The main purpose of the evaluation is to assess whether and how GEF support delivered under the programmatic approaches modality has delivered the expected results in terms of global environmental benefits while addressing the main drivers of global environmental change.
Guidelines for GEF Agencies in Conducting Terminal Evaluation for Full-sized Projects provide information to the GEF Agencies and evaluators on how they should conduct terminal evaluations for completed full sized projects funded by the GEF. The guidelines expand on the minimum requirement 3 of the M&E Policy (2010) which covers evaluation of completed projects and programs.
The objectives of the KM study are to assess the role of the GEF as a knowledge broker and provider, and the relevance and effectiveness of knowledge management and sharing across the GEF partnership. The overall purpose is to identify any eventual systemic issues that need to be addressed in planning for GEF-7.
Scope and Key Questions
Building on the conspicuous body of available evaluative evidence, the study will look at KM in the GEF in the period since the start of GEF-5 in 2009 to date. The following are the main questions the study will aim to answer:
This study looks at the GEF’s comparative advantage, the adequacy of donor funding, and the overall health of the GEF partnership.
More than 10 years since the last climate change focal area study, the GEF IEO is looking at the relevance, results, and performance of GEF climate change support.
The purpose of this study is to provide insights and lessons for GEF-7 based on evidence from an analysis of the climate change portfolio, terminal evaluations of completed projects, mapping of convention guidance to the GEF-6 strategy and programming, interviews with stakeholders, and case studies.
Twenty years since the GEF Council incorporated nongrant instruments in the Strategy, the IEO undertakes a comprehensive study of the nongrant portfolio.
Remote sensing and geospatial methods are useful, innovative tools for measuring environmental impact. They provide reliable and cost-effective baseline information, help detect changes over time, and track progress toward the achievement of convention targets.
To measure the impacts of Global Environment Facility (GEF) interventions, the GEF Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) has utilized remote sensing across focal areas including biodiversity, land degradation, and international waters.
During the GEF-5 replenishment negotiations it was agreed that, within the framework of paragraph 28 of the GEF Instrument, the GEF partnership needs to be broadened further to enhance country ownership in the GEF operation and to provide recipient countries greater choice in terms of agencies with which they work. At the request of GEF Council, GEF Independent Evaluation Office (GEF IEO) conducted a Process Evaluation of the Expansion of the GEF Partnership to assess the design, transparency and efficiency related aspects of the accreditation process.
Multiple benefits generated through GEF support consist of two types: the global environmental benefits (GEBs) that contribute towards achieving the strategic priorities of multiple focal areas, and the local environmental and socioeconomic benefits that indirectly generate and sustain the GEBs. One way that GEF has sought to create multiple benefits in a more integrated manner is through multi-focal area (MFA) projects. These projects are funded through allocations from different global environmental conventions and/ or trust funds, and track indicators specific to each focal area.
As part of its work program for the sixth replenishment phase of the GEF (GEF-6), and feeding into the Sixth Comprehensive Evaluation of the GEF (OPS6), the IEO has been tasked to review the GEF Integrated Approach Pilot (IAP) Program being implemented in GEF-6, and developed building on the GEF past experience in designing and implementing programmatic approaches. This program is composed of three pilots: