Response to
GEF Secretariat Review Sheet for Full/Medium-sized Projects
Country/Region: Liberia
Project Title: Liberia: Enhancing Resilience to Climate Change by Mainstreaming Adaption Concerns into Agricultural Sector Development in
Liberia
GEFSEC Project ID : 4268
GEF Agenc(ies) : UNDP
Anticipated project financing ($) : PPG : $ 75,000 GEF Project Grant : $ 1,016,460
Total Project Cost : $ 9,717,982
Program Manager : Knut Sundstrom
GEF Agency Contact Person : Tom Twining-Ward
Questions by GEF
Secretariat
7. Is the project
design sound, its
framework consistent
& sufficiently clear (in
particular for the
outputs)?
Comment by GEF Secretariat
July 25, 2011
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (i)
Please clarify the linkages
between the outcomes and
outputs; (ii) ensure consistency
across all documentation,
especially in the number and
description of project outcomes
and outputs; (iii) clarify
indicative activities to ensure
that there is not duplication; (iv)
in absence of Outcome 3,
consider concentrating
knowledge management and
communications activities
under the same output, or at
least outcome, and ensure that
such activities contribute to the
relevant outcome.
July 25, 2011
Response by Proponents
(i) Addressed especially through the below; i.e. more clearly distinguishing and providing
additionally arguments for output 2.4 vis-à-vis 1.1. (See pages 23/24 of CEO
Endorsement).
(ii) Fully edited; output 1.4 removed from section B2; reference to outcome 3 removed
throughout, including in Part I, H the M&E framework. All references to three
demonstration sites/counties removed. (See pages 2, 6, 16, 30 of CEO
Endorsement).
(iii) Indicative activities cross-checked. Duplications in outputs 1.1. and 2.4 addressed by
making it more explicit that the purpose of output 2.4 is to ensure that the
adaptation learning from the demonstration sites will be documented and
communicated “upwards” to facilitate bottom up and evidence based CRM/CCA
policy making in the agriculture sector in Liberia in the future. (See pages 23/24 of
CEO Endorsement).
(iv) Activities have been retained under both outcomes 1 and 2 as they are critical to each.
A more nuanced description of the additionality as well as a reformulation of the
activities should now better demonstrate why knowledge management must be
specifically addressed/ mainstreamed under each outcome. (See page 23/24 of
CEO Endorsement).
No specific cost effectiveness section is provided in the CEO Endorsement Template. (See
page 62 of Prodoc). Please refer to the cost effectiveness section in the Prodoc (Section 2.7).
1
11. Has the costeffectiveness
sufficiently been
demonstrated in
project design?
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Upon
clarifying the project framework
and design, please revisit and
clarify the cost-effectiveness of
knowledge management and
communication activities.
12. Is the project
structure sufficiently
close to what was
presented at PIF?
July 25, 2011
14. Is the valueadded of LDCF/SCCF
involvement in the
project clearly
demonstrated through
additional cost
reasoning?
July 25, 2011
17. Is the
LDCF/SCCF funding
level of other cost
items (consultants,
travel, etc.)
July 25, 2011
Relevant text has been included in Part IV, mostly relating to the removal of outcome 3, initially
included in the PIF. (See pages 30/31 of CEO Endorsement).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Please ensure the consistency of
all documentation to provide a
clear understanding of changes
made since PIF.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Kindly revisit and clarify the
additional cost reasoning
underlying outputs 1.4, 2.1 and
2.4.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Please adjust international
consultants' compensation to
conform with UN rates.
Output 1.4 was removed from the design in the project document already, and it was an
oversight not to fully remove it from the CEO Endorsement. This has been now harmonized.
(See pages 2 and 18 of CEO Endorsement).
A more detailed additional cost reasoning is provided for output 2.1. Although the PPG phase
undertook concerted efforts to determine the baseline and provide an initial description of the
livelihood and production systems, no full analysis and documentation of the farming system
could be conducted. The PPG phase started with establishing baselines for more sites than
finally selected, and a notable effort was made to conduct field investigations on site.
Considering that Liberia is still a relatively more difficult country for infrastructure and
movement, the PPG phase did solicit a good level of information including through local
consultations. More in-depth investigations are needed at the onset of the project and
throughout – participatory research is only just being (re-)established in the country. (See page
21 of CEO Endorsement).
Output 2.4 was more strongly positioned vis-à-vis output 1.1 and the additional cost reasoning
strengthened to specifically highlight the need to promote bottom up information flows to inform
national level policy setting. Pioneering adaptation learning from this first local level CCA
demonstration in Liberia in the agriculture sector must be fed “upwards” for improved policy
making. (See pages 23/24 of CEO Endorsement).
In fact four international experts (TA) are budgeted for, each for 48 person/weeks/, summing up
to 192 person/weeks. The remuneration is estimated at U$ 3000 per week, in line with
established UN rates.
The figure in Part I, Section E has been corrected to 182 from 96, in line with the details
provided in Annex C. (See page 5 of CEO Endorsement).
2
appropriate?
19. Are the confirmed
co-financing amounts
adequate for each
project component?
July 25, 2011
RECOMMENDED ACTION: (i)
Kindly increase the share of grant
co-financing and (ii) provide
accurate co-financing amounts in
all tables.
AEDE and FAO co-financing is as grants (parallel). UNDP cofinancing has been raised up to
$200,000. Government cofinancing was wrongly labelled in the request for CEO endorsement
as in-kind cofinancing while the cofinancing letter states that the cofinancing is $100.000 in kind
and $5.000.000 grant. The appropriate correction has been made in the revised Request for
CEO Endorsement
See updated information on pages 1 to 4 of CEO Endorsement and the new UNDP cofinancing
letter).
3