UNDP GEF APR/PIR 2006
(1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006)
I. Basic Project Data
Official Title:
Strengthening the Implementation Capacities for Nutrient
Reduction and Transboundary Cooperation in the Danube River
Basin
(Short name: Danube Regional Project Tranche 2)
Country/ies:
Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria,
PIMS Number
3123
Croatia, Czech Republic,
Hungary, Moldova, Romania,
Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Ukraine
Atlas Project Number
Focal Area
International Waters
Project Type
FSP
(FSP/MSP)
Strategic Priority
IW-1
Operational
OP 8
Programme
Date of Entry into Work
May 11, 2001
Planned Project
2 years
Programme
Duration
ProDoc Signature Date
March 2005 (Ukraine)-last
Original Planned
December
signature, May 2004
Closing Date
2006
Croatia .
Date of First Disbursement Tranche 2: June 2004
Revised Planned1
Revised 1:
Closing Date
May 2007
Is this the Terminal
NO
Date Project
APR/PIR?
Operationally Closed
(if applicable)
Date Mid Term
14.4. 26.5. 2004
Date Final Evaluation1
Evaluation2 carried out
carried out
(if applicable)
(if applicable)
Dates of visits to project
Date of last TPR
by UNDP country office
Meeting
Date of last visit to project November, December 2005,
by UNDP-GEF RTA
April 2006
1 Please explain any entry here in section V on "Changes in project schedule"
2 If an evaluation has been carried out in the last 12 months the report should be attached to this document.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-
APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 1 of 27
II. Progress towards achieving project objectives
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
Objective:
1. All Danube counties have
· The Danube Convention in · All Danube countries signed the
· All 13 Countries signed the Convention and are
Set up institutional and
developed and ratified
force (1998), by the year
Convention and are cooperating,
cooperating, financial support continues for 4
legal instruments to
policies and legal
2000 10 countries ratified
participating at the work of the
countries (non EU: MD, UA, BiH, SM) to be
assure nutrient
instruments for sustainable
(out of 13) and are
ICPDR EGs and regularly
able to participate at the work of the ICPDR
reduction and
water management and
cooperating, 11 countries
contributing to the budget,
· Analytical report on Pressures & impact
sustainable
nutrient reduction and have
need financial support to
financial sustainability of
analysis, typology; ecological classification;
management of water
put in place mechanisms for
be able to participate at
countries participation is
Economic Analysis; HMWB, Nutrients, etc.
bodies and ecological
exacting compliance
work of the ICPDR EGs
guaranteed by the countries..
used by the ICPDR for Danube Analysis Report
resources.
· Support needed for all non · EUWFD implementation in the
· Roof Report for RBMP (ICPDR policy tool) /
EU countries
Danube Basin is in line with the
Danube Analysis Report prepared, accepted by
The overall objective of
time-frame
the countries and submitted to EU.
the Danube Regional
· National policies and legislation
Project is to
is in line with key EU Directive
complement the
(WFD, ND, UWWTD, IPPC)
activities of the ICPDR
2. The ICPDR is the main
· Basic ICPDR tools for
· ICPDR tools (TNMN, AEWS,
· TNMN harmonized with EU WFD requirement
required to provide a
institutional and operation
water quality monitoring
EMIS, GIS) fully harmonized
/ annual reporting available, all 13 countries
regional approach and
mechanism for
and accident warning are
with requirements of the EU
participate (79 stations, 52 determinands in
global significance to
transboundary cooperation
set up, but not reflecting
WFD, fully operational and
water, 33 in sediments)
the development of
and pollution control for all
EU WFD requirements;
results used by the ICPDR and
· AEWS upgrade web based notifications
national policies and
Danube countries and
upgrade and development
countries
tested and used by 13 countries
legislation and to the
ICPDR tools for water
needed.
· Inter-ministerial Coordination at · Danube GIS needs assessment gives orientation
definition of priority
quality monitoring,
· New policy tools need to
national level is strengthened in
for the Danube GIS development
actions for nutrient
emission control, accident
be developed, e.g.RBMP,
all Danube countries, in
· Danube GIS Prototype prepared, 1 test dataset
reduction and pollution
prevention and information
GIS, particularly for
particular in lower DC.
for each shapefile template / table
control with particular
management are fully
nutrient reduction
· Joint indicators for
·
attention to achieving
Report: `Impact of the Danube on the Black
operational.
environmental status agreed
sustainable
Sea' presented to the countries ant the ICPDR
within Danube and Black Sea
transboundary
high level meeting
commission
ecological effects
· JTWG is functional, working according to the
within the DRB and the
workplan, annual meetings held, 4 meetings
since 2002
4 This should describe the quantitative indicator
5 This should be a quantitative numerical value
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 3 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
Black Sea area.
3. The civil society and in
· DEF established with the
· NGOs network strengthened
· 175 NGOs are members of the DEF
particular national NGOs in
GEF support in 1994,
200 NGOs in the DEF
· Water policy teams created
all Danube countries are at
needs support for
· Expert capacities of the DEF
· Two DEF bulletins published each year
the end of the Project
revitalization,
strengthened particularly in the
· Small Grants Programme projects - 56 national
proactively implicated in
· the network is weak (only
field of EU WFD
and 6 regional projects under implementation
national nutrient reduction
17 members), activities
implementation
2nd call (58 national and 6 regional completed
programmes, have
limited.
· DEF cooperating with the
in the 1st call)
organized workshops and
· EU WFD and Aarhus
ICPDR
· Pilot projects in 5 countries to enhance access
produced in national
convention are legal basis
· Pilot Public Awareness
of public to information.
language information
for public participation,
Campaigns in 6 countries
material for awareness
not incorporated in most
· Regular NGO publications in
raising campaigns and have
of the Danube countries
national languages
successfully implemented
· 12 Regional Grant Projects and
community based nutrient
112 National Grant Project
reduction projects financed
implemented
under the GEF Small Grants
· Strengthened public
participation and access to
information
4. The Project and ICPDR
· Existing concepts for GEF · Set of Indicators for project
· Set of 35 indicators for testing prepared and
have conceptualized and
indicators (process, stress
monitoring and evaluation of
agreed with the ICPDR
developed a monitoring and
reduction and
results of pollution reduction
· Analysis of historical data prepared and
evaluation system and has
environmental status) and
measures available for the DRP
sampling cruise at the reservoir under
identified the indicators
EEA indicators (DPSIR)
and ICPDR and tested.
preparation
(process, stress reduction
still under discussion and
· Analysis of Sediments at Iron
· Study on pollution trading and relevant
and environmental status);
development.
Gates carried out and potential
economic instruments prepared and
knowledge on
· Knowledge on sediments
environmental impact of
disseminated among stakeholders at ministerial
sedimentation, transport and
at Iron Gates and possible
sediments on the Black Sea
level through a basin-wide workshop.
removal of nutrients and
impacts on the Danube &
assessed.
toxic substances is
Black Sea in the future are · Identification of the benefits of
considerably increased and
very limited,
wetlands as nutrient reduction /
economic instruments to
· Analysis of possibilities to
retention facilities and the
encourage investments for
create a `Danube
contribution of wetlands in this
nutrient reduction are
Environmental Fund to
role to the WFD Programme of
accepted and implemented
support the ICPDR
Measures
at the national and regional
Investment Programme
· Economic instruments for
level
pollution trading are evaluated
and a set of recommendations
for their implementation
prepared for countries
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 4 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
5. Investments in sewerage
Priority municipal projects
Within the Danube basin 210
· Within the Danube Basin, 26 municipal
and municipal waste water
identified by countries
municipal projects are planned until
projects are underway and have 100% funds
treatment plants (WWTP-
(5Years nutrient reduction
year 2015
secured
M)
plan prepared within UNDP
· 19 project completed by 2003
DPRP)
· 50 project completed by 2005
6. Reduction of total nitrogen
According to the Danube
· Expected reduction of Nitrogen
· Reduction of N emissions is 4,915 t/y, of P
loads
Water Quality Model (1999,
loads is 21% (119 kt/y),
emissions 977 t/7 from projects completed in
7. Reduction of total
data 1994-97), the annual
· Expected reduction of
2003
phosphorus loads
loads from the Danube to the
Phosphorus loads is 32% (16
· Reduction of N emissions is 10,562 t/y, of P
Black Sea are 552 kt/year of
kt/y),
emissions 2,224 t/y from projects completed by
Nitrogen and 48.9 t/year of
2005
Phosphorus
· (DABLAS II / JAP 2004 reporting)
Outcome 1:
8. Acceptance of the Danube
· Start of implementation of · The ICPDR capacity to
· ICPDR coordinates the reporting for the EU
All Danube River Basin
RBMP by ICPDR and
the EU WFD, support
coordinate the DRB
WFD implementation in the Danube River
countries are
individual countries
needed for the EU
management planning process
Basin
implementing nutrient
accession and non
strengthened through tools and
· The work plan of the ICPDR EGs is in line
reduction policies and
accession countries.
mechanisms developed
with the EU WFD implementation tasks
legal instruments and
· In 2000 the countries
· Enhanced capacities of the 4
· 4 Non EU countries voluntarily participate on
measures for exacting
agreed that the ICPDR
DRB countries (Bosnia i
the EU WFD reporting
compliance, with
will be a platform for EU
Hercegovina, Moldova, Serbia
· Workshops on Surface Waters, Ground Waters,
particular attention to
WFD implementation in
and Montenegro and Ukraine)
Risk of Failure, HMWB, 3 trainings on
the EU WFD, IWRM,
the DRB.
that are either not in the EU
assessment of water bodies organized to
BAPs, BATs practices,
already nor an EU candidate
strengthen expert capacities of the ICPDR for
appropriate land use
country, to understand and then
EU WFD implementation, 80 experts
and wetland
implement the river basin
participated at each wshop.
management and
management planning
economic instruments.
approaches prescribed by the EU
WFD needed to assure that all
13 DRB countries are involved
at the same level to manage the
DRB sustainable
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 5 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
9. National reports on
· Transboundary Analysis
Ability of 13 countries to
· EU WFD Danube Roof report completed and
environmental
(TDA) of the DRB
commonly manage the Danube
agreed by 13 countries
characteristics and
carried out within the
River Basin, in a consistent
· Danube Analysis Report prepared, translated
economic analysis in line
UNDP Danube Pollution
approach, coordinated by the
into 7 languages and basin-wide distributed.
with EU WFD existing;
Reduction Programme
ICPDR, enhanced leading to the
(DPRP) 1998 11 GEF
development of the first Danube
eligible countries
River Basin Management Plan,
participated.
according to the EU Water
Framework Directive, using the
policy guidelines (Economic
analysis etc.), methodologies, and
tools (DRB GIS etc.) developed;
10. River basin management
· Basic monitoring data
· ICPDR will have all monitoring
· Monitoring tools upgraded (TNMN - 79
practices and gaps in
available
tools in place in order to fill data
sampling stations, 52 determinands in water
relation of WFD
gaps by 2006
and 33 in sediments, AQC implemented
requirements identified
· The ICPDR will harmonise
· Work on Intercalibration ongoing for
approaches / methodologies or,
harmonization
at least, make them comparable
throughout the Danube basin
· ICPDR will prepare a
Programme of Measures by
2009
11. GIS and related data base
· 11 basic thematic maps for · Danube thematic maps for EU
· 16 Danube thematic maps prepared in line with
for RBM Planning
TDA available from
WFD reporting prepared
EU WFD requirements
UNDP DPRP, only partly
· Danube GIS Prototype tested
· Danube GIS Prototype developed and ready for
in line with the EU WFD.
and further developed by the
testing and further use,
· No GIS
ICPDR
· Data for 8 countries available
· Data from all countries available
12. Pilot River Basin Plans in
No RBM planning for sub-
Sub-basin management planning
Support for development of Sava RBMP provided
line with EU WFD
basins
approach developed through 1 pilot
- RBMP templates for Sava basin, including gap
project (Sava Basin) in 4 countries
analysis are agreed with 4 participating countries
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 6 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
13. Adoption of BAP in
· BAP in national policies
· The integration of water quality
· A number of support documents prepared for
national policy - Concepts
of EU countries only
objectives related to agriculture
countries to prepare for agriculture policy
for best agricultural
· Farmers in the DRB are
nutrient pollution into
changes (Inventories on agricultural non-point
practices in line with EU
using traditional methods.
agriculture policies increased in
pollution sources(N&P); pesticide use;
requirements for central and
According to TDA 1998,
11 Danube countries.
agricultural fertilizer and manure use; policies;
downstream Danube
about 50% of Nutrient
· New agricultural policies for
Recommendations for policy reforms and BAP
countries are elaborated and
discharges are coming
controlling non-point sources of
use; Guidelines on Manure use, also in 6
discussed in workshops
from the agriculture sector
pollution from agriculture
Danube basin languages;
accepted by policy makers based · Workshop: EU WFD and Agriculture
on broadly disseminated nation-
participation of 80 experts
specific BAP concepts
14. National experts are trained
· No specific BAP available · BAP accepted by farmers in the
· 2 basin-wide workshops with participation from
to introduce best
field in DRB countries.
7 countries
agricultural practices in
· 1000 farmers made aware of
· 5 seminars and trainings at national and local
their countries
best agricultural practices for
level
reducing agricultural nutrient
· 14 farmers trained as trainers
emissions
· visit of a farm in Denmark 40 participants
from countries
· farmers aware of the BAP, through several
broadcastings on national TV and Radio of
Serbia, interviews and articles in national
newspapers and magazines specialized on
agriculture
15. Internet information on the
No web-site
Web-site with information of the
Web-site operational
introduction of best
BAPs used in pilot projects
http://www.carlbrodrp.org.yu/
agricultural practices in
operational
each DRB country
16. Pilot projects on practical
No pilot projects
· Point and non-point source
· 7 pilot projects under implementation / lessons
BAP implementation,
agricultural nutrient emissions
learned disseminated
training and institutional
reduced in 5 pilot sites.
· Financial implications evaluated in 7 pilot
support to expand BAP
· BAPs implemented in 100
farms
practices are carried out and
farms,
· more than 100
demonstration workshops of
· 100 farmers in lower DRB
experiences in pilot projects
aware of and applying best
conducted
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 7 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
17. Pilot project monitoring and agricultural
practices
progress evaluation
regarding financial
implications is performed
18. Three concepts for land use
Appropriate integrated land
Appropriate Land-Use Concepts
· Inventory of Protected Areas, covering 237
reforms of selected wetland
use concepts are missing, as
accepted by local stakeholders and
sites - database and map - input also for Natura
are discussed with
well as an assessment
being implemented in 3 pilot sites
2000, required by EU WFD
stakeholders
methodology
in 3 respective countries leading to
· Methodology for Land-use Assessment was
wetland/floodplain protection and
tested at 3 pilot sites (SK, HR, RO) and 3 on-
rehabilitation of approximately
sites stakeholders workshops organized with
7,000 hectares
participation of 30 experts at each workshop
· Specific proposals for final land-use concepts at
each pilot site
· Land-use concepts implemented in projects at 3
pilot sites under implementation (Slovakia,
Romania and Croatia), total area 4,400 hectares
19. New concepts for wetland
Proper land-use and wetland
· Capacities of key stakeholders ( · A manual for appropriate land-use is under
areas are endorsed by
management are not a priority
i.e. government, NGOs, private
preparation and will be presented at the basin-
governments (legal and
for countries
sector etc.) built in 11 DRB
wide workshop
institutional reform for
countries for implementing
· 1 preparatory workshop organized 20
integration of environmental
appropriate land-use policies to
participants
and economic issues is
reduce pressures on wetland and
· Basin-wide workshop for wetland managers
prepared)
floodplain areas in the DRB
from government, NGOs and private sector is
20. DRB workshop on project
· Basin wide workshop on
under preparation
results and conclusions
Integrated Land-use and
Wetlands management
organized
21. Assessment of the progress
· Review on national
· The integration of water quality
· Review of policies in 11 countries and the
in existing legislative and
policies in general,
objectives related to industrial
identification of gaps between EU and existing
enforcement status is
prepared within pdf-B in
pollution into industrial policy
and future legislation for industrial pollution
elaborated
2000
and regulatory framework
control and enforcement mechanisms
22. DRB countries have
· Some of the project
according to EU Directive on
· Report on Implementation of BAT /IPPC in
adapted national legislation
beneficiary countries were
Integrated Pollution and
11DRB countries
in line with the EU
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 8 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
23. Increased awareness of and
in EU accession process,
Prevention Control enhanced in
· Report on Implementation of BAT in 4 non-
knowledge about BAT
preparing for adopting EU
11 Danube countries.
accession countries
through workshops and
legislation
· Capacities of non EU countries
· Road Map for implementing BAT in Serbia &
training
to implement BAT / IPPC are
Montenegro, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Moldova
strengthened
and Ukraine
· Workshops programme of training and
dissemination
· An examination of alternatives for the further
support for the application of Best Available
Techniques in the DRB;
· 3 trainings on BAT & IPPC for experts from
BiH, UA, MD
24. Case studies on
Priorities for pollution reduction
· Undertaking of 5 reviews of industrial
environmentally friendly
revised, based on improved
complexes as case studies on BAT.
production technologies in
methodology for emissions
industries in particular
inventories (reflecting the EU
countries are performed
directives requirements on
reporting) and on better
understanding of cause and effect
relationships
25. Knowledge and
Most of the municipalities are Awareness of policy options for
· Two basin wide workshops organized to
understanding on the
not aware of concepts for cost improved collection of water and
present the T&C reforms to the countries, 50
benefits and costs of various benefits of tariffs and
wastewater service tariffs and fees
experts and high-level country representatives
alternative concepts are
charges
in all 11 Danube countries and in
participated.
improved
most municipalities enhanced.
· The current conditions related to regional or
26. Increased awareness of
· Municipalities are not
· policy reforms considered in 40
Municipal Water and Wastewater Utilities
municipalities on policy
aware of economic value
municipalities and adopted in 20
examined in 7 countries in general
options on the economic
of water and of policy
· tariff reforms considered in 60
· Possible tariff and effluent charge reforms
value of water, including
options related to reforms
municipalities and adopted in 20
identified and evaluated for 7 countries and 7
consideration and adoption
on tariffs and charges
· financial models understood in
municipalities as case studies were evaluated
of reforms and
· No methodology for tariffs
100 municipalities and applied
· 7 municipalities where the reforms are
understanding and
and charges calculation
in 40
considered, in 2 municipalities adopted and
application of models for
available, which would
models applied
tariffs and charges
consider policy reforms
calculation in a number of
municipalities
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 9 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator4 Baseline
Level5 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
27. Economic and financial
Ministries and affected agencies of
· ASTEC model developed (Accounts
viability of the tariffs
11 DRB countries are aware of the
Simulation for Tariffs and Effluent Charges),
reform for the water
effects of the current effluent
tested in 2 municipalities Pitesti (Romania)
companies in specific
charges designs on revenues, water
and Karlovac (Croatia)
countries are ensured
and wastewater tariffs, and
· Training workshop for ASTEC organized with
pollution abatement investments.
participation 11 experts in total.
28. Improved knowledge on the
Ministries or affected agencies of 3
· A number of regional meetings and
best tariff alternatives is
DRB countries are actively
dissemination workshops at national level
ensured for all stakeholders
considering changing their emission
470 experts and country representatives
charges to encourage reduction in
participated
nutrients and toxics.
· Information sheets on T&C prepared also in
29. Information on the cost-
Ministries or affected agencies of 3
national languages and distributed
benefits of incentives based
DRB countries and 6 selected
on instruments is discussed
demonstration municipalities have
and disseminated
used financial modeling to test the
consequences of possible reforms in
the design of their effluent charges.
30. Agreement on phase out of
Voluntary agreements on
Voluntary Agreement on the Phase-
· Voluntary agreement is not possible, a legal
phosphates in detergents
phase-out of phosphates in
out of Phosphates in detergent
ban has to be implemented (example: Czech
and governments
detergents applied only in
developed in cooperation with
republic had a voluntary agreement , but did not
commitment to implement
Austria and Germany
stakeholders that leads to
work)
related recommendations
implementation resulting in a
· ICPDR / DRP Task Force on Detergents
31. Lessons on phosphorus
projected 24% reduction of P from
established, recommendations for policy
reduction are learned during
point sources of pollution and 12%
implementation in 11 countries will be prepared
implementation of new
reduction in Total P Loads from
· P-free detergents available in 3 countries, 1 will
phasing-out programme for
the DRB to the Black Sea
introduce legislation, others need to consider
P-detergents
legislation
32. Introduction of P-free
detergents
33. Implementation of the main
EU WFD in force in 2000
· In 9 EU countries the EU WFD
· In 9 EU countries the EU WFD is
EU directive -Water
is implemented
implemented
Framework Directive,
· 4 non EU countries are
· 4 non EU countries comply with requirements
2000/60/EC
committed to comply with
requirements
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 10 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
34. Improved coordination of
Inter-ministerial
Inter-Ministerial Coordinating
· Analysis of IMCM was carried out in 10
Outcome 2:
national activities - Inter-
coordination exists
Mechanisms functioning in 10 Danube
countries, recommendations were
Countries are cooperating
ministerial Committees
in some countries
countries in order to develop,
prepared
under the ICPDR as main
established as needed
implement and follow up national
institutional and
· 6 countries need to strengthen their IMC
35. Existing structures and
policies, legislation and projects for
organizational mechanism for
capacities, relevant activities will be
mechanisms for
nutrient reduction and pollution control
transboundary cooperation,
completed by Feb 2007
implementation of
pollution and nutrient control,
environmental policies and
using improved water quality
legislation analyzed
monitoring, emission control,
emergency warning and
36. Adequate structures proposed
accidental prevention and
in cooperation with relevant
information management
ministerial departments
tools.
37. Classification of water quality
Set of determinands
Enhanced capacity of countries to
· TNMN harmonized with EU WFD
objectives and nutrient and
for water quality
develop policy measures for nutrients
requirement / annual reporting available,
toxics quality conditions is
monitoring TNMN and toxic substances reduction based on
all 13 countries participate (79 stations,
finalized
operation, not
improved monitoring water quality for
52 determinands in water, 33 in
harmonized with EU toxic substances and nutrients in line
sediments), upgrade and proposal for
WFD
with EU WFD requirements, assessment
SOPs for new determinants prepared
of environmental stress impact
· Environmental quality objectives and
relationship, based on use of common
standards for nutrients and other Danube
harmonized classification system and
specific priority substances
38. Inventories of emissions from
· List of hot spots
standards
· Analysis of the results of the EMIS
priority point and non-point
(TDA 1997)
inventory and their comparison with
sources ("hot spots") for P and
· Emission
TNMN and JDS results
N are revised
inventory 2000
· EMIS inventory updated, additional 60
(252 industrial
sources identified
and 555
municipal
sources)
39. Inventory of priority chemicals EU list of priority
· Danube List of Priority substances
in line with EU are updated
substances under
developed 29 priority substances
development
6 This should describe the quantitative indicator
7 This should be a quantitative numerical value
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 11 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
40. Swift and coordinated response PIACs operational in Swifter and better coordinated response
· Standard forms and web-based
to accidents
10 Countries,
to accidents increased in all 13 Danube
communication solution for information
41. Guidelines on accidental
communication is
countries through reinforcement of
exchange in emergency cases used by all
pollution prevention are
through a satellite
PIACs (accident alert centers) and
13 countries PIACs
reviewed
not cost efficient.
geographical extension in Bosnia i
·
42. National stations - PIACs for
Herzegovina and Serbia and
MD, UA, BiH, SM are fully
Montenegro
operational
43. Reduction of accidental spills - Hot spots identified
Reduction of risk of accidents through
· Accident Risk Spots ranking
Inventory and assessment of
within UNDP/DPRP implementation of check-list
methodology (M1methodology) prepared
high accident risks spots are
Transboundary
methodology used in 50 industrial
· ARS Inventory carried out 261 sites
completed in all countries
Analysis
locations / companies, identified as sites
identified 157 sites evaluated
with highest risk potential
· M2 Methodology tested, pilot project on
44. Cooperation on preventive and
Refineries implementation of a check
emergency measures is
list methodology, training provided for
improved
15 experts
45. DBAM is improved to respond DBAM developed
DBAM updated , to be used with MS
· DBAM updated to MS W-XP
to pollution transport issues
Windows XP
46. Enlarged set of users of
· Limited number
· Knowledge of the users how to use
· Training on the Danubis users provided at
Danubis Information System
of users and
the system and all its functionalities
central level 25 persons and at national
web site; intensification of use
knowledge how
is increased
level 11 countries 12 experts trained
to use the system, · 8000 hits/month of Danubis and
in each.
· Limited access
8000 hits/month for project website
· 630 registered users
rights
in 2006-02-06
· 18,000 hits / month average in sept05-
· 100 users
sept06
47. Networking within DANUBIS · Danubis
Management of information for the
· Upgrade of the Danubis at the central
by all ICPDR contracting
established, based ICPDR on work to manage the DRB
level 1 new server; Change of the
parties is realized
on Oracle, high
enhanced for 130 experts involved in
platform for the System; open-source
48. Mechanisms of having access
maintenance
the ICPDR (Secretariat, national experts
system implemented
to information are available
costs
working on ICPDR expert groups etc.)
· and national level 36 PC sets provided
· Computer
by the improvement of the DANUBIS
to countries..
Equipment
information system as evidenced by an
· 18,000 hits / month average in sept05-
required in the
expansion of the information available
sept06?
countries
as well as the use of the system (from
1500 hits per month in 2002 to 8,000
hits per month in 2006)
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 12 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
49. Interactive DANUBIS web site · Information
Increased public awareness of DRB
· ICPDR public web site is improved, more
is operational
provided for
problems, issues and solutions
attractive, provided with more
public is limited,
(including initiatives of the ICPDR,
information about the Danube,
no info about the
NGOs etc.) due to an improved, more
environmental issues, ICPDR and its
Danube,
user-friendly ICPDR and project web
activities, 18,000 hits / month average in
environmental .
site respectively as evidenced by an
sept05-sept06
issues, ICPDR
increase in hits to the web pages from
· Concept for Restructuring of the internal
activities,
1000 hits per month in 2002 to 8,000
area of the ICPDR Info system is
· `very dry'
hits per month in 2006.
prepared in order to improve performance
of the system, and respond to new
requirements from the point of view of
technologies and the information requests
50. Joint work programme for
· Memorandum of
Joint policy-making framework
· Status indicators to monitor nutrient and
MoU is applied
Understanding
established and functioning in DRB and
hazardous substances transport from the
signed,
Black Sea region for reduction of
Danube and change of ecosyst. in the
· JTWG
discharges of nutrients and hazardous
Black Sea defined and agreed upon
established,
substances into the Black Sea.
· Report: `Impact of the Danube on the
revitalization
Black Sea' presented to the countries ant
needed, including
the ICPDR high level meeting
51. Reports are produced
development of a
· Reporting procedure defined and agreed
according to new rules
workplan and set
upon
52. Agreement on regular meetings
of agreed
· Annual JTWG meetings organized (in
is concluded
indicators for
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and in 2006 is
assessment of the
planned)
Danube impact
· D-BS Strategic Partnership Stocktaking
on the BS NW
meeting organized in 2004, with
shelf
participation of 80 high level country
representatives of the ICPDR, BSC, GEF,
UNDP and other experts
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 13 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
53. Knowledge, professional skills
· Skills of experts · Key Danube institutions (e.g.
· Capacities of the ICPDR EG Chairs and
and understanding on nutrient
on basic level,
ICPDR) that are managing the DRB
Secretariat were strengthened through a
reduction issues are enhanced
· Countries need
enhanced via the building of
Training on Facilitation Skills, 35 persons
54. Training evaluation is updated
support for
capacities of 130 experts involved in
participated
participation at
ICPDR expert groups, ICPDR
· Workshop on Further future of the
ICPDR
Secretariat etc.
ICPDR supported the development
activities
· Essential Danube stakeholder groups
process of the Commission, 65 country
strengthened in their abilities to
representatives participated
reduce pollution due to increased
· Workshops on EU WFD Implementation
capacities of 300 stakeholder
at national level have strengthened
representatives (e.g. environmental
capacities of experts in 4 countries -
NGOs, wetland managers, municipal
policy makers/ senior ministry officials in
authorities, agricultural extension
MD, SM and BiH, RO, in total 80 experts
service reps., industrial operators
participated
etc.)
· Support for 11 countries to participate ant
the regular ICPDR EG meeting provided,
80-100 persons supported per year
55. Sustainable DEF secretariat -
· DEF established
· Sustainable operation of the DEF
· Increased capacity of the DEF secretariat
Outcome 3:
optimal operation of DEF
with the GEF
Secretariat achieved , leading the
staffing, qualification, expert team on
Public concern, participation
secretariat is achieved,
support in 1994,
further expansion and effectiveness
water policy established
and response to ecological
Improved capacities of the
needs support for
of the network;
issues has increased through
· Network strengthened 175 NGOs
NGOs
revitalization,
Small Grants Programme,
· Community involvement increased
· National focal points in 11 countries
awareness raising campaigns,
· the network is
through an expanded and
active
regular NGO publications and
weak (only 17
strengthened network (from 30 NGO
· 2 DEF bulletins regularly published per
work of the DEF network
members),
organizations as members in 2002
year also in other Danube languages
activities limited
to over 200 NGO organizations as
· concept for fund rising and financial
Public participation and
members in 2006) to undertake
sustainability under development,
access to information was
awareness raising and pollution
enhanced at national and local
reduction activities in 11 DRB
level.
countries;
· enhanced cooperation between
governments and NGOs; improved
capacity for fund raising
56. Knowledge on nutrient and
No training manuals
NGOs have increased knowledge on
· Training material on `Wetlands and
toxic are improved, reports on
on wetlands for
wetlands and nutrient issues and are
Nutrient reduction' prepared, training
nutrient and toxic, in national
NGOs, training
informed about revitalization measures.
provided in 11 countries with
languages, are published
skills need
participation of 15 experts per country
strengthening
· Training manual available in 5 languages
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 14 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
57. Cooperation between NGOs
DEF is not actively
Active involvement of DEF members in
· DEF is represented at the ICPDR EG
and governments is
participating at the
policy development and pollution
meetings and regular high level meeting
strengthened
ICPDR activities
reduction activities assured through
as observer.
partnerships with DRB governments
· Water policy teams created, to participate
(e.g. activities to involve the public in
in EU WFD Implementation also at
DRB Management Planning process in
national level
the frame of the EU Water Framework
Directive etc.)
58. Increased awareness with the
Danube Watch
· Awareness of general public on the
· In 2005 the Danube Day was initiated
public of Danube
published with
Danube, environmental issues and
with heavy support from the DRP, all 13
environmental problems -
previous support
the ICPDR and its activities is
countries participated with local activities
Public campaigns are
from the
increased
· In 2006, the Danube Day was organized
implemented
UNDP/GEF
· Public awareness activities of the
fully by the ICPDR through DEF network
Pollution Reduction
ICPDR are sustainable
at national level, DRP support was minor,
Programme
· Awareness of public in overall DRB
all 13 countries participated.
on the importance of pollution
· 4 campaigns implemented by the DEF in
reduction and environmental
4 countries, 2 additional are under
challenges has been enhanced
preparation
through targeted communication
activities and campaigns (farmers,
municipalities, wetland mangers,
environmental NGOs, etc. )
· Danube Day has been established as
an annual event and a platform to
raise awareness on pollution control
in 13 Danube countries. An estimate
of 1 million people have been
actively participating in Danube Day
activities throughout the region
during the last years
59. Efficient and effective NGO
· Small Grants
Awareness of nutrient pollution and
· 6 regional and 58 national projects
involvement through one
Programme
toxic substance problems in the DRB
implemented within the 1st call, 25
regional and two local grants
within previous
and involvement of DRB communities
project monitored
programmes
GEF project
in 11 DRB countries enhanced via 120
· 6 regional and 56 national project under
· NGOs have no
national small grant funded projects led
implementation within the 2nd call.
funds for
by national environmental NGOs and 12 · Specific Regional Prut RBMP Project
implementing
regional small grant projects involving
under implementation - led by Romanian
small projects
35 NGOs working on transboundary
NGO CESEP http://prut-rbmp.cesep.ro/,
problems
in cooperation with Moldova and Ukraine
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 15 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
60. Sufficient and reliable
No communication
· Communication Strategy is prepared
· DRP Communication Strategy developed
information for mass media
strategy available
and implemented for the DRP and its · 4 DRP press releases
purposes are prepared and
specific selected project components, · DRP fact sheets on 3 main themes
published
· Communication Strategy developed
· DEF press releases
and implemented also for the ICPDR · 2 DRP/ICPDR Posters and 2 Brochures
and the DEF
on Public participation and Danube
Analysis
61. Basin-wide documents are
Danube Watch
ICPDR has become a public oriented
· ICPDR Communication Strategy
periodically published
published only with
institution through enhanced quality of
· 2 issues of the Danube Watch published
external support
communication and by using awareness
· Danubis public website upgraded 1000
raising tools and sustainable means of
hits per month in average
communication as the Danube Watch
· ICPDR visual identity strengthened
Magazine and the web-page
through improved logo, design of reports
62. Implementation of Aarhus
· Aarhus
· Access to Information on DRB hot
· Two study tours: USA and the
Convention
convention,
spots improved in 5 DRB countries
Netherlands, 10 governmental and 5
63. Implementation of art. 14 of
· EU WFD art. 14
through increased capacities of 100
NGO participant at each
the EU WFD, 2000/60/E
on PP
governmental officials and 100 key
· Specific manuals and guidelines on
Public Information and
stakeholders (environmental NGOs
involvement of citizens and communities
Consultation; access to
etc.) as well as through the
in water management issues
information
appropriate legal frameworks and
· Two Basin-wide stakeholder workshop at
64. Strengthened capacity of
tools for providing information that
each, with participation of 90 country
governmental officials to
were developed
representatives
implement public involvement
· Pollution reduction processes
and of national NGOs to
initiated at 5 hot spots via the
become more effectively
conducting of 5 pilot projects that
involved in implementation of
were agreed with the respective key
the EU WFD;
stakeholders for each site based on
65. Strengthened cooperation
improved access to information.
between government officials,
NGOs and other stakeholders;
66. Country-specific strategies,
measures and practical
arrangements supporting
NGOs ,citizens and
communities involvement in
water resources management
and pollution control
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 16 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
67. Monitoring and evaluation
GEF concept for
Status of DRB environment as well as
Agreement on set of Indicators for testing, to
Outcome 4:
system for project
indicators for
progress and impacts of interventions
be used for the project outputs and fully used
The ICPDR and DRP are
implementation is operational
process, stress
(especially the UNDP/GEF DRP)
by the ICPDR
using system of indicators
68. Indicators are applied for
reduction and
monitored by comprehensive, tested and
(process, stress reduction and
emissions and water quality
environmental status functioning system of indicators for
environmental status in line
(stress reduction), progress of
available; specific
monitoring and evaluation at project
with EU and international
projects (process) and impact
report on indicators
level and policy compliance in the 13
reporting requirements) to
of measures (environm. status)
prepared during
DRB countries.
follow-up and evaluate results
of projects and measures,
69. Guidelines for the use of
PDF-b phase
specific attention is paid to
monitoring and impact
effectiveness of economic
indicators are available
instruments for nutrient
70. Assessment of the sediment
Some historical data
The understanding of the impacts on
Data gap analysis carried out in two
reduction, wetland removal
contents and impact on
from Romania and
Danube River and Black Sea ecosystem
involved countries, as needed input for a
capacities and assessment of
environment and health in
Serbia on Iron Gates
and potential risks of hazardous
sampling cruise at Iron Gate reservoir
accumulated pollutants in
relation to the sediments
available
substances, nutrients and silicates in
Iron Gates sediments.
dynamics are analyzed
Iron Gate reservoir sediments increased
71. Recommendations, control
and programmes developed.
measures and monitoring
programmes are proposed
72. Observation programme to
A study for defining
Nutrient removal and storage functions
· 3 Pilot projects under implementation
assess annual removal
priority wetland and
in 2 Danube wetland/floodplain sites
Moldova, Romania and Ukraine,
capacities is implemented
floodplain
being assessed (estimated 20 year
· guidelines for wetland assessment under
rehabilitation sites:
observation period) using the developed
preparation
`Evaluation of
methodological approach for monitoring
Wetlands and
and assessment;
73. Effects on pollution removal
Floodplain Areas in
· Monitoring approaches for assessing Workshop planned
are assessed and quantified and the DRB, including
nutrient removal in wetlands and
wetland management schemes
Inventory of selected
floodplains accepted by DRB
are identified
wetland areas'
wetland managers as well as DRB
74. DRB governments agree on
prepared in the
policy makers and being used;
wetland management plan
UNDP DPRP (1999) · Nutrient removal and storage
functions of wetlands and floodplains
enhanced through agreement on a
DRB wetland management plan.
75. Economic instruments for
Analysis of
Understanding by policy makers,
Danube Basin Study on pollution trading and
nutrient reduction analyzed
possibilities to create regulators, polluters and investors of
related economic instruments for nutrient
elaborated
a `Danube
potential of innovative market-based
reduction; basin-wide workshop organized to
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 17 of 27
Project Objective and
Description of Indicator6 Baseline
Level7 Target
Level4 Level4 at 30 June 2006
Outcomes
76. Assessment on legal and policy Environmental Fund nutrient pollution control instruments to
disseminate the results of the study and
issues related to economic
to support the
reduce the nutrient pollution in DRB
improve understanding of pollution trading
instruments in DRB countries
ICPDR Investment
enhanced.
concept in the DRB.
77. Needs and barriers for
Programme:
"pollution trading" studied
`Financing pollution
reduction measures
in the DRB: present
situation and
suggestion for new
instruments'
(prepared by UNDP
DPRP, 1999)
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 18 of 27
Rating of Project Progress towards Meeting Objective8
2005
2006
Comments
Rating Rating
National Project
HS HS · In les than a year before the project completion, we do not see any obstacles or barriers to meet the project
Manager/Coordinator
objective. This report provides evidence that the great majority of the project outputs will be delivered and
that the outcomes will be met or exceeded.
· Additional benefits for the Danube Countries and the ICPDR are achieved in the project outcome 1 on
policies development, where the project provided support for the EU WFD Implementation in the Danube
Basin and where the focus was also on non EU countries.
· Extraordinary results will be achieved also in the project outcome 3 on public participation and
communication, with over 120 small grants projects implemented, local campaigns, NGO network
strengthening, Danube Day initiating, enhancing access of public to information and many other
communication activities.
· The project component 1.8: Detergents will bring slightly different outcome, since it was recognized, that
it is not possible to achieve a voluntary agreement on P-free detergents, and therefore, legislative ban has
to be in place. The project will prepare a set of recommendations for countries.
Government GEF OFP9
(optional)
UNDP Country Office
UNDP Regional
HS
HS
Majority of the project objectives were met or will be before the end of the project. The Project team was
Technical Advisor
highly successful in achieving a great work to meet project objectives in the reporting period.
Action Plan to Address Marginally Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory Rating
Where a project has received a rating of MU, U or HU describe the actions to be taken to address this:
Action to be Taken
By Whom?
By When?
8 Ratings: See instruction sheet for definitions of ratings. Use only:
HS - Highly Satisfactory; S Satisfactory; MS Marginally Satisfactory; MU - Marginally Unsatisfactory; U Unsatisfactory; HU Highly Unsatisfactory.
9 In the case of a project involving more than 1 country, it is suggested that for simplicity only the OFP (optional) and Country Office Programme Manager from the lead
country sign-off. If representatives from more than 1 country sign off, please add additional rows as necessary, clearly indicating the country name for each signature.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 19 of 27
III. Progress in Project implementation
List the 4 key outputs delivered so far for each project Outcome:
Project Outcomes
Key Outputs
Outcome 1:
1. River Basin Management - Specific analytical documents for the RBMP - Roof Report
All Danube River Basin countries are implementing
(Economic analysis, Ground Waters, HMWB, etc.), Danube GIS Prototype
nutrient reduction policies and legal instruments and
2. Agriculture Series of reports: inventories, policy review, manuals, BAPs concept, 4 Pilot
measures for exacting compliance, with particular
Project, training
attention to the EU WFD, IWRM, BAPs, BATs
3. Tariffs and Charges ASTEC model for water t&c calculations
4. Report
on
Detergents
Outcome 2:
1. ICPDR WQ Tools WQ standards harmonized with EU WFD, TNMN determinands update
Countries are cooperating under the ICPDR as main
and harmonization
institutional and organizational mechanism for
2. Accident Response M2 methodology for assessment of contaminated sites in flood risk
transboundary cooperation, pollution and nutrient control,
areas, check-list methodology and implementation in Pilot project on Refineries, training on
using improved water quality monitoring, emission
check-list use
control, emergency warning and accidental prevention and
3. Concept for the ICPDR Information System restructuring
information management tools.
4. Capacity building workshops for ICPDR experts, Heads of Delegations, support for EG
meetings
1. DEF Publications (bulletins, publication on Wetlands); NGO expert database, DEF web site
Outcome 3:
2. Small Grants Programme Project 58 national and 5 regional projects implemented within
Public concern, participation and response to ecological
1st call, 56 national and 5 regional projects under implementation
issues has increased through Small Grants Programme,
awareness raising campaigns, regular NGO publications
3. DRP and ICPDR Communication Strategy; xx public awareness campaigns (Slovenia,
and work of the DEF network
Slovakia, Serbia.), Project publications: DRP and public participation; DRP and Danube
Public participation and access to information was
Analysis
enhanced at national and local level.
4. Public access to information - 4 pilot projects in Romania, Bugaria, Serbia, Bosnia in
Herzegovina, country specific manuals and guidelines for public access to information
Outcome 4:
1. Draft Report: Selection of core indicators to monitor stress reduction, status and process for
The ICPDR and DRP are using system of indicators
the DRP
(process, stress reduction and environmental status in line
2. Report on historical data on Iron Gates Sediments
with EU and international reporting requirements) to
3. 3 wetland Pilot projects under implementation
follow-up and evaluate results of projects and measures,
4. Report: Danube Basin study on pollution trading and corresponding economic instruments for
specific attention is paid to effectiveness of economic
nutrient reduction; basin-wide workshop on pollution trading and economic instruments
instruments for nutrient reduction, wetland removal
capacities and assessment of accumulated pollutants in
Iron Gates sediments.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR
2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 21 of 27
Rating of Project Implementation10
2005
2006
Comments
Rating
Rating
National Project
HS HS · All major project components will be completed as originally foreseen in the project document and the
Manager/Coordinator
project implementation plan.
· The project has full support from the ICPDR, the relevant project activities are fully harmonized with
the work programmes of the Expert Groups.
· The DRP cooperates closely with the Black Sea project in implementation of some project components,
given that the projects are sharing 3 beneficiary countries. Particular attention is also given to transfer of
lessons learned from the Danube Basin.
· From the timing point of view, the implementation of the project is well underway, most of the project
components will be completed by the end of 2006 and the remaining three (Agriculture, Sava RBM and
Interministerial Coordination) will be finalized by end of March 2007.
Government GEF
OFP11 (optional)
UNDP Country Office
UNDP Regional
HS
HS
The project team can be praised for the highly successful implementation of the project and in good spirit
Technical Advisor
and cooperation with ICPDR. Most of the outcomes foreseen will be achieved and all outputs delivered by
the end of the project. The project has produced a considerable number of high quality publications,
awareness materials and reports
Action Plan to Address Marginally Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory Rating
Where a project has received a rating of MU, U or HU describe the actions to be taken to address this:
Action to be Taken
By Whom?
By When?
10 Ratings: See instruction sheet for definitions of ratings. Use only: HS - Highly Satisfactory; S Satisfactory; MS Marginally Satisfactory;
MU - Marginally Unsatisfactory; U Unsatisfactory; HU Highly Unsatisfactory.
11 In the case of a project involving more than 1 country, it is suggested that for simplicity only the OFP (optional) and Country Office
Programme Manager from the lead country sign-off. If representatives from more than 1 country sign off, please add additional rows as
necessary, clearly indicating the country name for each signature.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP GEF PIR
2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 22 of 27
IV. Risks
1. Please annex to this report a print out of the corresponding Atlas Risk Tab (please use landscape format
and only print the frame).
2. For any risks identified as "critical" please copy the following information from Atlas:
Risk Type
Date
Risk Description
Risk Management Response
Identified
V. Adjustments to Project Strategy
Please report any adjustments made to the project strategy, as reflected in the logical framework matrix,
since the Project Document signature:
Change Made to:
Yes/No
Reason for Change
Project Objective
NO
Project Outcomes
NO
Project Outputs/ Activities /
NO
Inputs
Adjustments to Project Time Frame
If the duration of the project, the project work schedule, or the timing of any key events such as project
start up, evaluations or closing date, have been adjusted since project approval please explain the changes
and the reasons for these changes.
Change Reason
for
Change
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP
GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 23 of 27
VI. Financial Information
Please present all financial values in US$ millions to 2 decimal places only (e.g. $3,502,000 should be
written as $3.50m) please complete the table
Name of
Nature of
Amount
Amount
Additional
Estimated
Expected
Partner or
Contributor12
used in
committed
amounts
Total
Total
Contributor
Project
in Project
committed
Disbursement Disbursement
(including the
Preparation Document13 after Project
to
by end of
Private Sector)
(PDF A, B)
Document
30 June 2006
project
finalization11
GEF
GEF
$12.240 m
$9.750 m
$12.240 m
Contribution
Cash
Cofinancing
UNDP
Managed
UNDP(TRAC) UN Agency
Cash
Cofinancing
Partner
Managed
In-Kind
ICPDR
$12.878 m
$10.100 m
$12.878 m
Cofinancing
Total
$12.878 m
$10.100 m
$12.878 m
Cofinancing
Total for
$25.118 m
$19.850 m
$25.118 m
Project
Comments
Please explain any significant changes in project financing since Project Document signature, or
differences between the anticipated and actual rates of disbursement:
VII.
Additional Financial Instruments used in the Project
12 Specify if: UN Agency, other Multilateral, Bilateral Donor, Regional Development Bank (RDB), National Government, Local
Government, NGO, Private Sector, Other.
13 Committed amounts are those shown in the approved Project Document. These may be zero in the case of new leveraged
project partners.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP
GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 24 of 27
This section only needs to be completed if the project provides funds to any Financial Instruments such as:
Trust Funds, Sinking Funds, Revolving Funds, Partial Credit Risk Guarantees, Microfinance services,
Leasing or Insurance mechanisms.
If this project does not use any Additional Financial Instruments skip this and go to Section VIII.
Financial
Financial
Basis for Selection of Financial Institution
Instrument
Institution
Responsible for
Management
For Each Financial Instrument please complete the following two tables:
Name of Financial Instrument:
Source of Funds
Funds
Amount
Issues or Comments
(add rows for each
Committed
Disbursed
source)
in Project
to Date
Document
GEF
Rating of Performance of Financial Instrument14
2006
Comments
Rating
National Project
Manager/Coordinator
Government GEF OFP
UNDP Country Office
UNDP Regional
Technical Advisor
Overall Rating
Action Plan to Address Marginally Unsatisfactory, Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory Rating
Where a project has received a rating of MU, U or HU describe the actions to be taken to address this:
14 For ratings, use only:
HS - Highly Satisfactory; S Satisfactory; MS Marginally Satisfactory; MU - Marginally Unsatisfactory; U Unsatisfactory;
HU Highly Unsatisfactory.
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP
GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 25 of 27
Action to be Taken
By Whom?
By When?
End of Project Situation
What is to happen to any funds remaining in the Financial Instrument at the end of the project?
VIII.
Procurement Data
Note: For projects or project components executed by UNOPS this section must not be filled in -
data will be provided by UNOPS headquarters.
Please report the US$ value (in Thousands, e.g. 70,000 = 70) of UNDP/GEF Payments made to
GEF Donor Countries for Procurement. Please enter Project expenditure accumulated from
project start up to the date of this report into the matrix against the donor country supplying the
personnel, sub-contract, equipment and training to the project. Please report only on contracts
over US$ 2,000.
Supplying Donor
Personnel
Sub-contracts
Equipment
Training
Total
Country
(US$
(US$
(US$ thousands)
(US$ thousands)
(US$ thousands)
thousands)
thousands)
Germany
58
184
6
110
358
Denmark
839
839
Austria
1,200
439
1,639
UK
23
60
83
Netherlands
32
32
Switzerland
12
12
USA
106
106
Finland
34
34
Sweden 19
19
Total 19
34
6
110
3,122
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP
GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 26 of 27
IX. Lessons
Are there any lessons from this project that could benefit the design and implementation of other GEF-
funded projects? Please list up to three and indicate which one/s could be worth developing into case
studies of good/bad practice.
i. Excellent Cooperation with the ICPDR and its structures (co-executing agency and primary beneficiary)
resulting in improved administrative and technical capacities to cooperate. The ICPDR was formed to implement the
Danube River Protection Convention (DRPC) and is since 2000 the platform for coordinating the implementation of
the EU WFD in the DRB. The strength (and maturity) of the ICPDR together with the EU accession process has
contributed to the successful implementation of the DRP.
The project participates, together with relevant contractors where appropriate, in all Expert Groups Meetings
organized by the ICPDR. In this way the UNDP/GEF Project has the full overview and understanding and can
thereby provide the best assistance and input to the further development of the work, and provide a rapid response to
the inevitable changing needs of the ICPDR and the work of the Countries of the Danube Basin. Further, these
commonly implemented activities serve to improve administrative and technical capacities at the national level
based on guidelines and requirements set by the ICPDR and the Project. In this way, the GEF project plays a
catalytic role in stimulating DRB countries to meet their commitments to the DRPC and increasingly the WFD. This
encourages national governments to develop appropriate structures for regional cooperation that facilitate the
strengthening of good governance in the Danube River Basin.
Linking Global Environment issues to EU Water Framework Directive. A key lesson learned is the benefit of a
close link between global environmental objectives and an appropriate legislative framework. The EU WFD
represents, perhaps, the most comprehensive water legislation in the world. It provides an excellent basis for the
implementation of the DRP given commonly shared principles such as a basin-wide holistic approach, ecosystem
management etc. By linking project activities closely with the WFD and its implementation, the DRP is both
increasing the ability to meet global environmental objectives in the frame of the project, but also establishing the
basis for the sustainability of project results as well as the mechanisms for ongoing improvements after the life of
the project.
ii. Appropriate Level of Public Participation. The DRP has put a large emphasis on supporting increased public
participation in DRB cooperation. An important lesson learned is that it is critical to focus on developing appropriate
public participation mechanisms and strategies given specific level of activity (regional, national, sub-basin, local.)
The DRP is developing grassroots level (bottoms-up) activities via the Small Grants Programme, as well as is
supporting the development of the Danube Environmental Forum (DEF) which, as a regional network is capable of
working at all levels, sub-basin, national or local levels through its constituent members. The provisions of the WFD
provide an opportunity, based on legislative requirements, to enhance public participation within the frame of the
ICPDR and its parties for the first time. This will occur concretely by incorporating adequate public participation
activities and mechanisms into the process for developing the Danube River Basin Management Plan. Emphasis
here will be first at the regional (ICPDR or top) level. However, guidance will also be developed, to assist national
governments to incorporate public participation in river basin management at the sub-basin, national and local
levels. In addition to the above-mentioned activities, there are considerations to develop a specific project
component to improve access to information for key stakeholders and to enhance their abilities to address priority
sources of pollution (hot spots) in the DRB.
iii. Developing Appropriate Training Activities. By first undertaking a training needs assessment, the DRP learned
that training activities need to build institutional capacities (ICPDR, DEF etc.) as well as to build technical
capacities (nutrient reduction, wetland rehabilitation, reduction of toxic substances etc.) to assure increase of
knowledge and capacity to act for water management and pollution control. The training needs assessment also
served as the basis to prioritize training needs given limited resources (human and financial.)
X. Project Contribution to GEF Strategic Targets in Focal Area
O:\unops\docs\2004-2006 UNDP-GEF_phase 2\PDC_Project Documentation\007_UNOPS Project Status Reports & PIR-APR\New PIR-APR\UNDP
GEF PIR 2006 -DRP_final.doc
10/10/2006 10:37
Page 27 of 27