Climate Change Adaptation Action and Mainstreaming in Mozambique

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2010-2011, Mozambique
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
12/2011
Completion Date:
02/2013
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
25,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document African Adaptation Programme Final Evaluation Report.pdf report English 849.25 KB Posted 1254
Download document TORs AAP Final Evaluation.doc tor English 207.50 KB Posted 404
Title Climate Change Adaptation Action and Mainstreaming in Mozambique
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2010-2011, Mozambique
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 02/2013
Planned End Date: 12/2011
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. National and local governments and communities have the capacities to adapt to climate change and make inclusive and sustainable environment & energy decisions benefitting in particular under-served populations
Evaluation Budget(US $): 25,000
Source of Funding: 72288
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
José Antonio Cabo Bujan EVALUATOR
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: INGC, MICOA, INAM, Japan
Countries: MOZAMBIQUE
Comments: Strategic Plan Areas - Crisis Prevention and Recovery; Partners - INGC, MICOA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 More time and resources should be allocated for the design of a strategic program for national implementation to allow for adequate consultations at different national and subnational institutional levels.
2 National implementation projects (NEX/NIM) of mid financial size should be able to focus on a concrete strategic outcome/ outputs of the country program, provided this is well aligned with national priorities and not allow resources to be dispersed trying to score results in many areas.
3 A National implementation project (NEX/NIM) needs to set-up governing structures before implementation starts, including a project board, a national project director and a technical steering committee of technical officials of the implementing partners, including the UNDP and presided by the national project director that would meet regularly, can effectively support the implementation teams and provide solutions to problems and bottlenecks by having the capacity to solve technical and operational issues, while having easy access to and leverage with higher decision making levels.
4 Monitoring and evaluation should not be considered a requisite to be included in the project document but rather as a core of the project management. Accurate measurement of development results, including assessment of attribution effectiveness and efficiency of implementation strategies depend on an adequate M&E system. This involves allocating enough resources for M&E in terms of staff time and expertise to develop the instruments needed to collect and analyze monitoring information in a clear, transparent manner.
5 Risks assessments and their mitigation measures need to be conducted more carefully and updated during project implementation. Risks should be formulated in a more specific manner that will also facilitate the design of feasible mitigation measures.
6 Capacity needs assessments, at the right levels (political, technical, implementation units) that include technical and functional capacities, and the organizational and individual level, including the risk posed by staff and correct assessment of the expertise and manpower needed by the implementation units should be given more attention in project design including realistic mitigation measures.
7 A NIM/NEX project needs management and administrative support by the CO; assigning a program officer and assuring that administrative procedures are clearly understood by partners and providing agile follow-up on administrative matters is a must for a successful and effective implementation.
8 Awareness activities would be more effective if the scope and target groups are chosen strategically, e.g. a specific group of decision makers, or alternatively a general public awareness campaign rather than trying to score at all levels. A method to measure and assess the extent to which this awareness has been changed at different target groups must be explicitly described and budgeted in the project document and annual work plans.
1. Recommendation: More time and resources should be allocated for the design of a strategic program for national implementation to allow for adequate consultations at different national and subnational institutional levels.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

The project has closed. In future project design phases, the unit started considering time and resources for preparation, including activation of ?project preparation? phase in future.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: National implementation projects (NEX/NIM) of mid financial size should be able to focus on a concrete strategic outcome/ outputs of the country program, provided this is well aligned with national priorities and not allow resources to be dispersed trying to score results in many areas.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

This is currently being applied in integrating the PEI III and GHD to ensure focus and better alignment to UNDAF/CPD.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: A National implementation project (NEX/NIM) needs to set-up governing structures before implementation starts, including a project board, a national project director and a technical steering committee of technical officials of the implementing partners, including the UNDP and presided by the national project director that would meet regularly, can effectively support the implementation teams and provide solutions to problems and bottlenecks by having the capacity to solve technical and operational issues, while having easy access to and leverage with higher decision making levels.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

Setting up structures in advance is quite challenging, but the CO ensures that once project has been approved, the structures are set at the same time, so effective starting lag is reduced.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: Monitoring and evaluation should not be considered a requisite to be included in the project document but rather as a core of the project management. Accurate measurement of development results, including assessment of attribution effectiveness and efficiency of implementation strategies depend on an adequate M&E system. This involves allocating enough resources for M&E in terms of staff time and expertise to develop the instruments needed to collect and analyze monitoring information in a clear, transparent manner.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

M&E indicators are part of the PRODOC, and embedded in a result based framework, financial resources are allocated annually in AWP for that purpose

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: Risks assessments and their mitigation measures need to be conducted more carefully and updated during project implementation. Risks should be formulated in a more specific manner that will also facilitate the design of feasible mitigation measures.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

Risk assessment is a practice being already implemented and specific and formal, field risk assessment could be performed once risk is considered very high.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: Capacity needs assessments, at the right levels (political, technical, implementation units) that include technical and functional capacities, and the organizational and individual level, including the risk posed by staff and correct assessment of the expertise and manpower needed by the implementation units should be given more attention in project design including realistic mitigation measures.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

Capacity assessment is done regularly during the project preparation, although regional projects could miss the depth required to clearly identify country needs.

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: A NIM/NEX project needs management and administrative support by the CO; assigning a program officer and assuring that administrative procedures are clearly understood by partners and providing agile follow-up on administrative matters is a must for a successful and effective implementation.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

The CO carried out NIM/ NEX trainings for all IPs. In addition, on job coaching is provided. All projects are assigned to one specific National Programme Officer in CO that follows the daily work and supports to solve the bottlenecks, besides the Heads of Units.

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation: Awareness activities would be more effective if the scope and target groups are chosen strategically, e.g. a specific group of decision makers, or alternatively a general public awareness campaign rather than trying to score at all levels. A method to measure and assess the extent to which this awareness has been changed at different target groups must be explicitly described and budgeted in the project document and annual work plans.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/03/27]

Outputs are generally focus a specific target group, but baselines need to be set along with the M&E framework.

Key Actions:

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