Strengthening Community Based Forest and Watershed Managemnt (Mid Term Evaluation)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2011-2015, Indonesia
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
07/2012
Completion Date:
09/2012
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR IC_MTE SCBFWM.doc tor English 116.00 KB Posted 730
Download document SCBFWM - MTE report July 2012 - 12092012_final_erc.doc report English 1040.00 KB Posted 3410
Title Strengthening Community Based Forest and Watershed Managemnt (Mid Term Evaluation)
Atlas Project Number: 00056845
Evaluation Plan: 2011-2015, Indonesia
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 09/2012
Planned End Date: 07/2012
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Development plans and programmes integrate environmentally sustainable solutions in a manner that promotes poverty reduction, MDG achievement and low-emission climate-resilient development
  • 2. 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 $): 20,000
Source of Funding: GEF
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Dennis Fenton and Ashadi Team Leader
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-1
PIMS Number: 4032
Key Stakeholders: Min of Forestry and Bappenas
Countries: INDONESIA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Recommendation 1: Develop an operational strategy for achieving a sustainable impact (Financial and Institutional) The current path of the Project is unlikely to lead to financial or institutional sustainability. Until present, the Project has not done sufficient to ensure sustainability, either at the site level or at the watershed level. It has not done the necessary analysis, developed sustainability strategies, or undertaken actions. This raises major challenges for the Project, in particular for financial and institutional sustainability.
2 Recommendation 2: Focus the use of GEF Funds into the most essential activity areas The MTE finds that GEF funds have already been spread too thinly, and as a result some activities and inputs were under resourced. Furthermore, most recommendations in this report ? notably Recommendation 1 - will require funds from the Project budget. Hence, it will be necessary to make budget savings on other activities.
3 Recommendation 3: Enhance the Project approach to Gender Women play an important role in natural resources management and related decision-making in rural parts of Indonesia; and this role could increase in the future if men increasingly move to non-farm employment. For these reasons, and building on the important work undertaken by the Project so far, a more thorough approach to addressing gender inequality in the Project is recommended.
4 Recommendation 4: Consider enhancing the Project approach to Biodiversity Conservation Until present, the project has focused mostly on land conservation, and biodiversity conservation is to be achieved as a secondary benefit. This has allowed a good merging of land and socio-economic objectives. However, it is insufficient to guarantee a long-term and overall contribution to biodiversity conservation.
5 Recommendation 5: Ensure the technical quality of all project activities by drawing from international and national best practices A key to the Project success is that all inputs, activities and outputs are high quality and in line with international best practices. In particular, Project support to ensuring financial and institutional sustainability is challenging and will require high quality technical support, notably to the BPDAS.
6 Recommendation 6: Implement the Following Miscellaneous Adjustments
1. Recommendation: Recommendation 1: Develop an operational strategy for achieving a sustainable impact (Financial and Institutional) The current path of the Project is unlikely to lead to financial or institutional sustainability. Until present, the Project has not done sufficient to ensure sustainability, either at the site level or at the watershed level. It has not done the necessary analysis, developed sustainability strategies, or undertaken actions. This raises major challenges for the Project, in particular for financial and institutional sustainability.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/12/04]

Management Response: The management acknowledges that delivery of output has been successful in this period of the project but that a sustainability strategy for the post-SCBFWM phase must be formulated and implemented. Detailed plan of the activities are described in the MTE report under Recommendation 1.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1) All 6 BPDAS meet with extension centres to formulate a strategy of the assistance to CBOs after project end.
[Added: 2012/12/04] [Last Updated: 2012/12/06]
NPD 2013/01 Overdue-Initiated (scheduled)
2) Establish a classification of CBOs by capacity for prioritization of post SCBFWM activities.
[Added: 2012/12/04] [Last Updated: 2012/12/06]
PMU 2013/01 Overdue-Initiated (initiated/Scheduled)
3) Fact finding mission on site by national consultant on each site to: a. Intensive technical analysis to assess possible sources of funds and possible benefit distribution systems and possible MRV systems; b. Capacity and needs assessment of BPDAS c. Capacity building strategy for each BPDAS is formulated
[Added: 2012/12/04] [Last Updated: 2012/12/06]
PMU 2013/10 Overdue-Initiated MRV system is on progress of development
4) Finalization and socialization a formal Technical Guideline for Watershed Management that will institutionalise the approach to watershed management and/or the model(s) developed by the Project;
[Added: 2012/12/04] [Last Updated: 2013/03/05]
IP (Dir. Planning and evaluation of watershed management) 2013/03 Overdue-Not Initiated
2. Recommendation: Recommendation 2: Focus the use of GEF Funds into the most essential activity areas The MTE finds that GEF funds have already been spread too thinly, and as a result some activities and inputs were under resourced. Furthermore, most recommendations in this report ? notably Recommendation 1 - will require funds from the Project budget. Hence, it will be necessary to make budget savings on other activities.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/12/04]

Management Response: The management acknowledges that the project must focus on essential activities. Target groups (CBOs) with high potential must be prioritizes whereas other with lower performance and/or potential should be reduced.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2) For CBOs with limited capacity but high potential, it should be supported when possible by government programmes or private sector.
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, NPD, BPDAS, RF, UNDP 2013/01 Overdue-Initiated Refer to the result of the CBO classification of performing and non-performing CBOs
1) Stop the financing of small grants to CBOs with enough capacity to operate independently.
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, NPD, BPDAS, RF, UNDP 2013/01 Overdue-Not Initiated Refer to the result of the CBO classification of performing and non-performing CBOs
3) The role of the project should be to facilitate the partnerships, the design, the set-up and running of the small grant scheme;
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, NPD, BPDAS, RF, UNDP 2013/01 Overdue-Not Initiated Refer to the result of the CBO classification of performing and non-performing CBOs
3. Recommendation: Recommendation 3: Enhance the Project approach to Gender Women play an important role in natural resources management and related decision-making in rural parts of Indonesia; and this role could increase in the future if men increasingly move to non-farm employment. For these reasons, and building on the important work undertaken by the Project so far, a more thorough approach to addressing gender inequality in the Project is recommended.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/12/04]

Management Response: The management acknowledges that a gender action plan must be developed for each site and most importantly that the concept of gender balance and mainstreaming is clear to all stakeholders in all sites.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3) Conduct comprehensive gender analysis for 3 project sites
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, RF 2013/01 Overdue-Initiated Basic gender analysis already conducted in Yogyakarta and NTT
4) Develop draft gender action plan
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU 2013/03 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
5) Dissemination of draft gender action plan for finalization and approval
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU, Regional Offices 2013/09 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
6) Implement selected gender strategic issues into project activities
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU, BPDAS 2014/01 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
1) Raise awareness and commmon understanding about Gender concept in all sites;
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, RF, BPDAS 2013/01 Overdue-Not Initiated (scheduled)
2) Assign gender focal point in BPDAS.
[Added: 2012/12/06]
BPDAS 2013/01 Overdue-Not Initiated (scheduled)
4. Recommendation: Recommendation 4: Consider enhancing the Project approach to Biodiversity Conservation Until present, the project has focused mostly on land conservation, and biodiversity conservation is to be achieved as a secondary benefit. This has allowed a good merging of land and socio-economic objectives. However, it is insufficient to guarantee a long-term and overall contribution to biodiversity conservation.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/12/04]

Management Response: The management agrees with the above recommendation and will develop a strategy and action plan. The mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation will be measured with dedicated indicators.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1) Recruiting a biodiversity expert to assess the biodiversity situation at each site, including on-farm biodiversity. The review should cover the status of biodiversity and the threats;
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, UNDP 2013/01 Overdue-Not Initiated
2) Developing a strategy for mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into Project activities, with clear performance indicators (SMART);
[Added: 2012/12/06] [Last Updated: 2013/03/05]
PMU, UNDP 2013/07 Overdue-Not Initiated
3) Conduct training and awareness raising on biodiversity conservation for BPDAS, relevant district officials and selected CBO?s members as needed;
[Added: 2012/12/06]
PMU, BPDAS, RO 2013/03 Overdue-Not Initiated Already conducted in Yogyakarta
5. Recommendation: Recommendation 5: Ensure the technical quality of all project activities by drawing from international and national best practices A key to the Project success is that all inputs, activities and outputs are high quality and in line with international best practices. In particular, Project support to ensuring financial and institutional sustainability is challenging and will require high quality technical support, notably to the BPDAS.
Management Response: [Added: 2012/12/04]

Management Response: The management agrees that high quality of output is important and will enlarge the scope of discussion and technical assistance to international level.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Involve the use of foreign experts, or the use of Indonesian experts/organizations with a strong international record.
[Added: 2012/12/06] [Last Updated: 2013/03/05]
UNDP 2013/03 Overdue-Initiated
6. Recommendation: Recommendation 6: Implement the Following Miscellaneous Adjustments
Management Response: [Added: 2013/03/05]

The key actions listed below reflect the adjustments that the Management decided to follow up

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1) Review the TOR for the Project Board and its Technical Committee and make sure each body is fully aware of its responsibilities. One of the two bodies should become responsible for providing strategic guidance to the Project;
[Added: 2013/03/05]
NPD, UNDP 2013/03 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
2) The current Project indicators have been approved by GEF and the Project must report back on these. However, they do not serve a useful purpose in terms of adaptive management, or in terms of performance monitoring. It is therefore recommended that two indicators to monitor progress towards financial and institutional sustainability are developed. The baseline should be established for these, as should regular benchmarks until the project ends;
[Added: 2013/03/05]
NPD, UNDP, Project Board 2013/03 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
3) Ensure that the model developed by the project is clearly documented, that all its parameters are clearly described, and that all aspects of its development and implementation are monitored and documented, in order to prepare a top quality knowledge management product;
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU, RF 2013/07 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
4) Conduct an analysis on the effectiveness of coordination among institutions at national and sub-national levels to ensure the implementation of Integrated Watershed Management Plan.
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU, BPDAS, 2013/10 Overdue-Initiated Already conducted in NTT and Yogyakarta but not yet disseminated to local stakeholders
5) Take the necessary financial planning measures: Submit monthly financial reports to UNDP to reduce the gap in funding at the beginning of each quarter.The PMU will improve the quarterly budget planning so that it does not lead to a situation where the project has no funds in the final weeks of the year;
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU 2013/04 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
6) Socialization of the existing guidelines to ensure the standard quality of all project Output (IWMP, regulations, etc.). Discuss the draft of the output in multi-stakeholder expert groups.
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU 2013/07 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled
7) A study will be conducted next year on economic or financial analysis of the ecological services provided by watersheds in one project site, in order to place a monetary value on these services. These monetary values can later be used in advocacy campaigns.
[Added: 2013/03/05]
PMU, UNDP 2013/07 Overdue-Initiated Scheduled

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