1. Senior Evaluation Officer GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop
M&E in the GEF
Anna Viggh
Senior Evaluation Officer
GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop
April 17-19, 2012
Burkina Faso

2. Overview M&E levels and responsible Agencies
RBM, Monitoring & Evaluation
M&E in the GEF
M&E levels and responsible Agencies
M&E Policy
Minimum requirements
Role of the Focal Points
Fifth Overall Performance Study (OPS5)
Objective of the Overall Performance Studies
Evaluation streams & OPS5
Theory of Change
Content of OPS5 reports
Knowledge Sharing and Community of Practice
Questions & Answers

3. GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop
12/2/2018
RBM, Monitoring & Evaluation
Result based management - setting goals and objectives, monitoring, learning and decision making
Evaluation is a “reality check” on RBM
RBM, especially monitoring, tell whether the organization is “on track”
Evaluation could tell whether the organization is “on the right track”
Dakar, Senegal

4. M&E in the GEF Two overarching objectives
Promote accountability for the achievement of GEF objectives through the assessment of results, effectiveness, processes, and performance of the partners involved in GEF activities
Promote learning, feedback, and knowledge sharing on results and lessons learned among the GEF and its partners as a basis for decision making on policies, strategies, program management, programs, and projects; and to improve knowledge and performance

5. M&E Levels and Responsible Agencies

6. M&E: Minimum Requirements
Design of M&E Plans
Completed and fully budgeted M&E plans by CEO endorsement for FSPs, and CEO approval for MSPs
Project log frames should align with GEF Focal Area result frameworks contained in the GEF-5 RBM
Implementation of M&E Plans
Project/program monitoring and supervision will include execution of the M&E plan
Project/Program Evaluations
All FSPs and MSPs will be evaluated
Reports should be sent to the GEF EO within 12 months of project completion
Engagement of Operational Focal Points
M&E plans should explain how GEF OFPs will be engaged in M&E activities

7. M&E: Minimum Requirement 4
Engagement of Operational Focal Points
M&E plans should include how OFPs will be engaged
OFPs will be informed on M&E activities, including Mid-Term Reviews and Terminal Evaluations, receiving drafts for comments and final reports
OFPs will be invited to contribute to the management response (where applicable)
GEF Agencies keep track of the application of this requirement in their GEF financed projects and programs

8. Role of GEF Focal Points in M&E
Keep track of GEF support at the national level
Keep stakeholders informed and consulted in plans, implementation and results of GEF activities in the country
Disseminate M&E information, promoting use of evaluation recommendations and lessons learned
Assist the Evaluation Office, as the first point of entry into a country
Identify major relevant stakeholders
Coordinate meetings
Assist with agendas
Coordinate country responses to these evaluations

9. GEF-5 Cross-Cutting Capacity Development Strategy
Fifth component: enhancing capacities to monitor and evaluate environmental impacts and trends (should be identified as a priority in the NCSA capacity development action plan)
Capacity development plan should be
Formulated as a Medium-Size Project
Or integrated into a broader proposal that would be formulated as MSP or FSP (if MSP it should have 1:1 cofunding)
Development of regional partnerships could be considered
Funding available from $44m set-aside for capacity development

10. Follow-Up to Evaluations
A management response is required for all evaluation reports presented to the GEF Council by the GEF EO
GEF Council takes into account both the evaluation and the management response when taking a decision
GEF EO reports on implementation of decisions annually (Management Action Record)
For Country Portfolio Evaluations countries have the opportunity to provide their perspective to Council as well

11. Fifth Overall Performance Study (OPS5)

12. Objective of Overall Performance Studies
To assess the extent to which the GEF is achieving its objectives
As laid down in the GEF Instrument and reviews by the Assembly
As developed and adopted by the GEF Council in operational policies and programs for GEF financed activities
And to identify potential improvements

13. EO Evaluation Streams & OPS5
Consolidation and strengthening of the four streams of evaluative evidence
Country Portfolio Evaluations: up to 15 during GEF-5
Impact Evaluations: International Waters, Climate Change and other focal areas
Performance Evaluations: APR continued and strengthened as well as independent process reviews
Thematic Evaluations: focal area strategies and adaptation
Major element of OPS5 will be a meta-evaluation

14. Overall Analytical Framework: GEF’s Catalytic Role
Foundational
Support for the creation of an environment that enables necessary changes to take place
And…require constant attention and adjustment
Demonstration
Testing of approaches that are intended to lead to GEBs if adopted on a broader scale
Investment
Broader implementation of results of foundational and demonstration activities

15. Generic GEF Theory of Change
FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS
DEMONSTRATION ELEMENTS
INVESTMENT ELEMENTS
SCALE
Mainstreaming
Scaling-up
Market change
Replication
IMPLEMENTING STRATEGIES
Technologies & approaches
Organizational structures & arrangements
Financial mechanisms for adoption & sustainability
Promoting champions
Building on promising initiatives
Raising profile of initiatives
Removal of barriers
Innovation
GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
Policy, legal & regulatory frameworks
Administrative reforms
ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE
SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE
ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND
BEHAVIORAL CHANGE
KNOWLEDGE & INFORMATION
Information-sharing & access
Change in environmental status
Awareness-raising
Stress reduction
Knowledge generation
Environmentally sustainable development
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
INTERMEDIATE STATES
IMPACT
Adaptive management / Learning

16. Quality Assurance Three quality assurance advisors Reference group
Recognized experts from developed, newly emerging, and developing nations
Ongoing advice and comments to the replenishment group
Reference group
Formed by staff from the GEF Agencies independent evaluation offices
To provide peer reviews of sub-studies and other deliverables
Will provide time to allow for meaningful reviews

17. OPS5 will Consist of Two Reports
First report: end of 2012
A meta-evaluation approach, drawing on existing GEF evaluations
Final report: end of 2013 or early 2014
Final report will be tackled trough separate evaluation studies

18. Content of the First OPS5 Report: End of 2012
Relevance of GEF to conventions guidance
Ratings on outcomes and sustainability of finished projects
Ratings of progress toward impact of finished projects
Trends in catalytic role of GEF (foundation, demonstration and/or investment projects)
Trends in ownership and country drivenness
Better understanding of GEF longer term impact
Trends in performance issues such as cofunding, management costs, quality at entry and supervision
Trends in the implementation and achievements of the focal areas of the GEF

19. Content of the Final OPS5 Report: End of 2013 or early 2014
Trends in global environmental problems and the relevance of GEF -- will include the emergence of new financing
A more in-depth look at focal area strategies and at the existing impact evidence
Coverage of the reform process: GEF project cycle and modalities, direct access, STAR, Paragraph 28
Governance of the GEF, donor performance and resources mobilization
The role of the private sector and civil society
Cross-cutting policies: gender, participation, safegurads, and knowledge sharing
Update of the SGP evaluation (since 2009)
The role of STAP

20. OPS5 Audience OPS5 audience includes
replenishment participants
GEF Council
Assembly
Through the Assembly the members of GEF
Findings will be shared with other GEF parties
GEF Secretariat
GEF Agencies
STAP
NGO Network
Project proponents and others

21. Knowledge Sharing
M&E contributes to knowledge building and organizational improvement
Findings and lessons should be accessible to target audiences in a user-friendly way
Evaluation reports should be subject to a dynamic dissemination strategy
Knowledge sharing enables partners to capitalize on lessons learned from experiences
Purpose of KM in the GEF
Promotion of a culture of learning
Application of lessons learned
Feedback to new activities

22. GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop
12/2/2018
Climate-Eval
Community of practice on evaluation of climate change and development
Sharing best practices on climate change and development evaluation
700+ members
Online tools for participation
Website:
Linkedin Group
Social media
News letters
Blog
Dakar, Senegal

23. Climate-Eval: activities
International Conference in Alexandria in 2008
World Bank publication (book)
Evaluating Climate Change and Development (van den Berg and Feinstein, 2009)
Electronic library (400+ reports)
Webinars
Studies
Meta-Evaluation of Mitigation Studies
Adaptation Framework for M&E
3 more underway
Partnership – SEA Change , IDEAS
Supporters
SIDA, FOEN, GEFEO

24. Thank you 24