1. Accessing International Climate Finance

2. Imprint Published by: Contact adelphi Caspar-Theyss-Strasse 14a
Contact
adelphi
Caspar-Theyss-Strasse 14a
14193 Berlin / Germany T F E I
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
CF Ready Program
Godesberger Allee 119
53175 Bonn/Germany T F E I
Dennis Tänzler T
Dorit Lehr E T
Any content written by named authors do not necessarily reflect the views of adelphi nor GIZ nor of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Although the authors take all possible care to ensure the correctness of published information, no warranty can be accepted regarding the correctness, accuracy, reliability and completeness of the content of this information.
August 2014

3. Terms of Use
This Training Material was developed by adelphi with financial support from GIZ’s CF Ready Program on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development.
If you would like to adapt this presentation to your needs, please respect the following terms of use:
The imprint is mandatory. It may neither be altered nor removed from the presentation and should always be printed out as part of the presentation, if applicable.
The German Cooperation, GIZ and adelphi logo must not be moved or removed. No other logos or further information may be placed in the footer area.
If you wish to add your own content please indicate in the respective slides that the respective content has been added and that it was not part of the original version provided by the authors mentioned in the imprint.
If you would like to make substantial changes to the content of this presentation or have other questions regarding the material, please contact or

4. Where does international climate finance matter?

5. Objectives and content

6. What you can expect to learn from this session
Learn about modes of access for international climate finance with a focus on direct access
Understand the direct access approach of the Adaptation Fund
Understand the access modalities of the Green Climate Fund
Get an idea how to establish a National Implementing Entity
Understand the approach of the Global Environmental Facility

7. Modes of access

8. Three main access modalities for international climate finance
Multilateral access:
Management and oversight
Implementation
Execution
International domain
National domain
Fund Manager
Implementing Body
Executing Body
Direct access:
Management and oversight
Implementation
Execution
International domain
National domain
Fund Manager
Implementing Body
Executing Body
“Direct access” is widely understood as a short-hand term for developing countries directly accessing international public financing in order to implement national and local actions to address climate change. Direct access implies that the facilitation and project management function played by multilateral, international, and bilateral entities is not used to access international public finance, and instead this function is taken on by a national entity. Direct access to finance as a concept is applicable across both multilateral and bilateral financing.”
Multilateral access example: the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) and many other.
Direct access example: the Adaptation Fund direct access modality, “within the health sector the GAVI Alliance and Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria have delivered significant volumes of finance using this model.”
Enhanced access example: there are discussions about using this modality and approach shown on the slide is not agreed. As of today no major examples of enhanced direct access within the climate finance architecture.
See more on direct access to climate finance at:
Direct Access to Climate Finance: experiences and lessons learned. ODI, 2011
Enhanced access*:
Management and oversight
Implementation
Execution
International domain
National domain
Fund Oversight
Implementing Body
Executing Body
Fund Manager
* Approach shown on the slide is not agreed. There are discussions about using this modality, but no major examples in climate finance so far
Source: Direct access to climate finance: experiences and lessons learnt, ODI Discussion Paper, 2011

9. Direct Access as a prominent focus of international CF discussions
Which arguments are being mentioned for direct access?
Greater country ownership, oversight, and involvement
Stronger accountability
Reduced transaction costs
Faster delivery
Better targeting
Harmonization with national systems and strategies
Direct access support may not be the best choice of all countries. It is not a prerequisite, but rather additional option allowing countries to select the most suitable mechanism. Using multilateral or regional implementing entities can be equally effective.
 Feasibility of direct access under Adaptation Fund and Green Climate Fund deserves more detailed discussion…

10. Adaptation Fund

11. The Adaptation Fund
Objective – to finance concrete adaptation projects and programmes in developing countries that are parties to the Kyoto Protocol and are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.
Adaptation Fund timeline:
2001: established at COP 7 in Marrakech
2005: Kyoto Protocol enters into force
2007: created Adaptation Fund Board at COP 13 in Bali
2009: Fund operationalized at COP 15 in Copenhagen
2011: Germany conferred legal capacity to the Adaptation Fund Board
Resources:
2% of the sale of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Certified Emissions Reduction (CER) credits
Contributions from governments, the private sector, and individuals
$ 273 million pledged
$ 265 million signed
41 projects
…Additional resource mobilization ongoing
Countries with AF projects
Source:

12. Implementing Entities of the Adaptation Fund
Recognized by the AF Board as meeting the required fiduciary standards;
Overall management of the projects and programmes financed by the AF;
Bear all financial, monitoring and reporting responsibilities.
Multilaterial Implementing Entity (MIE)
multilateral institutions and regional development banks
National Implementing Entity (NIE)
National legal entities
Regional and Sub-regional Implementing Entities (RIE/SRIE)
Regional and sub-regional entities
Implementing Entities of the Adaptation Fund:
11 Multilateral (MIEs)
4 Regional (RIE)
16 National (NIEs)

13. Modalities for proposals submitted to the AF
Designated Authority (DA) endorses:
Accreditation of National, Regional or Sub-regional Implementing Entities
Projects/programs proposed by the implementing entities before they are submitted to AF
Direct Access
NIE
Endorsed by DA
RIE/SRIE
Regional access
Endorsed by DA
Designated Authorities  
The DA is a representative of the government who acts as the focal point for the Adaptation Fund. All applications for National Implementing Entities (NIEs) must be endorsed by a Designated Authority (DA). In the case of Regional Implementing Entities (RIEs), the endorsement letter should be signed by at least two DAs from the countries of the region.
Requirements for DA: An official (not an entity or organization) who works for the public administration of the country; must be communicated to the Adaptation Fund Board (AFB) secretariat by letter signed by a Minister, Secretary at cabinet level or Ambassador, preferably via . Does NOT require approval by the AFB
Endorsed by DA
MIE
Multilateral access
NIE – National Implementing Entity RIE – Regional Implementing Entity
SRIE – Sub-regional Implementing Entity MIE – Multilateral Implementing Entity
Source: Operational Policies and Guidelines for Parties to Access Resources from the Adaptation Fund
Template for Request for Project/Programme Funding from the Adaptation Fund

14. Modalities for AF proposal submission
Multilaterial Implementing Entity (MIE) accredited by the AF (selection):
Asian Development Bank (ADB)
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
World Food Programme (WFP)
World Bank
World Meteorological Organisation (WMO)
African Development Bank (AfDB)
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
See more details on MIEs at:
Source:

15. Modalities for AF proposal submission
Regional Implementing Entities (RIE):
Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP)
West African Development Bank (BOAD)
Observatoire du Sahara et du Sahel / Sahara and Sahel Observatory (OSS)
See more information about RIEs at:
Corporación Andina de Fomento (CAF)
Source:

16. Modalities for AF proposal submission
17 NIEs accredited by the AF:
National Environment Management Authority
Ministry of Natural Resources
Kenya
Rwanda
Centre de Suivi Ecologique
Centre de Suivi Ecologique, Senegal:
The Centre is an association subordinated to the Ministry of Environment and Conservation of Senegal
Task: collection, analysis and dissemination of data and information on natural resources in Senegal
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, India:
National Development Bank
Task: Promote sustainable agriculture and rural prosperity through effective credit support, institutional development and other innovative initiatives.
Ministry of Natural Resources, Rwanda:
- Objective: Ensure the protection and conservation of the environment and ensure optimal and rational utilization of natural resources for sustainable national development.
National Environment Management Authority, Kenya:
Semi Autonomous Government Agency (SAGA) in the Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources
Task: General supervision and coordination over all matters relating to the environment and principal instrument of Government for the implementation of all policies relating to environment
See full list of NIEs at:
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
Senegal
India
See full list of NIEs at:

17. Adaptation Fund direct access process
Designated Authority
Accreditation of National Implementing Entity (NIE)
Project or program identification
Project or program implementation
Evaluation
Select Designated Authority
Appointment procedure and replacement
Identify and endorse NIE
Prepare and submit application
Review process and Board decision on accreditation
Define national adaptation priorities
Identify project or programme
Submit proposal
Formulate concept
Prepare project or programme
Submit proposal
Approval
Disbursement
Reporting
M&E process in line with the Adaptation Fund requirements
“The accreditation process is just one step toward directly accessing resources from the Fund, with the next step being submissions for project support and implementation. The stages are linked; accreditation will have presumably laid the groundwork for effective project management by the accredited institution. Once accredited, all implementing entities that submit applications for funding will then identify priority interventions for projects that align with their national climate change strategies, and perform all supervisory, oversight, and implementation functions for those projects” (AF)
Direct process can be challenging for some countries and take some time until the actual funding for projects is provided. The accreditation process can take from 3 months up to one year. For Senegal, which had the first NIE accredited, it took only 6 moths after accreditation to get its project approved for funding. For Jamaica, it took 21 months. The average time from submission of a project proposal to its approval that go through the full two-step process was around 13 months in 2012 (ODI 2013).
See more on AF direct access at:
The Adaptation Fund and Direct Access, Adaptation Fund 2012
ODI, The effectiveness of climate finance: a review of the Adaptation Fund
Country experiences with the AF direct process:
Direct access to the Adaptation Fund: Lessons from accrediting NIEs in Jamaica and Senegal. CDKN, 2012
Source: The Adaptation Fund and Direct Access, Adaptation Fund 2012 More information:

18. Adaptation Fund Accreditation process for NIE
NIE accreditation process:
The Accreditation Panel assesses the application
The panel makes recommendation to the Fund Board
Submit an application for accreditation
Adaptation Fund Board takes the decision
3 months – 1 year
Key accreditation requirements:
Financial Integrity and Management
Institutional Capacity
Transparency, Self-Investigative Powers
Accreditation is valid for 5 years, and can be renewed, subject to review
Detailed Accreditation Requirements:
Financial Integrity and Management:
Accurately and regularly record transactions and balances in a manner that adheres to broadly accepted good practices, and are audited periodically by an independent firm or organization
Managing and disbursing funds efficiently and with safeguards to recipients on a timely basis
Producing forward looking financial plans and budgets
Legal status to contract with the Adaptation Fund and Board
Institutional Capacity:
Procurement procedures which provide for transparent practices, including competition.
Capacity to undertake monitoring and evaluation
Competency to manage or oversee the execution of the project/programme including ability to manage sub-recipients and support delivery and implementation delivery and implementation
Ability to identify, develop and appraise projects
Transparency, Self-Investigative powers:
Competence to deal with financial mismanagement and other forms of malpractice
Capacity to address complaints on environmental and social harms caused by projects/programmes
Source: NIE Accreditation Toolkit, Adaptation Fund 2014 More information:

19. Adaptation Fund Direct Access: success factors
Independence
Accountability Project Management
More autonomous entities have higher likelihood of accreditation. Only 2 out of 19 accredited NIEs are government ministries.
Full compliance with fiduciary standards are more important than having climate change activities as main focus of an applicant institution
Established and documented procedures for managing projects
Reputation as an accountable, transparent and trusted organization
Networks
Experience
Capacities
Engagement with stakeholders and established relationships with international organizations
Experience in accessing and channeling significant levels of development funding
Direct access accreditation enhances institution’s visibility, expertise and ability to attract funding from other sources Fast track GCF accreditation procedure for AF accredited entities
Additional success factors for NIE project development:
NIE only responsible for helping with decisions on potential projects, making formal applications , and channeling the funds to implementing organizations
Human resource management is critical to running the NIE. Option to create a separate office for NIE-related work
Creation of pools of experts can help to inform decisions about which adaptation projects should be prioritized or to improve the quality of project finance applications
Country’s ability to directly access international climate finance will depend to large extent on its institutional capacities. Process for accreditation and direct access can pose a challenge for some countries or institutions. Countries, which do not have sufficient capacities to develop and implement project proposals, will need to rely on international access and support from international implementing entities. Those with institutions fulfilling accreditation criteria for direct access, can have more ownership in managing and allocating funds.
For now, NIE have rather small share in total AF project portfolio. So far, out of 34 projects, funded by the AF, 29 were implemented by international implementing entities, and only 5 – by national or regional entities. Out of projects endorsed, 10 are to be implemented by the international entities, and 8 – by national, and 1 – by a regional implementing entity (AF, accessed See updates at and
See more lessons learnt and country examples at:
Direct access to the Adaptation Fund: Lessons from accrediting NIEs in Jamaica and Senegal. CDKN, 2012
Enhancing direct access to the Green Climate Fund. CDKN, 2013
NIE Accreditation Toolkit, Adaptation Fund 2014
Source: The Adaptation Fund and Direct Access, Adaptation Fund 2012 More information:

20. Green Climate Fund

21. Objectives and structure
Green Climate Fund (GCF) will “promote the paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate-resilient development pathways by providing support to developing countries to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change, taking into account the needs of those developing countries particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.” (GCF)
More details on the GCF:
The Green Climate Fund was designated as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC. It was created in 2010 at COP-16 in Cancun.
The Fund will contribute to the achievement of the ultimate objective of the UNFCCC.
The Fund will play a key role in channeling new, additional, adequate and predictable financial resources to developing countries and will catalyze climate finance, both public and private, and at the international and national levels.
The Fund will pursue a country-driven approach and promote and strengthen engagement at the country level through effective involvement of relevant institutions and stakeholders.
The Fund will strive to maximize the impact of its funding for adaptation and mitigation, and seek a balance between the two, while promoting environmental, social, economic and development co-benefits and taking a gender-sensitive approach.
The Fund will provide simplified and improved access to funding, including direct access, basing its activities on a country-driven approach and will encourage the involvement of relevant stakeholders, including vulnerable groups and addressing gender aspects.
The Fund is governed and supervised by a Board that will have full responsibility for funding decisions and that receives the guidance of the COP. The Fund established the Secretariat. The Fund has the Trustee with administrative competence to manage the financial assets of the Fund.
The Fund is located in Songdo, South Korea
The World Bank is the Fund’s Interim Trustee
Source: GCF Governing Instrument (
For further information see:
Source: GCF 2014
Climate Funds Update

22. GCF access modalities International access Direct access Enhanced:
IIE
NDA nominated
NDA nominated
RIE/ SRIE
Direct access
NIE
Enhanced:
under discussion
NDA – National Designated Authority
NIE – National Implementing Entity RIE – Regional Implementing Entity
SRIE – Sub-regional Implementing Entity IIE – International Implementing Entity

23. GCF access modalities
Executing Entities
Green Climate Fund
Accreditation
NDA
National Designated Authority
International access
Direct access
Designation
by developing
country
Transferring
funds
No-objection Procedure
Regional
Inter-national
National
Accredited Entity
Sub-national
National Designated Authority (NDA) with the mandate to officially communicate with the Fund.
fulfils an important function of representing the priorities and interests of the country in a clear and transparent manner
Accredited Entities: Countries can work through multiple entities (international, regional, national)
All entities, incl. international, regional, national and subnational entities, can apply for accreditation
Applicant entities must meet the Fund’s fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards (ESS)
101 NDA 14-04
National Designated Authority:
Acts as the focal point for the Fund communication
Recommends to the Board funding proposals in the context of national climate change strategies and plans, including through consultation processes
Facilitates the communication of nominations of entities to the Fund
Seeks to ensure consistency of funding proposals from national, subnational, regional and international intermediaries and implementing entities with national plans and strategies
Implement the no‐objection procedure
Can develop a strategic country work program on a periodic basis, that identifies priorities for the GCF and preferred implementing entities (optional)
96 initial National Designated Authority (NDA) or Focal Point designations as of 6 February 2015
Implementing enity:
Entities will be accredited with certain fiduciary functions, size of project/activity within a programme, and environmental risk category.
Fiduciary functions: shapes how the implementing entity or intermediary will operate using the Fund’s resources (e.g., grants, concessional loans, equity, guarantees)
Size of project/activity within a programme: micro, small, medium, large
Environmental and social risk category:
high risk Category A/ Intermediation I (I-1)
medium Category B/I-2
low/no Category C/I-3
Source: GCF/B.06/07
(accessed )

24. Role of National Designated Authority (NDA)
..Acts as the focal point for the Fund communication
..Recommends to the Board funding proposals in the context of national climate change strategies and plans, including through consultation processes
..Facilitates the communication of nominations of entities to the Fund
..Seeks to ensure consistency of funding proposals from national, subnational, regional and international intermediaries and implementing entities with national plans and strategies
..Implement the no‐objection procedure:“The Board will only consider funding proposals that are submitted with a formal letter of “no objection”, in accordance with the procedure approved in this decision.”
..Can develop a strategic country work program on a periodic basis, that identifies priorities for the GCF and preferred implementing entities (optional)
Source: GCF Decision B.04/05
GCF Decision B.07/03
Update on the Green Climate Fund’s Readiness and Preparatory Support Programme, July 2014

25. Initial guidelines for designating NDA or a focal point
Countries should have flexibility in the location, structure, operation and governance of NDAs or focal points
Likely to be placed within a ministry or authority conversant with the country’s national budget, economic policies and their interrelation with climate change- related priorities and development plans
The legal authority should be at a senior level and with a team responsible for
coordinating and driving communication with the Fund and
managing operational activities
Readiness funding for the establishment and operation of NDAs can be provided
Source: GCF Decision B.04/05

26. Accreditation procedure
Fast-track accreditation process
Institutions, which already successfully passed the accreditation process of either
the Global Environment Facility (GEF),
Adaptation Fund (AF) or the
Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation – EuropeAid of the European Commission (EU-DEVCO)
Fit-for-purpose-approach
applicants will only need to prove the fulfilment of those fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards which are necessary for the implementation of those projects the IE intends to carry out
Fast-track accreditation process
Institutions, which already successfully passed the accreditation process of either the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Adaptation Fund (AF) or the Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation – EuropeAid of the European Commission (EU-DEVCO), are eligible for the fast-track accreditation process of the GCF.
Those institutions do not have to follow the whole accreditation process, but only need to prove the fulfilment of those fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards that have not been assessed yet in the GEF-, AF, or EU-DEVCO-accreditation process.
Further, a fit-for-purpose-approach
applicants will only need to prove the fulfilment of those fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards which are necessary for the implementation of those projects the IE intends to carry out – depending on nature, risk and scale;

27. Accreditation procedure
Fit-for-purpose-approach
Accreditation procedure depending on nature, risk and scale of projects
Nature
Risk
Scale
Obligatory to all: basic fiduciary standards
Three categories:
Maximum total projected costs of the project:
Specialised fiduciary standards, applied to entities depending on the activities that will be undertaken:
(i) Project management;
(ii) Grant award and/or funding allocation mechanisms; and/or
(iii) On-lending and/or blending
High risk
Medium risk
Low or no risk
<USD10m
<USD50m
<USD250m
>USD250m
Nature:
All IEs will have to meet the basic fiduciary standards. For being accredited as intermediary, organizations will have to also fulfil specialized fiduciary, according to three different purposes:
(i) Project management;
(ii) Grant award and/or funding allocation mechanisms; and/or
(iii) On-lending and/or blending.
The risk of the implemented activities is subdivided into three categories:
Category A/Intermediation 1 (high risk): Activities with potential significant adverse environmental and/or social risks and/or impacts which are diverse, irreversible, or unprecedented.
Category B/Intermediation 2 (medium risk): Activities with potential mild adverse environmental and/or social risks and/or impacts that are few in number, generally site-specific, largely reversible, and readily addressed through mitigation measures;.
Category C/Intermediation 3 (low or no risk): Activities with minimal or no adverse environmental and/or social risks and/or impacts.
Scale: Applicants need to specify the maximum total projected costs of their projects. This refers to the grant total of project volume, incl. the GCF’s funding share, but also contributions by other donors. There are 4 different categories:
<USD10m | <USD50m | <USD250m | >USD250m

28. Accreditation process
Stage I: No-objection and readiness
- determining whether applicant entities show sufficient preparedness and institutional capabilities to progress to stage II in the accreditation process of the Fund
Stage II: Accreditation review and decision
- assessing whether applicant entities meet the Fund’s applicable initial basic fiduciary standards and applicable initial specialized fiduciary standards; and have the capacity to manage relevant environmental and social risks in line with the Fund’s interim ESS and scaled risk-based approach.
- making a decision on whether the applicant entity can be granted accreditation and move on to stage III for final validation and legal arrangements
Stage III: Final arrangements
- concluding the process through the validation and finalization of formal arrangements between the applicant entity
Full accreditation cycle should be completed within six months and reviewed after five years
Fast-track accreditation process possible for GEF, AF, EU DEVCO accredited implementing entities
Source: GCF decision B07/02, Annex I

29. Fiduciary standards and Environmental and Social Safeguards
See more details on the GCF fiduciary standards at
1. Basic fiduciary standards include:
1.1 Key administrative and financial capacities include the following elements:
General management and administrative capacities
Financial management and accounting
Internal and external audit
Control framework
Procurement
1.2. Transparency and accountability:
Code of ethics
Disclosure of conflict of interest
Capacity to prevent or deal with financial mismanagement and other forms of malpractice
Investigation function
Anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing
2. Specialized fiduciary standards include the following blocks:
2.1. Initial specialized fiduciary standards relating to project management
Project preparation and appraisal
Project oversight and control
Monitoring and evaluation
Project-at-risk systems and related project risk management capabilities
2.2. Grant award mechanisms
Transparent eligibility criteria and evaluation
Grant award decision and procedures
Public access to information on beneficiaries and results
Transparent allocation and implementation of financial resources
Good standing with regard to multilateral funding
2.3. On-lending and/or blending
Additional specialized criteria for on-lending and blending will apply for intermediaries and IEs that wish to use those financial instruments with the Fund’s resources
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.07/11, Annex I, II and III

30. First examples of IEs
Source: GCF

31. Global Environmental Facility

32. The Global Environmental Facility (I)
Objective – “help developing countries and economies in transition … to both mitigate and adapt to climate change, while enabling sustainable economic development” (GEF)
Mitigation
GEF Trust Fund
Eligibility: Country must be either eligible to borrow from the World Bank or an eligible recipient of UNDP technical assistance
Projects funded:
Energy efficiency
Renewable energy
Low-carbon transport
Land use and forestry
Capacity building
Mitigation
Adaptation
Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF)
Eligibility: all UNFCCC Non-Annex 1 countries; most vulnerable countries in Africa, Asia, and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are prioritized
Projects funded:
Adaptation, transfer of technologies, energy, transport, industry, agriculture, forestry, and waste management
Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF)
Eligibility: LDCs only
Preparation and implementation of NAPA
Adaptation
Applying to GEF Trust Fund:
Eligibility: Country must be either eligible to borrow from the World Bank or an eligible recipient of UNDP technical assistance.
Mostly grant-based: GEF can only offer finance in a form other than grants in accordance with criteria decided by COP.
Project criteria: see GEF Website (
Applying to SCCF funding:
Eligibility: all UNFCCC Non-Annex 1 countries; most vulnerable countries in Africa, Asia, and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are prioritised.
As requests exceed capitalisation, the following pre-selection criteria have been agreed:
Project or Program Quality
Balanced distribution of funds, emphasis on vulnerable non Annex I countries
Equitable regional distribution
Balanced support for all priority sectors
Balanced distribution among GEF agencies based on comparative advantage
Applying to LDCF funding:
Only LDCs are eligible. Proposals are reviewed in light of agreed project criteria informed by the UNFCCC:
Country ownership: projects concerns priority activity in the NAPA.
Program and policy conformity in terms of project design; sustainability, stakeholder involvement.
Financing plan developed, along with an assessment of cost-effectiveness.
Institutional coordination and support
Monitoring and evaluation
Project sizes:
Full-sized Projects (> $2m)
Medium-sized Projects (< $2m)
Enabling Activities (< $0.5m)
Programmatic Approaches ($5 - $150m)
Small Grants Programs (UNDP) (up to $50,000)
See more information on GEF project types and guidelines at:
Source:

33. Global Environmental Facility (II)
Access modalities:
Direct access (through accredited GEF Project Agency)
Multilateral access (through the GEF Agencies)
Project application process:
Throughout the year on a rolling basis
National institutions required:
Role
Direct Access
Multilateral Access
Country coordination:
GEF Operational focal point
GEF Operational focal point
Implementation:
GEF Operational focal point – member countries are required to choose focal points to coordinate, liaise, and communicate between the country and the GEF Secretariat and implementing agencies. They manage the operational aspects of GEF activities, including endorsement of project proposals, and facilitating GEF coordination, integration, and consultation at the country level. There are no prescriptive guidelines in the GEF about the selection of focal points, largely the country’s prerogative to select the most appropriate individual. The experience shows that most of the focal points reside in environment or finance ministries and area specific individual in that office with the required level of authority.
Implementation is delegated to GEF Partner Agencies, which include:
GEF Agencies - 10 institutions that were entitled to receive GEF Trust Fund resources directly as of November They include the following organizations: the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United Nations Development Program, United Nations Environment Program, and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
GEF Project Agencies – accredited institutions, entitled to work directly with the GEF Secretariat and Trustee to assist recipient countries in the preparation and implementation of GEF-financed projects, which will enable them to access resources from GEF-managed trust funds directly. The following types of entities will be eligible for accreditation:
National institutions
Regional organizations
Civil society organizations/non-governmental organizations
United Nations specialized agencies and programs
Other international organizations.
GEF Council is currently reviewing applications received in Not accepting further applications at this point.
Find out more on GEF project cycle, GEF Agencies and focal points at:
GEF Project Agencies
GEF Agencies
Execution:
End project promoters / recipients
End project promoters / recipients
Source:

34. Global Environmental Facility (III)
14 GEF Agencies
GEF Council is currently reviewing applications received in Not accepting further applications at this point.
See more at:
Source:

35. Summary Fund Direct Access Multilateral Access Green Climate Fund
Adaptation Fund
Global Environmental Facility / LDCF /
SCCF
Clean Technology Fund
Pilot Program for Climate Resilience
UK international Climate Fund

36. Key questions for discussion
How could the process of identifying and establishing a National Designated Authority (NDA) be organized in your country? Which actors need to be involved in this process?
What is the experience of your country with the international access via international implementing entities (e.g. GEF)?
How, if appropriate, could the process of identifying and establishing a National Implementing Entity (NIE) be organized in your country? Are there institutions which have the potential capacity to apply for NIE accreditation?

37. Thank you for your attention!!!

38. Adaptation Fund (http://www.adaptation-fund.org/)
Global Environmental Facility (
Green Climate Fund (
Brown, Clifford, Spearman, Within Reach. Strengthening Country Ownership and Accountability in Accessing Climate Finance. Working Paper. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute
CDKN Enhancing direct access to the Green Climate Fund
Frankfurt School - UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance, Key messages on direct access to international climate funds from participants of the NCFISP
Frankfurt School - UNEP Collaborating Centre for Climate & Sustainable Energy Finance, Direct access to international climate finance and associated fiduciary standards
Inter-American Development Bank, Climate Change and IDB: Building Resilience and Reducing Emissions
Inter-American Development Bank, Managing Environmental and Social Risks A Roadmap for National Development Banks in Latin America and the Caribbean
ODI Direct Access to Climate Finance: experiences and lessons learned. Discussion Paper
ODI The effectiveness of climate finance: a review of the Clean Technology Fund
WRI, Within Reach. Strengthening country ownership and accountability in accessing climate finance

39. BACK-UP

40. Elements of country ownership Current practices by countries
Typical gaps
Aligning climate finance with national strategies and priorities
Vesting decision-making responsibilities in national institutions
Using national systems for ensuring accountability in the use of climate finance
Taking ownership though national plans and priorities, e.g. climate change action plans or low-carbon strategies
Taking efforts to engage relevant stakeholders. Kenya: government initiated 20-month multi- stakeholder process to develop national climate change action plan
Reforming institutional arrangements and coordinating mechanisms, e.g. Salvador, Ghana, Guyana and other countries
Implementation cost is not estimated or integrated into national budget when such plans or strategies are developed
No clear priorities spelled out
Relevant stakeholders are not engaged, resulting in plans, not accounting for important considerations
Lack of strong leadership from key institutions
Overlap or unclear institutional mandates, poor coordination resulting in lack of leadership or conflicting policies
Limited expertise and capacity of key stakeholders in many developing countries
Poor track record of transparency and limited capacities impeding accessing international funding
“In Kenya for example, the government initiated a 20-month multi-stakeholder process to develop the national climate change action plan that was launched in March A senior-level task force composed of representatives from ministries, civil society, and the private sector oversaw the process. Multi-stakeholder technical working groups were responsible for each of the eight components of the strategy, with a ninth group in
charge of coordination” (WRI 2013)
“El Salvador, for example, recently established a Climate Change Committee that brings together ministries of finance, environment and natural resources, agriculture, public works and foreign affairs, as well as an Inter-
Institutional Committee for Climate Finance that brings together 20 ministries and autonomous institutions to coordinate matters related to climate finance. Ghana has established a National Climate Change Committee, which has a working group on finance. It also has a unit on natural resources, environment, and climate change within the Ministry of Finance that is responsible for mainstreaming climate change into the budgeting process. Guyana’s low-carbon development strategy mandated the establishment of a new Office of Climate Change to coordinate national climate change policy, and a Project Management Office to implement priority projects under the strategy, both housed within the Office of the President. It also established a multi-stakeholder steering committee with broad oversight over all aspects of climate change policy and low-carbon development. The steering committee includes representatives of all relevant government agencies, civil society (including indigenous peoples), and the private sector” (WRI 2013)
See more lessons learnt and recommendations in the WRI working paper:
Within reach. Strengthening country ownership and accountability in accessing climate finance. WRI 2013. (
Source: Within reach. Strengthening country ownership and accountability in accessing climate finance. WRI 2013.

41. Adaptation Fund structure
GEF interim secretariat
World Bank interim trustee
Board of 16 members elected by COP:
2 from each of the 5 UN regional groups
1 Small Island Developing State
1 Least Developed Country
2 Annex I Parties
2 non-Annex I Parties
Meets 3 times a year, usually in Bonn
Implementing Entities:
10 Multilateral (MIEs)
1 Regional (RIE)
15 National (NIEs)
Executing Entities implement project
Source: Adaptation Fund
* Regional Implementing Entity, Multilateral Implementing Entity, National Implementing Entity

42. Adaptation Fund direct access project cycle
Source: Adaptation Fund

43. Framework for direct access to climate finance
Why is direct access considered attractive?
Greater country ownership, oversight, and involvement
Stronger accountability
Reduced transaction costs
Faster delivery
Better targeting
Harmonization with national systems and strategies
Source: Enhancing direct access to the Green Climate Fund, CDKN 2013

44. Accreditations fees
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.08/45, Annex VI

45. Accreditation of Implementing Entities
IEs need to be endorsed by their National Designated Authority AND accredited by the GCF
All entities, including international, regional, national and subnational entities, can apply for accreditation
All The fit-for-purpose approach recognizes the role of a wide range of entities, which differ in the scope and nature of their activities, as well as their capacities
Applicant entities must meet the Fund’s fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards (ESS)
Fees for the application for accreditation will be paid by the entity at the time of submission of the application
Entities can apply on a rolling-basis, and the decision on accreditation will be taken by the Board at its meetings
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.08/45, Annex I

46. Accreditation: fit-to-purpose approach
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.08/45, Annex I

47. Sizes of projects / activities
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.08/45, Annex I

48. Environmental and social risk categories
Source: GCF decision GCF/B.08/45, Annex I