Enhancing Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2018-2020, Somalia
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
12/2019
Completion Date:
11/2019
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
60,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document Final UNDP-GEF-Terminal-Evaluation-Terms-of-Reference_Somalia LDCF1 Project_2018.pdf tor English 764.05 KB Posted 1260
Download document FINAL TERMINAL EVALUATION REPORT - LDCF I. 12.17.2019 (002).pdf report English 890.79 KB Posted 1338
Title Enhancing Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities
Atlas Project Number: 00084974
Evaluation Plan: 2018-2020, Somalia
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 11/2019
Planned End Date: 12/2019
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Resilience
  • 2. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 3.3.1 Evidence-based assessment and planning tools and mechanisms applied to enable implementation of gender-sensitive and risk-informed prevention and preparedness to limit the impact of natural hazards and pandemics and promote peaceful, just and inclusive societies
SDG Goal
  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
SDG Target
  • 1.5 By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters
  • 13.1 Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries
Evaluation Budget(US $): 60,000
Source of Funding:
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 28,871
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Umm Zia Kalsoom External Evaluator ummezia.cynosure@consultant.com PAKISTAN
Mohamed Jama Hussein External Evaluator legendkalmoy@gmail.com SOMALIA
Mohamud Adan Kalmoy External Evaluator mjamadeer@gmail.com SOMALIA
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Enhancing Climate Resilience of Vulnerable Communities
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Climate Change
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 5592
PIMS Number: 5268
Key Stakeholders: Puntland Regional Committee, Somaliland Regional Committee, South Central Regional Committee
Countries: SOMALIA
Lessons
Findings
1.

3. EVALUATION FINDINGS

This section provides detailed findings of the TE for the LDCF I project, including Project Design, Relevance, Efficiency, Effectiveness, Impact, and Sustainability. At the end of each section the evaluation rating is provided in accordance with the UNDP-GEF evaluation guidelines. 

3.1. PROJECT DESIGN

This section provides a critical assessment of the project design with regards to project implementation strategy and approach, as presented in the project document. In addition, key program and operational aspects presented in the project design are also reviewed, including monitoring and evaluation, partnership, finance, and gender. 

3.1.1. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND APPROACH

The project was designed by UNDP Somalia in 2014 and GEF approval was given in the same year, while implementation started in January 2015. In comparison to other UNDP-GEF projects which take two years or more starting from project design to implementation, the LDCF 1 project was designed and approved within the span of one year. This timeliness meant that the project design stayed relevant at the time of implementation as the situation on the ground did not change drastically during a lengthy approval period. Overall, the project’s logical framework was found to be well designed, comprising of activities relevant to the overall goals and objectives, and the progress indicators were SMART. However, the indicative activities outlined in the project document are highly ambitious and, covering a large variety of program areas. For instance, Outcome 1 seems to be an attempt at establishing the overall governance framework of climate change and resilience for the entire country, from scratch. In total 18 indicative activities were listed under Outcome 1 and 34 activities under Outcome 2. Most activities were further split across the three varied geographic zones of Puntland, Somaliland, and South Central. However, in the absence of specific linkages, the activities look more like a fragmented bucket list that ranges from review and development of policies to support to university graduates, research on drought-resilient seeds and plants, community mobilization, support to women, and piloting community resilience activities covering water resource management, flood protection, rangeland management, and livelihoods, etc. Such lack of activity linkage also limits the opportunity for developing synergies across activities and outcomes. Moreover, as the project document does not provide a Theory of Change to explore the causal analysis or inter-linkages between the two components or corresponding activities, the project appears as a sincere yet ambitious attempt at tackling a large range of challenges through an over simplified and fragmented approach. 

3.1.2. GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE

The districts2 to be targeted by the project for on ground activities were selected in consultation with the government while using multiple criteria, including: i) The extent of land degradation, ii) Flood extent, iii) High population, iv) Existence of other development partners, v) Security situation, and vi) Access. Moreover, considering the larger land area and higher vulnerability in South Central, four of the eight selected districts were chosen from this zone. This consultative process of selection seems to have resulted in selection of some of the most relevant areas in all three regions. 


Tag: Monitoring and Evaluation Partnership Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management Results-Based Management UN Agencies Coordination

2.

3.1.5. FINANCE 

According to the Project Document, the total allocated resources for the project were USD 72.8 million, as shown in table 1. 

As most of this was parallel financing, only USD 15.5 Million were available for implementation, including cash funds from GEF/LDCF - USD 8 million and UNDP – 1.5 million; and in-kind contribution from the Government of Somalia of USD 8 million. Of the remaining funds, the EU Grant of 34 million seems to allude to the EU’s MDG initiative for Somalia- Reducing hunger and food insecurity in Puntland region through improved and sustainable use of rangeland resources (2013-2019). However, this is a standalone program and the letter of support provided by the EU at the time of project design did not commit any financial resources for the program. Similarly, the UNDP/Charcoal refers to the UN Joint Programme for Sustainable Charcoal Production and Alternative Livelihoods (PROSCAL) (2013-2015). However, this project was also not only a separate project, albeit with some similarities to LDCF I, and was also planned to be wrapped in 2015, the year of the LDCF I project start up. While the USD 9 M identified to be contributed by the UNDP was in fact the budget for the parallel activities under LED, as mentioned in the letter of support provided by the UNDP. 

The TE team therefore believe that unless the design document is reviewed in-depth, the allocated sources presented in the project document can be misleading as the allocations are vastly lesser than those actually available to the project itself.


Tag: Efficiency Sustainability Programme/Project Design Project and Programme management Civil Societies and NGOs Country Government Jobs and Livelihoods

3.

3.1.7. GENDER

As mentioned earlier, the Project Document provided detailed analysis of the climate change context in Somalia with regards to policy, institutional capacity, and communities. Conversely, although ‘gender’ and ‘women’ have been referenced throughout the document, a detailed gender analysis was seen to be missing from the design. Moreover, instead of streamlining gender into activities across the project components, a standalone output was dedicated to Gender. Further, with the exception of Targets 3 (Agropastoral Schools) and Target 5 (women-based marketing businesses), the project’s Results Framework does not consistently present gender segregated targets. Having said that, provisions were made for a Gender Expert to be retained for one year to mainstream gender concerns.

The evaluation team found that although women as a highly relevant stakeholder were considered in the Project Document, not addressing their concerns in a more systematic manner risked limited women’s involvement during project implementation.

Design Rating: Based on the above analysis, it was found that the LDCF I project was designed based on consultations with a variety of stakeholders and relevant to the implementation context. In particular, the management arrangements and monitoring strategy were clearly defined. Similarly, with the exception of community infrastructure and support to students, sustainability was well integrated into the design. However, the project design has some shortcomings with respect to implementation strategy, as limited linkages or causalities are provided for activities spread across different themes and geographies. Moreover, while the project’s logical framework is comprised of SMART indicators and clear targets, these targets are not gender segregated. Having said that, the design made provisions for an Inception period to iron out some of the outstanding details. Based on these observations, the evaluation team found the design to be Satisfactory as it provided sufficient basis for initiating implementation in a highly evolving and volatile context. 


Tag: Gender Equality Gender Mainstreaming Women's Empowerment Programme/Project Design Results-Based Management Data and Statistics

4.

3.2. RELEVANCE

The project’s relevance was assessed with regards to its alignment with key development priorities of major stakeholders, including the Government of Somalia, GEF, UNDP, as well as the community’s needs. At the policy level, the project conforms to the priorities set out in the New Deal Compact 2013, provisional constitution of Somalia (2012), Somalia’s Six Pillar Policy (2012), Somaliland Constitution – Article 18, Somaliland National Development Plan (2012-2016), and Puntland Disaster Management Framework (2011). In particular, the LDCF1 project addresses the top four priorities of NAPA 2013, including 

i. Sustainable land management (rangeland and forestry) ii. Water resource management (water availability) iii. Disaster management 

Similarly, the project is aligned with the UN program strategy in Somalia, including the UN Strategic Framework Somalia (2017-2020) - Strategic Priority 4, UNDP Strategic Plan (2014-2017) Environment and Sustainable Development Primary Outcome, and UNDP Somalia Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment Strategy (2011-2015). Finally, the LDCF 1 project conforms to objectives 1, 2, and 3 of the GEF Programming Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change for the Least Developed Countries Fund/Special Climate Change Fund (LDCF/SCCF) 2018 – 20226 . In particular, Outcome 1 focusing on national capacity development is responsive to the prevailing policy context in Somalia. Under this outcome, the project aimed to build the governing and planning capacities at the national and district levels to enhance the adaptive capacities of vulnerable populations in the country. At the time of project design, ministries related to environment and disaster management had limited understanding of climate change and its impact. For instance, according to interviews with key informants, no hazard mapping had been carried out in the country before project support. Similarly, with the exception of NAPA (2013), key policies and strategies to address climate change and disaster management issues were either limited in scope or absent altogether. Moreover, the decades of conflict and insecurity in the country had led to the weakening of many of these state institutions due to lack of sufficient trained manpower and financing. Therefore, the evaluation team found the activities planned under this outcome to be highly relevant to the policy and governance context in Somalia. 


Tag: Agriculture Agriculture co-operatives Climate Change Adaptation Disaster Risk Reduction Vulnerable Coherence Relevance Global Environment Facility fund Country Government

5.

3.3. EFFICIENCY

Project efficiency was assessed while considering various operational factors, including adaptive management, monitoring and reporting, partnership and coordination, timeliness, and financial management. 

3.3.1. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

Adaptive management refers to the continual mitigation of risks arising throughout the project implementation period by adapting project design to the ongoing contextual changes occurring in the implementation environment. As the assessment of design and project relevance revealed, considerable strategy-level adjustments were required to ensure effective delivery. In this regard, major issues included developing a project Theory of Change, formalizing partnerships, and mainstreaming gender in the planned activities. An assessment of the project’s performance on these matters is presented in the paragraphs below. In  addition, some other changes made by the project management to respond to the changing situation during implementation are also discussed. 

3.3.2. PARTNERSHIP Following the standard programming approach in Somalia, the project was designed to be implemented as DIM. However, at the onset of implementation it was determined that active engagement of regional governments in project implementation will result in manifold benefits, including reduced transaction cost and improved access to beneficiaries. Moreover, as all donor funded projects until that time were implemented directly by development partners instead of government agencies, this approach would contribute towards building governmental capacity in project execution. According to this approach, partnership with selected government agencies was systematically formed by selecting agencies according to a Risk Assessment exercise and signing Letters of Agreement for implementation support. As detailed in the section on Effectiveness, the LOA approach led to stronger government capacity in project implementation and broader outreach to beneficiaries than expected through DIM.

3.3.3. APPROACH TO STUDENT TRAINING Another change in strategy leading to higher efficiency was the methodology employed to train university students. According to the project document, 09 students were to be supported to attend higher degree programs in environment/natural resource management. However, instead of sending the students to another country to attend the courses, the degree program was delivered at a local university with a combination of foreign and national faculty. This approach not only helped build the capacity of a national university but also enabled the project to finance 30 students (333% higher) compared to the planned 09. Moreover, instead of working with the Somalia National University (SNU), the project supported Amoud University in Somaliland in curriculum development and training. Although the design identified SNU as the partner for this initiative, the latter was chosen due to its relatively better capacity identified at the time of implementation. 


Tag: Efficiency Partnership Results-Based Management Theory of Change Jobs and Livelihoods

6.

3.3. EFFICIENCY 

3.3.8. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING

The Project Management was carried out at two levels, including UNDP and the Implementing Partners. I. UNDP: As outlined in the Project Document, the project was managed by a Project Implementation Team (PIT) based at UNDP Somalia. The PIT was established at the very onset and was comprised of a Project Manager, a Project Officer from each zone (3 in total), a Financial and Administrative Assistant, and a Monitoring and Evaluation specialist. 


Tag: Efficiency Human and Financial resources Project and Programme management

7.

3.3. EFFICIENCY 

3.3.9. MONITORING AND REPORTING

The TE team observed that monitoring was undertaken at multiple levels. This section provides an analysis of the monitoring arrangements carried out at different levels, including PIT, Implementing Partners, and Project Board. Overall, monitoring was carried out according to the UNDP-GEF project guidelines and in line with the targets set out in the project’s results framework and gender-segregated results were reported. As LDCF I was not only the first GEF-funded project in Somalia but also one of the first few projects to be implemented by the UNDP using the LOA modality, planning and monitoring mechanisms evolved over time with incremental improvements. 

I. Monitoring by PIT

Initially, LDCF I was implemented under the umbrella of the UNDP implemented PREP program. Under this arrangement, planning and monitoring was carried out at the regional level and information was assembled at the project level by an M&E Officer who was also responsible for all other projects under PREP. In addition, project planning was undertaken at the regional level to be later collated at the project level by the Project Manager. However, in April 2018, when the UNDP programming shifted to portfolio approach, a dedicated M&E Officer was assigned to LDCF I. Similarly, the planning process became more integrated as the regional teams worked together to develop the Annual Work Plans (AWPs) and implementation plans. A review of the project related documents revealed that this later change in strategy improved the availability of monitoring data and quality in progress reports. At the regional level, the regional program officers were in direct contact with the implementing agencies and subcontractors and responsible for not only obtaining progress data but also carrying out M&E in person through site visits, meetings, and observation. For instance, in the case of physical infrastructure schemes, the program officer visited a site three times during the course of the activity, including initial consultations, during the construction, and at the time of handover to the community. When required, the program officer was accompanied by an engineer to review the activity design, etc. Data collected through monitoring activities was presented in the form of standardized reports. While the implementing partners share monthly reports with UNDP according to the LOA requirements, the UNDP presented annual PIRs to GEF, documenting progress against the logical framework.In addition, the UNDP used Third Party Monitors (TPM) to undertake periodic reviews of the activities being undertaken in different regions. These reviews primarily covered activities related to physical infrastructure and had little or no focus on other key project components, such as policy and organizational capacity building. It is important to note that the Zonal Program officers were reportedly overworked as they have been responsible for coordinating and monitoring activities of other projects in addition to LDCF I. This was particularly challenging in the context of LDCF I due to the expansive geographic reach of the project, especially in areas where road network is limited. Further, despite the elaborate monitoring mechanisms implemented by the PIT, the TE mission found flaws with some infrastructure schemes and other inputs. For instance, as detailed elsewhere in the report, the installed solar panels in a number of visited sites did not generate sufficient power. Similarly, there were structural flaws with some water harvesting structures, e.g. contamination of stored water or efficiency of water distribution network, etc. 

II. Monitoring by Implementing Partners

The implementing partners carried out monitoring in accordance with the guidelines established in the LOAs. Accordingly, monitoring was carried out using field visits to project locations, review meetings with regional program officers and beneficiaries, and documentation of progress and lessons learned. The findings were reported to the PIT in monthly progress reports as well as a Project Completion Report highlighting challenges, lessons learned, and success stories. In addition, the IPs were responsible for sharing with the PIT evidence such as complete lists of beneficiaries, contact details, and attendance sheets of trainings, workshops, and meetings, etc. The monitoring by IPs considerably reduced the burden on the PIT M&E resources on one hand and helped improve the IP capacity in project management on the other. Further, it was reassuring to see that in order to ensure control over the quality of delivery, financial disbursement by UNDP was linked to the satisfactory quarterly progress reporting submitting by the implementing partners to the PIT.


Tag: Efficiency Global Environment Facility fund Gender Equality Gender Mainstreaming Women's Empowerment Monitoring and Evaluation Oversight Quality Assurance Results-Based Management Data and Statistics

8.

3.3.10. PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY

LDCF I was designed to be implemented by UNDP using DIM. However, as mentioned in the section on Adaptive Management, this implementation approach was modified to also engage selected government agencies as Implementing Partners (IPs). A review of the IP selection and engagement process revealed that PIT employed extensive due diligence. For instance, potential IP had to undergo an assessment based on HACT principles to determine their capacity and readiness for direct implementation. Only those agencies ranking Moderate Risk were engaged as partners through signing of Letters of Agreement (LOAs) with the UNDP. The LOAs were in fact detailed activity-based, time-bound contracts and their implementation was subject to direct monitoring by the PIT. Details of this partnership modality are presented in Annex 05 and detailed list of agencies with which LOAs were signed is provided in Annex 04. 

It is important to note that only agencies in Puntland and Somaliland qualified for LOAs, while capacity in the newly established states in South Central region were found to be weak due to newly founded ministries and departments. Therefore, UNDP worked in these regions primarily through DIM approach. But, the security situation on the ground significantly prevented progress of community-based activities. In fact, upon the recommendations of the MTR, the Agro-Pastoral Field Schools (AFPS) and associated activities had to be cancelled.

There is ample evidence to suggest that implementation through LOAs was one of the outstanding features of the project with regards to efficiency. In fact, until 2015 nearly all donor-funded projects in Somalia were implemented by donors or third parties with little strategic involvement of government agencies. Overall, LDCF I’s partnership with local government agencies helped broaden the project outreach, reduced burden on the M&E resources, and built the capacity of several government agencies in leading project management and implementation. Further, as through the LOAs the IPs were engaged in hiring sub-contractors, thereby giving them more control over strategic planning, decision making, and monitoring which resulted in bottom up planning and strong local ownership. For instance, as part of subcontractor selection IPs were able to choose from a range of water infrastructure designs instead of being bound to decisions solely made by UNDP or GEF. However, when it came to mitigating the challenges faced by DIM in South Central region with regards to security, the TE team found no evidence that the PIT made any efforts to explore alternative partnerships for implementation. As local CBOs and NGOs, etc. could potentially have been engaged as effective partners in undertaking APFS, an activity that was cancelled. 


Tag: Global Environment Facility fund Partnership Policies & Procedures Country Government Coordination

9.

3.3.12. FINANCE

At the time of design, the project was provided USD 9.5 Million, including USD 8 Million from GEF/LDCF and USD 1.5 Million from UNDP. However, by the TE the total available project resources had increased by 19% to USD 11.27 Million. These additional resources were mainly contributed by the UNDP as USD 1.16 Million for project management in 2019 to support operational expenditures, e.g. staffing and rent, etc. 


Tag: Efficiency Operational Efficiency Partnership Programme Synergy Theory of Change Coordination

10.

3.4.EFFICIENCY

3.4.1. POLICY DEVELOPMENT

With regards to policy development, the TE team determined that the project has played an instrumental role in filling the vacuum regarding the CCA and DRM related policy planning in Somalia. In this regard, key national and regional policies and strategies were developed, including: 

 i) The National Disaster Management Policy was approved at federal level for implementation in October 2017. ii) The National Climate Change Policy and Funds Mobilization Strategy has been completed iii) The disaster management strategies of 3 mandated agencies (NADFOR-Somaliland, HADMA - Puntland and Somalia Disaster Management Agency) were updated to address climate risks and enforce Disaster Risk Management and sustainable land use. iv) Climate compatible land use policies have been completed for Somaliland and Puntland and awaiting endorsement from the President. v) National Climate policy has been completed and awaiting approval.

In fact, the policy documents that have been approved (i – iii above) are being used for further planning. For instance, the regional disaster management strategies are now being used by the regional governments to guide their own planning as well as that of donors. In addition to the above policies, the project was also able to indirectly influence other planning instruments to incorporate CCA and DRM aspects. Some of these include the National Development Plan for Somalia and the regional development plans of Somaliland and Puntland. Conversely, the Land Use Policies which can play a critical role in sustainable development and resilience, although developed, have not been approved yet as land is a sensitive issue with multiple conflicting stakeholders. Therefore it is foreseen that consensus building on legislating the developed Land Use Policies is likely to take political will developed over time. 


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Climate change governance Disaster risk management Disaster Risk Reduction Gender Equality Women's Empowerment Policies & Procedures Resilience Jobs and Livelihoods Policy Advisory

11.

3.4.EFFICIENCY 

3.4.3. GENDER

Considering women’s particular vulnerability to climate change events, the project was seen to make conscious efforts to address the needs of women. In fact, in line with the UNDP’s Gender Strategy which states that 30% of beneficiaries should be women, LDCF I progress reporting presented genderdisaggregated progress on most indicators. In this context, as shown in Table 5, women were involved at all levels across the range of activities undertaken by the project. For instance, efforts were made to mainstream gender concerns into newly developed policies and plans, and women’s involvement was ensured in consultations for policy development, capacity building of ministries, students, and communities, and indirect benefits accruing from project-related activities, such as cash for work, etc.

Further, in the project design, Target 2.5 was focused particularly on women’s resilience through sustainable enterprise development. In response to this, 320 women (200 in Somaliland; 120 in Puntland) were trained on value-chain analysis and marketing in environment friendly businesses such as fodder production, marketing of Liquefied Petroleum Gas, drip irrigation, and fruits and vegetable farming. Moreover, another 280 women (160 in Somaliland; 120 in Puntland) were trained on Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) to support their NRM-related businesses. While 5 cooperatives each in Somaliland (100 women) and Puntland (50 women) were supported with businessrelated grants of USD 10,000 each. 

While the project made considerable efforts to ensure women’s participation in all activities, the TE team found that no project-level Gender strategy was developed. Instead, the PIT relied mostly on overall UNDP and UNDP Somalia’s Gender strategy for guidance. However, considering the particular importance of women’s role in CCA and DRM related interventions, both as stakeholders and affectees/beneficiaries, the TE team believes that a project-level Gender strategy might have further streamlined and focused the project’s efforts with regards to women. 


Tag: Climate Change Adaptation Disaster Risk Reduction Vulnerable Water resources Gender Equality Gender Mainstreaming Women's Empowerment Knowledge management Capacity Building Inclusive economic growth Jobs and Livelihoods Technology Data and Statistics

12.

3.5. IMPACT

The TE mission found evidence of the project’s positive impact at multiple levels, with implications for institutional capacities and community resilience, as detailed below:

3.5.1. INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITIES

The UNDP plays a lead role within the UN system as the co-Chair of Environment, Climate Change and Disaster Management working group at the federal level with the Office of the Prime Minister. In this capacity, LDCF I was introduced by the UNDP as the first ever GEF-funded major initiative implemented in Somalia. The project’s success has already resulted in follow up projects, e.g. LDCF II (USD 10 Million) focused on water resource management and the World Bank funded USD 40 million initiative also focusing on water to be initiated in 2019/2020. While the above are national-level projects, LDCF I’s support to institutional capacity development has also resulted in individual ministries being able to access other funding. For instance, LDCF I was the first ever donor project implemented directly by the Puntland Ministry of Environment. Building on this strengthened capacity, the GIZ awarded the Ministry a Drought Resilience and Preparedness project of USD 1.2 Million, while the World Bank under its upcoming water resources initiative plans to award the Ministry project funding of USD 9 Million. 

Similarly, continual support from the project led to gradually strengthened partner capacity. For instance, according to the institutional assessment undertaken by the PIT, The National Environment Research and Disasters (NERAD) in Somaliland was rated as High Risk in Year 1, but by year 3 department scored Moderate rating, making it eligible for directly managing project funds. Further, the importance of CCA at the institutional level promoted by the project is reflected in the fact that several key ministries incorporated Climate Change into their names. For instance, the Puntland Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism is not titled the ‘Ministry of Environment, Agriculture, and Climate Change’, while the Directorate of Environment in the Office of the PM is now called the ‘Directorate of Environment and Climate Change’.


Tag: Disaster Risk Reduction Water resources Impact Country Government Resilience Poverty Reduction Advocacy

13.

3.6. SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability of project outcomes were assessed in terms of continuation into the future, such as replication and up-scaling. At the institutional level, sustainability was found to be inherently incorporated into activities such as training, awareness raising, and capacity building. While ministries were capacitated to manage donor funds and directly implement projects, other project outcomes such as the district disaster management plans and disaster maps developed with LDCF I support are reportedly being used by relevant government ministries in guiding donor’s program planning. For instance, in an interview with HADMA, it was reported that Save the Children distributed emergency aid based on the disaster maps developed by the project. 

Similarly, the demonstrated impact of water conservation activities and high demand at the communitylevel have encouraged multiple donors, communities, and even private sector to replicate these structures. For instance, in Puntland, earth dams and sand dams were reportedly replicated as follows: i) American Refugee Committee (ARC): 07 structures; Save the Children: 03 structures; GIZ: 05 structures; WFP: 02 structures; Private Sector Contractors12: 03 structures; and Community13: 04 structures. Moreover, several women-owned enterprises supported by the project are also likely to continue into the future. Finally, the in-country demand for the CCA curricula designed by the project was found to be high. Responding to this need, the Amoud University has rolled out a Masters degree program in CCA and NRM on its campus in Hargeisa. 


Tag: Water resources Sustainability Human and Financial resources Country Government Donor Private Sector Resilience Operational Services Technical Support

Recommendations
1

Recommendation No. 1: Region-specific Programming Approach:
The implementation context in the three project targeted regions is diverse. In particular, the lack of government capacity and security situation have significantly affected implementation in South Central region as compared to Somaliland and Puntland. Therefore, it is recommended that any future projects consider these realities in mind while determining implementation approaches. For instance, while partnership with government can in fact lead to positive results in Somaliland and Puntland, alternative strategies such as collaboration with local NGOs and CBOs are likely to be the more practical option in South Central.

 

2

Recommendation No. 2: SECTORAL FOCUS
LDCF I design was focused on multiple sectors, including water resources, DRM, and livelihoods. While these issues are inter-related, the lack of inter-activity/inter-component linkages led to fragmented programming. This approach not only stretched the technical and M&E resources but also led to the dilution of project results. It is therefore recommended that future projects are designed using a Theory of Change, where the links between different outcomes and outputs are clearly defined.
Moreover, instead of focusing on multiple activities, it is recommended that a particular activity is designated as the pivot around which the rest of the outputs and activities are built. In the context of Somalia, two such fundamental issues are water resources and livestock. For instance, improvements in water resources can be linked with diversified agricultural livelihoods, better health and hygiene, and reduced livestock stress. Similarly, a project focusing on livestock development can contribute to improved animal productivity through investments in water and feed resources, while support to processing and market linkages can result in improved incomes. In this regard, value addition activities such as livestock fattening to be undertaken with communities and export of frozen meat through support to private sector can be lucrative in the context of Somalia. As LDCF II is already designed to concentrate on water management, it is recommended that a similar project is designed around livestock resources.
Another important consideration in such a scoping exercise would be defining the beneficiary group. In particular, it has been observed that while the effects of climate change and disasters are uniform for all, women are particularly vulnerable due to their extensive involvement in natural resource management, e.g. livestock rearing and caregiving responsibilities for the household. Further, in Somalia women are considered as savvy entrepreneurs having made their mark in all variety of local businesses. It is therefore recommended that instead of allocating specific activities to women development, women’s role as key project stakeholders is banked upon as this social group is likely to be the most responsive to any outside support due to their comparatively higher vulnerability.

3

Recommendation No. 3: Community Partnership
While the LDCF I project developed strong partnerships with many important stakeholders, effective community partnership was seen to be lacking. For instance, despite being the primary beneficiaries of activities under Component 2, communities were only involved in the initial decision making regarding project site selection. Conversely, their role was non-existent or negligible when it came to contributing to the construction cost of infrastructure schemes. Similarly, although communities were to be the long-term custodians of the newly developed schemes, there has been a lack of discussion regarding the sustainability plans, e.g. financial requirements, ownership arrangements, and technical knowledge for operations and maintenance. As seen on the section on sustainability, all these factors adversely affect the continued operations of these schemes.
It is therefore recommended that future similar programs develop a thorough community partnership strategy. In addition, sustainability plans need to be factored into the feasibility studies of infrastructure schemes while exploring different alternatives, e.g. community ownership, public-private partnership, and even support to private sector for generation of resilience-based businesses. Similarly, the communities need to be made aware of the concepts of water metering, rationing, and user fees, etc

4

Recommendation 4. Knowledge Management:
The LDCF I has generated a vast amount of literature, often in subjects on which there is limited prior factual information available in the country. For instance, the project has drafted policies, generated disaster maps, developed CCA-based curriculum, produced district disaster plans, and undertaken baseline surveys, feasibility studies, and detailed infrastructure designs, etc. However, despite their general utility to a variety of audiences, these documents are presently available only to the direct stakeholders of the project. It is therefore recommended that the project ensures ready availability and access of this knowledge base to the general public. One method of doing this would be to establish a website for LDCF II project and upload these documents on a section of this website.
Moreover, while the impact of the project is readily visible in many instances, it is not easy to either quantify or collate this impact. It is therefore recommended that a systematic impact assessment is undertaken of different project activities, while quantifying results such as number of direct and indirect beneficiaries, impact on community survival, adoption of new resilience strategies due to enhanced knowledge, generation of alternative livelihoods, and increase in incomes, etc. Such an exercise will not only help quantify project results, it will help highlight the highest impact activities to inform future planning by UNDP-GEF, the Government of Somalia, and other donors in the country.

5

Recommendation No. 5: Project Management:
LDCF I implementation approach was based on partnership with a number of stakeholders. While a number of these stakeholders were seen to perform well in the respective area of work, the lack of active collaboration among them led the project to be implemented in silos. Consequently, the project was not able to generate synergies and complementarities which could have significantly contributed to organizational capacity building and implementation efficiency. It is therefore recommended that future projects devise mechanisms for proactive collaboration led by UNDP. This can take the form of regular, i.e. quarterly or biannual review meetings and information exchange workshops, etc.
Moreover, as the project was geographically widely spread, the M&E team in the field was stretched. Similarly, at times conflict on ground can hinder monitoring. Therefore, it is recommended that UNDP makes more frequent use of Third Party Monitoring arrangements. With regards to financial management, as a number of partner agencies in Somaliland and Puntland now have stronger capacity, future interventions can pay funds for six months in advance as compared to the current practice of quarterly advances. This will give further freedom to the partners in planning their activities, build capacities for comparatively longer-term planning, and also reduce the transaction time involved in the higher frequency of transfers.

In addition, it is recommended that gender mainstreaming training and support is made an integral part of the organizational capacity building initiatives. This can potentially include recruitment of competent women staff at both the PIT and partner levels, and a strategy to systematically address gender concerns when working with communities.
Further, while the LDCF I project was focused on resilience, in the interest of expediency of response the 2016 drought response project was implemented through the umbrella of the LDCF I. While this initiative paid off in the short-run, it created confusion among the implementing partners and even the M&E team regarding the objectives and activities of LDCF I. It is therefore recommended that when implementing parallel projects, all stakeholders must be provided clear communication regarding the differences across the individual projects, while reporting should also be segregated in order to ensure clarity.

6

Recommendation No. 6: Building on LDCF-I Outcomes
Since LDCF I generated a number of outputs in the areas of policy, planning, and water resources, it is recommended that future projects build on this progress. For instance, the community need assessments and district level disaster plans must be used as a foundation for future programming in these areas. Similarly, water structures established by the project should now be capitalized upon to build longer term resilience by initiating agriculture and livestock-based livelihood and food security programming, as well as awareness on water-related health and hygiene practices, etc.
Similarly, opportunities for linking LDCF I outcomes to other projects and funding sources should be explored. For instance, strengthened cooperatives can potentially be further linked to GEF Small Grants Program (GEF-SGP) funding.

1. Recommendation:

Recommendation No. 1: Region-specific Programming Approach:
The implementation context in the three project targeted regions is diverse. In particular, the lack of government capacity and security situation have significantly affected implementation in South Central region as compared to Somaliland and Puntland. Therefore, it is recommended that any future projects consider these realities in mind while determining implementation approaches. For instance, while partnership with government can in fact lead to positive results in Somaliland and Puntland, alternative strategies such as collaboration with local NGOs and CBOs are likely to be the more practical option in South Central.

 

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

The project activities were mainly oriented towards Puntland and Somaliland as per the approved project document. This was considering the ground realities and challenges of access to areas that had to be covered under the project. However, project design also included small number of community level interventions and setting-up of Agro-pastoral schools in South Central regions. These activities did suffer due to security situation resulting in either slow progress in implementation or inability to implement the activities. Based on the recommendations of Mid-term Review these activities were dropped in the second half of implementation phase of the project.
Point on following alternative strategies such as collaboration with local NGOs and CBOs is well noted. This would be considered during the implementation of LDCF II project on Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM). The vulnerability of communities in the South Central to the impacts of climate change is also very high. Partnerships with NGOs and CBOs for building resilience of rural population remains high and different implementation strategies can be used to reach out to these communities.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1. Consideration for the region-specific Programming Approach
[Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2021/04/06]
Project 2021/03 Completed Fully implemented in the UNDP/LDCF2-Integrated Water Resource Management Project where Somaliland and Puntland Environment and Water Ministries are directly engaged, while due to security challenges the federal ministry of Energy and Water Resources led the implementation History
2. Recommendation:

Recommendation No. 2: SECTORAL FOCUS
LDCF I design was focused on multiple sectors, including water resources, DRM, and livelihoods. While these issues are inter-related, the lack of inter-activity/inter-component linkages led to fragmented programming. This approach not only stretched the technical and M&E resources but also led to the dilution of project results. It is therefore recommended that future projects are designed using a Theory of Change, where the links between different outcomes and outputs are clearly defined.
Moreover, instead of focusing on multiple activities, it is recommended that a particular activity is designated as the pivot around which the rest of the outputs and activities are built. In the context of Somalia, two such fundamental issues are water resources and livestock. For instance, improvements in water resources can be linked with diversified agricultural livelihoods, better health and hygiene, and reduced livestock stress. Similarly, a project focusing on livestock development can contribute to improved animal productivity through investments in water and feed resources, while support to processing and market linkages can result in improved incomes. In this regard, value addition activities such as livestock fattening to be undertaken with communities and export of frozen meat through support to private sector can be lucrative in the context of Somalia. As LDCF II is already designed to concentrate on water management, it is recommended that a similar project is designed around livestock resources.
Another important consideration in such a scoping exercise would be defining the beneficiary group. In particular, it has been observed that while the effects of climate change and disasters are uniform for all, women are particularly vulnerable due to their extensive involvement in natural resource management, e.g. livestock rearing and caregiving responsibilities for the household. Further, in Somalia women are considered as savvy entrepreneurs having made their mark in all variety of local businesses. It is therefore recommended that instead of allocating specific activities to women development, women’s role as key project stakeholders is banked upon as this social group is likely to be the most responsive to any outside support due to their comparatively higher vulnerability.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

Theory of Change: Recently approved LDCF II/ Integrated Water Resource Management Project and (under formulation) Green Climate Fund (GCF) project have incorporated the recommendation. Theories of Change for these projects have been developed in consultation with the stakeholders and should provide focus and strategic direction during the implementation.
The LDCF I project aimed at building resilience to the impacts of climate change. Given Somalia’s exposure to droughts and floods, key interventions were to showcase innovative water management options in the context of changing climate. Project resources were not adequate to expand the activities to diversify agriculture-based livelihoods, livestock improvement and developing value chains around livestock products. Recommendations on these areas will be considered during implementation of LDCF II and Green Climate Fund (GCF) projects. Also, partnerships will be broadened to work closely with Food and Agriculture (FAO), USAID and others working on livestock improvement and markets development.
Strengthening women role as key stakeholders and ensuring that they are meaningfully represented is crucial and has been fully integrated in the LDCF II with a stand-alone outcome “Gender mainstreaming, knowledge management and M&E” along with the development of gender analysis and action plan based on a Vulnerability Assessment conducted in 2017 by the UNDP Somalia Office. LDCF II will also develop Integrated Water Resource Management strategy that will be gender-sensitive and will take into account the societal roles and responsibilities of women. This will ensure women are active in decision making on climate actions. Likewise, Women will be trained to have employment with water quality testing and monitoring. Women are often most susceptible to water-borne diseases, so role for women in ensuring good water quality is essential for sustainable management. LDCF II project will enable women to build an asset base that will make them more resilient to climate change trough trainings and diversification of livelihoods. Furthermore, the National Women’s Union will continue to be involved and consulted in order to ensure women are properly trained and engaged. Gender-focused NGOs/CSOs will have the role of conducting gender-disaggregated surveys to ensure women develop skills to diversify their livelihoods and are involved in decision-making.
Furthermore, the LDCF II project will support agro-pastoralists, including women, to build resilience by diversifying their livelihoods (e.g., nursery establishment and hydroponic fodder production). LDCF II funds will be used to provide a gradual transition that allows time for adaptation with on-the-pasture, on-the-farm field demonstration sites. These sites will provide extensive training on how to exploit the value chain of livestock goods such as production of milk, yogurts and cheeses for both men and women. LDCF II will also promote women-based groups to have sustainable businesses focused on the production and sale of value chain products. Such an approach will build on the entrepreneurial spirit of Somali women, use existing women-based groups and provide women with alternate livelihoods and sources of income.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. Re-designing future Projects theory of change an interlinking water, DRM, and livelihood interventions across all components and outputs.
[Added: 2019/12/19]
Project Manager 2019/12 Completed The theory of change of the current LDCF2/IWRM Project fully takes into account this recommendation and has fully reconciled water resources, DRM, and Livelihood interventions across all outcomes and outputs
3. Recommendation:

Recommendation No. 3: Community Partnership
While the LDCF I project developed strong partnerships with many important stakeholders, effective community partnership was seen to be lacking. For instance, despite being the primary beneficiaries of activities under Component 2, communities were only involved in the initial decision making regarding project site selection. Conversely, their role was non-existent or negligible when it came to contributing to the construction cost of infrastructure schemes. Similarly, although communities were to be the long-term custodians of the newly developed schemes, there has been a lack of discussion regarding the sustainability plans, e.g. financial requirements, ownership arrangements, and technical knowledge for operations and maintenance. As seen on the section on sustainability, all these factors adversely affect the continued operations of these schemes.
It is therefore recommended that future similar programs develop a thorough community partnership strategy. In addition, sustainability plans need to be factored into the feasibility studies of infrastructure schemes while exploring different alternatives, e.g. community ownership, public-private partnership, and even support to private sector for generation of resilience-based businesses. Similarly, the communities need to be made aware of the concepts of water metering, rationing, and user fees, etc

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

In Somalia context, implementation capacities for multi-year climate adaptation projects is evolving. In the past, tendency had been towards short-term humanitarian response activities due to the recurring shocks and low capacities of institutions and local communities to absorb these shocks. LDCF I project was the first multi-year climate adaptation project that started engaging vulnerable communities to take actions to address root causes with medium to long-term perspective. As such, future projects will build on initial work of LDCF I. This will also ensure sustainability of investments. Ownership of communities is the starting point of infrastructure investments. As the communities mature and reduce their dependency on humanitarian support, stronger systems around community funds for O&M, public-private partnerships, scaling up resilience-based businesses and performance-based contracts with private contractor will be used to ensure sustainability.The recommendation is fully integrated into the future LDCF II project partnership strategy. The details of the activities and implementation structures will be designed, partnerships for action will be forged and stakeholder engagement will focus around these design processes. Private sector will be engaged, particularly as part of improving network of weather and climate forecasting equipment. Also, private sector, particularly related to the livestock industry and water supply will play an important in O&M for large water infrastructure through PPP structures and in creating opportunities for employment through value chain opportunities. As a general practice, large infrastructure will be maintained with government appointed companies through a Public Private Partnership while small infrastructure such as berkeds will be maintained by community Water User Associations (WUAs).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1. Developing a thorough community partnership strategy and public-private partnership, for the future similar projects to extend ownership and generation of sustainable resilience-based businesses
[Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/10/08]
Project Manager 2020/09 Completed The revised LDCF2/IWRM Project document fully takes into account this recommendation and has fully reconciled community partnership strategy and public-private partnership under component 2. The Revision of the project document was done at a high-level meeting in Sep 2020 and the specific recommendation is part of the very revised Prodoc . History
4. Recommendation:

Recommendation 4. Knowledge Management:
The LDCF I has generated a vast amount of literature, often in subjects on which there is limited prior factual information available in the country. For instance, the project has drafted policies, generated disaster maps, developed CCA-based curriculum, produced district disaster plans, and undertaken baseline surveys, feasibility studies, and detailed infrastructure designs, etc. However, despite their general utility to a variety of audiences, these documents are presently available only to the direct stakeholders of the project. It is therefore recommended that the project ensures ready availability and access of this knowledge base to the general public. One method of doing this would be to establish a website for LDCF II project and upload these documents on a section of this website.
Moreover, while the impact of the project is readily visible in many instances, it is not easy to either quantify or collate this impact. It is therefore recommended that a systematic impact assessment is undertaken of different project activities, while quantifying results such as number of direct and indirect beneficiaries, impact on community survival, adoption of new resilience strategies due to enhanced knowledge, generation of alternative livelihoods, and increase in incomes, etc. Such an exercise will not only help quantify project results, it will help highlight the highest impact activities to inform future planning by UNDP-GEF, the Government of Somalia, and other donors in the country.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

LDCF II website will be developed by Q2 of 2020 and the knowledge products from LDCF I will be uploaded on this website. Also, UNDP’s Adaptation Learning Mechanism (ALM) will be used as a dissemination and sharing tool that is accessible by all and regularly updated with most recent information from the projects.
During the baseline assessment of LDCF II, impact analysis of LDCF I will also be undertaken. The focus would be on impact of LDCF I interventions in reducing vulnerabilities to climate change, cost effectiveness and improvement from baseline situation of LDCF 1 to date.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1. Making project knowledge available and accessible to the public and undertaking a systematic impact assessment to document impacts.
[Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2021/04/06]
Project Manager 2021/03 Completed Impact visibility sample conducted in Somaliland and Puntland Water Harvesting infrastructure sites and documented by the UNDP Communication Unit. https://vimeo.com/470573066 https://undpsom.medium.com/early-warning-system-helps-farmers-survive-floods-and-droughts-3cc06add9d79 https://sonna.so/en/early-warning-system-helps-farmers-survive-floods-and-droughts/ https://www.radiomuqdisho.net/early-warning-system-helps-farmers-survive-floods-and-droughts/?fbclid=IwAR0v0O2xI4h1lQmOAoIl4RTdQDTSQjWIleb5IkL3IuuiDJh6XGb_YrCGKLU History
5. Recommendation:

Recommendation No. 5: Project Management:
LDCF I implementation approach was based on partnership with a number of stakeholders. While a number of these stakeholders were seen to perform well in the respective area of work, the lack of active collaboration among them led the project to be implemented in silos. Consequently, the project was not able to generate synergies and complementarities which could have significantly contributed to organizational capacity building and implementation efficiency. It is therefore recommended that future projects devise mechanisms for proactive collaboration led by UNDP. This can take the form of regular, i.e. quarterly or biannual review meetings and information exchange workshops, etc.
Moreover, as the project was geographically widely spread, the M&E team in the field was stretched. Similarly, at times conflict on ground can hinder monitoring. Therefore, it is recommended that UNDP makes more frequent use of Third Party Monitoring arrangements. With regards to financial management, as a number of partner agencies in Somaliland and Puntland now have stronger capacity, future interventions can pay funds for six months in advance as compared to the current practice of quarterly advances. This will give further freedom to the partners in planning their activities, build capacities for comparatively longer-term planning, and also reduce the transaction time involved in the higher frequency of transfers.

In addition, it is recommended that gender mainstreaming training and support is made an integral part of the organizational capacity building initiatives. This can potentially include recruitment of competent women staff at both the PIT and partner levels, and a strategy to systematically address gender concerns when working with communities.
Further, while the LDCF I project was focused on resilience, in the interest of expediency of response the 2016 drought response project was implemented through the umbrella of the LDCF I. While this initiative paid off in the short-run, it created confusion among the implementing partners and even the M&E team regarding the objectives and activities of LDCF I. It is therefore recommended that when implementing parallel projects, all stakeholders must be provided clear communication regarding the differences across the individual projects, while reporting should also be segregated in order to ensure clarity.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

Structural measures for proactive collaboration would be institutionalised for the LDCF II project. This was tried during the implementation of LDCF I project but had challenges due to formation of new administrative units in Somalia. For example, 4 new states were formed during implementation phase of LDCF I. This involved formation of new institutions with very basic capacities to interact at national level. As the institutions mature it would be possible to have systems in place of proactive collaboration for synergies and implementation efficiency.
UNDP Country Office has third party monitoring systems in place. More frequent use of TPM will be ensured in the implementation of LDCF II and pipeline projects.
The financial disbursements to the implementation partners depend on capacity assessment of each implementing partner. A risk rating is defined, and UNDP Country Office decide on payment modalities and duration of funding. Quarterly disbursement is considered safest with low or moderate level of risks. Also, this helps in ensuring that any reshuffle at political level minimise the chances of misappropriation of project resources.
The recommendation on clear communication while implementing parallel projects is well noted. However, UNDP enterprise resource planning system did ensure that funds for these projects are separately managed.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1. Building Proactive collaboration of future projects through quarterly or biannual review meetings and information exchange workshops, etc.
[Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/10/08]
UNDP 2020/09 Completed The revised LDCF2/IWRM Project has fully taken into an account Proactive collaboration through beefed up coordination meetings, collaboration, and Transboundary initiatives. History
6. Recommendation:

Recommendation No. 6: Building on LDCF-I Outcomes
Since LDCF I generated a number of outputs in the areas of policy, planning, and water resources, it is recommended that future projects build on this progress. For instance, the community need assessments and district level disaster plans must be used as a foundation for future programming in these areas. Similarly, water structures established by the project should now be capitalized upon to build longer term resilience by initiating agriculture and livestock-based livelihood and food security programming, as well as awareness on water-related health and hygiene practices, etc.
Similarly, opportunities for linking LDCF I outcomes to other projects and funding sources should be explored. For instance, strengthened cooperatives can potentially be further linked to GEF Small Grants Program (GEF-SGP) funding.

Management Response: [Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2020/11/12]

This is fully incorporated in the recently launched LDCF II project and soft pipeline Green Climate Fund project. The potential for replication of adaptation interventions is high under the recently launched LDCF II follow up project due to several actions: Firstly, the Integrated Water Resources Management strategy will guide water access initiatives strategically. Similarly, building national capacities for hydro-meteorological monitoring and alert dissemination rather than relying on donor agencies will enable warnings to be much more easily produced in a timely manner. By tailoring warnings, tens of thousands of agro-pastoralists will receive targeted early warnings and contingency plans via mobile phone. A field approach will provide an avenue to adapt traditional knowledge with new practices, which improves the chances of replicability due to the familiarity of the approach to other farmers. As part LDCF I and in the implementation of LDCF II, UNDP will ensure influencing other development partners, such as, World Bank, European Union, African Development Bank and GIZ.
Federal Government of Somalia has expressed interest to initiate GEF Small Grants Programme. This expected to be launched in 2021. Linking LDCF I outcomes will GEF-SGP will be explored during the formulation phase of the later.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1. Building on LDCF-I Outcomes especially water structures established by the project for longer term resilience of the future projects including agriculture , livestock-based livelihood and food security programming, as well as awareness on water-related health and hygiene practices, etc.
[Added: 2019/12/19] [Last Updated: 2021/04/06]
UNDP 2021/03 Completed Fully imbed on the ongoing LDCF2-IWRM project where complementarity and synergy is enriched in the IWRM Components through three strategically linked components, each of which contains a set of outputs with their respective activities. At the end of the project, each of the three components will result in an outcome, including: 1) Robust National water resource management policy integrating clear national and state responsibilities, 2) Accelerated Transfer of technologies for enhanced climate risk monitoring and reporting on water resources in drought and flood prone areas, and 3) Improved water management and livelihood diversification for agro-pastoralists. History

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org