Evaluación del proyecto regional PAS CHACO

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2015-2019, Paraguay
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
12/2017
Completion Date:
12/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
40,000

This report presents the findings, lessons and recommendations of the Terminal Evaluation (TE) of the GEF-UN Environment project that “Sustainable Forest Management in the Transboundary Gran Chaco Americano Ecosystem”. The project was co-implemented by UN Environment and UNDP, and executed by the governments of Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay with the Organization of American States (OAS) providing a supportive role as regional executing agency for the UN Environment portion of the project. Project performance and impact were assessed according to criteria that included relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, preparedness, participation and ownership among others. The evaluation field visits were conducted during October and November 2016, considering the project’s scheduled termination in December; however, the project partners decided to extend the project administratively (and programmatically in the case of Paraguay) until June 2017. Some pilot initiatives were also continuing to develop in Bolivia. As a result, some aspects of the project’s final delivery in 2017, particularly the case of Paraguay, may not be fully captured by the TE.

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document Executive Summary PAS CHACO.pdf summary English 849.20 KB Posted 103
Download document TOR PAS CHACO.pdf tor English 807.27 KB Posted 211
Download document 2505_2017_te_unenvironment_regional_bd_fsp_spem_gran chaco.pdf report English 3933.06 KB Posted 167
Title Evaluación del proyecto regional PAS CHACO
Atlas Project Number: 00060839
Evaluation Plan: 2015-2019, Paraguay
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 12/2017
Planned End Date: 12/2017
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Poverty and MDG
  • 2. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 1.1. National and sub-national systems and institutions enabled to achieve structural transformation of productive capacities that are sustainable and employment - and livelihoods- intensive
Evaluation Budget(US $): 40,000
Source of Funding: GEF
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 40,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with UN Agencies
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Hugo Navajas Evaluador Internacional Hnavajas@yahoo.com BOLIVIA
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: SFM Sustainable Forest Management in the Transboundary Gran Chaco American Ecosystem
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Multifocal Areas
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-4
GEF Project ID: 2505
PIMS Number: 4030
Key Stakeholders:
Countries: PARAGUAY
Comments:

Fondos que forman parte del componente administrado por la OEA, PNUD no adiministra estos fondos.

Lessons
1.

? The project has established a foundation of demonstrated sustainable practices that are sustainable that facilitates regional replication and impact. It is now time for the countries to move the project forward.

? Water is the fundamental entry point for sustainable development in the Gran Chaco.

? Honey production stands out as a viable sustainable development option that integrates environmental and socio-economic benefits.

? Performance was affected by the project’s geographic scale, range and dispersion of activities, and complex institutional arrangements.

? The project’s design overestimated the regional context and in particular the momentum of the SRAP and tri-national bodies established by the 2007 Gran Chaco Declaration.

? There are inevitable difficulties in aligning implementation processes between countries with different institutional/policy frameworks and governance cycles.

? The updating or revision of performance indicators and targets is important both for the appropriation of the project by its main stakeholders, and to adjust expectations to more realistic levels.

? Cultural sensitivity is essential in designing projects and working with rural communities in the Gran Chaco.

? Country and regional ownership were discouraged by the project’s direct support and representation of the SRAP

? Other project modalities might have been more effective and merited consideration at the design stage.

? Greater preparation and readiness was needed on the part of implementing and executing agencies, to rationalize administrative arrangements and integrate/streamline procedures to the extent possible.


Findings
1.

(Extracto, para ver el texto completo favor dirigirse al documento de evaluación)

Strategic Relevance

67. The project objective and outcomes were very relevant to global, regional and national environmental priorities. The Gran Chaco region comprises a mosaic of ecosystems that include savannahs, wetlands, one of the largest tracts of dry forest in the world and the second largest forested ecosystem outside the Amazon in South America. The project was designed to promote sustainable land and forest management (SLM, SFM) practices within the framework of the Gran Chaco Sub-Regional Action Plan (SRAP), a tri-national initiative that was launched by the governments of Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay to support the UN Conventions on Desertification (UNCCD) and Conservation of Biodiversity (UNCBD). In addition, several of the demonstrated practices contributed to climate change mitigation through the expected absorption of 0.5 tons of C02/hectare into soil inorganic carbons. 28 The project’s country components, institutional arrangements and pilot initiatives supported the National Action Plans to combat desertification and, in the case of Argentina, the implementation of national legislation for the conservation of native forests.

Evaluation rating for strategic relevance is “Highly Satisfactory”

 

Achievement of Outputs

71. The project results framework foresaw the delivery of 31 outputs under the three technical components. Output delivery was initially slow yet gradually improved to reach satisfactory levels; by the end of the project almost 90% of the planned outputs generated to some extent. The evaluation findings indicate that 18 outputs (58%) were fully delivered, 10 (35%) partially delivered and 3 (10%) undelivered. These are somewhat subjective estimates that combine field observation with reported data; the evaluator did not visit all of the project sites and several outputs are still in progress in Paraguay, where the project has been extended to June 2017. The second project component was clearly the most effective in terms of output achievement with approximately 80% full delivery; followed by the first component that fully delivered over half (53%)of its planned outputs. The project’s overall performance in terms of output delivery is rated as moderately satisfactory.

Evaluation rating for achievement of outputs is “Satisfactory”

 

 

 

M&E

184. One of the merits of project design and performance was the importance given to project monitoring, both by the regional PCU and the implementing agencies. One of the non-technical project components was devoted to monitoring, including a detailed and budgeted M&E plan

186. The M&E Plan was followed for the most part, and the demands of the 75 demonstration projects and TVPs required continuous monitoring by the PCU and Regional Coordinator in particular. Annual project audit requirements were not fully met by UNDP, which conducted two audits during the project period (whereas OAS complied with summarized data in its annual organizational audits). The audits that were conducted were internal to the aforementioned agencies and did not involve the project team; nor did they signal the administrative and financial management problems that hindered implementation. 88

 

There was periodic field monitoring by the country teams, however the quality of monitoring appears to have been inconsistent; the evaluator found that several projects were affected by problems that should have been detected through prior monitoring.54 Once familiarity with the formats was achieved, project reports were generally prepared correctly and on a timely basis; the evaluator found the Project Implementation Reviews (PIRs) to be well documented and based on consultations with national teams, with the added benefit of dual English/Spanish texts. The evaluation found no evidence of the GEF tracking tool being completed. While the reasons for this included the late implementation of many projects and perceived high cost of conducting periodic on-site measurements in the demonstration areas, this could have been anticipated at the design stage and included in the monitoring budget (perhaps expanding the participation of universities). The available monitoring data is more closely linked to the indicators and targets contained in the project document’s logical framework and PIRs.

Evaluation rating for monitoring and evaluation is “Satisfactory”


Recommendations
1

Recommendation 1: National executing agencies must continue to support the consolidation and dissemination of project results in order to replicate sustainable land and forest management practices on a broader scale.

2

NEAs and executing partners need to continue providing technical assistance and backstopping support to the various pilot initiatives that were implemented through the project. The two year period allocated for the implementation of demonstration projects was often insufficient to generate the expected results and follow-up is needed to consolidate results.

3

Further GEF support for the Gran Chaco’s Sub-regional Action Program should be contingent on the demonstration of tangible government commitments at policy and budgetary levels.

1. Recommendation:

Recommendation 1: National executing agencies must continue to support the consolidation and dissemination of project results in order to replicate sustainable land and forest management practices on a broader scale.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/07]

Desde PNUD Paraguay, los equipos de proyectos vinculados al cluster de Desarrollo Sostenible, han accedido a la información de cada una de las recomendaciones, las cuales son analizadas,  valoradas e incorporadas según su temática y relevancia.   Igualmente, se comparten y trabajan las recomendaciones con la contraparte nacional y al interior de la Unidad de Programa del PNUD.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Garantizar la inclusión de la recomendación en los siguientes proyectos del PNUD vinculados al área.
[Added: 2018/10/17]
Oficial de Programa 2018/07 Completed Ver siguientes links a proyectos, por ejemplo: https://open.undp.org/projects/00097177, https://open.undp.org/projects/00097180
2. Recommendation:

NEAs and executing partners need to continue providing technical assistance and backstopping support to the various pilot initiatives that were implemented through the project. The two year period allocated for the implementation of demonstration projects was often insufficient to generate the expected results and follow-up is needed to consolidate results.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/07]

Desde PNUD Paraguay, los equipos de proyectos vinculados al cluster de Desarrollo Sostenible, han accedido a la información de cada una de las recomendaciones, las cuales son analizadas,  valoradas e incorporadas según su temática y relevancia.   Igualmente, se comparten y trabajan las recomendaciones con la contraparte nacional y al interior de la Unidad de Programa del PNUD.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Continuar apoyando a los gobiernos locales del Chaco y a las instituciones nacionales del área (Secretaría del Ambiente y otras), a través de diversas iniciativas, a fin de que se siga avanzando hacia los fines de los proyectos demostrativos.
[Added: 2018/10/17]
Oficial de Programa 2018/07 Completed Varios proyectos en el territorio se encuentran en ejecución.
3. Recommendation:

Further GEF support for the Gran Chaco’s Sub-regional Action Program should be contingent on the demonstration of tangible government commitments at policy and budgetary levels.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/12/07]

Desde PNUD Paraguay, los equipos de proyectos vinculados al cluster de Desarrollo Sostenible, han accedido a la información de cada una de las recomendaciones, las cuales son analizadas,  valoradas e incorporadas según su temática y relevancia.   Igualmente, se comparten y trabajan las recomendaciones con la contraparte nacional y al interior de la Unidad de Programa del PNUD.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Verificar la inclusión de líneas presupuestarias y políticas de gobiernos locales consistentes con las líneas temáticas desarrolladas a través del proyecto PAS Chaco
[Added: 2018/10/17]
Oficiales de Programa 2019/12 Initiated Se incorpora como fecha de verificación el mes final del periodo del programa.

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