GEF 12/G32 5th Phase of Small Grants Program in Brazil

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2017-2021, Brazil
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
12/2018
Completion Date:
07/2018
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR UNDP-GEF-SGP TE.docx tor English 77.44 KB Posted 99
Download document BRAZIL SGP TE Final Report 25 07 18.pdf report English 1784.77 KB Posted 71
Download document BRAZIL SGP TE Annex10 25 07 18.pdf related-document English 719.74 KB Posted 61
Download document BRAZIL SGP TE Annexes 1-9 27 07 18.pdf related-document English 3893.98 KB Posted 62
Title GEF 12/G32 5th Phase of Small Grants Program in Brazil
Atlas Project Number: 00070540
Evaluation Plan: 2017-2021, Brazil
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 07/2018
Planned End Date: 12/2018
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Environment & Sustainable Development
  • 2. 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
SDG Goal
  • Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
  • Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
SDG Target
  • 1.5 By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters
  • 15.1 By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands, in line with obligations under international agreements
  • 15.2 By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding: GEF
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 20,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Juliana Wenceslau MSc juliana.santos@undp.org BRAZIL
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: 5th Operational Phase of the GEF Small Grants Program in Brazil
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Multifocal Areas
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-5
GEF Project ID: 4560
PIMS Number: 4578
Key Stakeholders: Ministry of Environment, ISPN
Countries: BRAZIL
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

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.

2

Reinforce the idea that processes require greater time (even if SGP guides restrict those times).

3

Since long term actions are needed to reinforce local group’s autonomy and sustainability processes, it is recommended to define strategies to delegate work on the strategic partners beyond SGP funding.

4

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 rising 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. Discussion on organic or ecological production effects on families´ income should be deepened since there is no consensus on these issues on behalf of the implementing entities.

5

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.

6

Elaborate management tools for working with vulnerable groups: where indicators could contain information such as “leadership change in organizations” and include a gender and intercultural analysis to know how to proceed in each ethnic group given the difficulties that often exist in communities to adapt this gender approach to their own cultural heritage

7

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.

8

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. Capitalize GEF 7 opportunity and the inclusion of new countries to share replicable experiences and lessons learnt considering SGP Brazil seniority and success, thus, promoting support for its continuation among civil society and government. Program promotion and expand and strengthen links with government strategic partners for supporting and fostering local communities and their initiatives. Attention should be drawn on the bottom-up approach enables an implementing lesson that cannot be accomplished through government levels.

1. 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: 2018/11/22]

ISPN totally agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1. This is a constant challenge and the NHI will continue to put effort on that. A key action is to identify other sources to support these strategic projects in a longer term, as well as matching with co-financing in order to amplify project's effect and duration. Example: with APA-TO we supported a submission of a bigger project to the Amazon Fund and with CTI a bigger project for USAID - both promoting longer processes of support for CBOs through regional NGOs.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/07 Initiated
2. Recommendation:

Reinforce the idea that processes require greater time (even if SGP guides restrict those times).

Management Response: [Added: 2018/11/22] [Last Updated: 2018/11/22]

ISPN totally agrees and will continue to do all that is possible to guarantee that a CBO can implement its project in a realistic time-frame considering SGP Operational Procedures.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
. Continue to amend MOAs when needed, 2. Provide additional support to CBOs even after project conclusion. 3. Help CBOs to seek for co-financing to allow a longer period of project implementation.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/07 Initiated Under development and to be continued in the next FSP during OP7
3. Recommendation:

Since long term actions are needed to reinforce local group’s autonomy and sustainability processes, it is recommended to define strategies to delegate work on the strategic partners beyond SGP funding.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/11/22]

ISPN agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
- As mentioned in recommendations 1 and 2. - SGP Brazil seeks to identify regional and strategic NGOs and/or CBOs in order to support local communities and promote local and regional network to strengthen SGP supported actions.
[Added: 2018/11/22] [Last Updated: 2019/07/23]
ispn 2020/07 Initiated History
4. 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 rising 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. Discussion on organic or ecological production effects on families´ income should be deepened since there is no consensus on these issues on behalf of the implementing entities.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/11/22]

ISPN agrees that this is an essential issue for agroecology in the Cerrado and Caatinga biomes.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1. The work with cattle raising will be supported in the new FSP of the Seventh Phase of the SGP Brazil
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/07 Initiated
5. 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: 2018/11/22] [Last Updated: 2018/11/22]

ISPN totally agrees with that.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
In the next FSP during OP7 this will be fully implemented since the beginning of the project through specific indicators.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/06 Initiated
6. Recommendation:

Elaborate management tools for working with vulnerable groups: where indicators could contain information such as “leadership change in organizations” and include a gender and intercultural analysis to know how to proceed in each ethnic group given the difficulties that often exist in communities to adapt this gender approach to their own cultural heritage

Management Response: [Added: 2018/11/22] [Last Updated: 2018/11/22]

This is a good recommendation, however it seems a little difficult to implement

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
ISPN can investigate a way to address to this recommendation during OP7.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/06 Initiated
7. 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: 2018/11/22]

ISPN agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
During OP7, SGP will continue to support grants focused o processing and adding value to biodiversity; 2. ISPN is increasing its advocacy actions in order to have a greater impact in adjusting the regulatory framework to benefit local communities and IPs through a co-financing project supported by CLUA.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/07 Initiated
8. 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. Capitalize GEF 7 opportunity and the inclusion of new countries to share replicable experiences and lessons learnt considering SGP Brazil seniority and success, thus, promoting support for its continuation among civil society and government. Program promotion and expand and strengthen links with government strategic partners for supporting and fostering local communities and their initiatives. Attention should be drawn on the bottom-up approach enables an implementing lesson that cannot be accomplished through government levels.

Management Response: [Added: 2018/11/22] [Last Updated: 2018/11/22]

ISPN agrees and will continue to do so.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
- SGP will continue to organize information through its knowledge management material during OP7, such as what we have been doing in the previous phases: a) manual facility construction for CBO's for NTFP and agroecological products; b) manual for project elaboration; c) administrative manual for small grants management, etc.
[Added: 2018/11/22]
ISPN 2020/07 Initiated

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