Final evaluation of project“ Improving Energy Efficiency in the Residential Building Sector of Turkmenistan“

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2016-2020, Turkmenistan
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
05/2017
Completion Date:
06/2017
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
16,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR_Terminal Evaluation_EERB_2017.doc tor English 204.00 KB Posted 114
Download document EERB Terminal Evaluation Report June 2017.docx report English 1617.87 KB Posted 112
Title Final evaluation of project“ Improving Energy Efficiency in the Residential Building Sector of Turkmenistan“
Atlas Project Number: 00061181
Evaluation Plan: 2016-2020, Turkmenistan
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 06/2017
Planned End Date: 05/2017
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 2.1.1 Low emission and climate resilient objectives addressed in national, sub-national and sectoral development plans and policies to promote economic diversification and green growth
Evaluation Budget(US $): 16,000
Source of Funding: UNDP
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 19,100
Joint Programme: No
Mandatory Evaluation: No
Joint Evaluation: Yes
  • Joint with Donors
  • Joint with State Concern “Turkmengas” Ministry of Construction and Architecture, Ministry of Communal Services, State Concern “Turkmen Oil and Gas Construction”, Municipality of Ashgabat City, Turkmen State Architecture and Construction Institute
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Paata Janelidze International Consultant GEORGIA, REPUBLIC OF
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Improving Energy Efficiency in the Residential Building Sector of Turkmenistan
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Climate Change
Project Type: EA
GEF Phase: GEF-1
GEF Project ID: 4097
PIMS Number: 4134
Key Stakeholders: State Concern “Turkmengas” Ministry of Construction and Architecture, Ministry of Communal Services, State Concern “Turkmen Oil and Gas Construction”, Municipality of Ashgabat City, Turkmen State Architecture and Construction Institute
Countries: TURKMENISTAN
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

Develop full-length LogFrame and include as an annex in report “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned

2

Revise the GHG reduction target for the Objective (t CO2 reduced)

3

Calculate specific cost of GHG reduction (USD/tCO2) for each EE measure in pilot buildings and include in “Summary Report on Monitoring of Pilot Buildings"

4

Revise a Section “Conclusions and lessons learned” of a report “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned” by using bullets for lessons learned

5

To conduct a survey in the 6 pilot buildings and also in the Koshi micro-district on: baseline and project level types and numbers of electric and gas heaters and their costs; whether the residents stopped using heaters for additional heating. Based on survey data, financial benefits due to the avoided purchase of heaters, can be estimated

6

Prepare a short version of the revised “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned” for the stakeholders

1. Recommendation:

Develop full-length LogFrame and include as an annex in report “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

Upon confirmation of the issues discussed below in Recommendation 2, the project team can prepare a full revised Project Results Framework.  But we note our current understanding that changes are permitted only at the level of outputs, not outcomes or overall objectives, without the special approval of the GEF Council. 

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP CO to discuss with the UNDP/GEF Regional Technical Advisor (RTA), then proceed accordingly with implementing recommendation.
[Added: 2017/08/30] [Last Updated: 2017/09/19]
UNDP CO, with guidance from UNDP/GEF RTA 2017/09 Completed Done and sent to Regional Technical Advisor (RTA). History
2. Recommendation:

Revise the GHG reduction target for the Objective (t CO2 reduced)

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

The TE recommendation and comments are based on a correct observation that the baseline energy consumption of pilot buildings was overestimated in calculations underlying the initial GHG reduction target in the Project Document.  The TE correctly notes furthermore that the entire original direct GHG emissions target was attributable to energy savings in six pilot buildings, multiplied by an operating lifetime of 20 years.

But it is unclear whether changing an objective target is actually permitted by the rules of GEF (the project funder) and UNDP.  Furthermore, direct energy savings and avoided emissions, by GEF’s current definitions, should include not only those from demonstration buildings, but also from code implementation and investment in building renovation during the project period. 

Therefore, our current position is that the target can be retained, and that progress toward it should be evaluated by taking account of all energy savings achieved during the project period via project activity. This issue should be discussed and cleared with the UNDP/GEF RTA.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP CO to discuss with the UNDP/GEF Regional Technical Advisor (RTA), then proceed accordingly with implementing recommendation.
[Added: 2017/08/30] [Last Updated: 2017/09/19]
UNDP CO, with guidance from UNDP/GEF RTA 2017/09 Completed Done and sent to Regional Technical Advisor (RTA). History
3. Recommendation:

Calculate specific cost of GHG reduction (USD/tCO2) for each EE measure in pilot buildings and include in “Summary Report on Monitoring of Pilot Buildings"

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

The energy performance of the demonstration buildings after installation of energy-efficiency (EE) measures was evaluated by measurement of actual energy consumption (heat, gas, electricity) in the whole building.  Therefore, based on the project’s currently available data, it is impossible to disaggregate the emissions reductions associated with each individual measure.  Elaborating measure-by-measure GHG reduction effects would require separate modeling of heat losses through the building envelope and heating systems.  This would carry very high technical uncertainty.  It would also require a volume of  staff time and effort that are not feasible given the imminent close of the project.

We fully recognize, however, that specific costs of the individual EE measures are inadequately explained in the given summary report.  We agree thatan annex to this report showing all of the costs of individual measures should be prepared.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP CO to prepare Annex in tabular form showing individual EE measures of pilot buildings, and their cost
[Added: 2017/08/30] [Last Updated: 2018/09/05]
UNDP CO 2019/05 Initiated Updated in 11 Dec 2017, status "extended" till May 2018. The action will be completed next year due to continued discussions with local authorities on energy efficiency measures in pilot buildings and their costs Updated on 05/09/2018: This activity will be accomplished in the framework of the new launched Sustainable Cities project. History
4. Recommendation:

Revise a Section “Conclusions and lessons learned” of a report “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned” by using bullets for lessons learned

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

The given report does explain lessons learned in narrative form.  These lessons are complex and nuanced, thus making it difficult and potentially misleading to present them as notes in bulleted form.  But we do see the value of putting the lessons all in one place.  Referring the reader to the full narrative will minimize misunderstanding.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
ICTA will implement this recommended change.
[Added: 2017/08/30]
UNDP CO 2017/08 Completed
5. Recommendation:

To conduct a survey in the 6 pilot buildings and also in the Koshi micro-district on: baseline and project level types and numbers of electric and gas heaters and their costs; whether the residents stopped using heaters for additional heating. Based on survey data, financial benefits due to the avoided purchase of heaters, can be estimated

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

Such a study would likely yield striking findings that would help justify EE measures not only for their energy savings, but also for their improvements to occupant comfort and safety.  But such a study is not possible in the extremely limited time left in the project.  Therefore UNDP will pass this recommendation on to its colleagues in the Ministry of Communal Services.  (But it is possible that this Ministry will consider such a study problematic, as it might shed a harsh light on deficiencies in heat delivery to existing buildings.)

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
5.1 UNDP to notify Ministry of Construction of this recommendation. 5.2 Ministry of Communal Services commissions a study of electric and gas space heating in existing buildings, and associated opportunities to eliminate such heating
[Added: 2017/08/30] [Last Updated: 2019/01/08]
UNDP Country Office 2018/12 Completed UNDP Senior Management had a meeting with representatives of Ministry of Construction and they were notified regarding the recommendation of studying of electric and gas space heating in 6 constructed buildings in project site. Updated on 11 Dec 2017: It was agreed with partners in the Ministry of Construction that this study will be completed in the framework of the potential new project. Updated on 09/01/2018: UNDP Senior Management had a meeting with representatives of Ministry of Construction and they were notified regarding the recommendation of studying of electric and gas space heating in 6 constructed buildings in project site. Abolition of the Ministry of Communal services and redistributions its duties to different entities challenged the process of commissioning the mentioned study. History
6. Recommendation:

Prepare a short version of the revised “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned” for the stakeholders

Management Response: [Added: 2017/08/30]

The project team has already prepared a color brochure with numerous facts and figures about the importance and success of the project.  Distribution of these existing materials, as well as the full “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned”, should remain the priority of the project and UNDP. (The ICTA has already prepared a short summary report of project results and submitted it to the PM, but this summary has been superseded by the brochure and the longer report.) 

But the TE recommendation is correct in implying that the long “Summary of Project Results and Lessons Learned” goes beyond other documents in its discussion of how the project overcame obstacles and achieved its results. 

In preparing a shorter version of the lessons-learned summary, one should consider exactly who the audience is.  Future project developers and managers would probably not balk at receiving the full-length report, and indeed might prefer it.  The shorter document might be best prepared for national partners in Turkmenistan, whose attention is divided among many other high-priority competing responsibilities.  This shortening could happen in conjunction with translation into Russian, as well as editing to ensure full acceptability for official external distribution.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Edit and shorten full lessons-learned summary. Translate into Russian and distribute to national partners. Distribute shortened and/or original version within UNDP regional network.
[Added: 2017/08/30]
UNDP CO and RTA as needed 2017/08 Completed

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