- Evaluation Plan:
- 2011-2019, DPR Korea
- Evaluation Type:
- Project
- Planned End Date:
- 12/2016
- Completion Date:
- 12/2016
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 30,000
MTR: Strengthening Ecosystem Resilience and Community Adaptive Capacity in Climate Affected River Basins in DPRK (SERCARB)
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 00087040_SERCARB_MTR_TOR_NovDec2016.pdf |
tor | English | 1039.36 KB | Posted | 313 |
| 00087040_SERCARB_MTR_Report_22Dec2016.pdf |
report | English | 1653.74 KB | Posted | 537 |
| 00087040_SERCARB_MTR_SummaryLessonsLearnt_Recom_22Dec2016.pdf |
summary | English | 1089.57 KB | Posted | 351 |
| 00087040_SERCARB_MTR_TOR_NovDec2016.pdf |
tor | English | 1039.36 KB | Posted | 289 |
| Title | MTR: Strengthening Ecosystem Resilience and Community Adaptive Capacity in Climate Affected River Basins in DPRK (SERCARB) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00087040 | ||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2011-2019, DPR Korea | ||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Project | ||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||
| Completion Date: | 12/2016 | ||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 12/2016 | ||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017) |
|
||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||
| Source of Funding: | SERCARB Project | ||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 30,000 | ||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | |||||||||
| Countries: | DPRK -DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA | ||||||||
| Comments: | SERCARB project is finally approved, in June 2013. There will be end of project evaluation, i.e Q4/2016 |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| 1. | 1. The effective two years project life is a too short period to demonstrate the full success of the present project. One-year no cost extension will be very important for the project success and to finalize the activities under the present ProDoc. Early recruitment of project team is crucial for the success of any project. One of the reasons for initial delay was the late formation of the project team 2. The SERCARB project is an excellent example of best practice in several aspects, including, capacity building, sustainability, target population participation and mainstreaming; The time invested into project design, was valuable for ensuring effective project formulation, planning of meaningful activities around the proposed targets and for facilitating implementation; Through the successful implementation of key project features further initiatives can be initiated. That was successfully shown by the project for the embankment activities as well as the newly build Awareness Center built in Alil-Ri. Good organization of international and national level project management is key for the success of any project. This is achieved through regular communication, monitoring of results, and clear follow-up actions whenever potential problems are identified; 3. Wherever possible and meaningful participatory approaches and techniques are key elements for sustainability and success of projects that work directly with target population; 4. Continuous review of key outputs and targets enables fast and high quality assessment of the project. Some of these targets have not been followed always in a consistent way by the project team 5. The project clearly demonstrated that the problems described in the ProDoc can be best and sustainably addressed with an integrated approach that takes into account all aspects and levels of a watershed rather than focusing on isolated solutions; The problems identified in the ProDoc being a problem for the whole country it has been good practice to design the project around some two Pilot Site in which an adapted methodology and approach has been developed that was thereafter implemented in additional sites and watersheds; 6. Further project development and sustainability depends very much on the continuous revision of MoLEP and SHMA capabilities and the ability of project partners to adapt to new (external) conditions and requirements 7. Especially in the context of DPRK fast clearance of the specifications is necessary to avoid unnecessary delays in the project implementation. This topic has been addressed by the BRH through a system of clearance pre-check; |
| Findings | |
| 1. | Evaluation findings are embedded in the evaluation report |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Additional time for project activities needed |
| 2 | Replicate the methods and approaches developed in an extension of the project in other communities |
| 3 | Maintain developed Methodology and implementation scheme |
| 4 | Review Output targets and indicators |
| 5 | Ensure coordination between project induced and stakeholder induced activities |
| 6 | Consolidate and strengthen MoLEP and SHMA capacities further |
| 7 | Implement the community based parts of the EWS, while waiting for purchase of equipment |
1. Recommendation:
Additional time for project activities needed
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2016/12/29]
Accepted
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1. Re-phase/approve all remaining activities in next year AWP
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team, CO | 2017/03 | Completed | History | |
| 1.2. Complete the activities in time, quantity and quality
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/12/06] |
SERCARB team | 2017/12 | Completed | History |
2. Recommendation:
Replicate the methods and approaches developed in an extension of the project in other communities
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2016/12/29]
Accepted
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1. Develop and approve extension document
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/12/06] |
SERCARB team, CO, RBAP | 2017/12 | Completed | CPD extension awaits for approval which is also the pre-condition for project's cost-extension. No CPD approved received as of December 2017 History | |
| 2.2. Plan activities in multi-years as per approved extension document
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/12/06] |
SERCARB team | 2017/12 | Completed | CPD extension awaits for approval which is also the pre-condition for project's cost-extension History | |
| 2. 3. Complete the extension activities planned for replication in time, quantity and quality
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/12/06] |
SERCARB team | 2017/12 | Completed | Since there is no CPD extension and thus the extension of the project, there will be no further activities under planned extension period History |
3. Recommendation:
Maintain developed Methodology and implementation scheme
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29]
Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 The methodologies and implementation scheme will be maintained in the extension document
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team, CO, and BRH | 2017/04 | Completed | On-going process, continue with improvements History | |
| 3.2 The methodologies and scheme will be continued and further improved in the course of extension / replication phase
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team | 2017/04 | Completed | On-going process, continued with improvements History |
4. Recommendation:
Review Output targets and indicators
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29]
Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 The targets and indicators found not SMART during the project review will be revised in the extension document
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team, CO, BRH | 2017/03 | Completed | Final draft extension document ready with SMART indicators History |
5. Recommendation:
Ensure coordination between project induced and stakeholder induced activities
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29]
Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1 Improved coordination mechanism will be put in place at different levels in both existing pilot sites and sites to be replicated, for better synergies and results
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team | 2017/04 | Completed | Duly noted and will be reflected in extension phase History |
6. Recommendation:
Consolidate and strengthen MoLEP and SHMA capacities further
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29]
Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 Further in-country training and overseas exposure activities will be undertaken for local level staff of MOLEP and SHMA, to continue their capacity strengthening and ownership increase
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/04/13] |
SERCARB team | 2017/04 | Completed | History |
7. Recommendation:
Implement the community based parts of the EWS, while waiting for purchase of equipment
Management Response: [Added: 2016/12/29]
Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.1. Community based EWS will be finalized and training provided in the pilot communities, before and after the purchase of the equipment, with the CO’s cash conservation mode lifted.
[Added: 2016/12/29] [Last Updated: 2017/12/06] |
SERCARB team | 2017/12 | Completed | On track with implementation as of April 2017. EWS will be implemented as planned History |