- Evaluation Plan:
- 2021-2025, Indonesia
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 04/2022
- Completion Date:
- 03/2022
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- No
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 30,000
00104290 Sixth OP of the GEF SGP in Indonesia (6th SGP) GEF Terminal Evaluation
Share
Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
tor | English | 577.69 KB | Posted | 64 |
![]() |
report | English | 1366.57 KB | Posted | 24 |
![]() |
related-document | English | 945.38 KB | Posted | 26 |
![]() |
related-document | English | 528.16 KB | Posted | 28 |
Title | 00104290 Sixth OP of the GEF SGP in Indonesia (6th SGP) GEF Terminal Evaluation | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Atlas Project Number: | 00104290 | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Plan: | 2021-2025, Indonesia | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||
Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
Completion Date: | 03/2022 | ||||||||||||||
Planned End Date: | 04/2022 | ||||||||||||||
Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||||||||
SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||
SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||
Evaluation Budget(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||||||||
Source of Funding: | GEF SGP | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||||||||
Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
Key Stakeholders: | Ministry of Environment and Forestry, The National Research and Innovation Agency, sub-national governments, community networks, NGOs (Yayasan Bina Usaha Lingkungan, World Research Institute (WRI) Indonesia, Yayasan Detara), private sectors (PT. Martina Bertho, Tbk) | ||||||||||||||
Countries: | INDONESIA |
Lessons | |
---|---|
1. |
Tag: Sustainability UNDP management |
Findings | |
1. |
|
Recommendations | |
---|---|
1 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation A1 |
2 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation A2. Failure and unsuccessful projects are perhaps more important to assess and analyze than successful ones. Key aspects behind failure and success should be analyzed to improve project preparation and selection process. |
3 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation B1. Stakeholder´s involvement plan should not only list potential actors and organizations, but it should also describe them and analyze what concrete measures and activities will be carried out to ensure their involvement and participation from the benefits derived from project intervention. |
4 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation B2. Communities and host organizations were not involved in project design. It is recommended to improve their participation, especially in setting goals and targets. |
5 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation B3. The Ministry of the Environment and Forestry could have played a greater role in project implementation, especially in terms of dissemination of lessons learned and scaling up technologies and practices implemented by communities. |
6 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation B4. Involve the Ministry of Women Empowerment and Children Protection in the project design and implementation so that the project’s outputs and outcomes and the data could be used by the MoWECP and at the same time it would also sensitize the ministry of Environment to gender-based natural resources management/governance discourses. The same recommendations also apply to other relevant ministries or governmental agencies |
7 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation C1. Report on project indicators should disaggregate between direct and indirect impacts derived from project intervention. There should be a clear indication about what has been achieved through GEF investments and what has been accounted as progress funded by other sources. |
8 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation C2. Implementation should allocate sufficient time and facilitate dedicated spaces for PMU and host organizations to ensure a common understanding of project strategy, goals and targets. These spaces to share views and lessons learned should continue during implementation. |
9 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation C3. It is recommended that personnel or an organization is given a specific task to ensure the adoption of, or to link, the project outputs and outcomes in national level government. |
10 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation D1. Add gender-based qualitative indicators to ensure the long-term changes by increasing stakeholders’ knowledge/awareness on inclusive, if not specifically mentioned as gender mainstreamed natural resources management so that it will strengthen the overall gender responsive/sensitive approach of the project. An activity to achieve this target could be in form of gender equality and social inclusion training for the community members, men and women, grantees and government officials |
11 | Terminal Evaluation recommendation D2. Define indicators that qualitatively measure the changes of women and other marginalized groups, leadership in community-based landscape/seascape management. In addition to the gender-based quantitative indicators. For example, setting indicator on women or other marginalized groups’ increasing capacities to speak in public (e.g. women’s group, community’s meeting, speaking to the authorities, depending on the context), in advocating for their rights fulfilment in landscape/seascape management, or increasing positive perception of men and women in regards with women’s roles in landscape/seascape management. An example of activities to achieve this result could be exchange learning programme between community groups (women groups, youth groups, etc.) not only between the grantees |