KKK-KCR

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2006-2011, Viet Nam
Evaluation Type:
Project
Planned End Date:
03/2009
Completion Date:
03/2009
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
40,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document 00051178_KKKKCR_TOR.pdf tor Posted 698
Download document 00051178_-_KKKKCR_EvalReport.pdf report English Posted 1095
Download document 00051178_-_KKKKCR_Sum_Recommen.pdf summary Posted 584
Title KKK-KCR
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2006-2011, Viet Nam
Evaluation Type: Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 03/2009
Planned End Date: 03/2009
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Crisis Prevention & Recovery
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 40,000
Source of Funding:
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Jo Breese Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: VIET NAM
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 1: Project design/formulation: 1.1. Project design, despite its coherence, does not meet needs of the Ba Na community. Current approach to licensing of NTFPs for sustainable harvesting and sale as proposed by FRR in their report.
2 1.2 Budget constraint: This situation has been exacerbated by a period of more rapid inflation in Vietnam since the project commenced.)
3 1.3 Structure of the Project Governance: lack of clarity about respective roles and responsibilities because PMU reports to the PSC that includes some implementers. When implementing the activities the stakeholder reports to the PMU.
4 1.4 Project Structure: The intention to have both SFCs certified by FSC within the time frame of the project is overly ambitious.
5 2: Implementation Approach 2.1. Replication approach: KKK and KCR and the connecting Green Corridor offer an emergent and innovative model of protected area connectivity to contribute to Vietnam's biodiversity conservation initiatives.
6 2.2 Replication approach: No formal mechanisms in place for national learning.
1. Recommendation: 1: Project design/formulation: 1.1. Project design, despite its coherence, does not meet needs of the Ba Na community. Current approach to licensing of NTFPs for sustainable harvesting and sale as proposed by FRR in their report.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

Agreed that further training shall be increased

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1.a. Implement further training building on the initial training activities in the second phase of the project (e.g. GIS, biodiversity monitoring, community engagement skills for Ba Na forest protection units. 1.1.b. KCR NR management board should provide training for all KCR NR staff in environmental education when their staff resources are increased.
[Added: 2009/10/07] [Last Updated: 2010/12/29]
PPC of Gia Lai and Binh Dinh, with support from PMU 2010/12 Completed Further training is taking place though hands on direct interactions between PMU members and local communities. Other training on biodiversity monitoring is yet to be initiated. Environmental education training is ongoing, though existing inputs from Environment Nature Vietnam
2. Recommendation: 1.2 Budget constraint: This situation has been exacerbated by a period of more rapid inflation in Vietnam since the project commenced.)
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

Budget revision

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.2.Conduct budget revision, reallocating more budget for under funded activities, including Community education with villages, CCG meetings, development of co-management, Training workshop for stakeholders, Preliminary assessments of the function and roles of stakeholders in co management, Preparation of the feasibility case to PPC to enable declaration of the Green Corridor
[Added: 2009/10/07] [Last Updated: 2010/01/19]
PMU 2010/01 Completed Budget revisions have been conducted to address priority needs of the project in line with its ultimate objective of corridor establishment
3. Recommendation: 1.3 Structure of the Project Governance: lack of clarity about respective roles and responsibilities because PMU reports to the PSC that includes some implementers. When implementing the activities the stakeholder reports to the PMU.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

Nothing has been done with this respect. The recommendation does not make much sense.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
In combination with the above
[Added: 2009/10/07]
TFT 2009/11 Completed
4. Recommendation: 1.4 Project Structure: The intention to have both SFCs certified by FSC within the time frame of the project is overly ambitious.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

Not part of the PMU, but rather of the TFT counterpart

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Not part of the PMU, but rather of the TFT counterpart.
[Added: 2009/10/07]
TFT 2009/10 Completed
5. Recommendation: 2: Implementation Approach 2.1. Replication approach: KKK and KCR and the connecting Green Corridor offer an emergent and innovative model of protected area connectivity to contribute to Vietnam's biodiversity conservation initiatives.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

The corridor has been identified, and elements into its operationalization presented to the Gia Lai PPC for endorsement. In effect, the corridor ahs been accepted and is about to be made operational.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. Provides a model for the creation of a Green Corridor: identification, assessment, development and implementation including community (CCG) and stakeholder engagement
[Added: 2009/10/07] [Last Updated: 2010/12/29]
PMU 2010/12 Completed
6. Recommendation: 2.2 Replication approach: No formal mechanisms in place for national learning.
Management Response: [Added: 2009/10/07]

Lesson sharing should be included as a specific activity for the remainder of this project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.2.a. Making key project information available on the project website (www.kkkkcrproject.org) would be a cost effective method for information sharing. 2.2.b. host a learning workshop and the outcomes of the project be written up into a learning document and shared with key decision makers and protected area managers
[Added: 2009/10/07] [Last Updated: 2010/12/29]
PMU 2010/12 Completed None of these have taken place as of yet. About one more year remaining in the project to conduct such workshop.

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