Final Evaluation of Capacity Development for Improved Environmental Management

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2012-2016, Seychelles
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
11/2013
Completion Date:
01/2014
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
13,982

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document Terms of Reference for TE of CB2.docx tor English 42.29 KB Posted 491
Download document CB2 Seychelles_Terminal Evaluation Report_Final (2).docx report English 1204.64 KB Posted 792
Download document Conclusions and lessons learned for Cb2.docx summary English 35.94 KB Posted 581
Title Final Evaluation of Capacity Development for Improved Environmental Management
Atlas Project Number: 00071548
Evaluation Plan: 2012-2016, Seychelles
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 01/2014
Planned End Date: 11/2013
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 1.3. Solutions developed at national and sub-national levels for sustainable management of natural resources, ecosystem services, chemicals and waste
Evaluation Budget(US $): 13,982
Source of Funding: GEF
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Anne Woodfine Mrs woodfine1@woodfine1.freeserve.co.uk
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Multifocal Areas
Project Type: EA
GEF Phase: GEF-1
PIMS Number: 3703
Key Stakeholders: GEF and UNDP
Countries: SEYCHELLES
Comments: Given the size of the Medium Size Project 400K, only a final evaluation will be undertaken in the last quarter of 2013 as agreed with the GEF Regional Technical Advisor
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 The project has supported the Government of the Seychelles to develop the Seychelles Sustainable Development Strategy (SSDS), to follow-on the Environmental Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS 2000-2010), which it is envisaged will mainstream sustainable development across all sectors, beyond the traditional ?environmental? sector. (Additional support for this process came from the came from EU ReCoMap project.) However, there were delays in preparation and finalization of the document: it was not published and validated until mid-2012 (it was to have been dated 2010-2020, but it was published as 2012-2020). The SSDS 2012-2020 includes implementation arrangements, which were to be in place and functioning by the end of 2013, yet these structures are not yet in place. (Many of these issues were beyond the control of the CB2 project.) Once operational, this is the most important achievement of the CB2 project.
2 By the time of the Terminal Evaluation, MEA Focal Points (FPs) knew little of the project and did not feel the project had contributed to their reporting to the MEAs on behalf of Seychelles. Better engagement would have been expected between the project and the MEA FPs in MEE, as this was a project they clearly supported at the outset.
3 National capacity in environmental management has been enhanced and will benefit into the future as the project supported development of course materials for the University of Seychelles (UNISEY) to teach a B.Sc. in Environmental Science. This will expand the pool of locally trained expertise in the sector and ensure capacity is built in environmental management into the future. Currently it is expected that 5-10 students will follow the programme each year ? with additional working environmental scientists likely to be attracted to study third year modules as short courses for professional development. This project activity did not involve a large amount of money ? but undoubtedly will have, along with the SSDS, the greatest long-term impact.
4 The project supported national consultants and an international consultant to develop the Seychelles Environmental Outlook (SEO-1) and a data management system to collect and maintain key environmental datasets which will help Seychelles report to international environmental conventions. The data management system is likely to meet the original aspirations and once fully operational will assist the MEA FPs to report. However, the final SEO-1 report has not yet been finalized, due to a break-down in relations between the project and the contracted consultant and datasets are not being shared to the extent envisaged.
5 Pilot sub-projects are encouraging Seychellois to undertake environmentally friendly activities including rainwater harvesting, generating solar power and recycling. These were all identified as priorities in the National Capacity Self-Assessment (2005). However, the project did not eventually include support for developing the district land use plans (LUPs) for Seychelles, as detailed in the Project Document (ProDoc), as delays between approval and start-up meant by start-up these were instead being supported by other GEF projects. The project budget could not have covered the costs of the LUPs
6 Project achievements have been attained despite various constraints in management, mainly linked to human resource issues ? but do not meet all the expectations, even those agreed in the Logical Framework revised at the Inception Workshop. Notably, changes in project and wider Project Co-ordination Unit staff have left the project at various times without appropriate leadership. Furthermore, the Steering Committee met only once in the 4 year project (extended from the planned 3 year project) and no-one in MEE agrees now who the National Project Director was or is. (It seems that the various Project Managers did not appreciate this was part of their role and the Programme Co-ordinators were perhaps not aware that the meetings were not taking place.)
7 Project baseline was not established at start-up using the evaluation method proposed for the project in the ProDoc (the Capacity Development Monitoring Scorecard) and no evidence can be found of any mid-term evaluation or review having been carried-out (both included in the ProDoc, although not strictly required for a MSP).Many routine project reports could not be traced at the terminal evaluation, making finding information on the progress of the project an effort in detective work, including referring to former staff (some in Seychelles, others further afield) and others less closely involved in the project in Seychelles.
8 CB2 has demonstrated that it does not require a large investment of funds to support development of modules for a university course in Environmental Science, which will ensure future cohorts of well-trained graduates. A CB3 project should raise knowledge and understanding of sustainable development across all sectors in GoS, also in the school curricula, teacher training, professional development and in the private sector.
9 The PCU and indeed wider UNDP should ensure that all staff use an agreed system to save project-related computer files and that the PCU back-up and archive digital data regularly to ensure project documents are not lost. This is now in place.
10 When project staff leave, they should be obliged to have a hand-over meeting if their replacement has been recruited, or brief the PC and leave detailed hand-over notes to assist their successor. (Similarly, when more senior staff leave (e.g. the PC during the CB2 project period), they should brief their successor and/or leave detailed notes.
11 When inexperienced Project Managers are recruited, as seems often to be the case in Seychelles due to wider HR issues (highlighted in the NCSA), they should be provided with greater support by their line managers. Reportedly they have regular meetings ? but this does not seem to have been adequate for the CB2 ? on other projects, the system seems to be working well.
12 If set-up, Steering Committee meetings should take place regularly. However for Seychelles, where the number of key GoS and NGO staff is small and individuals are involved in several GEF projects, perhaps having steering committees for each project is not workable and either a single SC for all projects (or certainly all small/MS projects) could be considered ? or alternative means of communication (e.g. Facebook or Twitter) used to regularly and routinely share information and ensure sound guidance/national ownership for projects.
13 Terms of contracts should be adhered, particularly no consultant should be paid amounts due on submission of reports before reports have been submitted.
14 Should relations between a project and a consultant (whether national or international) become difficult, early actions should be taken to avoid problems later in projects.
15 Project baselines and monitoring are important in order that impacts can be quantified at later stages ? M&E plans set out in the ProDoc and agreed at Inception should be adhered to.
16 As UNDP PCU implements other GEF projects, it should continue to support and encourage GoS to set-up implementation structures and use SSDS.
17 The Physical Planning Bill and Environment Protection Act, also the LUPs, all need to be approved by Cabinet/gazetted to support environmental management in Seychelles. MEE should catalyse this.
18 The need for capacity building in sustainable development is on-going across all sectors. This is not a one-off activity, but needs to be continuous at all levels (schools, university, teacher training, professional development, the private sector and public awareness). All sectors in GoS need to mainstream this capacity building for sustainable development, including using existing on-line teaching resources for schools. This should be integrated well into the upcoming Medium-Term National Development Strategy
19 MEE and more widely other GoS Ministries should continue to support the development and widening of access to the SEO database ? ensuring it is maintained and kept up-to-date, also that data is made accessible across GoS ITC systems ? and also, if possible, NGOs and the wider public can access and up-date data via the www.
20 Issues of data sharing need to be considered more thoroughly across GoS and with NGOs, as currently NGOs unwilling to add ?their? data as they recognise it to be valuable. Also GoS appears currently not willing to make available their data to the public. The mutual benefits of data sharing need to be highlighted, for example by the skilled staff of the Environmental Information and Data Section of MEE.
21 PCU and GoS (MEE) should encourage SIF and TRASS to continue to publicize their community activities and they should be supported (e.g. with funding from GoS and/or other GEF projects) to replicate them.
22 School and DA-based pilot sub-projects should be publicized by each participating organisation ? helped by the UNDP / GEF signboards, to increase scaling-up by other schools, private individuals etc. The PCU Communications Officer is reported to have already been tasked to follow up on this as part of her TOR.
1. Recommendation: The project has supported the Government of the Seychelles to develop the Seychelles Sustainable Development Strategy (SSDS), to follow-on the Environmental Management Plan of Seychelles (EMPS 2000-2010), which it is envisaged will mainstream sustainable development across all sectors, beyond the traditional ?environmental? sector. (Additional support for this process came from the came from EU ReCoMap project.) However, there were delays in preparation and finalization of the document: it was not published and validated until mid-2012 (it was to have been dated 2010-2020, but it was published as 2012-2020). The SSDS 2012-2020 includes implementation arrangements, which were to be in place and functioning by the end of 2013, yet these structures are not yet in place. (Many of these issues were beyond the control of the CB2 project.) Once operational, this is the most important achievement of the CB2 project.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management emphasizes that the role of the project was to support the preparation of the SSDS, and the responsibility of financing and implementing of the strategy falls upon Government. Management acknowledges, however, that it still has a role in encouraging Government, and supporting it as far as possible, to move forward with the establishment of institutional structures and implementation. Following on from the SSDS, Government has proceeded with integrating the strategy within the wider Mid-Term National Development Strategy (MTNDS) which is expected to be completed by the Ministry of Finance by mid-2014, and which will hopefully then form the platform for launching (financing) of the SSDS as a component of the MNTDS.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: By the time of the Terminal Evaluation, MEA Focal Points (FPs) knew little of the project and did not feel the project had contributed to their reporting to the MEAs on behalf of Seychelles. Better engagement would have been expected between the project and the MEA FPs in MEE, as this was a project they clearly supported at the outset.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management takes note of this important point. Focal Points have been extensively engaged with other projects within the UNDP-GEF portfolio, and this omission under CB2 relates at least in part to the failure of the Steering Committee to meet regularly (see below). Management will ensure active engagement of Focal Points in all subsequent projects.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: National capacity in environmental management has been enhanced and will benefit into the future as the project supported development of course materials for the University of Seychelles (UNISEY) to teach a B.Sc. in Environmental Science. This will expand the pool of locally trained expertise in the sector and ensure capacity is built in environmental management into the future. Currently it is expected that 5-10 students will follow the programme each year ? with additional working environmental scientists likely to be attracted to study third year modules as short courses for professional development. This project activity did not involve a large amount of money ? but undoubtedly will have, along with the SSDS, the greatest long-term impact.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management notes the point made by the evaluator that close engagement in this type of curricula development activity can have lasting impacts, and will continue to work with UNISEY and other national centres of excellence in building training capacity. Management also notes that the courses developed for UNISEY are also bearing fruit in terms of training key staff for employment within the GOS-UNDP-GEF PCU itself

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: The project supported national consultants and an international consultant to develop the Seychelles Environmental Outlook (SEO-1) and a data management system to collect and maintain key environmental datasets which will help Seychelles report to international environmental conventions. The data management system is likely to meet the original aspirations and once fully operational will assist the MEA FPs to report. However, the final SEO-1 report has not yet been finalized, due to a break-down in relations between the project and the contracted consultant and datasets are not being shared to the extent envisaged.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management notes that additional work is needed to operationalize the national environmental database and this is continuing under other projects within the GOS-UNDP-GEF portfolio. Management also notes the need to extract the relevant indicators from the SEO (from early drafts if necessary). In terms of the international consultant for the SEO, management acknowledges this very unfortunate situation where the consultant has reneged on his contract and has so far refused to submit the final draft of the document, encompassing both his own work and that of the national consultant team. PCU will try to address this situation by whatever means are available to it.

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: Pilot sub-projects are encouraging Seychellois to undertake environmentally friendly activities including rainwater harvesting, generating solar power and recycling. These were all identified as priorities in the National Capacity Self-Assessment (2005). However, the project did not eventually include support for developing the district land use plans (LUPs) for Seychelles, as detailed in the Project Document (ProDoc), as delays between approval and start-up meant by start-up these were instead being supported by other GEF projects. The project budget could not have covered the costs of the LUPs
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management notes that by the time the CB2 project began implementation the LUPS were already being funded under another project within the portfolio (all 25 LUPs for the districts of the inner islands of Seychelles were completed under this project - at a cost that was far beyond the means of the CB2 project). Management notes that the issue here is that the LUP targets should have been removed from the CB2 logframe during the inception process, at which point the (hugely ambitious) originally logframe was extensively revised. As noted by the evaluator the project did, however, provide sub-project support to implement the first (pilot) LUPs to be endorsed by Government.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: Project achievements have been attained despite various constraints in management, mainly linked to human resource issues ? but do not meet all the expectations, even those agreed in the Logical Framework revised at the Inception Workshop. Notably, changes in project and wider Project Co-ordination Unit staff have left the project at various times without appropriate leadership. Furthermore, the Steering Committee met only once in the 4 year project (extended from the planned 3 year project) and no-one in MEE agrees now who the National Project Director was or is. (It seems that the various Project Managers did not appreciate this was part of their role and the Programme Co-ordinators were perhaps not aware that the meetings were not taking place.)
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management notes the concern expressed by the evaluator in regard to the unfortunately high staff turnover within the CB2 project and inadequate handover processes. Management will endeavour to pay more attention to handover processes hereafter. Management notes a failure of the Steering Committee to meet more than twice (not once). The confusion seems to have been caused at least in part by the SC being combined with that of the NBSAP project under a different chairmanship than the rest of the projects in the UNDP portfolio. Management notes a recommendation on this point that the SC effectiveness could probably be enhanced by combining a number of projects under one SC and that PCU should proactively support the chairpersons in calling regular meetings

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: Project baseline was not established at start-up using the evaluation method proposed for the project in the ProDoc (the Capacity Development Monitoring Scorecard) and no evidence can be found of any mid-term evaluation or review having been carried-out (both included in the ProDoc, although not strictly required for a MSP).Many routine project reports could not be traced at the terminal evaluation, making finding information on the progress of the project an effort in detective work, including referring to former staff (some in Seychelles, others further afield) and others less closely involved in the project in Seychelles.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management takes note that more attention needs to be paid at inception to the M&E tools documented in the ProDoc ? this was a clear omission in this project, and has not been repeated in other projects within the portfolio. Management also takes note of the need to archive data such that information is not lost due to computer failures or staff turnover ? this has already been implemented. Management acknowledges that a MTE was not undertaken - it is not required (or affordable) for a project of this size ? but that an internal mid-term review would have been appropriate and will be applied to small projects lacking funding for an MTE in the future

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation: CB2 has demonstrated that it does not require a large investment of funds to support development of modules for a university course in Environmental Science, which will ensure future cohorts of well-trained graduates. A CB3 project should raise knowledge and understanding of sustainable development across all sectors in GoS, also in the school curricula, teacher training, professional development and in the private sector.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management notes the ideas of the evaluator for follow-up to the CB2 project, particularly in the importance of supporting professional development. This is already being continued through e.g. the Biodiversity project, and will likely be a Government priority for continuation into the new phase of GEF funding

Key Actions:

9. Recommendation: The PCU and indeed wider UNDP should ensure that all staff use an agreed system to save project-related computer files and that the PCU back-up and archive digital data regularly to ensure project documents are not lost. This is now in place.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

As noted, this has already been put into place (prior to the TE).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Establish regular back-up system for all files for the individual projects
[Added: 2014/07/07]
PCU/UNDP 2013/12 Completed Implemetded in October 2013 with purchause of new server to back up all data of PCU
10. Recommendation: When project staff leave, they should be obliged to have a hand-over meeting if their replacement has been recruited, or brief the PC and leave detailed hand-over notes to assist their successor. (Similarly, when more senior staff leave (e.g. the PC during the CB2 project period), they should brief their successor and/or leave detailed notes.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

This is considered normal practice at PCU, however it is noted that there were failings in this respect during the term of CB2 in that handover notes left by exiting managers were sometimes quite superficial and did not deal with key issues (e.g. the serious situation with regard to the SEO consultant was not adequately flagged up during appointment of a new Programme Coordinator or change of project manager during 2013.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
PCU to ensure that proper handover procedures are observed.
[Added: 2014/07/07]
PCU/UNDP 2013/12 Completed system is in place to ensure proper handing over frok outgoing staff. the
11. Recommendation: When inexperienced Project Managers are recruited, as seems often to be the case in Seychelles due to wider HR issues (highlighted in the NCSA), they should be provided with greater support by their line managers. Reportedly they have regular meetings ? but this does not seem to have been adequate for the CB2 ? on other projects, the system seems to be working well.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

There are regular meetings between all project staff (coordinating meetings) and meetings with individual managers at need. There is also centring between new managers and more experienced managers. However, it is noted that more regular project review meetings may be needed especially for new project managers who are less familiar with the PCU systems and procedures

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure regular meetings with all staff (coordination meetings) and ad hoc meetings with new staff as needed Continue to lobby Government for office space to house all staff within the same building ? enabling more continues supervision of new staff by the line managers
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
PCU/Ministry of Environment and Energy 2014/12 Completed Staff meetings are regular however Office space continues to be an issue with PCU currently split between two different buildings, which affects overall efficiency of coordination and management.Under consideration by Government, with a view to a move being effected by mid-2014. UNDP and PCU continures to raise the matter with the Ministry at every opportunity. however space is still a major issue in Seychelles. The Government has now identified a new location which may be provided to the PCU in 2015. discussions are still ongoing between UNDP and the Government
12. Recommendation: If set-up, Steering Committee meetings should take place regularly. However for Seychelles, where the number of key GoS and NGO staff is small and individuals are involved in several GEF projects, perhaps having steering committees for each project is not workable and either a single SC for all projects (or certainly all small/MS projects) could be considered ? or alternative means of communication (e.g. Facebook or Twitter) used to regularly and routinely share information and ensure sound guidance/national ownership for projects.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

The suggested grouping of projects to reduce the number of meetings and thus calls upon the time of key Government staff, in particular, is already being practiced by PCU (e.g. grouping of the Biodiversity and Biosecurity projects under one SC, grouping of both CC projects under one SC). This actually occurred with CB2, which was grouped with the second small project, NBSAP, but as the NBSAP SC also met very infrequently the original idea of the grouping was lost with the changes in project managers and the appointed SC chairman was not sufficiently proactive in following up. This will be avoided in future by more rigorous oversight of the PCU on the scheduling of SCs.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
More rigorous scheduling of SCs Exploration of possibilities for more extensive grouping of SCs (e.g. one or two SCs for environment projects, one for CC projects) and their linkage to the SSDS SC (e.g. as sub-committees under the SSDS SC).
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2015/09/21]
PCU/UNDP,MEE, SSDS SC No due date No deadline established Government has set up the SSDS SC in 2014 and it met for the first time in February. However, MEE is yet to set up a schedule for the SC for SSDS to meet regularly. SCs for other project are functioning proiperly and already some projects fall under the same SC. recommendations being implementred for both Energy projects as well.
13. Recommendation: Terms of contracts should be adhered, particularly no consultant should be paid amounts due on submission of reports before reports have been submitted.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

It is noted that the performance of consultants against their TORs needs to be monitored, and this failed in the case of the SEO consultant due in part to the turnover of staff, but also due to failings of the PCU adequately to assess and act upon the deteriorating situation with regard to the consultant. This is a lesson learned for the PCU. In regard to the second part of the recommendation, it is normal practice at PCU that consultants are not paid for delivery until delivery has occurred (e.g. in the case of the SEO the amount due on delivery of the final SEO report is still held by PCU pending actual delivery).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
The need for timelines and deliverables by consultants to be more rigorously monitored by the Project Managers, in the first instance, and delays or issues arising reported back to the Programme Coordinator. Deliverables will be checked by the Programme Coordinator, and Chief Finance Officer will not make payments until required deliverables are in place (loaded onto the back-up server)
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2015/09/21]
PCU and MInistry of Environment 2014/12 Completed This instruction has been passed on to all current project managers and will be communicated to all incoming managers. Action taken and is part of the PCU SOP so no further action is required.
14. Recommendation: Should relations between a project and a consultant (whether national or international) become difficult, early actions should be taken to avoid problems later in projects.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

As noted, this is a lesson learned.

Key Actions:

15. Recommendation: Project baselines and monitoring are important in order that impacts can be quantified at later stages ? M&E plans set out in the ProDoc and agreed at Inception should be adhered to.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

It is noted that there is a need, particularly at the inception phase, to review the M&E plan in detail, with particular attention to tracking tools, and that provision should be made in AWPs for the necessary monitoring processes. This has taken place effectively under other projects in the GOS-UNDP-GEF portfolio, e.g. with PA management effectiveness tracking tools, and the required tracking will be extended across all projects.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Ensure review of M&E plans identified in ProDocs during inception phases of projects. Ensure regular attention to M&E in project AWPs and their implementation, with particular attention to any tracking tools identified for the individual projects
[Added: 2014/07/07]
PCU/UNDP 2014/01 Completed Completed
16. Recommendation: As UNDP PCU implements other GEF projects, it should continue to support and encourage GoS to set-up implementation structures and use SSDS.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

The importance of establishing the institutional structure for the implementation of SSDS is under the responsibility of GoS, and is actively promoted by MEE. PCU/UNDP pays due attention to the SSDS framework in the design of new projects and implementation of existing projects, and is ready to fully integrate its work programme with the implementation of SSDS when the required structures are in place.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Establishment and financing of the SSDS institutional structure as identified within the SSDS.
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
MEE/MOFTI No due date No deadline established Ongoing with no Due Date May be waiting for the completion and approval of the MTNDS. The MTNDS has now be revised to the NDS and it is still under preparation by the Ministry of Finance
17. Recommendation: The Physical Planning Bill and Environment Protection Act, also the LUPs, all need to be approved by Cabinet/gazetted to support environmental management in Seychelles. MEE should catalyse this.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

The two framework acts are being finalized by the Attorney General?s office for presentation to and approval by cabinet. The LUPs have undergone their final consultations during 2013 and are now also being prepared by Ministry of Land Use and Habitat for presentation to Cabinet.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Complete Physical Planning and Environmental Protection Bills. Complete LUPs the remaining 23 LUPs
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
AG's Office, MEE, Cabinet, MLUH 2014/06 Completed Finalization affected by backlog of work at AGs office, but expected mid-2014. LUPs reported as now completed, awaiting only Cabinet Memo
18. Recommendation: The need for capacity building in sustainable development is on-going across all sectors. This is not a one-off activity, but needs to be continuous at all levels (schools, university, teacher training, professional development, the private sector and public awareness). All sectors in GoS need to mainstream this capacity building for sustainable development, including using existing on-line teaching resources for schools. This should be integrated well into the upcoming Medium-Term National Development Strategy
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management agrees this is a key priority. Management notes, however, that GOS is well aware of this and already has an emphasis on continuing to strengthen UNISEY and other professional development institutions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Insofar as PCU/UNDP is involved in the process for finalizing the MTNDS, and taking opportunities that may arise to promote this point with stakeholders, PCU will endeavour to support the emphasizing of the importance of capacity building activities within the MTNDS.
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
PCU, UNDP, MOFTI 2014/12 Completed Pending opportunities for PCU/UNDP to input into the process of finalizing the MTNDS. PCU has participated in the NDS formulation especially for sectoral consultation on the environment sector
19. Recommendation: MEE and more widely other GoS Ministries should continue to support the development and widening of access to the SEO database ? ensuring it is maintained and kept up-to-date, also that data is made accessible across GoS ITC systems ? and also, if possible, NGOs and the wider public can access and up-date data via the www.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

The 2014 AWPs for several projects within the GOS-UNDP-GEF portfolio pick up on this point and provide various inputs to proceed with the establishment of the National Clearing House Mechanism as the umbrella database, and various national databases under this (e.g. the environmental database).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Convene a workshop early in 2014 to look specifically at the issue of establishing the CHM and wider access to the various databases under construction Capacitate the DOE database institutional structure to manage and update the databases Complete the CHM Complete the various incomplete databases under the CHM, such as the environment database at DOE, and ensure linages to existing GOS databases such as that at MLUH (much of which is already web-based
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
PCU/Ministry of Environment 2014/12 Completed Funded under other PCU-managed projects Part-financed by MEE funding; additional support to be proved by PCU projects as needed Currently there are at least 4 separate databases that need to be brought together under the CHM umbrella Interim support to increase staff at the DOE database is to be provided under the in-coming Outer Islands project.
20. Recommendation: Issues of data sharing need to be considered more thoroughly across GoS and with NGOs, as currently NGOs unwilling to add ?their? data as they recognise it to be valuable. Also GoS appears currently not willing to make available their data to the public. The mutual benefits of data sharing need to be highlighted, for example by the skilled staff of the Environmental Information and Data Section of MEE.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

This will be addressed as part of the process outlined under recommendation 19, above.

Key Actions:

21. Recommendation: PCU and GoS (MEE) should encourage SIF and TRASS to continue to publicize their community activities and they should be supported (e.g. with funding from GoS and/or other GEF projects) to replicate them.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

Management takes note of this point and the effective work undertaken by the two named institutions, amongst others. The further development of activities by the two named institutions is already being supported by grants under the Biodiversity project (SIF and TRASS) and Protected Areas project (SIF), and both are likely to be engaged as stakeholders in an expected in-coming ecosystem-based adaptation project.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Engage the named institutions, and other key stakeholders, in the inception phase of relevant in-coming projects, notably the expected EbA project, to ensure effective follow-up of results.
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2014/12/15]
PCU,MEE 2014/12 Completed Outer Islands, Resource Efficiency and EbA projects expected to enter inception in 2014
22. Recommendation: School and DA-based pilot sub-projects should be publicized by each participating organisation ? helped by the UNDP / GEF signboards, to increase scaling-up by other schools, private individuals etc. The PCU Communications Officer is reported to have already been tasked to follow up on this as part of her TOR.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/07/07]

PCU is developing a communications strategy that will address this and other related points from the TE, as well as issues arising from other evaluations, and will address the perceived need for a more cohesive delivery of communications and awareness across the GOS-UNDP-GEF portfolio. The PCU Communications Officer is responsible for following this up from 2014.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Finalize a PCU Communications and Awareness Strategy Develop and implement a 2014 and subsequent work plans for delivery of the strategy
[Added: 2014/07/07] [Last Updated: 2015/09/21]
PCU/MEE 2015/06 Completed The Communication Strategy has been requested by Minister MEE. Financing has already been built into 2014 AWPs for the various projects. This is now ongoing and should be completed by end of 2014

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