Final Evaluation of Niger Delta Biodiversity Conservation Project

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2018-2022, Nigeria
Evaluation Type:
Final Project
Planned End Date:
11/2020
Completion Date:
01/2021
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR PIMS 2047 _ UNDP GEF Terminal Evaluation_2020.pdf tor English 478.48 KB Posted 978
Download document NDBP_TE_Final.pdf report English 10248.76 KB Posted 1084
Title Final Evaluation of Niger Delta Biodiversity Conservation Project
Atlas Project Number: 61066
Evaluation Plan: 2018-2022, Nigeria
Evaluation Type: Final Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 01/2021
Planned End Date: 11/2020
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Sustainable
  • 2. Others
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
SDG Goal
  • 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
  • 15.9 By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding:
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 38,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Nationality
Stanislaw MANIKOWSKI International Consultant
Steve ABAH National Consultant
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Niger Delta Biodiversity
Evaluation Type: Terminal Evaluation
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-4
GEF Project ID: 4090
PIMS Number: 2047
Key Stakeholders: Federal Ministry of Environment
Countries: NIGERIA
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

TE mission recommends to the FMoE and UNDP to introduce as compulsory formal cost-benefit evaluation of the important project activities. It is fundamental for the project sponsoring institution such as GEF, UNDP, or Government not solely to receive the accounting information but also know the values of outputs they financed.

2

TE mission recommends to the FMoE and UNDP to make the allocation of budget during the project execution conditional on the completeness of the M&E reporting

3

To FMoE. Critically evaluate the value of the project outcomes in terms of (i) importance of their contribution to the realization of the Ministry's objective, (ii) feasibility and replicability, (iii) cost-benefit and feasibility, and (iv) degree of acceptance by the direct beneficiaries. For the priority outcomes, evaluate the costs of their support and timeframe of execution, and identify the source of financing

4

To FMoE. Evaluate the technical value of the project documentation deposited in the Ministry; place in the WWW the documents judged important

5

To the FMoE. To strengthen the rural communities’ interest in sustainable biodiversity exploitation and conservation, require that the other existing and the future projects with biodiversity protection components consider the rural communities as the key stakeholders and incorporate their leaders into the projects steering institutions, implicated directly in activities execution and in M&E.

6

To UNDP. Require the projects to produce the exit strategy document and discuss its utility as a contribution to the reinforcement of the project sustainability and impact. 

7

To UNDP. Projects with an important set of activities concerning the rural or urban communities should prepare an adjustable plan of engagement with decentralized stakeholders. This plan should include a description of the community project implementation modality, plan of integration with other project's structures and other projects operating in the region, and the follow-up activities.

8

To SMoE and UNDP. Since the community environmental management and biodiversity protections interest stakeholders of various ethnic origin and of different education levels, for the sake of efficiency and economy, the project should complete its consultants' roster by specialists coming from the beneficiaries’ communities

9

The TE team recommends to SMoE and UNDP to introduce as compulsory the RBM of the projects and require the project managers to demonstrate that their proposed work program is cost effective and/or cost efficient.

Management Response Documents
1. Recommendation:

TE mission recommends to the FMoE and UNDP to introduce as compulsory formal cost-benefit evaluation of the important project activities. It is fundamental for the project sponsoring institution such as GEF, UNDP, or Government not solely to receive the accounting information but also know the values of outputs they financed.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/10/13]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
For subsequent projects with resources from the same donor, the CO will conduct cost-benefit evaluation of the important project activities to enable GEF, UNDP, or Government know the values of outputs financed.
[Added: 2021/12/08]
UNDP 2021/01 Completed This has already been done with other GEF projects
2. Recommendation:

TE mission recommends to the FMoE and UNDP to make the allocation of budget during the project execution conditional on the completeness of the M&E reporting

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
For subsequent projects with resources from the same donor, the CO would develop an M&E template for verifying each of the performance metrics in the results framework, along with allocation of resources and responsibilities conditional on the completeness of the M&E reporting.
[Added: 2021/12/08]
UNDP 2021/01 Completed Completed
3. Recommendation:

To FMoE. Critically evaluate the value of the project outcomes in terms of (i) importance of their contribution to the realization of the Ministry's objective, (ii) feasibility and replicability, (iii) cost-benefit and feasibility, and (iv) degree of acceptance by the direct beneficiaries. For the priority outcomes, evaluate the costs of their support and timeframe of execution, and identify the source of financing

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Federal and State MoEs to critically evaluate the value of the project outcomes in terms of (i) importance of their contribution to the realization of the Ministry's objective, (ii) feasibility and replicability, (iii) cost-benefit and feasibility, and (iv) degree of acceptance by the direct beneficiaries
[Added: 2021/12/08]
FMoE & SMoE 2021/01 Completed Completed
4. Recommendation:

To FMoE. Evaluate the technical value of the project documentation deposited in the Ministry; place in the WWW the documents judged important

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
FMoE will evaluate the technical value of the project documentation deposited in the Ministry and place in the WWW the documents judged important.
[Added: 2021/12/08]
FMoE 2021/01 Completed Completed
5. Recommendation:

To the FMoE. To strengthen the rural communities’ interest in sustainable biodiversity exploitation and conservation, require that the other existing and the future projects with biodiversity protection components consider the rural communities as the key stakeholders and incorporate their leaders into the projects steering institutions, implicated directly in activities execution and in M&E.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Beneficiary rural communities are considered as key stakeholders. Their leaders should be consulted before project inception and represented into the projects steering institutions at the right level, ensuring their active participation in activities execution and M&E.
[Added: 2021/12/08]
FMoE & SMoE 2021/01 Completed This has been incorporated into other GEF community projects. The projects have the buy-in of the various communities
6. Recommendation:

To UNDP. Require the projects to produce the exit strategy document and discuss its utility as a contribution to the reinforcement of the project sustainability and impact. 

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP to discuss and develop project exit strategy document and discuss its utility as a contribution to the reinforcement of the project sustainability and impact.
[Added: 2021/12/08]
UNDP 2021/01 Completed Completed
7. Recommendation:

To UNDP. Projects with an important set of activities concerning the rural or urban communities should prepare an adjustable plan of engagement with decentralized stakeholders. This plan should include a description of the community project implementation modality, plan of integration with other project's structures and other projects operating in the region, and the follow-up activities.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
UNDP to work with SMOEs and identify existing community groups and platforms to work with on important set of activities. Technical support to be provided including provision of description of the community project implementation modality, plan of integration with other project's structures and other projects operating in the region, and the follow-up activities
[Added: 2021/12/08]
UNDP 2021/01 Completed Completed
8. Recommendation:

To SMoE and UNDP. Since the community environmental management and biodiversity protections interest stakeholders of various ethnic origin and of different education levels, for the sake of efficiency and economy, the project should complete its consultants' roster by specialists coming from the beneficiaries’ communities

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Project to identify and include in its consultants' roster specialists coming from the beneficiaries’ communities
[Added: 2021/12/08]
SMoE and UNDP 2021/01 Completed Completed
9. Recommendation:

The TE team recommends to SMoE and UNDP to introduce as compulsory the RBM of the projects and require the project managers to demonstrate that their proposed work program is cost effective and/or cost efficient.

Management Response: [Added: 2021/12/08]

Fully accept - agrees entirely with all the recommendation and will seek actions to achieve the recommendation.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
A result-based management approach to be used in subsequent projects and incorporated from the design stage as well as during implementation to ensure the project is managed in a cost-efficient manner
[Added: 2021/12/08]
UNDP 2021/01 Completed Completed

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