the training is to enable the NCIP personnel to respond should there be any requests from IP communities for the documentation and mapping of their ICCAs. |
6. There is a need to achieve an inter-institutional commitment to take the lead after the Project is over, to follow up on key decision-making processes such as the ICCAs Bill, ADSDPP guidelines, ICCAs Registry.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
6.1 Formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | The PMU initiated and organized meetings with CSO partners to explore the possibility of establishing partnerships to continue providing support to BUKLURAN in the advocacy for institutionalizing ICCAs in the Philippines. The working groups has already begun supporting BUKLURAN. As a matter of fact, ANGOC and PAFID just started a new project with BUKLURAN aimed at enhancing the participation of IP communities under the ENIPAS Act. The working group has taken the lead and has begun working with legislators at the Senate of the Philippines and House of Representatives for the re-filing of the Philippine ICCA Bill in the 18th Congress. | |
6.2 Consultation-Workshop on the Preparation
of the Manual of Operations for the Revised ADSDPP Guidelines
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU | 2019/06 | Completed | This workshop consultation was conducted at the B Hotel in Quezon City. A total of 30 participants from the NCIP Central and Regional Offices participated in this workshop. They included the Executive Director, Bureau Directors, and Regional Directors. The workshop discussed and drafted the proposed Manual of Operations (MOO) for the NCIP Revised ADSDPP Guidelines. The participants agreed that they will take the lead in making sure that the draft MOO will be submitted and approved by the relevant NCIP authorities. | |
6.3 NCIP Validation Workshop on the draft Manual of Operations (MOO) of the NCIP Revised ADSDPP Guidelines
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | This activity was conducted at the Sulo Riviera Hotel to validate the draft MOO. It was attended by at least 18 NCIP personnel who took the challenge of owning and presenting the draft MOO to the relevant authorities in their agency for the approval of the Manual. |
7. The different participation spaces such as the Project Board and RIAC should be kept alive and operational to ensure Projects sustainability. This suggest the need to institutionalize these spaces and handle the lead to governmental authorities.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
7.1 DENR Conference on Institutionalizing ICCAs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR Regional and Field Offices, Local Responsible Partners (LRPs), and Partner Communities, BMB, PMU | 2019/04 | Completed | As part of the sustainability plans crafted during the conference, the DENR has committed to continue hosting the RIAC and sustain the engagement with the partner communities to support the ICCAs. The plans even included expansion sites. These will be part of their regular programs and activities. |
8. The exit strategy should consider the need for continuous support and follow up to realize the different guidelines, manuals as well as the Bill. Assuming these will be politically approved, there should be a period to generate capacities, teams and institutional structures for supporting implementation.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
8.1 Formation of the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) on ICCAs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR, BMB, PMU | 2019/09 | Completed | The DENR issued Special Order 2019 – 677 creating the IAWG on 18 September 2019. The formation of the IAWG is originally part of the strategy to push for the approval of the draft policies that will be produced under Outcome 1 of the Project. It is composed of representatives from the partner agencies | |
8.2 Formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group of CSOs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
NTFP – EP, BUKURAN, PAFID, ANGOC, FPE, ALG, KAISAHAN, PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | The Philippine ICCA Working Group of CSOs has started working with the 18th Congress of the Philippines. The Philippine ICCA Bill has already been re-filed for consideration in the Senate and in the House of Representatives. This working group is also working with the DENR and the NCIP to ensure that IP participation ion conservation as manifested in their ICCAs will be given due recognition and support under the ENIPAS Act. |
9. Engage the Biodiversity Friendly Enterprises Program to explore scaling up and sustainability opportunities for the livelihood initiatives.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
9.1 Evaluation of the livelihood activities implemented under the Philippine ICCA Project
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU, BMB, BDFE Core Group | 2019/10 | Completed | This was part of the work plan for 2019. The evaluation was supposed to have been conducted in January 2019 but did not push through. The evaluation is included again in the project closure activities in October 2019. Hopefully the DENR-BMB BDFE Core Group will be available. |
10. Continue to link the ICCAs to other BMB Projects that facilitates the establishment of Payment for Ecosystems Services (PES) for Projects included in the CCPs. The revenue flows from PES offers opportunities to sustain or expand the conservation and protection of ICCA areas.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
10.1 Formation of the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) on ICCAs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR, BMB, NCIP, HLURB, DILG, NEDA, DA-BFAR, BUKLURAN, PAFID | 2019/09 | Completed | The DENR issued Special Order 2019 – 677 creating the IAWG on 18 September 2019. The formation of the IAWG is primarily for the purpose of creating a forum for discussing all matters related to ICCAs, including the support for implementing the CCPs and other schemes such as the PES to provide benefits to communities contributing to biodiversity conservation. | |
10.1 Formation of the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) on ICCAs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
DENR, BMB, NCIP, HLURB, DILG, NEDA, DA-BFAR, BUKLURAN, PAFID | 2019/09 | Completed | The DENR issued Special Order 2019 – 677 creating the IAWG on 18 September 2019. The formation of the IAWG is primarily for the purpose of creating a forum for discussing all matters related to ICCAs, including the support for implementing the CCPs and other schemes such as the PES to provide benefits to communities contributing to biodiversity conservation. | |
10.2 Formation of the Philippine ICCA Working Group of CSOs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU | 2019/07 | Completed | The Philippine ICCA Working Group of CSO has been working with the partner communities on these and other related advocacies. |
11. Continue M&E of the implementation of the Community Conservation Plans including the priority livelihood Projects supported by the Project or incorporated in the plans/budget of the LGUs or supported by national government agencies, and NGOs/CSOs.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
11.1 Meeting with DENR field offices
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU, CENRO, PENRO | 2020/08 | Completed | Completed under the initiative of the DENR-FASPS. The meeting with the concerned Regional offices, BMB and the former Project Management Unit was conducted online on August 5, 2020. The PMU has been meeting with the respective PENRO/CENRO personnel to pursue the collaboration with the partner communities. Among the agreements is for the PMU to provide these agencies with copies of the Community Conservation Plans (CCPs) so they will have a reference for further support and monitoring the progress of the plans, including the implementation of the livelihood activities. In some project sites, the LRPs have also agreed to continue collaboration with the partner communities and monitor the progress of the livelihood activities. This is true for Magpet (PEF), AGMIHICU (NTFP), Tinglayan (MCCI), and KEF. |
12. Avoid last minute execution of livelihood funding in sites where resources were not allocated. Assist the local community in Dipaculao, Aurora to enter into partnership with private sector or NGO partner for the planned livelihood project (coffee production).
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/12/12]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
12.1 PMU Meeting with Daluhay
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
PMU | 2019/06 | Completed | Following this recommendation, the PM communicated with DALUHAY that implementation can no longer commence given that the project is in the closing stage. DALUHAY sent a direct petition to UNDP complaining that the PM is not allowing them to implement livelihood activities. It even prepared a petition signed by the DETA chieftains. The PM brought up the matter with the Project Board (PB). The PB advised the PM to negotiate. Hence, this meeting. The PM agreed to have a no-cost extension for DALUHAY until 30 June 2019 to buy them time to implement the livelihood support activities. THE BMB Director approved the no-cost extension. |
13. Mobilize PMU to provide hands-on site-based support to ensure quality reporting and delivery in less advanced LRPs.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
13.1 Philippine ICCA Project Site Report Writeshop and Monitoring
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
LRPs, PMU | 2019/05 | Completed | This activity was conducted with the LRPs in the Mindanao to provide technical assistance to the Local Responsible Partners (LRP). This is in line with the objective of the Project Management Unit (PMU) to help the LRPs meet the required outputs, reports, and other deliverable. The PMU has intensified efforts to make the outputs and deliverable compliant with requirements of the project as indicated in the Terms of References (TOR) of the LRPs. This write shop and technical assistance activity is intended to provide a venue for the LRPs and the PMU to work together on improving the quality of the outputs and reports. As a direct result of this intervention, the LRPs in Mindanao was able to has satisfactorily complied with the requirements of the Project. |
14. CCPs would need to be upgraded to become adequate negotiation tools, providing a proper budget for implementation as well a description of the sectors benefitting from the environmental services produced by these territories.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/11/25] [Last Updated: 2020/11/26]
Agree with recommendation
Key Actions:
Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
14.1 Review of the CCPs
[Added: 2020/11/25] |
LRP, BMB, PMU | 2019/09 | Completed | The Project has laid down the minimum requirements and contents of the CCPs. Only those plans that have complied with these requirements are accepted and approved for payment. |