"Monitoring and Evaluation Officer Performance Indicators - DOC"
ANNEX B: MONITORING, PROGRESS REPORTING, AND EVALUATION PLAN Conservation and Sustainable Management of Below- Ground Biodiversity: Phase II The objective of monitoring and evaluation is to assist all project participants in assessing project performance and impact, with a view to maximizing both. Monitoring is the continuous or periodic review and surveillance by management of the implementation of an activity to ensure that all required actions are proceeding according to plan. Evaluation is a process for determining systematically and objectively the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and impact of the activities in light of their objectives. Ongoing evaluation is the analysis, during the implementation phase, of continuing relevance, efficiency and effectiveness and the present and likely future outputs, effects and impact. The general and specific objectives of the project, and the list of its planned outputs, have provided the basis for this M&E plan. The project will be evaluated on the basis of execution performance, output delivery, and project impact (outcomes per the project logframe.) Execution performance Execution monitoring will assess whether the management and supervision of project activities is efficient and seek to improve efficiencies when needed so as to improve overall effectiveness of project implementation. It is a continuous process, which will collect information about the execution of activities programmed in the annual workplan, advise on improvements in method and performance, and compare accomplished with programmed tasks (see Annex 2: Work Plan). This activity will be the direct responsibility of the Global Project Coordinator under the supervision of Steering Committee. See Table 1 for the execution performance indicators. The UNEP Project Management Officer (PMO) will, in collaboration with the Global Coordinating Office (GCO), track these indicators. Table 1: Indicators for Evaluating Whether Project Management Unit are Effectively Operational Indicator Means of Verification1 Semi-annual and annual activity and progress reports are prepared in a timely and Arrival of reports to UNEP satisfactory manner Quarterly expenditure reports are prepared in a timely and satisfactory manner. Arrival of reports to UNEP Performance targets, outputs, and outcomes are achieved as specified in the annual (Semi-) annual progress work plans. reports Deviations from the annual work plans are corrected promptly and appropriately. Work plans, minutes of PSC Requests for deviations from approved budgets are submitted in a timely fashion. meetings, timely submission of revised budget to UNEP for approval Disbursements are made on a timely basis, and procurement is achieved according IMIS system at UNEP and to the procurement plan. Bank Account statements of executing agency Report on the procurement of non-expendable equipment against the project budget filed in a timely manner. Inventory of Non- Expendable Equipment reports Audit reports and other reviews showing sound financial practices. Audit statements Project Steering Committee (PSC) is tracking implementation progress and project Minutes of PSC meetings impact, and providing guidance on annual workplans and fulfilling TOR. PAC is providing policy guidance, especially on achievement of project impact. Minutes of PAC meetings 1 The responsible officer to track this will be the GEF project task manager in consultation with the project coordinator. 1 Delivered outputs. Ongoing monitoring will assess the project’s success in producing each of the programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality. Internal assessment will be continuously, and by an annual project progress review, provided by the GPC and final evaluations of outputs will be carried out by external consultants contracted by UNEP. See Table 2 for a summary of expected outputs by project component, and the updated project workplan for Phase II (Annex 2) for a detailed list of project activities and corresponding outputs for phase one of the project. Table 2: Description and timing of expected outputs by project component Project Components Outputs (O) and Milestones (M) Outcome 1. Internationally accepted standard methods for characterisation and evaluation of BGBD, including a set of indicators for BGBD loss. 1.1. Standardized methods M Methods selected (mm: 09; yr: 01) 2 M Methods tested (mm: 12; yr: 01) O Methods documented (mm: 03; yr: 02) 1.2. Indicators agreed and tested and incorporated M Indicators BGBD loss agreed (mm: 06; yr: 02) into scientists research protocols M Indicators BGBD loss tested (mm: 12; yr: 02) O Validated indicators for BGBD loss (mm: 12; yr: 03) 1.3. Tools for the economic valuation of BGBD M Economic valuation workshop (mm: 02; yr: 01) enhancing BGBD visibility M Tools tested in case study (mm: 12; yr: 02) O Tools evaluated and documented (mm: 12; yr: 03) Outcome 2. Inventory of BGBD 2.1 Benchmark areas and sample areas M Benchmark sites and windows selected and established characterization creating land use gradients (mm: 06; yr: 01) knowledge and understanding O Interpretation of satellite imagery or aerial photos finalized and land use mapped (mm: 09; yr: 01) O Geographical database containing data on soils land use etc, established (mm: 12; yr: 01) 2.2. Inventory of BGBD creating better BGBD M Sampling frames established (mm: 08; yr: 01) understanding M Inventory of at least one of the benchmark area per country concluded (mm: 04; yr: 02) M Field data analysed and reported (mm: 08; yr: 02) O Data on inventory included in national and global database (mm: 10; yr: 04) 2.3. Soil health in benchmark area in relation to M Soil biological quality assessed in representative sites in BGBD evaluated each of the benchmark areas (mm: 04; yr 03) 2.4. Global Information Exchange Network M Network for information exchange established (mm: 10; yr: 02) M Data base design completed and implemented (mm: 03; yr: 03) O Database fully operable; data content accessible (mm:12; yr 04) Outcome 3. BGBD management practices 3.1 Characterize farm management and land and M land management, farm management, and crop crop management practices management practices characterised in the benchmark areas (mm: 03; yr 04) 3.2. Demonstration sites selected M Demonstration sites selected and farmers participation secured (mm: 06; yr: 04) M Management practices selected with farmer input (mm: 03; yr: 04) 2 The time for realisation of outputs or milestones is indicated by months (mm) and year (yr) after the start of the project based on a project duration as stated in the project document. That is, years 1, 2 and 3 refer to Phase I of the project and years 4 - 6 refer to the Phase II of the project. With extension of either phase the timeframe shifts accordingly. 2 3.2 Farmer management practices incorporating M Demonstration sites established and operational (mm: 08; BGBD management practices yr 04) O BGBD management results analysed and disseminated (mm: 12; yr 05) 3.3 Implement practices for BGBD management and M Demonstration plots successfully operational (mm: 06; yr conservation in pilot demonstration sites. 04) O Results obtained (mm: 06; yr 05) 3.4 Evaluate environmental benefits of BGBD M Demonstrations successfully accomplished (mm: 06; yr conservation and sustainable land-use management 05) O Results from demonstration sites extracted and evaluated (mm: 08; yr 05) Outcome 4. Policy advisory system 4.1 Policy obstacles identified presenting need for O Review of policies concluded (mm 12; yr 04) revisions in country BGBD policies O Review of international conventions with relevance to BGBD (mm: 12; yr 04) M Policy tools identified (mm 12; yr 04) 4.2. Policy negotiations initiated hence enhanced O Policy briefs published (mm 06; yr 05) land use management M Alternative land use system management incorporating BGBD recommended (mm 06; yr 05) O Decision support system for policy decisions initiated (yr 05 onwards) 4.3. Enhanced BGBD knowledge spreading to M BGBD knowledge out-scaled (yr 06 onwards) beneficiaries Outcome 5. Capacity building 5.1. Enhanced BGBD knowledge creating adoption M Specialist in country training activities in soil biology of BGBD management in land use practices conducted (yr 1 onwards) M Specialist training activities in special techniques and methods (yr 1 onwards) 5.2. Enhanced capacity ensuring continuity of O Research themes identified and proposals written (yr 1 outcomes onwards) 5.3. Enhanced awareness creating replication and O Poster and leaflets distributed, sensitisation workshop wider use of BGBD technologies conducted (yr 4 onwards) O Policy documents (yr 4 onwards) 3 Project impact. Evaluation of the project’s success in achieving its outcomes will be monitored continuously throughout the project through semi-annual progress reports, annual summary progress reports, an annual project progress review and final evaluation, all of which will use the project logframe as a monitoring, evaluation, and reporting tool (see Project Logframe in Annex 10B of the project documents). Table 3 presents the key performance indicators (slightly adapted from the indicators that have been identified in the approved project document). Table 3 List of Key Performance Indicators Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) Development By the end of the project, BGBD Conceptual framework for BGBD conservation Thematic papers presented in annual meeting 2005 Objective conservation practices identified, tested, not available at commencement. in Manaus will be synthesised in consultation with (project goal): implemented and made available to the farmers to consolidate a conceptual framework for Conservation and public. BGBD conservation strategies and the synthesis sustainable papers disseminated in community wokshops, management of farmers groups discussions, with nature below-ground conservators in seminars and by active biodiversity is demonstration of methodologies on the ground in enhanced. farmers plots and in nature reserves. How all conservation practices will be disseminated Capacity to manage and conserve Little capacity for BGBD identification, Participating scientists and students will be BGBD improved. taxonomy, management and conservation at subjected to training on BGBD isolation, commencement of the project in many of the identification, taxonomy, species multiplication, partner countries. species conservation, species management and BGBD processes in ecosystem and agricultural enhancement techniques using participatory learning methods and farmers knowledge networks as training and dissemination tools. How farmers will be trained, techniques? Purpose: A minimum of three improved Baseline data on BGBD and the associated Demonstration plots will be established in BGBD conserved ecosystem services (e.g., nutrient functions in different land use systems have farmers fields to expose the farmers on the and sustainably cycling, soil structure modification, been documented in phase 1 of the project and benefits of using BGBD in nutrients cycling, soil managed in crop nutrient capture enhancement, will be used to evaluate the final result. structure modification, vermicomposting, globally control of soil borne and pest diseases, phosphorous solubilization and release of crop significant forest carbon sequestration, etc.) uptake, and in entomology of soil borne and pest ecosystems in demonstrated in all the seven partner diseases and for carbon sequestration. seven tropical countries by 2008. Farmers do not use BGBD conservation Adoption studies taking consideration of culture, countries. BGBD practices at the moment. resources, climatic conditions, economic At least 20 farmers in each benchmark viability and use of BGBD will be carried out 4 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) area in each partner country adopt with farmers contributing to the demonstration BGBD conservation practices by 2008. plots and those of the surrounding farmers to enable the unravelling of the factors that drive farmers adoption decisions and the identified factors used to influence further spread and adoption of BGBD technologies and ideas derived from the project. Biodiversity threatened areas identified Inherent soil conditions, above ground and Each land use and/or vegetation will be and measures to conserve them put in below-ground biodiversity status that have characterized and both species richness and place by 2009 in the benchmark areas been characterized by end of phase 1 of the abundance used to determine acceptable of all the partner countries. project will determine the existing land use biodiversity status according to existing baselines. literature and knowledge as baseline. At least 2 interest groups in each of the There are NGOs, CBOs and other interest Surveys will be carried out by each partner partner countries and 2 interest groups groups working in the benchmark areas that country and the GCO to determine number of at the global level promoting/and or can be incorporated but are currently not partners working independently or directly with adopting alternative strategies for promoting BDGB management and ecosystem project farmers, NGOs, CBOs and and other conserving below ground biodiversity improvement practices. interest groups by 2008 and results reported in by 2008. semi-annual and/or annual reports. A BGBD project internet based BGBD global website is in place and Brazil Each website will have a counter that will information system operational and has the BiosBrazil web portal already in place. provide a sum of the number of hits since the providing links to other global Other partner countries are in the process of site was hosted. initiatives and national initiatives (i.e. designing and initiating their country websites Number of links with other biodiversity websites WEB portals and databases) and webportals. and initiatives to be enumerated for each country website by the GCO using a pre-prepared format after hosting of the global and country websites and a report prepared for each annual report. Statistics on evidence of data being downloaded BGBD website and internet based from the website or on specific visits onto database is being accessed by up to BGBD content pages to be obtained from inbuilt 10,000 hits per year. web-statistics counters on the sites and reported in the annual or semi-annual reports. Outcome 1 Methods for characterization and During BGBD inventory in phase 1 possible Individual scientists and teams of scientists to Internationally evaluation of BGBD available to global indicators of BGBD loss were identified but synchronise their BGBD inventory and land use accepted standard community by 2007. not yet quite confirmed. data to establish possible BGBD loss indicators. methods for 5 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) characterization Forests and less disturbed areas are and evaluation of At least three indicators for BGBD loss Inventory of BGBD in forests, less disturbed hypothesized to have highest diversity and BGBD, including tested, documented and being used by areas and pastures to form the baselines. species abundance and are proposed to be used a set of indicators at least 5 biophysical scientists in each by participating scientists as the reference for BGBD loss. of the partner countries. baselines to determine BGBD loss and results either published or reported in semi-annual or annual reports. Identified baselines and loss indicators have Individual scientists studying different BGBD BGBD loss indicators identified and not been published by the participating species will determine the species loss in any published in journals and being scientists niche and country synthesis to determine species accessed and used by at least 3 partner richness and /or loss of richness per land use, countries and other international niche or management type and present the scientists. findings in reports and published papers. Activity 1.1 Agreement on standard methods for Initially there were TSBF and ASB and other Lead scientists in the functional properties of Select, standardize inventory of BGBD across the partner scattered BGBD collection and isolation BGBD will be selected by the GC to collate and and test methods countries. methods in different documents and from discuss thematic BGBD inventory methods for characterizing Methods for sampling and where methods were obtained as baselines. using electronic mailing lists, discussion forums BGBD at characterization of BGBD applied and and other means to come up with agreed landscape and tested in each of the benchmark sites standard methods and achieve agreed project farm level (11). positions from the available TSBF and ASB baselines. Manual on standard methods for Evaluation reports of methods tested in inventory of BGBD published by 2007. benchmark sites in 7 countries. Evaluation reports of methods for BGBD characterization at farm and landscape level tested in the various benchmark areas Manual written Citation of articles on methods published by the BGBD (monitored yearly) How all these agreements will be reached , describe the process Activity 1.2 Understanding of below-ground Knowledge on the roles of BGBD on Individual scientists or groups of scientists will Identify and test biodiversity as indicator of soil quality ecosystem services though available to a few compare BGBD species data with land use and key indicator (s) (soil related ecosystem functions) scientists in the beginning was scanty and not other geographic niches’ data after a careful of BGBD loss improved through experiments in each shared by many scientists across the analytical process to determine trends and of the benchmark areas. continents. correlations and afterwards present their findings and recommendations and from the 6 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) Indicators for loss of BGBD tested Potential loss indicators have been identified analysis: across all benchmark areas. in phase 1 as baselines for the project but are Report on and test the indicators tested in all 7 still yet to be confirmed and documented. countries Publish results from experiments demonstrating importance of BGBD for different functions (e.g., decomposition , pest status) by comparative studies in each of the seven countries How the indicators will be identified. You are giving us results here- see the title of the column: How the results will be delivered? Activity 1.3 Guidelines for economic valuation of Few methods were available at beginning of A natural resource economist will conduct a Methods for BGBD established and applied in cases project to link BGBD with economic value participatory Ex-ante analysis in the benchmark evaluating the studies in each of the country indicators for maximum utilization. areas to determine economic endowment, economic (and programmes demonstrating economic climatic opportunities and constraints, cash- livelihood) benefits derived from management of flow, agricultural production constraints, benefits of BGBD BGBD. economic opportunities and the place of BGBD for stakeholders in the potential exploitation equation together (at local, national with the participating scientists, conservationists Valuation manual written and made and farmers in each partner country to determine and global scales) available globally. economic value and potential environmental opportunity of different BGBD species and technologies. How? Methodology, process? Reports on case studies on value of BGBD under different conditions at selected sites presented annually. Manual on valuation of BGBD written. Paper published by the involved scientists. Outcome 2a) Inventory and evaluation of BGBD in The partner countries and the GCO had no Benchmark sites will be characterised and Inventory and the benchmark sites added to existing databases at commencement of the project. documented in each country during phase 1 of evaluation of databases. the project and reported as projecy documents. BGBD in Databases and information systems Inventories of BGBD in the benchmark sites benchmark sites installed and functional in all the seven will be carried out and published during phase 1 representing a countries and accessed nationally and of the project. range of globally internationally by at least 100 queries The benchmark characteristics and the species significant per year. data will be entered into spreadsheets and ecosystems and prototype country databases. 7 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) land uses. Outcome 2b) A global information exchange network for BGBD. Activity 2.1 Comparative description of the There was little general description of the Benchmark sites in each of the partner countries Land-use mapping benchmark areas of the project in terms benchmark areas before the commencement will be characterised in terms of land use, soils, of benchmark of the ecosystem characteristics, socio- of the project. climate, socio-economic factors, geology and areas economic characteristics and lands use agricultural management and documented during (including land use intensity) made phase 1 of the project. Methods to include: available by 2005 by using: Satellite imagery and aerial photographs Satellite imagery and aerial interpretation, photographs. land use and land management characterization Agreed sampling locations. plus maps soil profiles and maps published Ground truthing of land use categories. Data entered into the project Websites and Digital databases. databases. Land use intensities. Activity 2.2 Planned sample collection completed There was no established relationship on the A quantitative analysis will be carried out on the Apply agreed and characterized samples analyzed link between BGBD and land use intensity link between land use intensity and BGBD and methods for using agreed methods. until end of the inventory in phase 1 of the from the analysis; it will be possible to relate BGBD Loss of BGBD in relation to land use project. land use intensity and other variables to BGBD characterization to intensity established by 2006, for each loss. This will be achieved by engaging the full range of land- of the benchmark areas. services of a consultant in land use use intensities in intensity/landscape systems analyst to work each of the together with the partner country scientists. benchmark areas Activity 2.3. Soil (biological) quality assessed for Initially there were little data on soil Soil productivity, pest presence including the representative sites in each of the organisms for the representative sites in the presence of harmful BGBD will be evaluated Soil health in benchmark areas. benchmark areas. against the occurring BGBD and remedial benchmark area in measures to restore soil health using BGBD relation to BGBD Planned sample collection completed management strategies taken. evaluated and characterized samples analysed using agreed methods. Activity 2.4 WEB portal (or WEB site) established None of the partner countries had established Information systems to be established where websites within the context of the BGBD data will be entered, stored and exchanged 8 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) Information on by (or for) each of the BGBD country project. among participating scientists and the general BGBD in relation programmes by 2008. The global website was developed after public including farmers and other ecologists. to land use freely Links established with 4 WEB sites (or commencement of project during phase 1 of Inventory and demonstration data will be available portals) associated with initiatives of implementation. presented in many formats and languages international stature, dealing with targeting different audiences considered to be biodiversity or sustainable land direct beneficiaries of the project outputs. management. Outcome 3 At least three demonstrations sites per There are no demonstration sites currently Demonstration sites will be selected in a Sustainable and country contributing to sustained existing in all the benchmark areas of the participatory process with the farmers and replicable conservation of diverse land uses in partner countries. ecosystem managers while taking care of management each of the partner countries by 2008. environmental and economic conditions to practices for At least 20% of the farmers demonstrate ecosystems and agricultural BGBD demonstrated to taking up knowledge production systems management using BGBD conservation on BGBD technologies. manipulation and conservation techniques. identified and implemented in pilot demonstration sites in representative tropical landscapes in the seven countries. Activity 3.1 Socio-economic conditions in each of Socio economic survey was conducted in Socio-economic scientists in each participating Characterize farm the benchmark areas established by phase 1 of the project and the current socio- country together with the GCO socio-cultural management and 2005 economic status of the communities has been consultant and natural resource economics land and crop Land an crop management practices established. consultant will analyse jointly with the country management documented for each of the benchmark Land and crop management data was collected scientists and prioritize thematic areas to be practices areas by the end of 2005 in phase 1 though BGBD awareness addressed by the project in order to achieve campaigns have been few. maximum benefits and impacts of the project Stakeholder awareness on BGBD outcomes before embarking on phase two documented in 6 benchmark areas by implementation in 2006. 2005. Activity 3.2 Management options and intervention So far, there is scanty documentation of Individual scientists through experimentation Select and strategies identified for each of the environmental benefits of BGBD and how and research on environmental services will evaluate benchmark areas. they should be managed and sustained in determine the most appropriate BGBD management Agreement with stakeholders on site ecosystems and in farming systems to act as management protocols and conservation 9 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) practices for selection, intervention and project guidelines and BGBD baseline management methods and from these: BGBD planning by March 2006 methods. Reach agreements with stakeholders, sign them conservation At least two demonstration sites and forwardto the implement agencies and selected per benchmark area (local) authorities. Select demonstration sites Document success of management through publications, photos and video recordings. Again these are results Activity 3.3 At least two demonstration sites No project related demonstration sites exist in Each of the partner countries will in a Implement established by 2006, and at least two any of the partner country benchmark areas. participatory process with conservationists, practices for demonstration sites still operational by communities and farmers identify thematic BGBD in 2007. problem areas to be addressed and collective management and Field days and stakeholder meeting joint action select demonstration sites. conservation in held. pilot demonstration sites. Activity 3.4 Assessment of economic, social and There is existing body of knowledge of An economist consultant will be involved by the Evaluate environmental cost and benefits of potential benefits of BGBD conservation and GCO to coordinate this activity and work with environmental improved management of BGBD their relevance in farming and ecosystem the partner countries to determine the benefits of BGBD across scales for different stakeholders services. More of these will be exploited environmental benefits of BGBD including conservation and for each country programme completed during phase two with joint experimentation designing methods and mechanisms to pass on sustainable land- by 2008. with the farmers and conservationists. the benefits to the beneficiaries. use management. Synthesis of national analyses to assess global perspective (s) 10 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) Outcome 4 Recommendations that support BGBD Currently only Brazil has biodiversity policy Each partner countries will engage a policy Recommendations conservation are made available for mainstreamed in their legislation though some analyst to study and highlight BGBD policy of alternative land land-use policy decision makers in the issues on BGBD and community participation gaps and thereafter find mechanisms of use practices and partner countries before 2009. still need to be tackled. involving policy makers and politicians in the an advisory In at least three partner countries process so that the identified gaps and/or areas support system for agreements reached with policy makers can be addressed. policies that will on policy issues that ensure the enhance the implementation of alternative conservation of management practices that conserve BGBD. BGBD and ecosystems at local and national levels. Activity 4.1 Development scenarios formulated and Currently none of the partner countries has Partner countries to study BGBD policy gaps in Scenario analyses analyzed for impact on BGBD for each produced comprehensive analysis of BGBD relation to the CBD, role of the farmer, role of and policy of the benchmark areas. policies in relation to country positions and the scientists, role of the biodiversity institutions evaluation for Gaps in existing national policies actions. and role of regional government in BGBD conservation of regarding the conservation and management and conservation and thereby come BGBD management of BGBD identified for up with: each of the BGBD countries Reports of consultative meetings. Policy briefs. Synthesis of national policy analyses. Memoranda, land management guidelines issued Possible social and cultural barriers. Possible economic barriers. Global analysis/synthesis. Activity 4.2 Effective institutional linkages Currently there is little analysis of institutional Discussed and agreed upon national action plans established with government bodies or relevance in as far as BGBD use, collection, presented within each country at the relevant Negotiate institutions that deal with policy transfer, trade, ownership, IPR, etc and links administrative level alternative analyses or policy formulation with the CBD and BGBD policies in the International conventions recognize the strategies for partner countries to enhance BGBD importance of conservation of BGBD and reflect BGBD Conduct stakeholder workshops at each conservation. the same in action plans developed and by conservation and benchmark area to address land use sustainable land- policies related to biodiversity and Likewise there is little documented knowledge adopted articles in conventions or associated on how to sustain land use systems by documents use management sustainable agricultural production. incorporating BGBD knowledge into BGBD project is consulted on, creates ecosystems and land use management awareness for, or advocates policies regimes. for, conservation and sustainable management of BGBD 11 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) Activity 4.3 Demonstration sites secured for at least Due to the stage of project implementation, Project teams in each country to hold meetings Propose actions another three years by the end of the there is still lack in the analysis and and workshops with stakeholders to present their and policies at programme at least for one benchmark recommendation of actionable outputs that findings and recommendations and therby get local and national area by each of the country can be passed on to policy makers. feedback from the stakeholders and jointly scales programmes. .3come up with a road map and action plans to Propose amendments on BGBD to achieve the agreed upon decisions. existing action (or investment) plans addressing biodiversity conservation and sustainable agricultural production. Outcome 5 At least 80 well trained partner Very few scientists were at commencement of GCO and partner countries to carry out Improved capacity scientists, farmers and NGOs the project working with farmers and independent farmers, NGOs, and of all relevant promoting BGBD technologies and communities to promote BGBD conservation conservationists surveys by 2007 in the partner institutions and knowledge in the partner countries by and ecosystem services. countries benchmark areas and a wider range of stakeholders to 2009. stakeholders to determine level of scientific implement involvement in BGBD management with the BGBD research and management Though biodiversity policies exists in many of farmers, NGOs, conservationists and other conservation and capacity institutionalized in scientific the countries out of Agenda 21 deliberations in management of institutions in participating countries by government agencies to determine the Rio, BGBD and their role in land use stakeholders evaluation of scientific competence BGBD in a 2007. management and conservation is not sustainable and and information dissemination and thereby: Policy makers using BGBD mainstreamed in many of them. efficient manner. information to revise country policies GCO and partner countries to present in annual in at least 3 countries by 2008. or semi-annual project reports the number of scientists working on projects with the farmers and other conservationists. GCO and partner countries to document the number of other new projects stemming from the efforts of the BGBD project and number of BGBD project scientists and students working in those projects. How the capacity will be approved Activity 5.1 By the end of the project at least 150 GCO and partner countries to carry out Enhance capacity persons belonging to university staff, independent farmers, NGOs, and in disciplines national research organisations etc. conservationists surveys by 2007 in the partner identified as trained on technical mattes in short countries benchmark areas and a wider range of lacking in term (international) training courses. stakeholders to determine level of scientific cooperating involvement in BGBD management with the 12 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) countries By the end of the project 100 students farmers, NGOs, conservationists and other trained on topics related to government agencies to determine the conservation and sustainable stakeholders evaluation of scientific competence management of BGBD. and information dissemination and thereby: Training events and sensitisation Project to enumerate number of scientists, workshop conducted at the benchmark farmers and NGOs trained on BGBD during areas to improve capacity of farmers, project life-span since only subject matter extension workers and NGOs to specialists were in place when the project interpret and apply information on commenced. BGBD, as a collaborative effort of Specialist training activities in soil biology and stakeholders. related fields held (south-south and north-south) conducted by both the partner countries and the GCO. Staffing levels for soil biology and related disciplines to be reported at the beginning and at the end of the project period. Workshops, farmer field schools and other involving farmers, community representatives and local government representatives. National networks established between NARC, NGO’s, local governments and farmers’ organisations Networks established internationally between research institutes Activity 5.2 At least one stakeholder workshops Only three of the partner countries have held GCO to conduct electronic surveys to all Enhanced conducted for each of the benchmark stakeholder workshops. participating scientists and an independent list of awareness and sites, involving stakeholders from local Only Mexico, Kenya and Indonesia have beneficiaries in each country to determine the knowledge of to national (and international) level. disseminated brochures of the project though level of BGBD knowledge infusion to the BGBD and its selected list as a result of: Project document and outputs Kenya and Mexico to a limited extent. functions among Poster and leaflets distributed by both the distributed through established network No network of beneficiary institutions or partner countries and the GCO. stakeholders from of persons, institutions and organisation individuals has been compiled by the partner farmers to national Survey of dissemination rates during the second dealing conservation of natural countries. planners phase of the project mainly. resources and sustainable agricultural The GCO has prepared a comprehensive list production. Review of policy documents (see outcome 4) of beneficiary institutions and individuals. and evaluation by both the partner countries and Publication of scientific reports and the GCO of the utilization of decision support papers, representation of the BGBD 13 Intervention Indicators of Performance Baseline (if baseline is not known, please Method of data collection/data collection strategy Logic identify how and when baseline will be including frequency established) project at international scientific tools developed by the project. conferences. Knowledge of soil biota and its Again the same – you these are results management disseminated to farmers, extensionists and NGOs Decision-makers utilise soil biodiversity information in national and regional plans. 14 Table 4: Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation Responsibilities Add here task forces – make columns more narrow This table summarizes the responsibilities of the project management entities regarding monitoring and reporting 3. UNEP Global Coordinating Country Programme Country programme National programme Advisory Project Advisory Committee Project Office (GCO) Coordinating Office (CPCO) Implementing Committee Committee (NPAC) Steering (PIC) Committee Monitor the agreed Establish reporting Establish reporting guidelines Discuss, develop and implement Oversee and provide overall Receive annual summary Receive semi-annual progress M&E plan in guidelines for all partners for all the country partners in the country logframe, worplan and guidance for country project progress reports, and all reports, annual summary accordance with the in the project and ensure project and ensure that they monitoring and evaluation plan implementation. substantive reports, and provide progress reports, and all terms of agreement with that they meet reporting meet reporting dates and provide based on the global workplan policy guidance to the project on substantive reports, and GEFSEC dates and provide reports reports of suitable quality. and activities. any matters arising from a provide policy guidance to of suitable quality Receive annual summary reading of these reports the project on any matters Prepare semi-annual progress progress reports, and all arising from a reading of Receive semi- Ensure timeliness of activities substantive reports, and provide annual progress and Prepare semi-annual reports and annual summary Provide overall guidance for the these reports progress reports and progress reports for the GCO, and acquisition of results as policy guidance to the project on annual summary indicated in the country any matters arising from a project implementation. progress reports, annual summary progress and forward substantive and The PSC has the reports for UNEP, and quarterly financial reports, with workplans. reading of these reports responsibility and authority to quarterly financial Individual members of the PAC reports and copies forward substantive and supporting documentation as make decisions concerning quarterly financial reports, appropriate, in a timely manner will be available to assist in all aspects of project of all substantive The CIC will include a selection The NPAC will include high writing or reviewing major reports from Project with supporting to the GCO. of lead scientists participating in level representatives from each management and documentation as reports or documents with implementation. Co-ordinator. the project in the partner partner institute to build strong possible policy implications, appropriate, in a timely Implement project activities at countries partnerships among national manner to UNEP. the project benchmark sites and whether reports to GEF or other. The PSC will hold an Annual Project Management agencies Officer to attend and demonstration plots and provide Meeting to review project participate fully in Carry out a programme of regular progress and final progress and to plan for the meetings of the project regular visits to project reports. The PAC will include high level following year. UNEP- Steering Committee sites to supervise representatives from each Project Management Officer activities, and pay special partner countries to build strong and at least two members of Project Management attention to those sites partnerships among national the PAC will also attend the Officer to conduct with serious agencies Annual Meeting in their annual supervision implementation problems oversight capacity. missions—on an as needed basis-- with The PSC will review the member(s) of the GCO work done by the Working to selected project sites Groups. and identifies implementation problems and suggests remedies to annual meeting of the Steering Committee. Engage and prepare terms of reference for 3 The Project management and implementation arrangements are described in Annex N 15 independent M&E consultants to conduct the mid-term and final evaluations Facilitate the selective review of the project by STAP (as appropriate) Carry out other monitoring as is determined in collaboration with the project Steering Committee. Notes for Table 4: The Global Coordinating Office at global level consists of: the global project coordinator assisted by supporting staff consisting of the project information manager. project admnistrator, secretary and data analyst/research assistant The Project Advisory Committee consists of: representatives (7) from each of the participating countries nominated by the country team but not part of the country partners and six members representing international organisations (FAO, ICRAF, University of East Anglia, Colorado State University,) or the larger international programmes (The World Conservation Union, International Union for Nature Conservation-IUCN) all with relevance to the subject of (belowground) biodiversity, conservation and agriculture. The Project Steering Committee will consists of: the conveners of the country programmes, with addition of the Project Management Officer,UNEP/GEF and the director of TSBF. The National Project Advisory Committee (NPAC) will consist of higher level representatives of the institutions participating in the project in addition to representatives from the Ministry of Agriculture/natural resources or nature conservation if they are not represented among the participating institutes. The Country Programme Implementing Committee (CPIC) will consist of scientific representatives of the institutions participating in the project taking lead positions in specific areas of the project execution. The Country Programme Coordinating Office (CPCO) will consist of country project convener CPC or (or country director in case the CPC cannot dedicate a minimum of 50% of his/her time to project activities in which case the executing institution has to appoint a project coordinator with powers to make decisions), a financial officer, an information manager, a data analyst, and a secretary Monitoring and progress reports The project will be subject to annual progress review (APR) at least once every 12 months by representatives of TSBF-CIAT, UNEP and partner countries, and wherever necessary extraordinary progress review meetings may be organised. In order to maintain objectivity of the progress review and to supplement the expertise needed for the review, external expert(s) may be invited to participate. The APR will be organised in conjunction with either the project steering committee (PSC) meetings or Project Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings. The reports emanating from the review meetings will be used to modify and improve the orientation and performance of the project 16 implementation. When the project is judged to be at risk by the APR, UNEP Project Management Officer will submit the report to UNEP/GEF Divisional Review and Oversight Committee (DROC), and until a risk flag is lifted, reports will be continuously submitted to DROC for its policy guidance on the overall direction of the project implementation. The GCO (TSBF-CIAT) shall prepare and submit to each progress review meeting an Annual Progress Report in line with the Project Implementation Review conducted by UNEP. This will ensure that design and inception activities are closely monitored and modification to the project plan can be made in time. Any other additional Project Reports and substantive reports will be submitted to UNEP for their agreements prior to their finalisation. The following table describes reports and their content to be used for project implementation monitoring: Table 5. Progress reporting Report Format and Content Timing Responsibility Progress Reports Document the completion of Reports will use standard UNEP Half-yearly, within 30 Global planned activities, and describe Progress Report format. days of end of each Coordination progress in relation to the annual reporting period, Office operating/work plan. The project logframe will be attached Review any implementation to each report and progress reported problems that impact on against outcome and output performance indicators. Summary of problems and proposed action Provide adequate substantive data outcomes for inclusion in consolidated project quarterly and annual progress reports Highlights of achievements The Project Implementation Review Per GEFSEC format Yearly (after project UNEP Project (PIR) reports has been under Management implementation for Officer one year) Consolidated Annual Summary Progress Reports Presents a consolidated summary Reports will use a standard format to Yearly, within 45 Global review of progress in the project as a be developed following the UNEP days of end of the Coordination 17 whole, in each of its activities and in Progress Report model reporting period Office each output The project logframe will be attached Provides summary review and to each report and progress reported assessment of progress under each against outcome and output activity set out in the annual indicators. workplan, highlighting significant A consolidated summary of the half- results and progress toward yearly reports achievement of the overall work programme Summary of progress and of all project activities Provides a general source of information, used in all general Description of progress under each project reporting activity and in each output Review of delays and problems, and of action proposed to deal with these Review of plans for the following period, with report on progress under each heading Financial reports Report on confinancing that has Use Annex 3 with supporting Annual Global been provided to project as documentation of realised Coordination originally estimated in project cofinancing Office proposal approved by GEF Co-Financial reports Details project expenses and The required format is provided in Quarterly Global disbursements Table 7 Coordination Office Disbursements and expenses in categories and format as set out in standard UNEP format, together with supporting documents as necessary Financial audits Annual audit Audit of accounts for project Annual UNEP Project management and expenditures Management Officer 18 Table 6. Principal Reports by title, number, timing and responsibility This table refers to monitoring the quality of the technical reports that the project will be producing as primary outputs. The project management unit will provide a standardized format for these reports as soon as possible. Report, number and title Format and Expected date Responsibility4 Content CSM-BGBD 04-1 Content will follow March 2004 GCO Reports to be approved by Synthesis of reviews of below-ground-biodiversity in the seven guidelines provided by Peer Reviewers and PSC tropical countries Project Management Unit and approved by Project Steering Committee. CSM-BGBD 05-2 As above April 2005 Professor F. Moreira, Professor Standard methods for the inventory of soil biodiversity, site David Bignel, Individual description and land use practice Contributors and the GCO to approve do not use names CSM-BGBD 05-3 As above April 2005 Country Programme (CP) Below-ground biodiversity in the Lampung and Jambi benchmark Indonesia (through their convener areas, Sumatra Indonesia – CPC). Project reports to be approved by PAC and PSC CSM-BGBD 05-4 As above April 2005 CP Uganda (through CPC Below-ground biodiversity in the South-Busoga and Mabira Forest Uganda). Reports to be approved Benchmark areas, Uganda. by PAC and PSC CSM-BGBD 05-5 As above April 2005 CP Kenya through CPC Kenya. Below-ground biodiversity in the Embu and Taïta Hills benchmark Reports to be approved by PAC areas, Kenya. and PSC CSM-BGBD 04-6 As above April 2005 CP Côte d’Ivoire through CPC. Below-ground biodiversity in the Oumé and Taï National park Reports to be approved by PAC Benchmark areas, Côte d’Ivoire and PSC CSM-BGBD 04-7 As above April 2005 CP India through CPC India. Below-ground biodiversity in the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve Reports to be approved by PAC and Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve Benchmark areas, India and PSC CSM-BGBD 04-8 As above April 2005 CP Mexico through CPC Mexico. Below-ground biodiversity in the Los Tuxtlas and Calakmul Reports to be approved by PAC benchmark areas, Mexico and PSC CSM-BGBD 04-9 As above April 2005 CP Brazil through CPC Brazil. 4 Country programmes are denoted by CP and the convener of the country programmes as CPC. 19 Below-ground biodiversity in the Benjamin Constant benchmark Report to be approved by PAC area, Amazon, Brazil and PSC CSM-BGBD 05-11 As above December 2005 Task Force on synthesis of Impact on land use on below-ground biodiversity and indicators of inventory results and GCO. BGBD loss. Reports to be approved by PAC and PSC CSM-BGBD 04-12 As above December 2006 GCO and Country Project Economic valuation of BGBD: report of case studies Conveners We have task force for this! CSM-BGBD 06-01 As above April 2006 GCO and Country Project Below-ground biodiversity in benchmark areas across eco-regions Conveners of importance: Summary and Synthesis SM-BGBD 06-02 AS above December 2006 Task force Methods for economic valuation of the BGBD CSM-BGBD 08-01 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Brasil country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-02 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Brasil country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-03 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Cote d”Ivoire country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-04 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD India country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-05 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Indonesia country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-06 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of 20 BGBD; report from BGBD Kenya country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-07 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Mexico country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08-08 As above December 2007 Country Project Conveners Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; report from BGBD Uganda country project on demonstration sites CSM-BGBD 08_09 Enhanced ecosystem services through improved management of BGBD; Synthesis report CSM-BGBD 08-10_ As above December 2007 GCO and Country Project Role of Policy in BGBD conservation and management: A Global Conveners Synthesis 21 22