Success message
error message
warn message
Implementation of the Benguela Current LME Action Program for Restoring Depleted Fisheries and Reducing Coastal Resources Degradation
Commissioning Unit: Namibia
Evaluation Plan: 2014-2018
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 01/2014
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Namibia
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation:

7.1       Issue: GEF has invested over USD20 million in the Benguela Current LME, primarily on its threatened fisheries resources and while this has been justified since BCLME is breaking new ground at the institutional and political commitment level, the time has come to extend the project activities beyond the institutional framework and the upstream foundational work and accelerate the implementation of the SAP. 

Recommendation:  It is recommended to UNDP as the agency at the forefront of BCLME initiatives, to ensure that further support to the BCC or the governments from GEF or elsewhere should give priority to operationalization of the SAP and in particular it should actively involve other sectors apart from fisheries, and institutions from outside government in the private sector, relevant NGOs and coastal communities at grassroots level.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/05]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Fully Taken up during the BCLME III project preparation and to be followed up during its implementation.
[Added: 2017/01/05]
UNDP, BCC 2016/12 Completed Completed
2. Recommendation:

7.2       Issue: GEF limits on project management costs are a challenge and in some cases unrealistic.  It is also unreasonable to treat all projects as equal regardless of design and scope – they are not.

Recommendation:  It is recommended to GEF (UNDP to make representations to GEF) to reconsider its universal cap on acceptable project management costs.   GEF could raise the limit but regardless of whether it does or not, it needs to acknowledge that different projects have different project management needs and set limits accordingly.  GEF could also provide guidance for project implementers on what precisely constitutes project management costs.

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/05]

Agreed

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
To be taken up during the subsequent project document formulation processes and these costs to be also considered as distinct, i.e. separate from administrative and be treated as technical, i.e. actual costs of delivering the services vis managing the projects.
[Added: 2017/01/05] [Last Updated: 2018/08/09]
BCC, UNDP RBA /RSC, and UNDP Namibia 2024/01 Initiated Ongoing actions for subsequent projects with vertical funding from GEF. History
3. Recommendation:

7.3       Issue: Many projects come to an end without an effective Exit Strategy.  In fact, many Project Managers are not really sure of what an Exit Strategy entails.  Much effort goes into handing over project physical assets but rarely is there the equivalent effort in handing over the intellectual assets created by the project.

Recommendation:  It is recommended to UNDP and the GEF that an Exit Workshop or similar event be made a mandatory activity of project closure, in the same way as the Inception Workshop is part of the project launch.  The Exit Workshop must bring together project personnel (including past consultants) and those organizations and individuals who are identified as being in a position to continue with the work of the project.  At the Workshop, the project needs to outline the work accomplished and the outstanding work that still needs to be done and identify whether these can “live” on their own, or require a champion.  Consensus then needs to be reached on who is taking over the responsibility both for unfinished work as well as for products and benefits that need to be “adopted” and sustained by someone else.  It is most important that to the extent possible, a source of funding support is identified to ensure financial sustainability.  

Management Response: [Added: 2017/01/05]

Agree

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Exit strategy and workshop to be organised in future project initiatives to ensure that there is smooth hand over and sustainability beyond the project life cycle.
[Added: 2017/01/05]
BCC; UNDP 2024/01 Completed To be taken up in subsequent project initiatives. It is to be noted that projects prepare exit plans that are discussed with the key counterparts; however the meetings minutes may not reflect as exit workshop.

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