Success message
error message
warn message
Enhancing resilience of communities in Solomon Islands to the adverse effects of Climate Change in Agriculture and Food Security
Commissioning Unit: Fiji
Evaluation Plan: 2013-2017
Evaluation Type: Project
Completion Date: 12/2015
Unit Responsible for providing Management Response: Fiji
Documents Related to overall Management Response:
 
1. Recommendation: Recommendation 1: Extension of the project by 1 to 1.5 years
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/22]

Management Response: Agreed, in principle. However, since the independent evaluation has not provided sufficient reasoning for ?1 to 1.5 years? of extension, an expenditure analysis will need to be carried out by the PMU assisted by UNDP along with the adjustment of the existing Multi-year Work Plan, 2014 Annual Work Plan with budget and implementation schedule details. Only after this analysis, will the exact timeframe of the proposed extension be proposed to the Project Board. Furthermore, an extension of the project duration, which constitutes a material deviation from the Agreement that UNDP has entered into with the AF Board will need to be (a) communicated to the Board and (b) approval sought from the Board. The recommendation on project extension can be communicated to the AF Board through the submission of the upcoming annual Project Progress Report (due by end of June 2014).

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.Expenditure analysis 2.Readjustment of Multi-year Work Plan and 2014 AWP with budget and implementation schedule details 3.Project Board review of the length of extension along the readjusted MYWP 4.Informing AF Board and seeking approval for an extension (if applicable following (3))
[Added: 2014/12/22] [Last Updated: 2018/12/04]
1) NPMU 2) NPMU 3)UNDP 4)UNDP 2014/06 Completed Key actions were completed and project was closed. History
2. Recommendation: Recommendation 2: A Gantt chart or other project management aid should be used in order to capture the linkages between activities and the necessary steps required to perform the activities. Decision making should be determined in advance with the relevant information available to support the decision made. The information sources must be analysed and task allocated to a responsible person.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/22]

Management Response: Agreed, in principle. Gantt chart functions have been applied in project management support tools, and UNDP have been actively supporting NPMU to set frames and processes for this. A Gantt chart was included in the original project document. This combined with the Total Budget and Workplan served the basis to establish a Multi-year Workplan (including key activity building blocks per outputs, with scheduling and budget details) during inception phase. MYWP served as basis to define more detailed Annual Work Plans, and there is an ongoing process to further specify implementation plans for community level ground activities for each target province. While planning and management tools and structures have been introduced, their use can be further streamlined and consistency further improved through enhanced NPMU functions. Therefore response measure to this MTR finding should be nested within a more general recommendation for strengthening project management structure. The narrative of the MTR also confirms that the underlying challenge of the PMU capacity and structure goes beyond the availability of project management aids and informed-decision making. Since the third recommendation is also with respect to the PMU capacity, a joint management response for the second and third MTR recommendations is presented below.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.Combined with Management Response for Recommendation 3 (See below)
[Added: 2014/12/22] [Last Updated: 2018/12/04]
N/A 2014/09 Completed Combined with MR for Recomm.3 History
3. Recommendation: Recommendation 3: PMU to be assisted with a project management and an agricultural and an aquaculture expert preferable with international experience
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/22]

Management Response: Partially agreed. It is agreed that the project requires coordinated technical support. However, in general, the support needs for PMU for better project management and for high quality technical inputs for project implementation should be reviewed separately. With regards to the capacity building needs for PMU staff, it is fully agreed (See also Recommendation 2). Furthermore to enhance coordination of available national expertise (technical project staff and personnel of national partner institutions) and link with other technical resourcing and support arrangements (consultants, CROP agencies) it is recommended to formalize the function of a Technical Advisory Group. With respect to the technical support on aquaculture, the project board agreed to withhold the intervention on aquaculture to ensure focused implementation of the project at this critical juncture. The need and capacity of the IP to bring the aquaculture focus back into the project will be discussed at a Board Meeting in future.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.Engage in dialogue with the IP on an appropriate approach for capacity building for both technical and project management aspects. 2.Recruitment of a Senior Technical Advisor (STA) The primary purpose of this is to provide ongoing support to PMU in a mentoring fashion, including guidance on key technical aspects, as well as strengthening basic project management capacity such as realistic work planning, budgeting, reporting and liaison with partners. 3.Formal establishment of a Technical Advisory Group 4.A review of technical assistance needs (as part of STAs deliverables) 5.Discussion with the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock and CROP agencies on the technical knowledge gaps for climate resilient agriculture 6.Recruitment of further national and international experts on climate resilient agriculture and aquaculture
[Added: 2014/12/22] [Last Updated: 2018/12/04]
1. UNDP and IP 2. IP (or the recruitment activity delegated to UNDP based on LoA) 3. IP 4. IP supported by NPMU 5. IP supported by NPMU 6.IP supported by NPMU 2014/09 Completed Key actions have been completed. History
4. Recommendation: In addition to the three recommendations presented above, the MTR consultants put forth the following recommendations directed at UNDP: 1. Re-establish financial credibility of the UNDP with the service provides within SI 2. Establish fuel depot in regularly visited provincial centers to save time, secure fuel supply and reduce the costs 3. Follow the UNDP in field safety procedures more precisely; use meteorological services for planning the field activates and sea travel 4. Keep the safety equipment of UNDP in a useable state (satellite phone and Personal Rescue Beacon (PRB)) 5. Train UNDP staff on safety and first aid as the general use of safety equipment as satellite phones, PRBs. 6. Establish a project server and a back-up system, a centralized file system and library of hard copy documents.
Management Response: [Added: 2014/12/22]

Management Response: Partially agreed. 1. UNDP will look into the issues that currently slow down financial transactions and make necessary proposals for improvement. 2. It is out of the scope of this project to establish fuel depots. However, logistical challenges in visiting some of the project target sites are noted and monitoring visits will be improved from the logistical planning perspectives. 3. UNDP will review the current procedures and will make necessary proposals if required. 4. The project will purchase necessary safety equipment for the use of the project staff. 5. UNDP will review the current procedures and will make necessary proposals if required. 6. It was confirmed that a back-up and central repository system is already being practiced.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
Management Response: Partially agreed. 1.UNDP will look into the issues that currently slow down financial transactions and make necessary proposals for improvement. 2.It is out of the scope of this project to establish fuel depots. However, logistical challenges in visiting some of the project target sites are noted and monitoring visits will be improved from the logistical planning perspectives. 3.UNDP will review the current procedures and will make necessary proposals if required. 4.The project will purchase necessary safety equipment for the use of the project staff. 5.UNDP will review the current procedures and will make necessary proposals if required. 6.It was confirmed that a back-up and central repository system is already being practiced.
[Added: 2014/12/22] [Last Updated: 2018/12/04]
UNDP 2015/12 Completed UNDP established three Fuel depots in 3 project site based on feasibility and also bought safety equipment (additional life jackets, beacons) for the use of project staff. This has been completed in 2015. History

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