- Evaluation Plan:
- 2016-2021, Zambia
- Evaluation Type:
- Mid Term Project
- Planned End Date:
- 06/2018
- Completion Date:
- 11/2018
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 40,000
Mid-Term Evaluation of the promoting climate-resilient, community-based regeneration of indigenous forests in Zambia Central Province project
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 MTR ToRs for Forest Regeneration May 30 18.doc |
tor | English | 205.50 KB | Posted | 126 |
 Zambia PIMS 4712-GEF5435 Mid-Term Review Final Report.pdf |
report | English | 1495.95 KB | Posted | 55 |
| Title | Mid-Term Evaluation of the promoting climate-resilient, community-based regeneration of indigenous forests in Zambia Central Province project | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00086025 | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2016-2021, Zambia | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Mid Term Project | ||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 11/2018 | ||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 06/2018 | ||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017) |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
||||||||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 40,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | Project Budget, Donor | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 66,010 | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development (MMEWD), Ministry of Chiefs and Traditional Affairs (MOCTA), Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAL), Zambia Meteorological Department (ZMD), Serenje District Council, District Council of Chiefs, and Zambia Climate Change Network (ZCCN) | ||||||||||||||
| Countries: | ZAMBIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1. Improve communication and coordination At the technical level, inadequencies in communication and clear articulation of institutitional roles abnd responsibilities has led to basic misunderstandings in activity implmentation, sequencing, as well as design and distribution of farming implements. The project lacks visibility, because there are limited communication materials such as project info sheets, pamphlets and sign boards, which would be useful in promoting project achivements and emerging lessons. |
| 2 | Re-assess activity sequencing in order to reduce time lags, and conduct prioritization and economic viability of livelihood options.
Sub optimal sequencing limits options for adjustments once an investment is made. It is necessary to reduce the time lag between livelihood activity training and provision of inputs. Project teams need to apply critical path analysis and understand activity interdependencies prior to commencing implementation. For example, community training on various livelihood activities must be immediately followed with distribution of inputs. |
| 3 | Follow-up on co-financing resource mobilization. The project has not yet fully harnessed the potential co-financing resources from the oter partners. As a matter of priority, efforts should be made to establish formal arrangements with other partners to support certain activities, including in-kind contributions or cash for project implementation. These discussions need to happen urgently. |
| 4 | Conduct socio-economic viability analysis before introducing briquetting machines Promoting sustainable charcoal production requires robust socio-economic analysis and lessons from other similar projects, such as Westernt Tanzania can be useful. It is necessary to undertake analysis of the socio-economic potential and the likely barriers to adoption of briquetting machines prior to any investment. Considerations could be made for commercial type sustainable charcoal production systems and the formation of associations. This approach reduces the burden of monitoring and builds a potential framework for deforrestation free charcoal production |
| 5 | Improve attendance at Project Steering Committee (PSC) Meetings The PSC meets twice a year, ut it is understood that it remains difficukt to get al appointed members to regularly attend. Often only proxies attend the meetings. The MTR team highly recommends that members of the PSC attend meetings because the convenining power of PSC's enables quick and strategic decision making when project issues arise as well as manageing risks and opportunities. It is perhaps worth creating PSCs comprising of deputy PSCs and departmental heads, in order to increase attendance while still maintaining the necessary high level representation. |
1. Recommendation:
1. Improve communication and coordination
At the technical level, inadequencies in communication and clear articulation of institutitional roles abnd responsibilities has led to basic misunderstandings in activity implmentation, sequencing, as well as design and distribution of farming implements. The project lacks visibility, because there are limited communication materials such as project info sheets, pamphlets and sign boards, which would be useful in promoting project achivements and emerging lessons.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/05/15] [Last Updated: 2019/05/15]
Strengthening adherence and development communication materials
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strengthening adherence to the defined roles and responsibilities of the IPs through reporting lines by monthly partners meetings and quarterly monitoring.
Development of communication materials (info sheets, pamphlets, sign boards, brochures, tear drops, banners, posters) covering the project components to improve project visibility.
[Added: 2019/05/15] |
COMACO, ZEMA, PSC, Energy | 2019/12 | Initiated | This is being done through improved communication through emails, bi monthly meetings and quarterly monitoring |
2. Recommendation:
Re-assess activity sequencing in order to reduce time lags, and conduct prioritization and economic viability of livelihood options.
Sub optimal sequencing limits options for adjustments once an investment is made. It is necessary to reduce the time lag between livelihood activity training and provision of inputs. Project teams need to apply critical path analysis and understand activity interdependencies prior to commencing implementation. For example, community training on various livelihood activities must be immediately followed with distribution of inputs.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/05/15]
Alignment of the project imlementation calendar to the farmer seasonal calendar and seasonality of activities
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alignment of the project implementation calendar to the farmer seasonal calendar and seasonality of activities
[Added: 2019/05/15] |
PIU, Technical team with support and approval by the PSC | 2019/02 | Completed | An implementation plan has been developed. The activities for the three implementing parters are now sequenced with farmers seasonal calendar |
3. Recommendation:
Follow-up on co-financing resource mobilization.
The project has not yet fully harnessed the potential co-financing resources from the oter partners. As a matter of priority, efforts should be made to establish formal arrangements with other partners to support certain activities, including in-kind contributions or cash for project implementation. These discussions need to happen urgently.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/05/15]
Engagement of the co-financers through quarterly meetings in order to capture their contributions
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engagement of the co-financers through quarterly meetings in order to capture their contributions
[Added: 2019/05/15] |
PIU, FD, UNDP | 2019/12 | Initiated | Letters have since been sent to the co-financers requesting for a meeting |
4. Recommendation:
Conduct socio-economic viability analysis before introducing briquetting machines
Promoting sustainable charcoal production requires robust socio-economic analysis and lessons from other similar projects, such as Westernt Tanzania can be useful. It is necessary to undertake analysis of the socio-economic potential and the likely barriers to adoption of briquetting machines prior to any investment.
Considerations could be made for commercial type sustainable charcoal production systems and the formation of associations. This approach reduces the burden of monitoring and builds a potential framework for deforrestation free charcoal production
Management Response: [Added: 2019/05/16]
Develop efficient charcoal producer groups, undertake learning visits and conduct a socio-economic analysis
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Efficient charcoal producer groups are in existence under the Village Action Groups which are registered entities (societies)
[Added: 2019/05/16] |
Department of Energy, FD, PIU | 2019/12 | Initiated | The project has engaged TDAU to support energy department in the implementation of energy efficient technologies. | |
| Undertake a learning visit for charcoal producer groups to an area with best practices in efficient briquette production
[Added: 2019/05/16] |
Department of Energy, FD, PIU | 2019/12 | Initiated | The project has engaged TDAU to support energy department in the implementation of energy efficient technologies | |
| Conducting a socio-economic analysis on potential and likely barriers to adoption of briquetting as well as commercial type sustainable charcoal production systems
[Added: 2019/05/16] |
Department of Energy, FD, PIU | 2019/12 | Initiated |
5. Recommendation:
Improve attendance at Project Steering Committee (PSC) Meetings
The PSC meets twice a year, ut it is understood that it remains difficukt to get al appointed members to regularly attend. Often only proxies attend the meetings. The MTR team highly recommends that members of the PSC attend meetings because the convenining power of PSC's enables quick and strategic decision making when project issues arise as well as manageing risks and opportunities. It is perhaps worth creating PSCs comprising of deputy PSCs and departmental heads, in order to increase attendance while still maintaining the necessary high level representation.
Management Response: [Added: 2019/05/16]
Proxies attending PSC meetings should at least be a grade below the member they are representing.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proxies attending PSC meetings should at least be a grade below the member they are representing. In addition, teh Climate Change policy provides for steering committee that comprises only permanent secretaries. The Committee is now operational.
[Added: 2019/05/16] |
PSC | 2019/06 | Overdue-Initiated | The project annual work plans and budget are approved by teh climate change steering committee which comprises a committee of Permanent Secretaries. |