Mid-term Japan Caribbean Climate Change Partnership

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2014-2017, RBLAC
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
11/2017
Completion Date:
11/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
22,980

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR JCCCP Midterm Evaluation - FINAL .pdf tor English 375.20 KB Posted 151
Download document FINAL REPORT J-CCCP Mid Term Review .pdf report English 2142.76 KB Posted 275
Title Mid-term Japan Caribbean Climate Change Partnership
Atlas Project Number: 00088096
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2017, RBLAC
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 11/2017
Planned End Date: 11/2017
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
  • 2. Output 1.4. Scaled up action on climate change adaptation and mitigation across sectors which is funded and implemented
  • 3. Output 1.5. Inclusive and sustainable solutions adopted to achieve increased energy efficiency and universal modern energy access (especially off-grid sources of renewable energy)
SDG Target
  • 13.1 Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries
  • 13.2 Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning
Evaluation Budget(US $): 22,980
Source of Funding: Japan
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 22,980
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Alfredo Caprile Evaluator acaprile@sd-advisors.com.ar ARGENTINA
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: Caribbean COs
Lessons
1.

Lesson 1: Importance of including output indicators and their corresponding mid-term targets in the project results framework

The Project Results Framework of the J-CCCP initiative does not have output indicators with their corresponding mid-term and end-of-project targets nor does it include a detailed sequence of the activities that ought to be undertaken in order to achieve each of the outputs. As a result, the PMU has not been able to capitalise fully on the usefulness of the project results framework as a tool for the proper implementation and monitoring of the project. The main lesson learned is the importance of including output indicators in the Project Results Framework to facilitate the monitoring and evaluation of the project during the implementation phase at the output level. More critical is the lack of an outline and / or diagram with the causal linkages of the intervention showing the logical sequence and chronological flow of the different outputs, direct outcomes, intermediate states and longer-term outcomes towards the achievement of the intended impact of the intervention.

Note: This is currently being undertaken to be presented at the next Project Board as identified previously. The revision wanted to take the MTR into consideration hence it was not finalized yet.


2.

Lesson 2: Under estimation of the technical capacities and response times of the public and private sectors across the Caribbean countries has been one the causes for implementation delays

The J-CCCP initiative prove to have high level of national project ownership from the eight targeted countries. However, a major challenge faced by virtually all of the targeted countries has been the limited technical, financial and human resources which impacted on the capacity to design adaptation and mitigation strategies as well as on the formulation of low emission and climate resilient pilot project interventions. This limitation is manifested in the inherent weaknesses of national and local institutions and vulnerable communities who lack the human resources and funding which are needed to implement such strategies and project interventions.

By having underestimated the technical capacities and response times of the government´s central and sectoral ministries as well as those of national pilot project proponents, the PMU has experienced an additional workload which translated in implementation delays for Outcomes 1 and 2. For example, as a consequence of the limited project formulation capacities identified in almost all countries, the PMU decided to mobilise 9sub-thematic experts to support the preparation and approval of the pilot project proposals.


3.

Lesson 3: Lack of an analysis of the intended causality pathway of the proposed interventions at the output and outcome levels has impacted negatively in the implementation of the technology transfer

The J-CCCP project has not been able to focus fully on the importance that the early implementation of certain activities under Component 3 should have in maximizing the overall impact of the intervention. In part, this is due to the fact an analysis of the intended causality pathway of the proposed interventions at the output and outcome levels has not been included in the Project Document (as described under lesson 1 above).

The Evaluator considers that activities such as developing linkages with Japanese private sector through business exchange and trade shows should have been one of the first activities to be implemented after having identified the priority needs of each country. This would have prompted the possible inclusion of technology innovation in the pipeline of pilot projects and evaluation of the application potential of such technologies in the Caribbean region. By not having yet done much on this front, the opportunity to validate the potential of introducing climate smart technologies for Japan in the region as part of the J-CCCP intervention is virtually lost.


4.

Lesson 4: Adaptive management is key to ensure success of regional projects

As it is the case with most regional projects, the J-CCCP initiative has been a complex and challenging project to design and implement since the specific needs and circumstances of the eight targeted countries are not entirely the same. Even though in many respects Caribbean countries share many similarities, they also have different needs and tend to move at different paces and hence adaptive management is required to take care of the different dynamics.

Adjusting work plans and reprogramming outputs both at regional and country levels has been critical throughout the implementation process. Overall, the PMU has been successful in implementing adaptive management to correct some of the shortcomings of the Project Results Framework, and provide assistance and follow up for the preparation of NAMAs and NAPs as well as providing guidance and support to pilot project proponents during the proposal preparation and evaluation process.


5.

Lesson 5: The template for pilot project proposals proved to be too complex for the project formulation capacities of the proponents and caused critical delays in the approval process

Based on the comments from the majority of the project stakeholders that have been interviewed, the 27-page long template that has been designed as a guideline for the preparation of the pilot project proposals is deemed to be too complex and an overkill for the limited size and complexity of the pilot projects that have been proposed. In all, it has taken over a year to begin approving the first pilot projects. In fact, a less demanding template was initially presented at the Inception Workshop, however the TAG believed a more robust tool/template was necessary to ensure quality and impactful projects with built-in sustainability. In the opinion of the Evaluator and based on the poor project formulation capacity among pilot project proponents it may have been more productive to have used a less demanding template and utilize the resources that have been devoted to the initial screening of the pilot projects and the re-formulation of the template to provide hands on support during the implementation phase to ensure quality and impact of the projects with built in sustainability as it has been done through the hiring of the 9 technical experts later on to enhance the pilot project proposals.


6.

Lesson 6: Based on the cumulative progress to date, the J-CCCP project design has been too ambitious in its activities and targets in relation to the amount of time and to some extent financial resources that has been allocated

Based on the evidence gathered during the MTR, the implementation of the J-CCCP project has been professionally managed and administered by the PMU team. However, an analysis of the extent of activities and targets that have been proposed in relation to the amount of resources and the time that have been allocated shows that the project design has been too ambitious and as a result and in spite of the one year no cost extension that has been granted, there is a certain degree of uncertainty with regard to the prospects of full delivery of project results for all of the eight targeted countries by the project end date In particular, full project implementation in countries like Dominica that have suffered extensive damages from hurricanes is highly questionable at this time.


Findings
1.

Conclusion 1. The implementation of the J-CCCP is rated as Moderately Satisfactory. The overall rating of the J-CCCP project based on the evaluation of findings is rated as Moderately Satisfactory. Table 7 summarises the rating of the MTR based on evaluation criteria.


2.

Conclusion 2: Project design is too ambitious in its activities and targets.

The project design is based on balanced interventions between country-driven activities implemented according to national contexts and responding to specific country needs and an overarching component specifically designed to enhance South-South and North-South cooperation and developing public-private partnerships with the objective of promoting technology transfer. However, the Evaluator considers that in relation to the amount of time and resources that have been allocated and given the complexities associated with the implementation of regional programmes, the project design has been too ambitious in its activities and targets


3.

Conclusion 3: Developing linkages with Japanese private sector is the most

innovative element of project design.

By far the most innovative element of the project design is related to the impact that could be achieved as a result of an early implementation of promoting study visits of Caribbean private sector representatives to Japan to learn more about Japanese climateresilient technologies and their potential application in productive processes.

Unfortunately, not much progress has been done to date on this front to date in spite of the fact that this is viewed as one of the main causal pathways from outputs to direct outcomes and as such should have been implemented as early on as possible with the view of exploring the potential of incorporating innovative technologies in the formulation of demonstration projects in order to prove their applicability and replicability potential across the Caribbean region during the implementation of the JCCCP initiative. Consequently, none of the proposed pilot projects are based on the application of innovative technologies from Japan or elsewhere. However, it is fair to note that the project has been proactive and effective in developing a number of strategic partnerships with key organisations to help advance with the activities related to the development of NAMAs and NAPs and the formulation of pilot project proposals across the eight targeted countries.


4.

Conclusion 4: M&E has been negatively affected by shortcomings in the Project

Results Framework

The Project Results Framework has several main shortcomings that have made the monitoring and evaluation of the project activities more difficult, as discussed in more detail in Section 3.2.1. The first one has to do with the fact that no indicators and their corresponding mid-term and end of project targets have been included to evaluate progress at the output level. In second term, no pre-established mid-term targets are included in the Project Results Framework to assess the level of progress on the achievement of the proposed outcomes. Best practices indicate that the Project Results Framework should have indicators for outcomes and outputs with their respective midterm and end-of project targets. Also, there is poor to no alignment between the indicators that have been selected to track progress of Outcome 2 and some of the proposed end of project targets. Finally, a list of indicative activities for achieving each of the outputs have been included leaving it open to the interpretation of the PMU on how best to proceed, which could also be viewed as a potential plus in terms of preserving a certain degree of flexibility. Overall, the Project Results Framework should be streamlined and made more ‘results-oriented’ with clearer indicators and end of project targets.

Note: This is currently being done and the PMU were awaiting the recommendations of the MTR to incorporate any added recommendation in the ‘streamlined’ revised Results Framework.


5.

Conclusion 5: Project implementation and fund disbursement are behind schedule

At its midpoint, the project is behind schedule compared to the timeline that was planned originally. Cumulative fund disbursements through the end of the third quarter of 2017 have reached 31 % of the total available funds and the overall progress to date in the implementation of project activities is assessed to be between 30 to 35% with the most progress concentrated in the development of NAMAs, followed by NAP development.

Out of the 36 pilot project proposals that have been reviewed, 22 have been approved and four of these projects are being implemented. The In spite of the delays that have occurred mainly during the early phase of implementation, the J-CCCP project has relatively good prospects of delivering most of the planned project results under the assumption that a 6-month extension is granted (see recommendations).


Recommendations
1

Recommendation 1: Expectations of project achievement and impact needs to be adjusted.

Based on the implementation delays that have occurred during the early part of project implementation and taking into consideration that the project end date of December 2018 is only 14 months away, there is a need to take stock of what can be achieved realistically within the remaining budget and time frame and proceed to adjust the work plan and remaining budget, accordingly. In doing so, it will be important to ensure that at least one of the demonstration projects that have the highest replication potential are successfully completed for each of the four targeted sectors before the end of the J-CCCP intervention. Also, it would be important to increase technical assistance to those countries that are most advance with the preparation of NAMAs and NAPs to ensure of having a set of NAMAs and NAPs with high replication potential ready to apply for a Technical Assistance to begin seeking climate finance support for their implementation.

2

Recommendation 2: Streamline the Project Results Framework to make it more results oriented with clear indicators and end of project targets. 

An overall revision of the indicators and end of project targets to reflect the changes to the work plan.  This should be based on realistic expectations of projected achievements.

3

Recommendation 3: Look for ways to accelerate the delivery of the remaining outputs.

Different strategies may be needed to move the implementation of NAMAs and NAPs in each of the countries based on their specific capacities, needs and the likelihood of achieving results before the end of the project. The same applies to finding ways to ensure that the implementation of demonstration projects is achieved accordingly.

4

Recommendation 4. Speed up all activities related to the Japan- Caribbean transfer of technology.

Place special emphasis in ensuring the prompt establishment of linkages with the Japanese private sector through business exchanges and trade shows with the objective of identifying climate-smart technological options that could be made available for implementation in the Caribbean countries and if possible find ways to set up a demonstration project to test their technical and financial viability and use it as a show case for future replication.

5

Recommendation 5. Request a 6-month extension.

Ensure that pilot projects are completed and that the results of the mission to Japan could be used to identified potential innovative technology transfer applications and at a minimum establish a road map to evaluate the feasibility of implementing such innovative technologies in the region, something that could then be used to formulate an intervention by a future programme.

6

Recommendation 6. Develop and if possible begin implementation of strategies for securing additional funding sources to strengthen the long-term sustainability of the intervention.

Additional funding will have to be secured for the implementation of the NAMAs and NAPs that are being developed for each of the countries and additional funding will also be required to undertake operation and maintenance activities over the long term, in particular for those projects that will be implemented in highly vulnerable and remote communities.

1. Recommendation:

Recommendation 1: Expectations of project achievement and impact needs to be adjusted.

Based on the implementation delays that have occurred during the early part of project implementation and taking into consideration that the project end date of December 2018 is only 14 months away, there is a need to take stock of what can be achieved realistically within the remaining budget and time frame and proceed to adjust the work plan and remaining budget, accordingly. In doing so, it will be important to ensure that at least one of the demonstration projects that have the highest replication potential are successfully completed for each of the four targeted sectors before the end of the J-CCCP intervention. Also, it would be important to increase technical assistance to those countries that are most advance with the preparation of NAMAs and NAPs to ensure of having a set of NAMAs and NAPs with high replication potential ready to apply for a Technical Assistance to begin seeking climate finance support for their implementation.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

While the PMU accepts that the expectations of project achievement and impact needs to be adjusted, the adjustments are planned in a more holistic way.  The PMU will seek to adjust the work-plan to accommodate the completion of all approved pilot projects and will be employing a variety of methods to ensure that this is achieved.  There will also be a specific monitoring put in place to ensure delivery relating to NAPs and NAMAs.

It should also be noted that Recommendations 2 and 5 and its related actions demonstrates how expectations and impact (as well as related Outcomes) will be specifically adjusted.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.2 Deploy Technical Specialists and M&E personnel to pilot project locations as needed so as to assist with delays relating to reporting on implementation as well as immediate trouble-shooting so as to minimize any possible delays with respect to implementation of the pilot projects.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated The PMU undertook missions to Dominica (January) and Belize (April) 2018 to assist with accelerating progress. There were also weekly status meetings with Technical Specialists and M&E Analyst for some projects. Submission of the Progress Report was also enforced
1.3 Ensure National Focal Points NFPs and PMU prioritize and focus on consultancy delivery of NAPs and NAMAs with special assistance on delivery and contract management. Utilise the Procurement Officer in the monitoring of these contract deliverables so as to alert PMU and NFPs on necessary actions to be taken regarding assurance of delivery.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated Contract Management System managed by the Procurement Officer was utilized. In some cases automated calendar reminders for deliverable dates were utilized. NFPs were charged to focus on this garnering the necessary feedback for finalization of the NAPs and NAMAs
1.4 Revise and consolidate specific project activities such as the Wrap-up event and the experience-sharing event.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated One event scheduled for July 2019 to accommodate 1) Final PB meeting 2) Wrap-up event (with Lessons learnt) 3)North-South exchange of information (with Expert from Japan)
1.1 Revise Annual Work Plan (AWP) 2018 with new timelines and updated results and ensuring that activities for at least 60% of the projects will be finished (yield results) by December 2018. Other project results should be accommodated through the acceptance (and approval) of Recommendation 5.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/02 Completed The Revised AWP was approved by the Project Board in January 2018. As of June 2018, projections reveal that approximately 49% (18 out of 37) pilot projects would be concluded by December 2018. History
2. Recommendation:

Recommendation 2: Streamline the Project Results Framework to make it more results oriented with clear indicators and end of project targets. 

An overall revision of the indicators and end of project targets to reflect the changes to the work plan.  This should be based on realistic expectations of projected achievements.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

Narrative: As noted in the MTR, actions relating to this recommendation had commenced prior to the finalisation of the report.  The revision of the RF was therefore completed in January 2018. The RF was revised to reflect:

         a. the addition of 3 new Outcome indicators

         b. revision of end of project targets

         c. the addition of Output indicators that reflect better alignment to capturing results as well alignment to Outcome indicators

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1. Revise the Results Framework (RF) with new Outcome indicators that align to proposed targets as well as Output indicators (which inform the Outcome).
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/01 Completed The RF was revised to reflect: a. the addition of 3 new Outcome indicators b. revision of end of project targets c. the addition of Output indicators that reflect better alignment to capturing results as well alignment to Outcome indicators History
2.2. Present and obtain approval of the revised RF by Project Board
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/01 Completed
3. Recommendation:

Recommendation 3: Look for ways to accelerate the delivery of the remaining outputs.

Different strategies may be needed to move the implementation of NAMAs and NAPs in each of the countries based on their specific capacities, needs and the likelihood of achieving results before the end of the project. The same applies to finding ways to ensure that the implementation of demonstration projects is achieved accordingly.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

The PMU will implement strategies to accelerate implementation.  These strategies will focus on the continuous use of the Country Office Delivery Accelerated Package as well as refinement of internal contract management systems. Targeted engagement of key national counterparts will also be employed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Establish targeted and more efficient procurement process including a. Request continuous usage of the Delivery Acceleration Package re: direct contracting where applicable b. Establish and utilize an automated contract management system that will provide alerts on deliverables
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated These included: a. Request continuous usage of the Delivery Acceleration Package (DAP) re: direct contracting where applicable b. Establish and utilize an automated contract management system that will provide alerts on
3.2 Increase involvement of high level officials to prioritize in-country activities through regular scheduled calls/communication regarding required feedback or updates
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated The PMU has sought formal understandings of the communication chains for several countries and has also devised structured communication between stakeholders. The PMU has undertaken formal communication with Permanent Secretaries of Finance in St. Lucia and St. Vincent and also with senior management in other Country Offices
4. Recommendation:

Recommendation 4. Speed up all activities related to the Japan- Caribbean transfer of technology.

Place special emphasis in ensuring the prompt establishment of linkages with the Japanese private sector through business exchanges and trade shows with the objective of identifying climate-smart technological options that could be made available for implementation in the Caribbean countries and if possible find ways to set up a demonstration project to test their technical and financial viability and use it as a show case for future replication.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

It is agreed that activities relating to the Japan-Caribbean transfer of technology should be fast-tracked, however, the PMU will focus on a more targeted approach than what is outlined.  The project has already planned a study tour to be conducted in April 2018.  Research was undertaken relating to the Japanese technology available and its potential for replicability in the Caribbean.  The study tour was planned on this basis and will encompass visits to areas of the private sector.  With relation to the transfer of technology, the project expects to contract experts from Japan in the most applicable area (based on feedback from the study tour) so as to provide training on replicability of the technology to proponents.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.3 Utilise selected technologies or incorporate within current demonstration projects where applicable.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/12 Overdue-Initiated The PMU has been looking at ways to incorporate the technologies in current projects given the set budget and timelines in the these pilots. The drought tolerant seeds which were highlighted on the study tour have been suggested and are being sourced for the Morne Prosper and Dominica Community High School pilot projects. However due to the applicability and costs it may be difficult to incorporate some of the other technologies presented at this time in the project.
4.1 Conduct a study tour to Japan that will include 20 Caribbean key stakeholders (project proponents) in the area of agriculture. The study tour will feature tours of the private sector companies which provide climate-smart technological options
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/04 Completed This was conducted in April 2018 with 21 participants representative farmers and technical agriculture experts. Participants learned agricultural practices and technologies including organic and nature farming, permaculture, and protected agriculture such as vertical farming, solar plant factories and light plant factories. They were also exposed to innovative advancements including membrane and hydrogel technologies.
4.2 Engage experts from Japan in specific technology to provide training to proponents from selected demonstration projects
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2019/06 Overdue-Not Initiated The project will contract an expert from Japan who will be invited to the regional workshop on lessons learned and case studies in 2019
5. Recommendation:

Recommendation 5. Request a 6-month extension.

Ensure that pilot projects are completed and that the results of the mission to Japan could be used to identified potential innovative technology transfer applications and at a minimum establish a road map to evaluate the feasibility of implementing such innovative technologies in the region, something that could then be used to formulate an intervention by a future programme.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

While it is agreed that an extension is necessary for project completion, the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) for the project (as well as the CO) has advised that given the nature of some of the activities and in order to yield the best results from this project, an extension of 12 months would be more appropriate.  It is believed that this will give the project sufficient time to yield results which would have been delayed and revised due to the passing of Hurricane Maria in the region.  It would also allow for full case studies showcasing real results to be developed and shared.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.3. Utilise expert (on technologies identified) from Japan to establish (or assist with establishing) a roadmap to the feasibility of implementing such technologies in the selected countries for future intervention.
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2019/12 Overdue-Initiated It is expected that this will be provided as part of the sustainability plan which would also include information for replication utilising technologies identified. The PMU is currently determining the modality for providing this service
5.1 Communicate to donor the need for the extension
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU 2018/05 Completed The Project Board approved the extension in January 2018 and the Donor sent official approval (March 2018) of one year no-cost extension until December 2019
5.2 Obtain approval from the Project Board to request project extension for twelve months
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU 2018/01 Completed
6. Recommendation:

Recommendation 6. Develop and if possible begin implementation of strategies for securing additional funding sources to strengthen the long-term sustainability of the intervention.

Additional funding will have to be secured for the implementation of the NAMAs and NAPs that are being developed for each of the countries and additional funding will also be required to undertake operation and maintenance activities over the long term, in particular for those projects that will be implemented in highly vulnerable and remote communities.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/01/30] [Last Updated: 2018/08/13]

During the coming year, the project will concentrate on planning for a finance workshop which would demonstrate the climate public expenditure assessment tool and its relationship to climate financing for targeted countries.

The CO will also prioritise resource mobilisation directly related to the follow-on activities of the J-CCCP, in particular the implementation of the NAP and NAMAs developed by the J-CCCP. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
6.2 Submit full sustainability plan in order to identify potential donors for funding of implementing NAPs and NAMAs and other related activities. a. Develop project concept for development of project focused on implementation of NAPs and NAMAs
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2019/06 Overdue-Initiated A project concept has been developed for resource mobilisation of the implementation of the NAPs and NAMAs. The Country office also submitted two applications for the QIAO Plan funding opportunity under the thematic area o fScaling-up Sustainable Energy Solutionsusing the NAMAs that were developed to guide the submission.These were specific to 1. Greening Schools in Saint Lucia 2. Scaling-up of sustainable energy solutions in Grenada
6.3 Co-organise a Donor symposium for NAP SLU and SVG
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2018/04 Completed There was significant interest and the participating countries were able to present to over eight donors, four of whom expressed direct interest in the implementation of specific areas of the NAP
6.1 Organise a Climate Finance Workshop
[Added: 2018/08/13]
PMU/CO 2019/04 Overdue-Not Initiated The project aims to partner with another agency on this. It is planned that workshop willfocus on: • National Fiscal incentives for RE and PPP • Sharing experience of CPEIR for one country to other countries for South-South cooperation

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

1 UN Plaza
DC1-20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org