12/G32 Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF Small Grants Program in Brazil

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2012-2016, Brazil
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
12/2015
Completion Date:
08/2015
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
11,564

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document MTR ToR Template Brasil.doc tor English 128.50 KB Posted 382
Download document Brazil SGP MTR Final Report Sep 2015.pdf report English 605.13 KB Posted 634
Title 12/G32 Fifth Operational Phase of the GEF Small Grants Program in Brazil
Atlas Project Number: 00084459
Evaluation Plan: 2012-2016, Brazil
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 08/2015
Planned End Date: 12/2015
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 $): 11,564
Source of Funding: GEF
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Alejandro Imbach
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
PIMS Number: 4578
Key Stakeholders: MMA, ArticulaƧao Semi Arido Brasileiro
Countries: BRAZIL
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 To complete the current phase of the SGP Brazil maintaining the current ways of operation that has proven effective and efficient to achieve the agreed results. Overall the Brazil SGP Project implementation is very successful and so the first recommendation is to maintain the good work.
2 Evaluation Recommendation or Issue 2: To adjust two indicators of the Project logframe as follows: Outcome 1. New indicator and target Number of families in Caatinga and Cerrado generating income through marketing of biodiversity products. New target: 5,000 families Outcome 2. New target Reduce to 3,000 has the target of the "Area under agro-ecological management" indicator
3 Evaluation Recommendation or Issue 3: To complete the pending tasks of reporting to the GEF Tracking Tools using the information it already has.
4 While the SGP regional partners (such as APA-TO, CAV, CAA, MIQCB, ASSEMA, CTI and others) are providing long-term support to the CBOs in their areas, it is important for the SGP to develop strategies with these organizations to keep supporting SGP-supported CBOs beyond the SGP grant projects. In other words, local groups will not become autonomous and sustainable over a period of two years with a small grant; longer processes are needed. Hence the importance of defining these strategies and rely on the work of strategic partners beyond the duration of the grants.
5 The SGP could strengthen its work with key partners via strategic projects. It seems that the potential of this type of project is not yet fully exploited by the SGP and this may be a strong instrument to increase its influence across the biomes.
6 The bridge between OP4 and OP5 stage was a difficult experience for the Brazil SGP. Nothing suggests that the transition from OP5 to OP6 will be different. Therefore, the MTR recommends beginning the process towards OP6 as soon as possible with a basic PIF that can be used to obtain the endorsement letter from the country and then to start the elaboration of the full PIF required for entering in GEF OP6.
7 As the last group of SGP grants was approved just before the MTR and less than a year and a half remains until the end of the current SGP Project, it is recommended to the SGP to maintain open the possibility of negotiating an extension of the current project by six months to allow time for the completion of those grant projects.
8 The SGP agro-ecological work is very good and very important and it is very focused on water issues and plant production. However the MTR perceives much less emphasis on including cattle raising in the agro-ecological approach. Livestock production is the activity that after agribusiness occupies more land and causes more degradation of the Cerrado. Therefore, a more explicit emphasis on cattle raising issues is recommended, for example through pilot grant projects helping peasants to evolve from extensive ranching to stabled systems articulated with release of land for natural regeneration of the Cerrado.
9 Projects supported by the SGP include women and youth. However the logical framework has no targets or indicators on this issue and not obvious unbundled records of activities, participation and impact on these groups. The SGP should advance in this respect, at least at the record level; merely recording information on these aspects draws attention to them and create space for more explicit activities about them.
10 The SGP should continue supporting efforts to simplify regulations for marketing family agriculture and biodiversity products with basic processing (pulps, jellies, preserves, flour, etc.). Basic processing adds value to products and much needed income to rural families; unnecessary or excessive regulations blocking access to markets need to be adjusted or removed.
11 There seems to be many opportunities to tenders, sales, projects, funding, etc. for CBOs and local organizations from different federal, state and municipal entities, but the information about this seems to be fragmented and scattered. The SGP should analyze the possibility of supporting efforts to perform clearing-house actions to organize the information and make it more accessible for Cerrado and Caatinga organizations.
1. Recommendation: To complete the current phase of the SGP Brazil maintaining the current ways of operation that has proven effective and efficient to achieve the agreed results. Overall the Brazil SGP Project implementation is very successful and so the first recommendation is to maintain the good work.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To continue keeping track of project's execution
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2017/12 Completed Until the project conclusion History
2. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or Issue 2: To adjust two indicators of the Project logframe as follows: Outcome 1. New indicator and target Number of families in Caatinga and Cerrado generating income through marketing of biodiversity products. New target: 5,000 families Outcome 2. New target Reduce to 3,000 has the target of the "Area under agro-ecological management" indicator
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and already did the change

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Continue to monitor grants' indicators according to the new targets
[Added: 2015/12/24]
ISPN 2017/12 Completed Until project conclusion
3. Recommendation: Evaluation Recommendation or Issue 3: To complete the pending tasks of reporting to the GEF Tracking Tools using the information it already has.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and is planning to conclude pending tasks in the beginning of 2016

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Learn with UNDP CO about GEF Tracking Tools
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2016/01 Completed History
4. Recommendation: While the SGP regional partners (such as APA-TO, CAV, CAA, MIQCB, ASSEMA, CTI and others) are providing long-term support to the CBOs in their areas, it is important for the SGP to develop strategies with these organizations to keep supporting SGP-supported CBOs beyond the SGP grant projects. In other words, local groups will not become autonomous and sustainable over a period of two years with a small grant; longer processes are needed. Hence the importance of defining these strategies and rely on the work of strategic partners beyond the duration of the grants.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN totally agrees and is permanently looking for long-term opportunities to strengthen civil society and key partners.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
. Keep building partnerships and looking for long-term support for strategic regional NGOs besides SGP
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2017/01 Completed History
5. Recommendation: The SGP could strengthen its work with key partners via strategic projects. It seems that the potential of this type of project is not yet fully exploited by the SGP and this may be a strong instrument to increase its influence across the biomes.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and plans to do that during OP6, because for now, all resources for grants are already committed.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Include strategic projects as part of the OP6 SGP Brazil country strategy
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/12 Completed History
6. Recommendation: The bridge between OP4 and OP5 stage was a difficult experience for the Brazil SGP. Nothing suggests that the transition from OP5 to OP6 will be different. Therefore, the MTR recommends beginning the process towards OP6 as soon as possible with a basic PIF that can be used to obtain the endorsement letter from the country and then to start the elaboration of the full PIF required for entering in GEF OP6.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and already started PIF preparation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
As the last group of SGP grants was approved just before the MTR and less than a year and a half remains until the end of the current SGP Project, it is recommended to the SGP to maintain open the possibility of negotiating an extension of the current project by six months to allow time for the completion of those grant projects.
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2016/02 Completed History
7. Recommendation: As the last group of SGP grants was approved just before the MTR and less than a year and a half remains until the end of the current SGP Project, it is recommended to the SGP to maintain open the possibility of negotiating an extension of the current project by six months to allow time for the completion of those grant projects.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and will consider this possibility.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To keep a close monitoring of project execution and discuss the extension possibility with the UNDP CO.
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN/UNDP 2016/12 Completed History
8. Recommendation: The SGP agro-ecological work is very good and very important and it is very focused on water issues and plant production. However the MTR perceives much less emphasis on including cattle raising in the agro-ecological approach. Livestock production is the activity that after agribusiness occupies more land and causes more degradation of the Cerrado. Therefore, a more explicit emphasis on cattle raising issues is recommended, for example through pilot grant projects helping peasants to evolve from extensive ranching to stabled systems articulated with release of land for natural regeneration of the Cerrado.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and appreciate this recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To do more knowledge management products about cattle raising sustainability
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2016/12 Completed History
To include this issue as one of those to be supported under SGP during GEF6
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/12 Completed History
9. Recommendation: Projects supported by the SGP include women and youth. However the logical framework has no targets or indicators on this issue and not obvious unbundled records of activities, participation and impact on these groups. The SGP should advance in this respect, at least at the record level; merely recording information on these aspects draws attention to them and create space for more explicit activities about them.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees with recommendation

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1. To measure more directly women's and youth participation in SGP grants
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/12 Completed History
2. To promote a Workshop about agroecology and the youth in 2016
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2016/08 Completed History
10. Recommendation: The SGP should continue supporting efforts to simplify regulations for marketing family agriculture and biodiversity products with basic processing (pulps, jellies, preserves, flour, etc.). Basic processing adds value to products and much needed income to rural families; unnecessary or excessive regulations blocking access to markets need to be adjusted or removed.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Continue to work for policies influencing regarding this issue
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/12 Completed History
11. Recommendation: There seems to be many opportunities to tenders, sales, projects, funding, etc. for CBOs and local organizations from different federal, state and municipal entities, but the information about this seems to be fragmented and scattered. The SGP should analyze the possibility of supporting efforts to perform clearing-house actions to organize the information and make it more accessible for Cerrado and Caatinga organizations.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/24]

ISPN agrees and is already doing that.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
. To continue to do knowledge management about legal framework and policies aiming at CBOs
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/12 Completed History
. To continue to influence policies improvement in order to benefit local communities
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/02 Completed History
3. To produce and disseminate a webpage about projects elaboration for local communities and disseminating opportunities for support to this public
[Added: 2015/12/24] [Last Updated: 2018/10/03]
ISPN 2015/04 Completed History

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