Final evaluation "Improving of the Environmental Monitoring in the Black Sea" project

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2014-2017, RBEC
Evaluation Type:
Final Others
Planned End Date:
11/2015
Completion Date:
05/2015
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
22,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR_EMBLAS-1_Final Evaluation.pdf tor English 659.24 KB Posted 639
Download document TE Report EMBLAS-I_84971_FINAL_31May2015.pdf report English 1322.26 KB Posted 354
Download document TE Annexes EMBLAS-I_84971_Final_31May2015.pdf related-document English 1125.80 KB Posted 292
Title Final evaluation "Improving of the Environmental Monitoring in the Black Sea" project
Atlas Project Number: 77906
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2017, RBEC
Evaluation Type: Final Others
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2015
Planned End Date: 11/2015
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 $): 22,000
Source of Funding: EC
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Stephanie Hodge International Evaluation Specilaist shodge1@gmail.com
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: UNDP, EC
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 OVERALL OBJECTIVES The overall objective of EMBLAS I was to set up initiatives that will help improve the protection of the Black Sea environment. The 2nd phase is building-up on these initial activities and keeps the overall objective of the project as ?to help improve protection of the Black Sea environment?. Recommendation: The specific objectives of EMBLAS-I and EMBLAS-II remain the same, since both phases of the project are complementary to each other and they should be seen as one initiative
2 2 DESIGN / STRATEGY / CAPACITY BUILDING APPROACH EMBLAS I has been designed as a preparatory action and a baseline development for a larger technical support to the beneficiary countries. In the 2nd phase there is a need to focus also on communication, knowledge management and capacity building. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 In the project team, focal points should be designated to manage each result to help move the project implementation mindset from a focus on deliverables to results. 2.2 A project capacity building approach/strategy needs to be developed for three levels of capacity building including regional, national and local. It can build up on the Training Programme developed in the phase I. 2.3 PM ensure a whole of project communications, coordination and knowledge management function. 2.4 Further development of the draft documents prepared by the phase I should be ensured, particular attention is needed for the work on Water Quality / Good Environmental Status Methodology, as well as on compliance indicators work that need to be agreed / vetted at regional level. Technical oversight and vetting of the quality of work need to be ensured; 2.5 The three level capacity building approach (regional, national and local) should be developed. Bring in assistance as necessary to do this exercise. 2.6 An explicit/concrete communication and knowledge management strategy should be developed and applied in the phase II. 2.7 A plan for close monitoring of risk scenarios and plans to mitigate the risks should be updated and included in EMBLAS 2 implementation strategy. This means to enact a project design that is technically and political well throughout and result based and legally agreed. The tasks of project partner institutions need to be clearly designated as to avoid all levels of risk and to deal with risk scenarios. 2.8 PIU ? Communications/ KM function- Develop user friendly versions of guidelines which can be easily understood by political actors and used in practice (high theoretical compilations are absolutely useless for the field work or preparation of assessments). Role of knowledge management is to turn scientific products into user friendly communications for many audiences.
3 3. COORDINATION AND LINKAGES In the EMBLAS-I the basic coordination and linkages were developed with MISIS project and EPIRB project. The 2nd phase of the project includes more extensive technical activities, where the synergies with other ongoing projects / initiatives should be utilized RECOMMENDATIONS: 3.1 A coordination and synergies strategy should be developed using knowledge management approaches (synergistic actions for a coordinated and efficient approach to environmental monitoring across the Black Sea region). UNDP is a global leader on knowledge management for promoting south cooperation and coordination. It can bring this expertise to the project and work with the BSC to create a sustainability plan that links to a much more strategic approach. 3.2 An updated synergies inventory should be developed to take stock of what is needed to enhance future coherence goals with other ongoing and finished projects with similar objectives. This exercise should entail a good description of the linkages, their implementation schedules and a partnership strategy to ensure that the learning from those projects are incorporated. 3.3 An initiative or bridging project activity could be proposed to avoid losing the momentum of learning and products from MISIS; to further incentivize regional cooperation and encourage overarching monitoring results linked to result not only for the EMBLAS beneficiary countries, but including all six Black Sea countries. 3.4 EMBLAS EU project manager could meet with and be briefed by MISIS EU project manager to discuss the potential for the new initiative 3.5 Harmonization of results with the MISIS project needs to be ensured. This activity can be linked to development of exit strategy and the developing a concept or plan for a new six-country capacity development strategy for entire BS region. 3.6 Close cooperation and synergies/linkages with River Basins project EPIRB (can do joint planning) should be developed on joint technical tasks. 3.7 A coherent knowledge sharing /partnership coordination strategy could be developed, which may be linked to strengthening the role of the BSC and its structures (Members, Secretariat and Advisory Groups) for Knowledge Management and coordination as part of the regional capacity beguiling approach.
4 4. WORK PLANNING In the phase I the general work plan has been laid ? down in the Inception report and later on adjusted at the Steering committee meetings. The duration of the phase II is planned for 42 months (with potential extension), and a large number of activities are planned. Therefore specific attention needs to be paid to the work planning: RECOMMENDATIONS: 4.1 In general the project results need to be planned and coordinated towards results and overall objectives. Coordination is critical for the harmonization of goals inherent in this project?s strategy. In the project team a focal point should be appointed for technical monitoring and coordination of results. Ensure strategy for results and guided processed vs. deliverables: designation of focal points to manage each result area will help to move the project implementation mindset from documents and deliverables to results. 4.2 A results-based work plan for EMBLAS 2 needs to be developed (to be presented at inception meeting) with timing and schedule as precise as possible (do scoping and planning), delegation of authority and responsibility, and estimation of inputs and costs. 4.3 The deliverables need to be carefully planned with linkages in mind and indication of clear timing and quantifiable and or qualified benchmarks. Develop a detailed project planning and scheduling the sequence of activities; certain activities can be done in parallel.
5 5. STAKEHOLDERS ENGAGEMENT In the phase I the project partners have been considered as the key project stakeholders that were in touch with other relevant institutions (during the initial stage of Diagnostic Report II preparation). The extended stakeholder workshops were organized shortly before the end of the project phase I. In EMBLAS II the stakeholder involvement needs to be expanded: RECOMMENDATIONS: 5.1 Relevant civil society organizations and NGOs, private sector should be included in project activities and potentially in additional planning. Scope and consult them (target women where possible) in the activities (see stakeholder workshop minutes). 5.2 Specific target groups in the partner countries should be included such as the relevant ministries and agencies responsible for fisheries and agriculture, industry and transport, selected regional and local administrations, universities, research centers and training institutions, NGOs and the private sector.
6 6. HUMAN RESOURCES RECOMMENDATIONS: In EMBLAS-I the core team was composed of the Project Manager, Technical Advisor, Project Assistant and Programme Analyst. The team has been supported by the national experts. In the 2nd phase much stronger core team is needed, due to the number and variety of the project activities, where specific expertise is required. 6.1 A focal point for Knowledge Management should be appointed from the project team, with results linked to BSC and its Secretariat capacity strengthening goals. 6.2 The need for an institutional capacity development expert to support national monitoring strategies should be considered ; Deal with the need for an Institutional capacity and public policy expert to support project national strategies; 6.3 If needed additional experts should be hired with expertise in technical areas, including for monitoring and surveys, institutional and capacity development, knowledge management and communication and international waters management. Recommended staffing in the phase 2:  Results Leader for PA1 (Support the countries in Bucharest Convention implementation) - policy expert ? to be hired  Results Leaders for PA 2 (Joint BS Pilot Surveys) ? Team Leader, supported by Monitoring Expert  Reader Leader PA3 (Capacity building and trainings)? Monitoring Expert  Reader Leader PA4 (Joint BS Cruise ? open sea) - Team Leader with support of Monitoring Expert  Results Leaders for PA5 (Databases) - Team Leader supported by Communication and Coordination Expert  Results Leaders for PA6 (Communication and Visibility) - Communication and Coordination Expert  Technical Advisor. TA?s role is still needed for specific areas, synergies and quality assurance across all key results.
7 7. MONITORING RECOMMENDATIONS: In EMBLAS ? I, the monitoring of the project progress and achieved results was based on the project logical framework, supported with the work plan developed in the inception phase. The monitoring of work of project partners and experts was ensured by the project management, on the basis of the individual terms of references as a part of contractual arrangements. The project Steering Committee has been involved in the project results monitoring and advised on various issues emerged during the project implementation. 7.1 Before the Steering Committee Meeting a Technical meeting should be organized with scientific presentations of the key results areas. The Steering Committee meeting would then deal with the work plan overview and key decisions to be taken on specific issues. 7.2 PIU develop a results based monitoring framework that includes five key results managers vs. management by deliverables. A system for monitoring that included the experts and partners oversight of key result areas should be established, including timesheets, check-lists for partners, templates for reporting; Delegate clear management responsibilities, including monitoring functions, i.e. reports, 7.3 PM ensure all sub-contractors and implementing partners provide short implementation /progress reports on the status of deliverables on a regular basis for UNDP and EC management 7.4 PIU Develop a draft project work plan for results (as opposed to deliverables), prepared such that it helps PM consider the entire projects capacity building and deliverable needs. The work plan should articulate the linkages between all result area as to clarify tasks and expected results of each expert from the project core team very clearly. This should be closely monitored by the UNDP RTA. The results based management, work plan with required input specifications, identification of capacity building needs are the key elements to be reflected in the project deliverables and results.
8 8. RESULTS RECOMMENDATIONS: PA1-Availability and quality of chemical and biological data to provide for integrated assessments of the Black Sea state of environment, including pressures and impacts 8.1 The Diagnostic Report II has been prepared as a basis for integrated assessment of the Black Sea environment, this document should be further used for all project work planning in the phase 2. PA2- Bucharest convention and other agreements, I.E. EU marine strategy implementation supported 8.2 Work area harmonized and completed in line with methods and tools developed in other PA areas. Can fall under the responsibility of the Policy Advisor in EMBLAS-II as should the work on GES which still need work to complete. 8.3 Further development of the draft documents prepared by the phase I should be undertaken, particular attention is needed for the work on Water Quality / Good Environmental Status Methodology, and on compliance indicators work that need to be agreed / vetted at regional level. Technical oversight/ vetting of the quality of work need to be ensured; 8.4 Actions taken for harmonization of methods for GES and compliance indicators. EMBLAS II needs to make sure that there are links between the work done on the preparation of monitoring programs (PA 3 of EMBLAS I) and preparation of surveys. PA3 ? Black Sea monitoring programmes development/updated accordance with reporting obligations under the multilateral environmental agreements, the WFD, MSFD 8.5 Strategy developed for setting up / designing a longer term change process , designed with appropriate technical assistance (institutional capacity development expert to give guidance on each national process and develop an exit strategy that will included this element in each country) as part of a larger CB initiative. 8.6 Author a plan for future technical and cooperation partnership at regional and national level, including a mapping of stakeholder synergies with important projects and needs for follow-up activities, related to e.g. integrate coastal zone management, fisheries, etc... 8.7 To ensure the national demand for capacity strengthening and exercises on ICZM is addressed, build this element into the capacity development and knowledge management strategy (linked to above section) a focus on ICZM, which will deal with practical activities). 8.8 UNDP national country office could be involved in the project work with the stakeholders, as well as in work related to national monitoring programs and support the project in resource mobilization. 8.9 Location of project management liaison in Odessa is good for political reasons and for support of Ukraine processes. 8.10 As building the capacity of the Black Sea Commission Secretariat is also part of this projects strategy and so close linkages are essential for sustainability and capacity strengthening. The webpage and the knowledge management function might be best provided at the Black Sea Commission Secretariat as to begin the process of capacity building to take over results of EMBLAS II. PA4 ? Assessment of the regional networks technical capacities monitoring Black Sea 8.11 Merged with pa 1- The project supported the preparation of the Diagnostic Report II, with assessment of the national capacities for monitoring. However, at this point the capacities of individual reference laboratories were not increased significantly; only needs for capacity building were identified in the Diagnostic Report. The training program has been prepared, and training has been carried out. Additional follow-up activities will need to be prepared and implemented. PA5 ? Capacities of existing network of Black sea reference laboratories strengthened 8.12 Additional trainings are to be implemented, and the training programme fine-tuned according to the actual needs. PA6 ? Methodologies and plans based on joint surveys based on ones that already exist and activities planned under other funded projects 8.13 The Joint Survey Methodology has been prepared as a draft document. The list of monitoring was cited, and parameters still need to be clarified, on the basis of the revised national monitoring programs. The methods to be used for the surveys need to be technically vetted, additional expertise may need to be brought in to work on relevant details. PA7 ? WEB based system for Black Sea water quality database 8.14 The BS Water Quality database has been prepared in the concept form. The new communication staff expert might oversee the area of work around the longer term results. 8.15 Additional work to be done for the Phytoplankton and Mnemiopsis components of BSIS, where few activities were undertaken. WQ database as a very initial prototype and is available.
9 9. SUSTAINABILITY RECOMMENDATIONS: 9.1 NGOs/CBOs, and integral national stakeholders should be invited to participate in the project, this is particularly important for the phase 2 of the project. 9.2 The Black Sea Commission and its Secretariat should be provided with technical assistance for knowledge management, including planning and implementation through a learning-by-doing approach and with a link to PA5-database; Knowledge management strategy should be linked to PA5 as a database and capacity development strategy and PA6 on visibility. 9.3 Other donor options for co-financing future regional capacity building initiatives should be explored, e.g. linked to GEF regional fisheries. 9.4 Coordination with the Black Sea Commission and its Secretariat should be ensured to follow-up exit strategy for regional capacity building on project learning and actions. The work on an exit strategy might be considered by the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Groups. Financial sustainability For the moment, the financial sustainability of EMBLAS-I is secured, since there is a follow-up 2nd phase, where resources are available to continue with the activities. Financial sustainability of project results will become an issue by the end of EMBLAS II. In this context it is necessary: 9.5 The costs the national monitoring programmes need to be evaluated. This project should become a part of a master capacity strengthening plan that integrates the learning from ongoing projects and builds capacity of the national sub-programme and the Black Sea Commission for monitoring. The national sub-programs will need country-based project design missions that are part of the overall regional master plan for strengthening regional capacity. 9.6 An exit strategy should be developed that gives concrete suggestions on how to take forward the national monitoring programs and continuation of the national capacity development post EMBLAS 1 and 2 and secure funding. Institutional sustainability In general, EMBLAS is not focusing on building of new networks, but on strengthening of the existing structures. 9.7 The need for expertise to support development of national capacity building plans should be considered, the project partners could be involved 9.8 The Exit strategy should consider a bridge between the ends of MISIS, EPIRB and EMBLAS. It can include short outline of a concept for a future project design that enables a follow-up capacity strengthening initiative integrating the learning and the understanding that a baseline for monitoring from MISIS, EPIRB and EMBLAS 1 and 2. Policy level sustainability The first steps towards the policy level sustainability have been made, through preparation of documents to be used at the regional level (i.e. Biological guidelines, draft monitoring programs), that are expected to be endorsed by the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Groups. 9.9 In the 2nd phase the project should plan for and undertake advocacy work at national level and potentially with involvement/ consultation with UNDP national programme on environment in each country. There will be a need to work with stakeholders, training, establishment of contacts, cooperation with the BSC and authorities dealing with relevant legislation and policy.
10 10. KEY SUGGESTIONS BASED ON KEY LESSONS LEARNED Future directions of project development underlining the main objectives and projects result is proposed to be composed out of the following issues: 10.1 Focus this project more on strengthening capacities nationally and in the region. 10.2 Use DR II recommendations in planning. 10.3 Employ the PA3 work of EMBLAS 1 in designing future national capacity building pilots. 10.4 Continue to manage /monitor risk but keeping in mind that EMBLAS work goes beyond political borders as it deal with the Black Sea, a shared resource that goes beyond political boundaries by nature of the shared environmental problems. 10.5 Develop user friendly versions of guidelines which can be easily understood by political actors and used in practice (high theoretical compilations are absolutely useless for the field work or preparation of assessments). Role of knowledge management is to turn scientific products into user friendly communications for many audiences. 10.6 Observe cost-efficiency in work but take care to work with the best, no matter their nationality. Go beyond to bring in appropriate technical assistance i.e. knowledge management, institutional capacity and public policy development and other key technical areas noted in report. 10.7 Ensure consultations with the BSC Advisory Groups, to make sure that work done for Georgia, Russia and Ukraine is in line with similar work ongoing for Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey. In addition to make sure that the results of project work can be used in the regional context ? for the BS Commission & Secretariat work. 10.8 Move to a strategic results (change) focus, policy influence (advocacy and cost benefits analysis) and less on deliverables. The results of the project from this perspective also need to be closely monitored, in line with the LogFrame and planned results (many of which are related to national change in phase two) as specified in the DOA. One team member should be appointed to follow-up on this task (Communication and Coordination Expert of EMBLAS II); 10.9 At the same time, the project should have a monitoring and evaluation procedure in place to check, review and approve documents prepared by experts/partners. One team member should be appointed to follow-up on this task (Communication and Coordination Expert of EMBLAS II); 10.10 Ensure good practice in meetings & events planning and organization, with deadlines for agenda preparation, background documents submission, comments to be provided by participants, preparation of minutes form meeting and their approval; 10.11 Work plan of the activities needs to be firmly established and followed as the project is containing a number of practical activities that require time for preparation, implementation and evaluation. If delays occur, a contingency plan needs to be in place in a short term period. 10.12 Provide for good organization of activities, which are agreed to first with the EMBLAS 2 management body (all members) and then with partners / experts. 10.13 Continue to establish priorities; for instance, for the moment in EMBLAS 2 the priority is to agree on the DOA, to prepare a solid results based work plan (taking into consideration this TE) with the estimation of required inputs and costs, inception report and ensure the funding of the project comes to conclude contracts with partners and organizations.
1. Recommendation: OVERALL OBJECTIVES The overall objective of EMBLAS I was to set up initiatives that will help improve the protection of the Black Sea environment. The 2nd phase is building-up on these initial activities and keeps the overall objective of the project as ?to help improve protection of the Black Sea environment?. Recommendation: The specific objectives of EMBLAS-I and EMBLAS-II remain the same, since both phases of the project are complementary to each other and they should be seen as one initiative
Management Response: [Added: 2016/01/08]

No Action Needed

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: 2 DESIGN / STRATEGY / CAPACITY BUILDING APPROACH EMBLAS I has been designed as a preparatory action and a baseline development for a larger technical support to the beneficiary countries. In the 2nd phase there is a need to focus also on communication, knowledge management and capacity building. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 In the project team, focal points should be designated to manage each result to help move the project implementation mindset from a focus on deliverables to results. 2.2 A project capacity building approach/strategy needs to be developed for three levels of capacity building including regional, national and local. It can build up on the Training Programme developed in the phase I. 2.3 PM ensure a whole of project communications, coordination and knowledge management function. 2.4 Further development of the draft documents prepared by the phase I should be ensured, particular attention is needed for the work on Water Quality / Good Environmental Status Methodology, as well as on compliance indicators work that need to be agreed / vetted at regional level. Technical oversight and vetting of the quality of work need to be ensured; 2.5 The three level capacity building approach (regional, national and local) should be developed. Bring in assistance as necessary to do this exercise. 2.6 An explicit/concrete communication and knowledge management strategy should be developed and applied in the phase II. 2.7 A plan for close monitoring of risk scenarios and plans to mitigate the risks should be updated and included in EMBLAS 2 implementation strategy. This means to enact a project design that is technically and political well throughout and result based and legally agreed. The tasks of project partner institutions need to be clearly designated as to avoid all levels of risk and to deal with risk scenarios. 2.8 PIU ? Communications/ KM function- Develop user friendly versions of guidelines which can be easily understood by political actors and used in practice (high theoretical compilations are absolutely useless for the field work or preparation of assessments). Role of knowledge management is to turn scientific products into user friendly communications for many audiences.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1-2.2 Matrix of responsibilities will specify the tasks of the project team members, with support from the partner organizations as necessary
[Added: 2016/02/12]
Project Management Unit 2015/12 Completed Attached to the progress report Emblas-II
2.3-2.5 The project dissemination and communication strategy and a training program will specify the capacity building needs and approach, as well as the communication and KM strategy, based on the project activities
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Communication strategy 2016 prepared, implemented, ComStrat 2017 prepared and relevant trainings and education campaigns organized. History
2.6 The documents prepared in the EMBLAS-I are being reviewed by the EMBLAS-II team, the input from the BSC Advisory Groups members is expected
[Added: 2016/02/12]
Project Management Unit 2015/12 Completed
2.7 It will be reflected in the frame of the PA 7. project management. Risk assessment is part of the UNDP internal procedures. If needed the Steering Committee will be involved in related decisions to be taken.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the initiation of the actions. Steering Committee has been update on the key risks in the project, recommendation applied also in the follow-up project phase History
2.8 This recommendation will be considered in the PA 6: dissemination and visibility and it will be included also in the project results dissemination strategy
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: SoPs developed for environmental monitoring (chemistry and biology) and sentinels monitoring guidelines prepared and disseminated. History
3. Recommendation: 3. COORDINATION AND LINKAGES In the EMBLAS-I the basic coordination and linkages were developed with MISIS project and EPIRB project. The 2nd phase of the project includes more extensive technical activities, where the synergies with other ongoing projects / initiatives should be utilized RECOMMENDATIONS: 3.1 A coordination and synergies strategy should be developed using knowledge management approaches (synergistic actions for a coordinated and efficient approach to environmental monitoring across the Black Sea region). UNDP is a global leader on knowledge management for promoting south cooperation and coordination. It can bring this expertise to the project and work with the BSC to create a sustainability plan that links to a much more strategic approach. 3.2 An updated synergies inventory should be developed to take stock of what is needed to enhance future coherence goals with other ongoing and finished projects with similar objectives. This exercise should entail a good description of the linkages, their implementation schedules and a partnership strategy to ensure that the learning from those projects are incorporated. 3.3 An initiative or bridging project activity could be proposed to avoid losing the momentum of learning and products from MISIS; to further incentivize regional cooperation and encourage overarching monitoring results linked to result not only for the EMBLAS beneficiary countries, but including all six Black Sea countries. 3.4 EMBLAS EU project manager could meet with and be briefed by MISIS EU project manager to discuss the potential for the new initiative 3.5 Harmonization of results with the MISIS project needs to be ensured. This activity can be linked to development of exit strategy and the developing a concept or plan for a new six-country capacity development strategy for entire BS region. 3.6 Close cooperation and synergies/linkages with River Basins project EPIRB (can do joint planning) should be developed on joint technical tasks. 3.7 A coherent knowledge sharing /partnership coordination strategy could be developed, which may be linked to strengthening the role of the BSC and its structures (Members, Secretariat and Advisory Groups) for Knowledge Management and coordination as part of the regional capacity beguiling approach.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1,3.2 A review of the existing / ongoing initiatives & projects in the region will be carried out, with identification of areas & activities with possible cooperation and joint actions. Partnership strategies will be outlined.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Project established cooperation with other projects and relevant institutions History
3.3, 3.4 It is expected that during the project implementation additional needs for activities will emerge. A proposal for follow-up projects & initiatives will be part of the project exit strategy for EMBLAS-II
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Project followed the example of MISIS Assessment History
3.5, 3.6 The MISIS experts will be invited to share the experience with the project results and lessons learned during the EMBLAS-II. Joint activities with EPIRB are already planned mainly in relation to the capacity building and training activities
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Project followed the example of MISIS Assessment, potential cooperation with EUWI+ project explored History
3.7 The knowledge sharing strategy and capacity building approach will be part of the project dissemination and visibility strategy
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Communication Strategy 2016, 2017 prepared History
4. Recommendation: 4. WORK PLANNING In the phase I the general work plan has been laid ? down in the Inception report and later on adjusted at the Steering committee meetings. The duration of the phase II is planned for 42 months (with potential extension), and a large number of activities are planned. Therefore specific attention needs to be paid to the work planning: RECOMMENDATIONS: 4.1 In general the project results need to be planned and coordinated towards results and overall objectives. Coordination is critical for the harmonization of goals inherent in this project?s strategy. In the project team a focal point should be appointed for technical monitoring and coordination of results. Ensure strategy for results and guided processed vs. deliverables: designation of focal points to manage each result area will help to move the project implementation mindset from documents and deliverables to results. 4.2 A results-based work plan for EMBLAS 2 needs to be developed (to be presented at inception meeting) with timing and schedule as precise as possible (do scoping and planning), delegation of authority and responsibility, and estimation of inputs and costs. 4.3 The deliverables need to be carefully planned with linkages in mind and indication of clear timing and quantifiable and or qualified benchmarks. Develop a detailed project planning and scheduling the sequence of activities; certain activities can be done in parallel.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1, 4.2, 4.3 The results-based planning is outlined in the Inception report (IR) - the work plan, time frame and responsibilities are presented. This is also part of the PA7 project management- to be ensured by the key project team members
[Added: 2016/02/12]
Project Management Unit 2015/12 Completed
5. Recommendation: 5. STAKEHOLDERS ENGAGEMENT In the phase I the project partners have been considered as the key project stakeholders that were in touch with other relevant institutions (during the initial stage of Diagnostic Report II preparation). The extended stakeholder workshops were organized shortly before the end of the project phase I. In EMBLAS II the stakeholder involvement needs to be expanded: RECOMMENDATIONS: 5.1 Relevant civil society organizations and NGOs, private sector should be included in project activities and potentially in additional planning. Scope and consult them (target women where possible) in the activities (see stakeholder workshop minutes). 5.2 Specific target groups in the partner countries should be included such as the relevant ministries and agencies responsible for fisheries and agriculture, industry and transport, selected regional and local administrations, universities, research centers and training institutions, NGOs and the private sector.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1, 5.2 Involvement of the NGOS and CSO will be planned in the frame of the PA6. The list of stakeholders prepared in the EMBLAS-I will be reviewed and the stakeholder involvement will be reconsidered accordingly.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Project involves a range of the stakeholders, mainly schools and environmental NGOs in specific project campaigns – Environmental sentinels and Black Sea Clean Beach Day History
6. Recommendation: 6. HUMAN RESOURCES RECOMMENDATIONS: In EMBLAS-I the core team was composed of the Project Manager, Technical Advisor, Project Assistant and Programme Analyst. The team has been supported by the national experts. In the 2nd phase much stronger core team is needed, due to the number and variety of the project activities, where specific expertise is required. 6.1 A focal point for Knowledge Management should be appointed from the project team, with results linked to BSC and its Secretariat capacity strengthening goals. 6.2 The need for an institutional capacity development expert to support national monitoring strategies should be considered ; Deal with the need for an Institutional capacity and public policy expert to support project national strategies; 6.3 If needed additional experts should be hired with expertise in technical areas, including for monitoring and surveys, institutional and capacity development, knowledge management and communication and international waters management. Recommended staffing in the phase 2:  Results Leader for PA1 (Support the countries in Bucharest Convention implementation) - policy expert ? to be hired  Results Leaders for PA 2 (Joint BS Pilot Surveys) ? Team Leader, supported by Monitoring Expert  Reader Leader PA3 (Capacity building and trainings)? Monitoring Expert  Reader Leader PA4 (Joint BS Cruise ? open sea) - Team Leader with support of Monitoring Expert  Results Leaders for PA5 (Databases) - Team Leader supported by Communication and Coordination Expert  Results Leaders for PA6 (Communication and Visibility) - Communication and Coordination Expert  Technical Advisor. TA?s role is still needed for specific areas, synergies and quality assurance across all key results.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.1, 6.2 The matrix of responsibilities will specify the roles of the ?focal points? for the key project activities & results, including the Knowledge management, where the BSC PS will have also a role. Additional experts to support the project team will be hired according to the emerging needs.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2016/12 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: Attached to the progress report Emblas-II. History
6.3 In case that some additional need for expertise in the field of institutional capacity will emerge, it is possible to hire an additional expert. However, it is foreseen that the project partner organizations will cover this task
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/15]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Additional short-term experts hired – chemistry, economy, hydromorphology History
7. Recommendation: 7. MONITORING RECOMMENDATIONS: In EMBLAS ? I, the monitoring of the project progress and achieved results was based on the project logical framework, supported with the work plan developed in the inception phase. The monitoring of work of project partners and experts was ensured by the project management, on the basis of the individual terms of references as a part of contractual arrangements. The project Steering Committee has been involved in the project results monitoring and advised on various issues emerged during the project implementation. 7.1 Before the Steering Committee Meeting a Technical meeting should be organized with scientific presentations of the key results areas. The Steering Committee meeting would then deal with the work plan overview and key decisions to be taken on specific issues. 7.2 PIU develop a results based monitoring framework that includes five key results managers vs. management by deliverables. A system for monitoring that included the experts and partners oversight of key result areas should be established, including timesheets, check-lists for partners, templates for reporting; Delegate clear management responsibilities, including monitoring functions, i.e. reports, 7.3 PM ensure all sub-contractors and implementing partners provide short implementation /progress reports on the status of deliverables on a regular basis for UNDP and EC management 7.4 PIU Develop a draft project work plan for results (as opposed to deliverables), prepared such that it helps PM consider the entire projects capacity building and deliverable needs. The work plan should articulate the linkages between all result area as to clarify tasks and expected results of each expert from the project core team very clearly. This should be closely monitored by the UNDP RTA. The results based management, work plan with required input specifications, identification of capacity building needs are the key elements to be reflected in the project deliverables and results.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
7.1 In the case of the Inception Workshop and the SC meeting, the SC meeting will be held prior to the Inception. This is due to the need to get the strategic agreement of the Steering Committee on the project prior to detailed technical work planning with the project partners
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: SC meeting held prior to the Inception Workshop, scientific tech. workshop held prior SC meeting in Feb2017 History
7.2 The project Log-Frame is the basis for the results-based monitoring of the project achievement. The system of monitoring for the work of the project partners and experts is already in place, following the practice from EMBLAS-I. The Terms of References and reporting requirements are specifying the necessary documents to be provided
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions:Log-frame followed in reporting (indicators achievements are monitored) History
7.3 The Communication and Coordination Expert will support the Project Manager in this task
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: PR expert hired until end of the second phase of the project History
7.4 The project will work towards the results, where the deliverables are necessary to achieve the desired outputs & outcomes. Detailed workplan is part of the Inception report, which is also outlining the tasks and responsibilities of experts and partner organizations as well as the members of the project core team.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Status update in February 2017 as initiated During the course of project implementation the work plan has been revised on annual basis, this recommendation has been transferred also to the project follow-up phase. History
8. Recommendation: 8. RESULTS RECOMMENDATIONS: PA1-Availability and quality of chemical and biological data to provide for integrated assessments of the Black Sea state of environment, including pressures and impacts 8.1 The Diagnostic Report II has been prepared as a basis for integrated assessment of the Black Sea environment, this document should be further used for all project work planning in the phase 2. PA2- Bucharest convention and other agreements, I.E. EU marine strategy implementation supported 8.2 Work area harmonized and completed in line with methods and tools developed in other PA areas. Can fall under the responsibility of the Policy Advisor in EMBLAS-II as should the work on GES which still need work to complete. 8.3 Further development of the draft documents prepared by the phase I should be undertaken, particular attention is needed for the work on Water Quality / Good Environmental Status Methodology, and on compliance indicators work that need to be agreed / vetted at regional level. Technical oversight/ vetting of the quality of work need to be ensured; 8.4 Actions taken for harmonization of methods for GES and compliance indicators. EMBLAS II needs to make sure that there are links between the work done on the preparation of monitoring programs (PA 3 of EMBLAS I) and preparation of surveys. PA3 ? Black Sea monitoring programmes development/updated accordance with reporting obligations under the multilateral environmental agreements, the WFD, MSFD 8.5 Strategy developed for setting up / designing a longer term change process , designed with appropriate technical assistance (institutional capacity development expert to give guidance on each national process and develop an exit strategy that will included this element in each country) as part of a larger CB initiative. 8.6 Author a plan for future technical and cooperation partnership at regional and national level, including a mapping of stakeholder synergies with important projects and needs for follow-up activities, related to e.g. integrate coastal zone management, fisheries, etc... 8.7 To ensure the national demand for capacity strengthening and exercises on ICZM is addressed, build this element into the capacity development and knowledge management strategy (linked to above section) a focus on ICZM, which will deal with practical activities). 8.8 UNDP national country office could be involved in the project work with the stakeholders, as well as in work related to national monitoring programs and support the project in resource mobilization. 8.9 Location of project management liaison in Odessa is good for political reasons and for support of Ukraine processes. 8.10 As building the capacity of the Black Sea Commission Secretariat is also part of this projects strategy and so close linkages are essential for sustainability and capacity strengthening. The webpage and the knowledge management function might be best provided at the Black Sea Commission Secretariat as to begin the process of capacity building to take over results of EMBLAS II. PA4 ? Assessment of the regional networks technical capacities monitoring Black Sea 8.11 Merged with pa 1- The project supported the preparation of the Diagnostic Report II, with assessment of the national capacities for monitoring. However, at this point the capacities of individual reference laboratories were not increased significantly; only needs for capacity building were identified in the Diagnostic Report. The training program has been prepared, and training has been carried out. Additional follow-up activities will need to be prepared and implemented. PA5 ? Capacities of existing network of Black sea reference laboratories strengthened 8.12 Additional trainings are to be implemented, and the training programme fine-tuned according to the actual needs. PA6 ? Methodologies and plans based on joint surveys based on ones that already exist and activities planned under other funded projects 8.13 The Joint Survey Methodology has been prepared as a draft document. The list of monitoring was cited, and parameters still need to be clarified, on the basis of the revised national monitoring programs. The methods to be used for the surveys need to be technically vetted, additional expertise may need to be brought in to work on relevant details. PA7 ? WEB based system for Black Sea water quality database 8.14 The BS Water Quality database has been prepared in the concept form. The new communication staff expert might oversee the area of work around the longer term results. 8.15 Additional work to be done for the Phytoplankton and Mnemiopsis components of BSIS, where few activities were undertaken. WQ database as a very initial prototype and is available.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
8.1 The DRII is taken into consideration in the finalization of Revised Monitoring Programs, planning of CB activities and surveys
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the actions: National monitoring programs prepared, tested in surveys 2016 History
8.2, 8.3, 8.4 In general, further development of the documents prepared within EMBLAS-I is foreseen. The particular attention will be given to the Guidelines for WQ monitoring / GES Methodology and Compliance indicators, as these documents have regional importance (not only for the project beneficiary countries). The involvement of the BSC Secretariat and Advisory Groups is foreseen in vetting the final documents.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Status update in February 2017 as initiated The Good Environmental Status methodology has been applied for the Black Sea environmental status assessment, on the basis of the results from the monitoring surveys. The guidelines for WQ monitoring, i.e. the Standard Operational Procedures (SOPs) are part of the Scientific Reports from the Surveys 2016. History
8.5 The strategy for a longer-term change process will be part of the overall EMBLAS Exit strategy, that will be developed by the end of the 2nd phase of the project
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unint 2018/06 Completed Status update in February 2017 as initiated. Exit strategy for the EMBLAS-I updated at the end of EMBLAS-II phase. History
8.6 - 8.7 EMBLAS is not specifically targeting the ICZM and related activities, however it can be taken into consideration when preparing the project exit strategy and recommendations for further actions in the region
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Status update in February 2017 as initiated. The ICZM concept is in principle included in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and Water Framework Directive (WFD). The activities of the follow-up phase of the project were fully aligned with MSFD and WFD requirements. History
8.8 In the EMBLAS-I the country offices were involved in the project implementation (mainly from operations point of view). In the 2nd phase of the project it is foreseen to extend the work with the project stakeholders where the Country Offices will have a role.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Communication Teams from the COs are involved in PR activities, practice leaders are Steering Committee members. Recommendation fully applied in the follow-up project phase History
8.9 The project office will remain in Odessa
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Project office is hosted by Institute of Marine Biology, Ukraine History
8.10 Building the capacities of the BSC Secretariat fits in the context of building capacities at the regional level. This will be done through helping with the databases / BSIS and BSIMAP that is supposed to be hosted by the Secretariat. In addition the project will provide support to the project beneficiary countries with input for documents to be compiles by the BSC Secretariat for all Black Sea Countries (BS SOE report, SAPIR, etc.)
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated comments in February 2017: Capacity building activities focused on the national institutions responsible for the Black Sea Monitoring. The Black Sea Water Quality Database has been updated and it is hosted by UkrSCES, which is the Black Sea Regional Activity Center for Pollution Monitoring and Assessment (under the BS Convention) History
8.11 The Diagnostic Report II, is one of the key resource documents for the 2nd phase of the project
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed The Diagnostic Report-II has been one of the key documents for the preparation of the follow-up project phase History
8.12, 8.13 Further activities related to the capacity building and trainings are planned in the EMBLAS-II, in the frame of project activities 2-4
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of actions: A number of trainings organized for chemistry, biology, marine litter, trainings of individual experts supported History
8.14 The Joint Survey Methodology has been prepared as a general framework document. For the practical implementation of the pilot studies and open sea surveys specific manuals will be prepared with details on the sampling sites, parameters to be monitored, methods to be used, data collection sheets, etc.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of action: Methodologies and monitoring programs prepared and followed in the Surveys 2016, and in forthcoming Surveys 2017 History
8.15, 816 The Communication & Coordination Expert of the EMBLAS-II will provide guidance to the database developers from the user point of view and knowledge management layout, overall presentation on the website, incorporation to the BSC Secretariat website, etc. The content and structure of the databases will be the responsibility of technical experts
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of actions: Database development taken over by the project partner organization - UkrSCES History
9. Recommendation: 9. SUSTAINABILITY RECOMMENDATIONS: 9.1 NGOs/CBOs, and integral national stakeholders should be invited to participate in the project, this is particularly important for the phase 2 of the project. 9.2 The Black Sea Commission and its Secretariat should be provided with technical assistance for knowledge management, including planning and implementation through a learning-by-doing approach and with a link to PA5-database; Knowledge management strategy should be linked to PA5 as a database and capacity development strategy and PA6 on visibility. 9.3 Other donor options for co-financing future regional capacity building initiatives should be explored, e.g. linked to GEF regional fisheries. 9.4 Coordination with the Black Sea Commission and its Secretariat should be ensured to follow-up exit strategy for regional capacity building on project learning and actions. The work on an exit strategy might be considered by the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Groups. Financial sustainability For the moment, the financial sustainability of EMBLAS-I is secured, since there is a follow-up 2nd phase, where resources are available to continue with the activities. Financial sustainability of project results will become an issue by the end of EMBLAS II. In this context it is necessary: 9.5 The costs the national monitoring programmes need to be evaluated. This project should become a part of a master capacity strengthening plan that integrates the learning from ongoing projects and builds capacity of the national sub-programme and the Black Sea Commission for monitoring. The national sub-programs will need country-based project design missions that are part of the overall regional master plan for strengthening regional capacity. 9.6 An exit strategy should be developed that gives concrete suggestions on how to take forward the national monitoring programs and continuation of the national capacity development post EMBLAS 1 and 2 and secure funding. Institutional sustainability In general, EMBLAS is not focusing on building of new networks, but on strengthening of the existing structures. 9.7 The need for expertise to support development of national capacity building plans should be considered, the project partners could be involved 9.8 The Exit strategy should consider a bridge between the ends of MISIS, EPIRB and EMBLAS. It can include short outline of a concept for a future project design that enables a follow-up capacity strengthening initiative integrating the learning and the understanding that a baseline for monitoring from MISIS, EPIRB and EMBLAS 1 and 2. Policy level sustainability The first steps towards the policy level sustainability have been made, through preparation of documents to be used at the regional level (i.e. Biological guidelines, draft monitoring programs), that are expected to be endorsed by the Black Sea Commission and its Advisory Groups. 9.9 In the 2nd phase the project should plan for and undertake advocacy work at national level and potentially with involvement/ consultation with UNDP national programme on environment in each country. There will be a need to work with stakeholders, training, establishment of contacts, cooperation with the BSC and authorities dealing with relevant legislation and policy.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
9.1 Involvement of the NGOS and CSO will be planned in the frame of the PA6.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Education and environmental institutions involved in project activities History
9.2 The assistance to the BSC secretariat is provided through developing the databases and BSIS/BSIMAP.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed The Black Sea Water Quality Database has been updated and it is hosted by UkrSCES, which is the Black Sea Regional Activity Center for Pollution Monitoring and Assessment (under the BS Convention History
9.2 Knowledge Management strategy should be prepared in close cooperation with the Secretariat and it should be part of the Project Dissemination Strategy.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 1027 on the initiation of the action. Communication and Dissemination plan for the EMBLAS-II has been prepared, it includes also elements of knowledge management History
9.3 A fund-raising / search for co-financing is planned during the phase 2.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated comment in February 2017: Cooperation with EC JRC established. Concept for the third phase of the project prepared (EMBLAS-Plus) History
9.4, 9.6, 9.8 In the frame of EMBLAS-I an outline for the overall EMBLAS exit strategy has been developed. The ?full-scale? exit strategy is planned by the end of EMBLAS-II
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Exit strategy for the EMBLAS-I updated at the end of EMBLAS-II phase. History
9.5 In the EMBLAS-II the cost analysis will be done for the national pilot monitoring studies as a basis for overall assessment of the costs for national programs. Further needs for expertise and capacity building will be identified
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/07/19]
Project management Unit 2018/06 Completed Economic assessment of the national monitoring programs has been prepared in the frame of the EMBLAS-II project History
9.10 The advocacy work at the national level will be primarily the task of the project National Focal Points, who should be the contact point for working with the national stakeholders and policy makers
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: National Focal Points nominated and active in project implementation History
10. Recommendation: 10. KEY SUGGESTIONS BASED ON KEY LESSONS LEARNED Future directions of project development underlining the main objectives and projects result is proposed to be composed out of the following issues: 10.1 Focus this project more on strengthening capacities nationally and in the region. 10.2 Use DR II recommendations in planning. 10.3 Employ the PA3 work of EMBLAS 1 in designing future national capacity building pilots. 10.4 Continue to manage /monitor risk but keeping in mind that EMBLAS work goes beyond political borders as it deal with the Black Sea, a shared resource that goes beyond political boundaries by nature of the shared environmental problems. 10.5 Develop user friendly versions of guidelines which can be easily understood by political actors and used in practice (high theoretical compilations are absolutely useless for the field work or preparation of assessments). Role of knowledge management is to turn scientific products into user friendly communications for many audiences. 10.6 Observe cost-efficiency in work but take care to work with the best, no matter their nationality. Go beyond to bring in appropriate technical assistance i.e. knowledge management, institutional capacity and public policy development and other key technical areas noted in report. 10.7 Ensure consultations with the BSC Advisory Groups, to make sure that work done for Georgia, Russia and Ukraine is in line with similar work ongoing for Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey. In addition to make sure that the results of project work can be used in the regional context ? for the BS Commission & Secretariat work. 10.8 Move to a strategic results (change) focus, policy influence (advocacy and cost benefits analysis) and less on deliverables. The results of the project from this perspective also need to be closely monitored, in line with the LogFrame and planned results (many of which are related to national change in phase two) as specified in the DOA. One team member should be appointed to follow-up on this task (Communication and Coordination Expert of EMBLAS II); 10.9 At the same time, the project should have a monitoring and evaluation procedure in place to check, review and approve documents prepared by experts/partners. One team member should be appointed to follow-up on this task (Communication and Coordination Expert of EMBLAS II); 10.10 Ensure good practice in meetings & events planning and organization, with deadlines for agenda preparation, background documents submission, comments to be provided by participants, preparation of minutes form meeting and their approval; 10.11 Work plan of the activities needs to be firmly established and followed as the project is containing a number of practical activities that require time for preparation, implementation and evaluation. If delays occur, a contingency plan needs to be in place in a short term period. 10.12 Provide for good organization of activities, which are agreed to first with the EMBLAS 2 management body (all members) and then with partners / experts. 10.13 Continue to establish priorities; for instance, for the moment in EMBLAS 2 the priority is to agree on the DOA, to prepare a solid results based work plan (taking into consideration this TE) with the estimation of required inputs and costs, inception report and ensure the funding of the project comes to conclude contracts with partners and organizations.
Management Response: [Added: 2016/02/12]

Addressed by the actions

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
10.1 It will be done through capacity building, trainings, knowledge sharing
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Trainings organized according the needs of countries History
10..2 DRII considered in planning the surveys and training programs
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action History
10.3 The revised monitoring programs are part of the national pilots aimed also at capacity building
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed completed History
10.4 The Risk monitoring will be the project management task, primarily monitored by UNDP within standard internal procedures related to the project management. For relevant decisions the SC will be consulted
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed Risk register was updated to be presented to the final project board/steering committee review in October 2018 History
10.5 This will be addressed in the project dissemination and communication strategy
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed Done History
10.6 Selection of experts to work on the project will be based on the specific criteria related to the required expertise, clearly outlined in the respective ToR. Selection process will strictly follow UNDP procedures.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Relevant short-term experts hired History
10.7 The consultation process will be ensured through participation of the project in the meetings of BSC Advisory Groups, where relevant project activities/results can be presented and discussed
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed The final SC meeting and Advisory Group will meet in October 2015 to review the final progress. History
10.8 The project LogFrame will be used as tool to monitor the results & achievements of the project. Relevant project team members will be appointed to follow & monitor the project from the results point of view.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed Updated comment in February 2017: The project LogFrame is followed in the reporting of the project progress (included in the regular donor reports). the Logframe was monitored. Achievements are tracked in the final progress report. History
10.9 Each expert and partner under contract need to follow the respective Terms of Reference. The review and approval of the document is the project management task. Each document will be reviewed by the relevant project team member.
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed The contracts have been fulfilled. History
10.10 Considered in the PA7 project management, a standard practice for meeting organization will be presented at the Inception Workshop
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Project follows the agreed time schedule in the SC meeting organizing History
10.11, 10.12 The overall workplan is part of the Inception Report. The detailed plan for the 1st year will be discussed at the Inception Workshop and SC meeting. The plan will be followed by the project management and in case of delays / issues the Steering Committee will be informed accordingly
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2018/10/19]
Project Management Unit 2018/09 Completed IR completed. Updated comment in February 2017: SC meeting 2016 approved the work plan 2016, SC Meeting in Feb 2017 approved the work plan. Due date updated to September 2018 and pending clarification from the project team. History
10.13 The prioritisation of activities is part of the project management : Revised DoA prepared after the SC meeting (July 2015) the approval from EC will be requested Inception report drafted, comments from the countries being collected, to be presented at the SC meeting and Inception workshop
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action. History
10.13 Next installment from EC to be received after approval of the Inception Report and submission of the interim Progress Report, with the request for the next installment (through UNDP Brussels)
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2016/02 Completed Progress reports submitted to EC and approved, next two installments received in April 2016 and Dec 2016 History
10.13 After approval of the Inception Report (that includes the tasks and responsibilities of partner organizations) the ToRs & contract with partner organizations will be prepared
[Added: 2016/02/12] [Last Updated: 2017/02/16]
Project Management Unit 2018/06 Completed Updated in February 2017 on the completion of the action: Contracts (Letters of Agreement with partner organizations signed, tasks defined in the ToRs are under implementation History

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