Mid-term Evaluation: Strengthening Climate Adaptation Capacities in Georgia (SDC)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2021-2025, Georgia
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
05/2022
Completion Date:
04/2022
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
No
Evaluation Budget(US $):
30,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR-mid-term-Multi-Hazard-SDC-Feb2022.pdf tor English 744.72 KB Posted 23
Download document Evaluation report-mid-term-Multi-hazard-SDC-Feb2022.pdf report English 2693.59 KB Posted 49
Title Mid-term Evaluation: Strengthening Climate Adaptation Capacities in Georgia (SDC)
Atlas Project Number: 00094354
Evaluation Plan: 2021-2025, Georgia
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 04/2022
Planned End Date: 05/2022
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Resilience
  • 2. Sustainable
  • 3. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 2.3.1 Data and risk-informed development policies, plans, systems and financing incorporate integrated and gender-responsive solutions to reduce disaster risks, enable climate change adaptation and mitigation, and prevent risk of conflict
SDG Goal
  • Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
SDG Target
  • 13.1 Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries
  • 13.2 Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning
  • 13.3 Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning
Evaluation Budget(US $): 30,000
Source of Funding: SDC
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 19,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Amal Ahmad Abababseh International Evaluator/Team Leader JORDAN
Rusudan Kardava Local evaluator GEORGIA, REPUBLIC OF
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: SDC, Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture
Countries: GEORGIA, REPUBLIC OF
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

A1 (Overall Recommendation).

To grant a 12 to 18 months no-cost extension in the project timeframe. This will greatly help in fully achieving the stipulated objectives and outputs of the project. If this no-cost extension cannot be granted, the project team with the support of the TWGs and the Project Board should revisit the overall scope: a focused and less ambitious Results Framework for the entire duration of the second phase should be developed. Nevertheless, the MTE would like to highlight that this second option is tricky and should be examined very carefully as the outputs of the SDC Projects are the inputs for the GCF Project and thus any changes on the deliverables might be greatly affecting the overall aim of the whole programme

2

A2 (Recommendations on Strengthening effectiveness).

To convene, at the earliest, a special meeting of the Technical Working Groups to discuss and guide on the interventions that are lagging. UNDP should also further streamline and accelerate the work to engage a Regional Technical Advisor to further support the implementation of project interventions and develop revised plans. The revised plans developed by the Project should be duly approved by UNDP and the SDC and be implemented at the earliest

3

A3 (Recommendation on Strengthening Effectiveness)

The assessment methodologies prepared are very complicated for government practitioners to understand and to use/implement in the future. Hence, it is recommended that once these methodologies are implemented with the support of the project, these should be modified, simplified, and translated. Intensive training programmes should be delivered to ensure that concerned stakeholders can use them

4

A4 (Recommendation on Strengthening Effectiveness)

With the limited time left available, develop a well-designed scientific approach promoting the adoption of the standardized and harmonized national multi-hazard mapping and risk assessment methodology. To ensure that national institutions can utilize the national multi-hazards mapping and risk assessment methodology, concrete steps need to be put in place

  Observe and develop empathy, questioning the assumptions, creating many ideas in brainstorming session, adopting a hands-on approach in piloting and testing, and undertake ongoing experimentation: sketching, piloting, testing, and trying out concepts and ideas.

5

A5 (Recommendation on strengthening effectiveness)

Due to the limited time left, develop a coherent approach fostering the adoption and utilization of the developed institutional and legal frameworks for multi-hazard mapping and risk assessment implemented to provide a clear structure for the development of risk information. If successful, this approach of fostering the adoption of legal and institutional frameworks should also be applied to other policies and laws

6

A6 (Recommendation on strengthening effectiveness)

Considering that the project focused the first half of the implementation on developing key methodologies, assessments and background studies, the focus on the second half needs to be on ensuring that key stakeholders possess the necessary capacities and mechanisms to effectively implement the established methodology and the updated policy and regulatory framework. The work on the capacity building component should be accelerated and made very condensed

7

A7 (Recommendation on strengthening effectiveness)

Institutionalize the approach to national multi-hazard mapping and risk assessment based on stakeholder interests, capacities, and potential to effectively apply the methodologies in the long run. Clear institutional accountability lines should be established to avoid “blame-shifting” in case the methodologies are not implemented coherently

8

A8 (Recommendation on strengthening effectiveness)

Ensure that key stakeholders are supported by increasing their capacity to implement their mandates in line with the new legal and institutional framework. This will require training of staff and eventually establishing a ToT approach to increase the sustainability of the Project’s impact but will also require identifying the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder

9

A9 (Recommendation on improving efficiency)

Thus, it is recommended to employ a dedicated Specialist at the PMU level for the SDC project to coordinate the implementation of Outputs 1.1 and 2.1 and to support the Project Manager in reviewing and approving the technical reports. Furthermore, there is also a need to compile data on objective level indicators to duly assess the achievement status of project objectives

10

A10 (Recommendation on improving efficiency)

To further regularize and streamline weekly coordination meetings at the PMU level and prepare mechanisms to address coordination issues between the SDC and GCF funded projects especially with the local and national governments

11

A11 (Recommendation on increasing potential for impact)

To increase the potential for the impact it is recommended to consider the latest research findings on multi-hazard mapping and risk assessment methodology as well as in multi-hazard mapping and risk profiling tools and approaches. Accordingly, the project should continue and potentially expand approaches to enhance national and local levels capacities to utilize the tools developed by the project and to ensure the continuity of the work after the project closure. These approaches demonstrated a high potential for impact

12

A12 (Recommendation on increasing sustainability)

Given that the project experienced a major delay during the first half of its implementation, the upcoming implementation period should be focused on sustainability. The project team is encouraged to develop a timely and pragmatic exit strategy along with a financial sustainability plan in a participatory manner with key stakeholders involved in the project as well as close coordination with the donors to the project. It should be outlining issues, ways and means to smoothly phase-out and hand over interventions to partners, to ensure sustainability and continuity. The following recommendations should be considered in the upcoming period and could also be included in the exit strategy

  • Develop a comprehensive approach on how to ensure the sustainability of the developed policy and legislative framework. Ensure that key stakeholders such as the NEA and MEPA are supported in increasing their capacity to implement its mandate. This will require training of staff and eventually establishing a ToT approach to increase the sustainability of the Project’s impact.
  • Develop a step-by-step approach ensuring a smooth transition from UNDP-driven to nationally driven approach to CCA/DRR. This approach should focus on increasing the sustainability of existing technical work being done by national and international experts linking them with the budgets of the relevant institutions and communicating the new approach to institutions.
13

A13 (Recommendation on increasing sustainability)

Consider establishing a monitoring mechanism on the implementation of recommendations of the capacity assessments and knowledge management carried within the framework of this project. It is assumed that this would result in an increased implementation rate and improved sustainability of the results

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