Annual Monitoring of GEF IW Projects GEF IW Task Force M&E Framework as June 1, 2006 applied to Self-Assessment

*Transboundary, Multi-country Water Systems: more comprehensive approaches to balance competing uses: IWRM/ICM *Building capacity, trust, confidence, setting priorities: if agreement, GEF may assist with implementation of agreed policy, legal, institutional reforms & demo investments to balance competing uses of water resources. *Water use, flows, pollution, fishing, habitat, droughts, floods, groundwater protection GEF INTERNATIONAL WATERS FOCAL AREA

Portfolio Gaps and Priority Concerns in the IW Focal Area: Under-representation in South Asia and upcoming need for many implementation projects in Africa—challenge of balancing multiple uses of water resources for multiple MDGs. Droughts/floods/sea level rise/groundwater all under-represented; need demos to test approaches. Dam release management/groundwater critical as river basin flows continue to decrease & wetlands/deltas dry. SIDS are priorities for action; urgent needs. Ocean over-fishing a global concern; $60 billion annual trade. Poorly treated sewage a global concern. Need to engage the business community.

GEF-4 Strategic Objectives for IW IW-1: Catalyze implementation of jointly agreed reforms and stress reduction investments on-the- ground for transboundary water systems Percentage Resources: 60-65% Outcomes/results: measurable pollution reduction, water use efficiency/improved flows, water-related sectoral reforms, transboundary water institutions functioning, measurable improvements where Partnership Investment Funds are implemented.

GEF-4 Strategic Objectives for IW IW-2: Expand foundational capacity building to a limited number of new transboundary waters through integrated approaches and undertake targeted learning Percentage Resources: 20% Outcomes/Results: ministerially agreed strategic action programs reforms/investments; inter-ministry committees; capacity developed

GEF-4 Strategic Objectives for IW ■IW-3 Undertake innovative demos for key portfolio gaps  Balance competing water uses through IWRM/ICM including adaptation to droughts/floods/sea level rise  groundwater protection: priority on SIDS  reducing Persistent Toxic Substances complementary to POPS focal area Percentage Resources: 15-20% Outcomes/Results: innovative institutional reforms / financial modalities tested, measurable pollution reduction, water use Efficiency/improved flows, protected water supplies, balancing water uses

GEF International Waters Projects can be divided into four categories Foundational (enabling activity) Projects –TDA/SAP/ Inter- ministry Committees in each country(OP8&9) Implementation of Action Programs-- SAPs (OP 8,9&10) Global/Regional Demonstration Projects (OP10) Technical Support and Learning Projects (OP10)

As GEFSEC is preparing to take over the function of monitoring annual project implementation, achievements and the overall impact of the focal areas portfolios from the GEF M & E function, the GEF IW Task Force is discussing the following framework in response to GEF Replenishment Requirements Annual Performance Monitoring for GEF International Waters Projects

Three types of indicators are applied to each project category: Process Indicators, Stress Reduction Indicators, and a new type “Catalytic Impact Indicators” that captures achievements. The exception would be Strategic Partnerships with Investment Funds--Envir Status Indicators would also be reported, and some SAP implementation projects may be asked to report environmental status indicators as well. For each of the 4 project types, a limited set of specific indicators should be included in the logframe. For each specific indicator in the project, project manager or agency will annually report quantitative results (when feasible: kg/year, ha, % etc.) or assign a score (0-3) The framework consists of simple basic elements

New Type of GEF IW M & E Indicator: Catalytic Impact Indicators *New requirement to report on catalytic impacts of GEF projects during Replenishment cycles. *Original 3 Types of Indicators are still valid, designed for OPs 8 and 9, not OP 10 demos and portfolio learning. […] *Need to record and project spin-off catalytic results: --new conventions, treaties, protocols, legal reforms --catalysis in IAs: internalized in CAS or by new partnerships with IAs/ multilats/ bilaterals --results from GEF IW learning activities

Annual Monitoring of GEF IW Projects Technical Support and Structured Learning Projects Thematic or global projects to help share experiences, promote participation, increase awareness, catalyze actions and partnerships – OP 10 / SO IW-2 Catalytic Impact Indicators Number of hits at project website Number of downloads from project website Effectiveness of structured learning - exchange activities as it emerges from evaluation questionnaires filled by participants (0-3) Effectiveness of IWC (IW Portfolio Conference) and face to face meetings held, as it emerges from evaluation questionnaires (0-3) Partnerships solidified or new ones/ new activities & cofinancing (0-3) Outcome of international events reflect GEF experience and approaches(0-3)

In order to utilize the framework as a tracking tool for Replenishment results/targets, an Annual Scorecard for each project will submitted. Part A: annual results (last 12 months) and Part B: cumulative results (since beginning of project). For all projects, agencies would also annually report on implementation progress (% of scheduled disbursement; delivery of outputs in line with original schedule; co-financing on schedule) to contribute to a portfolio characterization. Two tracking tools will be maintained for results reporting for Replenishment purposes by the IW Task Force: a Coverage Indicator Tracking Tool, and a Results Indicator Tracking Tool (with annual and cumulative tables – see attached example).

Cumulative Coverage as of May 2006* 0 (0) “waterbody” projects established Web sites w/IW:LEARN tools, 0 (0) Web sites connected with iwlearn.net via IW-IMS 10,668 (10,668) unique visits to iwlearn.net from over 120 (120) countries. 3 (3) helpdesk requests fielded from 3 (3) countries & 0 (0) projects. 216 (41) people from 70 (21) GEF-beneficiary countries across 40 GEF IW projects participated in Structured Learning activities, including 36% (41%) women and 64% (59%) men -- since (0) participants in 3 rd IW Conference, of which 80% male, 63% from GEF IW beneficiary nations, and 52% from the Americas 150 (150) people and 57 (57) GEF projects received GEF IW Bridges newsletters via direct mailing.… * Numbers in parenthesis represent only data for year 2006, as of May 2006.

GEF IW Scorecard Template--Annual Report of Results to Contribute to the Tracking Tools Part A: Annual Results Report quantitative; or 0-1 / 0-3 rating I. Process Indicators: ______: _____; ______; II. Stress Reduction Indicators: ______; ______; ______; III. Catalytic Impact Indicators: ______; _____: ______: IV. Implementation progress: outputs; % disbursement; co-fin. Part B: Cumulative Results Report Roll ups of progress toward the different types of indicators listed in Part A / logframe on a cumulative basis for the life of the project. I. _____; ______; ______; II. _____; ______; _____; III. _____; ______; _____; IV. _____; ______; _____; Subcommittee formed to develop the Template for the Scorecard

IW:LEARN Results Per GEF IW Scorecard, focus on.. –Catalytic Impact Indicators (Annually, Section III) (cf. “Outcomes” and more) –Implementation Progress (Quarterly, Section IV) –Disbursement (quarterly) –Co-finance (annually)

III.IW:LEARN Outcomes (Catalytic Impacts) Across 5 Project Components: A. Information Sharing: >75% projects use IW-IMS and >50% of users obtain needed info by B. Structured Learning: 30+ projects apply lessons from IW:LEARN structured learning to improve TWM in the basins by C. IW Conferences: Representatives from all GEF IW projects participate in 2 portfolio-wide review, replication and partnership events. D. Testing Innovative Approaches: GEF IW projects and partners benefit from a set of demonstration activities integrating TWM information sharing and structured learning. E. Partnerships to Sustain Benefits: TWM structured learning and information sharing institutionalized. IN PROGRESS

III. Other “Catalytic Impacts” 2005 Anecdotes –50 useful, measurable actions planned by St. Petersburg workshop participants –UNECE Water Convention contributes to Petersberg/Athens Process to improve IWRM –IWC3 participants felt learning would improve their projects' design, implementation, communications, inter-project linkages and integration. –Gender, Water and Climate exhibit deployed (via co-finance) helping to link projects with professional 2006 Anecdotes –IW Communications Manual drafted by and for GEF IW projects –21 Newport workshop participants provide recommendations to 10 LMEs to improve governance and socioeconomics. –ELI obtained external finance to deliver P2 for water mgmt. training in LAC and WWF4 session on P2 in IW mgmt. –LME governance workshop participants carry over XXXX recommendations back to their home projects. –G&WA partners foster and sustain Gender & Water exhibit tour in LAC region

IV(a) IW:LEARN Outputs (Progress by Component) Based on Project Timeline in IW:LEARN Project Document Need for each PAL and partners to provide quarterly updates regarding progress relative to these indicators. Accomplished (in full) by end of target year Partially accomplished by end of target year Not accomplished by end of target year

Year 1Year 2Year 3 Year 4 A. Information Sharing: >75% projects use IW-IMS and >50% of users obtain needed info by A1. IW Info. Mgmt. System (IW-IMS) IW-IMS protocols established, prototype in place; 1 new module (Africa) IW-IMS populated; Helpdesk operational, proactive & responsive; 1 new module (aquifers) Helpdesk responds to 24 requests/yr; 1 new module (TBD) Helpdesk fielding 48+ requests/yr; 1 new module (TBD) A2. ICT Technical Assistance 1 ICT Training Workshop; 25% of projects’ Websites linked to IW-IMS 50% of projects’ Websites linked to IW-IMS 1 ICT Workshop; 75% of projects’ Websites linked to IW-IMS 95% of projects’ Websites linked to IW-IMS

Year 1Year 2Year 3 Year 4 B. Structured Learning: 30+ projects apply lessons from IW:LEARN structured learning to improve TWM in the basins by B1. Regional Multi- Project Exchanges At least 1 regional exchange launched (Europe) At least 2 regional exchanges launched (Caribbean) At least 3 regional exchanges launched (Africa); Present regional exchange findings at IWC4 Learning products on IW-IMS B2. Learning for Portfolio Subsets Freshwater &/or LMEs exchanges launched Freshwater & LME exchanges both launched (or continuing) Coral reef exchange launched; other exchanges present findings at IWC4 Learning products on IW-IMS B3. Inter-Project Exchange Missions 1-4 multi-week inter-project exchanges B4. Public Participation Training Training materials developed1 st workshop; training materials revised 2 nd workshop; training materials augmented 3 rd workshop; training materials on IW-IMS

Year 1Year 2Year 3 Year 4 C. IW Conferences: Representatives from all GEF IW projects participate in 2 portfolio-wide review, replication and partnership events. C1. IWC3 (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) IWC3 held; IW portfolio recommendations to CSD Proceedings disseminated via IW-IMS C2. IWC4 (Cape Town, South Africa) IWC4 host, location and co- finance secured; agenda set IWC4 heldProceedings disseminated via IW-IMS

Year 1Year 2Year 3 Year 4 D. Testing Innovative Approaches: GEF IW projects and partners benefit from a set of demonstration activities integrating TWM information sharing and structured learning. D1. S.E. Asia Regional Learning Center (SEA-RLC) SEA-RLC established to address projects TWM needs; Web site launched and linked to IW-IMS Regional GEF IW GIS on- line, connected to IW-IMS Roster of >100 experts addresses projects’ needs; 3 GIS DSS modules featured >1000 IW resources added to IW-IMS; SEA IW project applying GIS modules D2. Southeastern Europe/Mediterrane an 3 roundtables for senior officials and experts; regional TWM information exchange network launched via Internet 3 roundtables for senior officials and experts; network sustained via regional partners Network and learning products accessible via IW-IMS D3. CSD/GEF Roundtable with CSD Global roundtable, in follow- up to CSD-12 (and leading up to CSD-13) Learning products accessible via IW-IMS

Year 1Year 2Year 3 Year 4 E. Partnerships to Sustain Benefits: TWM structured learning and information sharing institutionalized. E1. Partnerships and Strategic Plan Initial sustainability plan finalized and approved by IW:LEARN SC; role for partners in sustainability plan finalized, approved Partners recruited and aligned to sustain IW:LEARN benefits for all activities per plan. Sustainability plan revised per mid-term review Sustainability plan realized through partners strategic plans. E2. IW Contributions to Global TWM 2-3 projects receive cost share to participate each of in 2 GEF IW side events; 1-2 outreach &/or learning products disseminated, including LME video (co- produced by IW:LEARN) 2-3 projects receive cost share to participate in each of 2 GEF IW side events; 1-2 outreach &/or learning products disseminated, including Gender and Water exhibit 2-3 projects receive cost share to participate in 1-2 GEF IW side events; 1-2 outreach &/or learning products disseminated 2-3 projects receive cost share to participate in each of 2 GEF IW side events; 1-2 outreach &/or learning products disseminated

IV(b) IW:LEARN Disbursement Based on annual budgets, contracts and periodic invoicing Need for each PAL to invoice according to contractual schedules or else negotiate with PCU for contractual modifications to accommodate shifting delivery dates. Need for UNEP to provide disbursement data for its activities (currently D1 still MIA)

Disbursement, by Component

% Disbursement, by IA NOTE: Current UNEP values do not add to 100% and are not yet fully re-phased for 2008Q3 end date.

IV(c) IW:LEARN Co-Finance Based on co-finance commitments in IW:LEARN Project Document Need for each PAL and partner with commitment to provide annual co-finance estimates (distinguishing cash and in-kind) Need to track unanticipated co-finance (cash &/or in-kind) as provided

Name of Co- financier (source) ClassificationTypeAmount (US$) Status* IBRD-WBIMulti-LateralsCash 100,000 IBRD-WBIMulti-LateralsIn-Kind410,000 UNDP Cap-NetUN AgencyIn-Kind1,400,000 UNEP-DEWA ** UN AgencyIn-Kind and/or Cash 1,207,400 UNDP-EEGUN AgencyIn-Kind230,000 USA-NOAAGovernmentIn-Kind200,000 ELI NGOIn-Kind300, ,116 IUCN-WANINGOIn-Kind$350,000 IUCN-GMP NGOIn-Kind$300,000 GWP NGOIn-Kind$100,000 GWPNGOIn-Kind$90,000 Co-finance 1

Co-finance 2 Name of Co- financier (source) ClassificationTypeAmount (US$) Status* GETF NGOCash & In-Kind $355, ,000 SEA-START RC Chulalongkorn U. ** NGOIn-Kind290,400 UNECE UN AgencyIn-Kind225,000 38,600 UNESCO-IHP ISARM/IGRAC UN AgencyIn-Kind30,000 Germany- MoE GovernmentIn-Kind 150, ,537 Greece-MoFAGovernmentIn-Kind 150,000 GWP-Med NGOIn-Kind20,000 LakeNETNGOIn-Kind48,000 EcoAfricaNGOIn-Kind170,000

Unexpected Cofinance E2: IISD/IIED/Environment Canada: $3035 (cash) in 2006 E2; Boston University: $2000 (in-kind) in 2006 B1: CTC-St. Petersburg : $650 (in-kind) in 2005 A1: Transnatura, LLP: $525 (in-kind) in 2005 TOTAL unexpected: >$6,000

Ta ke Home Message IW:LEARN needs PALs and other partners to help collate data to support indicators tracking IW:LEARN’s: –Coverage By activity; across projects, geography, gender –Results Catalytic Impacts (annually) Progress (quarterly) Disbursement (quarterly) Co-finance (annually) Thank you for your ongoing help!