Small Wind Energy Development Project for Rural Areas (SWEDPRA)

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2011-2019, DPR Korea
Evaluation Type:
Outcome
Planned End Date:
11/2012
Completion Date:
05/2013
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
15,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document PIMS 751 SWEDPRA Terminal Evaluation Report- FINAL.pdf report English 1957.04 KB Posted 748
Download document 00076431_TOR_SWEDPRA Terminal Evaluation.docx tor English 42.48 KB Posted 388
Download document 00076431_Lessons learned_SWEDPRA Terminal Evaluation.docx summary English 13.38 KB Posted 465
Title Small Wind Energy Development Project for Rural Areas (SWEDPRA)
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2011-2019, DPR Korea
Evaluation Type: Outcome
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2013
Planned End Date: 11/2012
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
Evaluation Budget(US $): 15,000
Source of Funding: swedpra
Joint Programme: No
Mandatory Evaluation: Yes
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Remi Rijs Team Leader info@eologica.com
Pak Hung Song National Consultant
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Climate Change
Project Type: MSP
GEF Phase: GEF-3
PIMS Number: 751
Key Stakeholders: MEPI, SOAS
Countries: DPRK -DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Comments: SWEDPRA project evaluation brought forward to November 2012 and completed. Report being finalized at time of Evaluation Plan revision
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Evaluation Recommendation 1: In order to devise a successful exit strategy for the Project, the Evaluators recommend focusing first on the consolidation and eventual enhancement of the current achievements. These are: a capable wind resource assessment team at CWERD; an advanced prototype of a modern 300W wind turbine design; established batch production capacity at the CWERD workshop. While communication exists between SAOS and SCST, and the local manufacturers, very little has been done to actually demonstrate the achievements of the Project to these and to the potential end-users. In view of the Evaluators, these elements should be reviewed and discussed with the national counterparts and brought to a well-defined termination.
2 Evaluation Recommendation 2: The national wind resource assessment team has already acquired adequate skills but could benefit from more practice and periodic technical feedback by the international wind energy expert. This can be done by performing wind assessments at different sites, which basically involves the transport and reinstallation of measuring towers and proper data analysis and reporting. The role of the international wind expert would be to ensure that work and reporting is done in conformity with the international standards and to promote a professional work attitude. In order to guarantee the availability of hardware (sensors and data loggers) during this process, SWEDPRA may consider procuring some spare parts. However, the Project cannot create the conditions for access to hardware on the longer term; this barrier must be addressed by DPRK.
3 Evaluation Recommendation 3: In order to secure the development of the ?modern? 300 W wind turbine, the following issues need to be addressed: (i) characterization of the powerload curve of the electric generator; (ii) determination of the energy production of the wind turbine at the test field; (iii) long-term tests under field conditions to assess the reliability of the mechanical construction and obtain inputs for design improvement. All tests should be carried out according to accepted engineering practices and possibly, in compliance with the pursued international standards. It is recommended to establish a detailed test protocol to this purpose, agreed upon by CWERD and UNDP DPRK with support from an international expert. The measurement data should be shared with UNDP and a final test report compiled. The Evaluators would like to see a 1 page summary of this test report ?once available- attached to this Terminal Evaluation as a proof that SWES design under SWEDPRA has been successful.
4 Evaluation Recommendation 4: The hardware for the recommendations (i) and (ii) above, is already available at CWERD. The Evaluators suggest UNDP to consider the procurement of some basic data loggers, anemometers, and electric power meters for long-term field tests (item iii) if sufficient funds are available. After successful completion of the test programme, the 300 W wind turbine can be considered a valid and proven base model. With this achievement in place, CWERD can start adapting the wind charger to local wind conditions and market needs, and embark on prototype development of larger-scale models.
5 Evaluation Recommendation 5: As a second element of the exit strategy, it is recommended to install the tested 300 W wind turbine at each of the identified five local workshops. This activity would re-establish the link with the original strategy towards decentralized production and market development. The presentation of the 300W model to the rural markets would define a logical end point for the SWES design process. If properly planned, this can still be achieved. Support to the local manufacturers to start production themselves is out of reach of the Project, but they can act as agents to distribute the units produced at CWERD. The indicated steps would enhance SWEDPRA?s delivery on the outcome ?SWES design?. In addition, it would increase interaction between national stakeholders, which may generate useful information for market strategies in the future.
6 Evaluation Recommendation 6: As a third (and last) element of the exit strategy, it is suggested to use the remaining GEF funds for the procurement and installation of mature small wind technology systems to supply rural households, farms or community buildings with high-quality, electric energy. Such systems can vary in size from 300 W to 5 kW. Since mature technology is not yet being produced in DPRK, it is strongly recommended to import such systems from established foreign manufacturers. The successful deployment of these systems will bring direct benefits to rural end-users, will contribute to create interest and demand from the public, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to the baseline scenario. Please refer to Annex H (of terminal evaluation report) for a tentative description of the activities and costs to implement the depicted SWEDPRA exit strategy.
7 Evaluation Recommendation 7: With respect to future programming, it is recommended not to focus on small wind energy technology for electricity generation alone. Mechanical wind mills can be a cost-effective option for pumping drinking water, low-head irrigation, and drainage. Experience with these ?wind pumps? is available in many countries in Asia and production can usually be done in simple workshops. Solar-PV panels can drive electrical pumps without the need for costly battery back-up, and can also pump water from deep wells. Alongside electric centrifugal pumps and conventional pistons pumps, rope pumps are a very cost-effective means for small-scale watering and can easily be adapted to local production and repair. Mechanical wind pumps were included in the original project design of SWEDPRA, but not pursued.
8 Evaluation Recommendation 8: Project ownership has been identified as an underlying issue during the execution of SWEDPRA as the national counterparts and UNDP seem not fully share the overall project goal. Obviously, the long suspension period has played a negative role in this. Other causes can be the unfamiliarity of national staff to work in the context of an international project; and a lack of understanding of each other?s roles and responsibilities. The Evaluators suggest that UNDP and NCC-E take time to analyze the Project?s implementation in detail and identify elements to make future interventions more effective. At a more technical level, it is recommended to include SAOS and SCST in this dialogue.
9 Evaluation Recommendation 9: In function of the outcomes of this dialogue, the Evaluators would suggest to shape the recommendations (i-iii) for finalizing the 300 W ?new model? SWES, in the form of a ?mini-project?. This implies the detailed definition of objectives, preparation of a workplan, time frame, responsibilities, identification of required inputs, delivery of final results, and verification thereof. This exercise will not only contribute to the success of the depicted exit strategy, but may also strengthen the basis for the successful design and implementation of future donor-funded programmes in DPRK. Other activities under the proposed exit strategy include the procurement and installation of (imported) SWES systems for rural end-users. In function of the workplan, it may be convenient to extend the project until December 2013.
10 Evaluation Recommendation 10: The Evaluators do not recommend to pursue technology development as part of a project if the final objective is the delivery of energy benefits among end-users. The overall process becomes too long and subject to many risk factors, and usually fails. Product development can hardly be underestimated. With a view on UNDP?s Energy and Environment programme in DPRK, this would suggest to focus more on the delivery of proven energy solutions for rural households and on strengthening local delivery mechanisms and business models, for example for battery charging, water supply and cooking. There is also ample scope for energy supply for agricultural processing. Besides equipment as supplied under the SRED project, this also requires strengthening and repair of presently disrupted production and supply processes in the rural areas.
1. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 1: In order to devise a successful exit strategy for the Project, the Evaluators recommend focusing first on the consolidation and eventual enhancement of the current achievements. These are: a capable wind resource assessment team at CWERD; an advanced prototype of a modern 300W wind turbine design; established batch production capacity at the CWERD workshop. While communication exists between SAOS and SCST, and the local manufacturers, very little has been done to actually demonstrate the achievements of the Project to these and to the potential end-users. In view of the Evaluators, these elements should be reviewed and discussed with the national counterparts and brought to a well-defined termination.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

The theoretical knowledge of SAOS staff is on good level although ability to apply their knowledge to practical work is lacking. Final prototype actually does not exist yet. Local partners produced some turbines based on an ?Open Source? design but these are also not prototypes. The production capabilities exist in theory, but haven?t proved that this production capacity can be used under real production scenarios.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 To share the evaluation report with concerned parties.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM 2012/05 Completed The evaluation report is shared with the concerned parties. The meeting was arranged.
1.2 Arranging consultation with Project National Director (ND), Project Technical Manager (PTM) and International Wind Expert (IE) during expected IE mission in May. Discuss the issue of exit strategy on PSC meeting.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PSC, NCC-E and UNDP CO 2013/05 Completed Discussion on 6th Joint SRED/SWEDPRA PSC on 12/12/2013.
1.3 Agree with national partners on key elements of exit strategy for the project including a batch production of 300 W units at CWERD workshop.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PSC, NCC-E and UNDP CO 2013/12 Completed
2. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 2: The national wind resource assessment team has already acquired adequate skills but could benefit from more practice and periodic technical feedback by the international wind energy expert. This can be done by performing wind assessments at different sites, which basically involves the transport and reinstallation of measuring towers and proper data analysis and reporting. The role of the international wind expert would be to ensure that work and reporting is done in conformity with the international standards and to promote a professional work attitude. In order to guarantee the availability of hardware (sensors and data loggers) during this process, SWEDPRA may consider procuring some spare parts. However, the Project cannot create the conditions for access to hardware on the longer term; this barrier must be addressed by DPRK.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Partially agree as with given minimum amount of wind measurement stations in place, it also would be possible to calculate local, regional or even national wind resource maps that enable a more controlled and optimized wind energy planning. Nevertheless until end of the project the main focus will be the manufacturing, testing of generator and data analysis of power performance. The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners. This is not part of training by IE during two missions in May and August. During these two missions focus will be on the manufacturing, testing of generator and data analysis of PPM. After consultation, IE shares the point of view of the evaluator and it was agreed to include it in May or August mission plans. To do this, IE has to rearrange the work plan. One possibility would be the work on a wind site assessment. It is required to get information from PD and PTM on all wind resource assessments performed during the project cycle by CWERD, either within the project as well as with own resources.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Consultation with ND, PTM and wind IE. Review mission plan for IE and add it to the training by IE during two missions in May and August.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, NCC-E and UNDP CO 2013/06 Completed The evaluation report is shared with the concerned parties. Both mission plans were discussed and agreed between concern parties
2.2 PD and PTM provide information on all wind resource assessments performed during the project cycle by CWERD either within the project as well as with own resources.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM, PD, PTM 2013/06 Completed Information was provided and sent to IE via PM
2.3 To look into available resources in consultation with UNDP Senior Management.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM, DRR 2013/06 Completed Due to closer of all legacy projects by UNDP it is not feasible to expect any additional resources for SWEDPRA project.
2.4 Consultation between UNDP and NCC
[Added: 2014/02/26]
DRR 2013/06 Completed Action to be taken by UNDP CO
3. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 3: In order to secure the development of the ?modern? 300 W wind turbine, the following issues need to be addressed: (i) characterization of the powerload curve of the electric generator; (ii) determination of the energy production of the wind turbine at the test field; (iii) long-term tests under field conditions to assess the reliability of the mechanical construction and obtain inputs for design improvement. All tests should be carried out according to accepted engineering practices and possibly, in compliance with the pursued international standards. It is recommended to establish a detailed test protocol to this purpose, agreed upon by CWERD and UNDP DPRK with support from an international expert. The measurement data should be shared with UNDP and a final test report compiled. The Evaluators would like to see a 1 page summary of this test report ?once available- attached to this Terminal Evaluation as a proof that SWES design under SWEDPRA has been successful.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Point (i) will be the focus of mission task of IE in May as well as by the international consultant for manufacturing improvement. Point (ii) can be derived from the available data. Most important is the characterization of the Power Output (not to be confused with energy output). Point (iii): although it was not addressed in depth until now, theoretical training on that aspect was provided in December 2011 and in September 2012. The test report is realistic to aim for unto December 2013, in line with finishing the PPM and the long term operation (6 months of operation under certain conditions).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Consult with ND, PTM and IE.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, IE 2013/06 Completed The evaluation report is shared with the concerned parties
3.2 One page summary of this test report by end December 2013
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, IE 2013/12 Completed One page summary of this test report received by IE and commented.
4. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 4: The hardware for the recommendations (i) and (ii) above, is already available at CWERD. The Evaluators suggest UNDP to consider the procurement of some basic data loggers, anemometers, and electric power meters for long-term field tests (item iii) if sufficient funds are available. After successful completion of the test programme, the 300 W wind turbine can be considered a valid and proven base model. With this achievement in place, CWERD can start adapting the wind charger to local wind conditions and market needs, and embark on prototype development of larger-scale models.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Unfortunately the project has no more budgets to consider the procurement of some basic data loggers, anemometers, and electric power meters for long-term field tests. Of course more investment in hardware and much longer project duration would help to be more flexible in order to measure and monitor the characteristics of the WT prototypes and maybe several prototypes in parallel. As well it would enable to map the national wind resource more precisely

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 Consult with ND, PTM and IE.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, IE 2013/08 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners.
4.2 To look into available resources in consultation with UNDP Senior Management
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PD, DRR, PM 2013/09 Completed Budget is very tight and no additional resources available. It is important to note that no reduction in other items is possible
5. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 5: As a second element of the exit strategy, it is recommended to install the tested 300 W wind turbine at each of the identified five local workshops. This activity would re-establish the link with the original strategy towards decentralized production and market development. The presentation of the 300W model to the rural markets would define a logical end point for the SWES design process. If properly planned, this can still be achieved. Support to the local manufacturers to start production themselves is out of reach of the Project, but they can act as agents to distribute the units produced at CWERD. The indicated steps would enhance SWEDPRA?s delivery on the outcome ?SWES design?. In addition, it would increase interaction between national stakeholders, which may generate useful information for market strategies in the future.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Due to budget and time constrains it is not feasible to implement until December 2013.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 National partners must make urgent actions towards improvement of the SAOS Manufacturing Workshop based on comments provided by IE in November-December 2011 and May 2012. Therefore urgent Skype meeting with IE and PD/PTM is required.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, PTC and UNDP CO 2013/12 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners. Skype meeting was arranged between IE and local partners via SRED/SWEDPRA Project Office
5.2 UNDP procures small tools and materials.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, PTC and UNDP CO 2013/07 Completed Due to different reasons procurement of small tools was significantly delayed
5.3 Improve design of existed 300 W wind turbines according to the international standards ToR for design improvement has been prepared in 2012 and procurement has to be completed.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC, PM, PTC and UNDP CO 2013/07 Completed Work on design was delayed and therefore also the need for small tools and materials was delayed either
5.4 Install the tested 300 W wind turbine at each of the identified five local workshops
[Added: 2014/02/26] [Last Updated: 2018/07/23]
PTC, PM, PTC and UNDP CO 2013/12 Completed Due to budget and time constrains this task was left outside of the closed project History
6. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 6: As a third (and last) element of the exit strategy, it is suggested to use the remaining GEF funds for the procurement and installation of mature small wind technology systems to supply rural households, farms or community buildings with high-quality, electric energy. Such systems can vary in size from 300 W to 5 kW. Since mature technology is not yet being produced in DPRK, it is strongly recommended to import such systems from established foreign manufacturers. The successful deployment of these systems will bring direct benefits to rural end-users, will contribute to create interest and demand from the public, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to the baseline scenario. Please refer to Annex H (of terminal evaluation report) for a tentative description of the activities and costs to implement the depicted SWEDPRA exit strategy.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

The recommendation made does not meet the scope of the project. Project rather intended to support only locally produced 300W wind turbines and not just to purchase any other turbines produced outside the country. The budget was elaborated to develop design, build and implement a production line for a modern WT type, made in DPRK. That in fact was in most parts also achieved, but due to the budget and time constraints it was not possible to implement the first batch of series production. In theory all necessary knowhow was transferred and the local counterpart would be enabled in doing so, but translation into practice is missing

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1 To discuss with concern parties.
[Added: 2014/02/26] [Last Updated: 2018/07/23]
PM, ND, PTM 2014/02 Completed Although the project has procured 5 kW Wind turbine and established it in Pyongsong Hospital. The remained funding does not allow additional upscale in size from 300 W to 5 kW in general and especially not if procured from established foreign manufacturers. Especially it is also not possible to purchase them in such huge amounts to reach visible reduction of greenhouse gas emissions compared to the baseline scenario, or to reach significant amount of beneficiaries. History
7. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 7: With respect to future programming, it is recommended not to focus on small wind energy technology for electricity generation alone. Mechanical wind mills can be a cost-effective option for pumping drinking water, low-head irrigation, and drainage. Experience with these ?wind pumps? is available in many countries in Asia and production can usually be done in simple workshops. Solar-PV panels can drive electrical pumps without the need for costly battery back-up, and can also pump water from deep wells. Alongside electric centrifugal pumps and conventional pistons pumps, rope pumps are a very cost-effective means for small-scale watering and can easily be adapted to local production and repair. Mechanical wind pumps were included in the original project design of SWEDPRA, but not pursued.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Partially agree. It can be considered in future while developing new UNDP Rural Energy Initiative and maybe a rural irrigation strategy or program. Though, electricity generating WTs are more flexible in their use and application, as electricity can be used not only for water pumping (using water pumps). The need for storage capacity however is very similar for solar as for wind, as both are intermittent RE sources.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 To share the evaluation report with broader audience including SRED partners such as NCC and SRED NPD.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM 2013/05 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners
7.2 To discuss this issue on the joint SRED and SWEDPRA PSC meetings.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PTC and PSC 2013/12 Completed Currently UNDP and SRED NCC are working on SRED stocktaking report, concept pater for possible new rural energy initiative. The suggested can be considered in the future possible project document. Currently in this project/budget until end December 2013 it is not possible
8. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 8: Project ownership has been identified as an underlying issue during the execution of SWEDPRA as the national counterparts and UNDP seem not fully share the overall project goal. Obviously, the long suspension period has played a negative role in this. Other causes can be the unfamiliarity of national staff to work in the context of an international project; and a lack of understanding of each other?s roles and responsibilities. The Evaluators suggest that UNDP and NCC-E take time to analyze the Project?s implementation in detail and identify elements to make future interventions more effective. At a more technical level, it is recommended to include SAOS and SCST in this dialogue.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

The project was inherited by UNDP from UNOPS in 2010 and UNDP was stretched to receive better feedbacks from UNOPS and the national partners most of the time. The dialogue truly was not efficient, caused by barriers and restrictions on the DPRK counterpart side. Neither UNDP CO local staff nor newly appointed Government project partners had any institutional memory. No documents were available in UNDP CO archives from that time. No response was received from UNOPS

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1 To share the evaluation report with concerned partners
[Added: 2014/02/26]
NCC-E and UNDP CO 2013/05 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners
8.2 Arrange consultations on different levels ? PTC, PSC and most importantly on the level of NCC-E/UNDP CO management meetings.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
NCC-E and UNDP CO 2013/12 Completed The issue requires involvement of UNDP CO and NCC-E and NCC for overall situation with project implementation in the country
9. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 9: In function of the outcomes of this dialogue, the Evaluators would suggest to shape the recommendations (i-iii) for finalizing the 300 W ?new model? SWES, in the form of a ?mini-project?. This implies the detailed definition of objectives, preparation of a workplan, time frame, responsibilities, identification of required inputs, delivery of final results, and verification thereof. This exercise will not only contribute to the success of the depicted exit strategy, but may also strengthen the basis for the successful design and implementation of future donor-funded programmes in DPRK. Other activities under the proposed exit strategy include the procurement and installation of (imported) SWES systems for rural end-users. In function of the workplan, it may be convenient to extend the project until December 2013.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Agree. It will be followed by UNDP and the Government partners. Design of smaller project units enables more flexibility to plan, do and check. Steering is easier as well as the budget allocation. Also mini projects allow higher flexibility in terms of project result applicability and relevance

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 To communicate the suggested to PD and PTM.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
ND, PTM, PM, IE 2013/09 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners
9.2 Arrange consultation between ND, PTM and IE.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
ND, PTM, PM, IE 2013/09 Completed Consultations were arranged. It is suggested to address this issue during IE?s next mission on 30th May
9.3 To discuss in details during IE mission in May with PD and PTM.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
ND, PTM, PM, IE 2013/09 Completed Discussions were arranged.
9.4 Prepare detailed definition of objectives, preparation of a workplan, time frame, responsibilities, identification of required inputs, delivery of final results, and verification thereof for new design of 300W locally made turbine.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
ND, PTM, PM, IE 2013/09 Completed ?Mini-Project? was prepared in consultation with key stakeholders d with milestones, starting with analysis what has been achieved and what must be done to get the 300 W turbine readily developed.
10. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation 10: The Evaluators do not recommend to pursue technology development as part of a project if the final objective is the delivery of energy benefits among end-users. The overall process becomes too long and subject to many risk factors, and usually fails. Product development can hardly be underestimated. With a view on UNDP?s Energy and Environment programme in DPRK, this would suggest to focus more on the delivery of proven energy solutions for rural households and on strengthening local delivery mechanisms and business models, for example for battery charging, water supply and cooking. There is also ample scope for energy supply for agricultural processing. Besides equipment as supplied under the SRED project, this also requires strengthening and repair of presently disrupted production and supply processes in the rural areas.
Management Response: [Added: 2013/06/27] [Last Updated: 2014/02/26]

Agree. It will be taken into account while development of new rural energy initiative

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 To share the evaluation report with concerned partners
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM 2013/09 Completed The evaluation report has been shared with concerned partners.
10.2 Arrange consultation between ND, PTM and IE.
[Added: 2014/02/26]
PM, PTM, PD, IE 2013/12 Completed

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org