Programme Planning under FTFP & FTPP II December 2015 FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan Bishkek, 16 December 2015

Objective of the presentation December 2015 FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan To clarify the evolution of Operational Framework, discuss what is new, and lessons from FTPP I

Operational Framework Outline Key concepts Scope Modalities and criteria Procedures for submission of request and review Management of FTPP and roles and responsibilities How effective was the Operational Framework ? What is new in revised Operational Framework ? Recommendations Can OF reflect these changes? December 2015 FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan3

Key concepts Creating Partnership MFAL, MFWA, MoD, MOFA, TIKA and FAO Ownership as underlying concept  demand-driven & national ownership  responds to priorities identified  above supported by coordination and liaison Roles & Responsibility FAO and Government share roles, accountability FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan4 December 2015

Scope The OF is a comprehensive guidance document, which allows: FTPP/FTFP to follow a programme approach, facilitate integrity, coherence and synergy under following thematic areas: The Thematic areas = aligned with FAO expertise 5December 2015FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan FTPP II (Proposed)FTFP (Proposed) Food security, nutrition and food safety Protection and Management of Natural Resources, including Fisheries, Aquaculture, Animal and Plant Genetic Resources Agricultural and Rural development Policies Capacity Enhancement Sustainable management of forests and trees Sustainable land and natural resource management Institutional reform, education and national capacity enhancement

Geographical coverage: FAO SEC countries (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Turkey & Uzbekistan) scope of the Partnership may be enlarged on mutual consent of the Parties 6December 2015FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

Modalities and criteria - well appreciated by all stakeholders Country eligibility Aims and purposes Country or sub-regional priorities Critical gap or problem Catalytic role and sustainable impacts Scale and duration Government commitments Capacity building Gender sensitivity Partnership and participation 7December 2015FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

Procedures for request submission and review what is new ? 8December 2015 National and Multicountry Projects Interventions pre-determined by Results Matrix SEC coordinates proposals Govts and FAO prepare proposal, concept note with budget. Letter of Intent will be sent. FAO internal financial, technical and operational clearance. Under revised PCM, technical clearance is responsibility of LTO, mostly at SEC, operational clearance for project under USD will be under FAOR Approval by SC Co-signing, information to countries FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

Management of FTPP and roles and responsibilities TOR of Steering Committee overall policy guidance and orientation review and approval of funding overall supervision and monitoring of FTPP Co-Chaired by MFAL and FAO FAO Secretariat support Management = SEC SRC overall responsibility December 20159FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

How effective was the Operational Framework ? Good structure at high level, did not cover sufficiently an outreach at project level Need to move from Ex-ante to Ex-post control How to turn into a win-win in management and monitoring? A presentation on M & E will follow today Appears rigid in approval schedule, without sufficient feedback to the donor on performance of projects December FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

What is new in revised Operational Framework ? Facilitate Programme Approach to ensure integrity, coherence and synergy of FTPP 1-assisted interventions; Technical Review Committee composed of relevant technical units of the Ministries to evaluate project outlines and monitor progress; Establishment of Programme Management Unit proposed; A letter of agreement/interest from the beneficiary country before approval of projects Amount of unallocated funds reduced from 25% to 5% Rather than 50%, up to 10% FTPP fund to support/complement multicounty or sub regional activities to maintain synergies with ongoing or pipeline activities A set of newly defined criteria for visibility Q: Can we manage the above? December FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan

Comparison of elements of OF Previous OFProposed OF Three broad thematic areasFour thematic areas Allocation of funds for each thematic area is 25% with a provision of 25% unallocated funds Distribution of funds for each thematic area have been proposed to 20% for last thematic area with a provision of 5% as unallocated funds An allocation of 50% support and/or complement activities at multi- country and sub-regional level. Up to up to 10% support and/or complement activities at multi-country and sub-regional level, upon approval by the Steering Committee. National-level FTPP initiative should not exceed US$ 200,000 with a duration of 24 months Not finalized No Technical Committee was thereInclusion of Technical Review Committee No PMU was thereProposed for PMU Not such arrangement mentioned A letter of agreement from the beneficiary country should be requested before the approval of the project Such arrangement were not there Inclusion of one high level member from the participating countries to the Steering Committee Only publicityPublicity and visibility (with certain criteria proposed)

Recommendations from FAO practitioners & countries Increase the ceiling for National projects from USD 200,000 to USD 500,000 Change the approval cycle to biennium, to harmonize with FAO cycle and allow approval for while programme awaits ratification. Introduce rolling approval cycle Improved communication and stronger participation of donor, participating Govts, FAOR Clarify Roles and responsibilities of the Steering Committee members Accountability mechanism at National level

Recommendations from FAO practitioners & countries Synergies with other national and regional programmes Partnership strengthened between GoT, FAO, TIKA, Govts, both in Ankara & in countries Synergy and complementarity between two Partnership Programmes (FTPP/FTFP) FAO project approval process has been simplified, quality assurance is now in Regional Office through Programme and Project Review Committee, technical clearance at SEC and delegation of budget approval at FAO Representative level is USD 500,000

Can OF reflect these changes? Next steps – what can be done before Afyon? What type of analysis and data are needed for all stakeholders to take decisions? How can a mature pipeline inform the OF? Discussion Questions

Thank you Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Sub-regional Office for Central Asia (FAOSEC)