Mid-term evaluation for Promoting Sustainable Bio-energy Production from Biomass (SBEPB) in Timor-Leste

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2015-2020, Timor-Leste
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
12/2019
Completion Date:
01/2020
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

This report summarizes the findings of the [Informal] Midterm Review Mission conducted during the 5 to 9 August 2019 period for the UNDP-GEF Project entitled: “Promoting Sustainable Bio-energy Production from Biomass” (hereby referred to as the SBEPB Project or the Project), that received a US$ 1,743,000 grant from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) in October 2014This report summarizes the findings of the [Informal] Midterm Review Mission conducted during the 5 to 9 August 2019 period for the UNDP-GEF Project entitled: “Promoting Sustainable Bio-energy Production from Biomass” (hereby referred to as the SBEPB Project or the Project), that received a US$ 1,743,000 grant from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) in October 2014

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document ToR_IC_Team Leader MTR_Biomass (1).pdf tor English 360.13 KB Posted 144
Download document BIOMASS Project_Timor Leste MTR Report Dec20_V5_FINAL.pdf report English 802.97 KB Posted 65
Title Mid-term evaluation for Promoting Sustainable Bio-energy Production from Biomass (SBEPB) in Timor-Leste
Atlas Project Number: 00077146
Evaluation Plan: 2015-2020, Timor-Leste
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 01/2020
Planned End Date: 12/2019
Management Response: Yes
UNDP Signature Solution:
  • 1. Poverty
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021)
  • 1. Output 1.5.1 Solutions adopted to achieve universal access to clean, affordable and sustainable energy
  • 2. 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 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
SDG Target
  • 7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding: GEF Fund
Evaluation Expenditure(US $): 5,000
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
GEF Evaluation: Yes
GEF Project Title: Promoting Sustainable Bio-energy Production from Biomass (SBEPB) in Timor-Leste
Evaluation Type: Mid-term Review
Focal Area: Climate Change
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-6
GEF Project ID: 00088130
PIMS Number: 4250
Key Stakeholders: Ministry of Public Works (Electricity DEpartmet), Secretary of State for Environment
Countries: Timor-Leste
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1

To improve project implementation and project sustainability, the following recommendations result from this MTR exercise:

  • Based on successful results after the project decided to discontinue collaboration with Mercy Corps, the project should continue this success and at the same time introduce signals that the market will change after the project ends.
  • The project should stretch its implementation time and introduce one more round of subsidy to producers, this time at e.g. 50% level (instead of 80%). This way, producers can see the response from their customers on higher price levels (as they currently don’t know what the market is willing to pay for stoves) and they can see a clear signal that things will change (as they now seem to count on continued high subsidies from whatever source). For this, it would be needed to continue the project implementation up to end of March 2020.
  • To enhance chances for sustainable results of the project the project could support setting up an ICS producer industry association, e.g. suggesting structure (e.g. elected or rotating chair of the association) and set-up and initiating inauguration of the association. This may also be combined with a training for producers on alternative and/or innovative cook stove models (as brought up by one producer) to inspire and prepare for a changing future.
  • Discussions with the government, especially in the next board meeting, should focus on the approval of the RE law (and its relation to success rate of the project) and possibility to free up government budget (from the RE/biogas/solar programme?) for continuation of the ICS subsidy in one way or another (at lower levels, e.g. 50% for some time more and then further reduced). Perhaps the government could also be convinced to continue with the ICS Suco and introduce some kind of certification for such achievement. Please also note that the board meeting should approve the revised LogFrame.

With regard to the institutional cookstoves, it would be good if sustainability of the program could be discussed with the Ministry of Education and see if and how they could integrate clean cookstoves in their school feeding program.

2

To correct project design, a number of suggestions are being recommended to adjust the Project Results Framework target formulation as follows:

  • In Component 1, leave out the indicator referring to PURE/SURE (this reference has never been explained in the ProDoc but probably refers to previous UNDP projects). Also revise policy referring to BET only towards broader RE policy.
  • In Component 2, Remove the sub-outcome 2.1 in order to reduce number of indicators and to adjust against overstretched ambition without commitment of FIs at the project development stage and reduced UNDP TRAC resources dedicated to the project. Also, based on recommendation during Inception Phase, number of cookstoves deployed can be combined in one indicator (to reduce the number of indicators) and indicators under Outcome 2.3 that are duplications from indicators in other parts of the Logframe can be deleted.
  • In Component 3, remove duplicating indicators in order to reduce the number of indicators.
3

To improve monitoring and evaluation of the project, the following is recommended:

  • Come to a clear understanding of the GHG emission reduction targets as expected in the Project Goal as well as in the Tracking Tool and calculate savings both for End of Project targets (Project Goal) as well as for the Tracking Tool.
1. Recommendation:

To improve project implementation and project sustainability, the following recommendations result from this MTR exercise:

  • Based on successful results after the project decided to discontinue collaboration with Mercy Corps, the project should continue this success and at the same time introduce signals that the market will change after the project ends.
  • The project should stretch its implementation time and introduce one more round of subsidy to producers, this time at e.g. 50% level (instead of 80%). This way, producers can see the response from their customers on higher price levels (as they currently don’t know what the market is willing to pay for stoves) and they can see a clear signal that things will change (as they now seem to count on continued high subsidies from whatever source). For this, it would be needed to continue the project implementation up to end of March 2020.
  • To enhance chances for sustainable results of the project the project could support setting up an ICS producer industry association, e.g. suggesting structure (e.g. elected or rotating chair of the association) and set-up and initiating inauguration of the association. This may also be combined with a training for producers on alternative and/or innovative cook stove models (as brought up by one producer) to inspire and prepare for a changing future.
  • Discussions with the government, especially in the next board meeting, should focus on the approval of the RE law (and its relation to success rate of the project) and possibility to free up government budget (from the RE/biogas/solar programme?) for continuation of the ICS subsidy in one way or another (at lower levels, e.g. 50% for some time more and then further reduced). Perhaps the government could also be convinced to continue with the ICS Suco and introduce some kind of certification for such achievement. Please also note that the board meeting should approve the revised LogFrame.

With regard to the institutional cookstoves, it would be good if sustainability of the program could be discussed with the Ministry of Education and see if and how they could integrate clean cookstoves in their school feeding program.

Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/01]

The recommendations are noted. Sustainability of the results achieved is critical and project will continue to make efforts to work with ICS partners and the Government to establish subsidies for ICS, RE policy, and explore what the market is willing to pay under a reduced subsidy scheme.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 Continuing working with local ICS producers
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB project 2020/03 Initiated Keep working with local ICS producers without Mercy Corps till end of project
1.2 Stretching the implementation time and introducing one more round of subsidy scheme to producers
[Added: 2020/01/01] [Last Updated: 2020/03/03]
SBEPB project 2020/02 Completed One more round of subsidy implemented in December 2019. Project are now in the process of data entre. History
1.3 Convening monthly meetings of ICS producers in which the idea of creating an association will be introduced.
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB project 2020/03 Initiated Ongoing
1.4 The issue of the need for the approval of the RE law and subsidy for ICS to be discussed at the project board meeting. The revised logframe also to be approved by the project board.
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2020/03 Not Initiated Project board will be organized in 2020.
1.5. Discussion with MoE about School Institutional Stoves with school feeding program will be initiated and discussion with Nazareth Foundation ongoing.
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2020/03 Initiated Will be discussed
2. Recommendation:

To correct project design, a number of suggestions are being recommended to adjust the Project Results Framework target formulation as follows:

  • In Component 1, leave out the indicator referring to PURE/SURE (this reference has never been explained in the ProDoc but probably refers to previous UNDP projects). Also revise policy referring to BET only towards broader RE policy.
  • In Component 2, Remove the sub-outcome 2.1 in order to reduce number of indicators and to adjust against overstretched ambition without commitment of FIs at the project development stage and reduced UNDP TRAC resources dedicated to the project. Also, based on recommendation during Inception Phase, number of cookstoves deployed can be combined in one indicator (to reduce the number of indicators) and indicators under Outcome 2.3 that are duplications from indicators in other parts of the Logframe can be deleted.
  • In Component 3, remove duplicating indicators in order to reduce the number of indicators.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/01]

Followed the recommendation of MTR when the project got the MTR report

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 In Component 1, leave out the indicator referring to PURE/SURE and revise policy referring to BET
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2019/12 Completed Followed the MTR Recomendation
2.2 Removing the but-outcome 2.1.
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2019/12 Completed Followed the recomenation
3.3 remove duplicating indicators on Component 3
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2019/12 Completed Followed the recommendation to remove
3. Recommendation:

To improve monitoring and evaluation of the project, the following is recommended:

  • Come to a clear understanding of the GHG emission reduction targets as expected in the Project Goal as well as in the Tracking Tool and calculate savings both for End of Project targets (Project Goal) as well as for the Tracking Tool.
Management Response: [Added: 2020/01/01]

Project will share with project board and Director National Energy Renewable (DNER)

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 To understanding of GHG emission reduction tracking tool and calculating Project will calculate the GHG emission reduction targets as expected in the project goal and the tracking tool in consultation with the Government.
[Added: 2020/01/01]
SBEPB Project 2020/03 Not Initiated Will follow the recomendation

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