Submission Date: 31 August 2009

Expected Calendar (mm/dd/yy)
Milestones	Dates
Work Program	April 2008
Agency Approval date	Sept 2009
Implementation Start	Oct 2009
Mid-term Evaluation	Oct 2011
Project Closing Date	Oct 2013

PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION

GEFSEC Project ID: 3524

GEF Agency Project ID: PIMS 4063

Country(ies): Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines

Project Title: Sulu-Celebes Sea Sustainable Fisheries Management Project (SCS SFM)

GEF Agency: UNDP

Other Executing Partner(s): UNOPS

GEF Focal Area(s): International Waters

GEF-4 Strategic Program(S): IW-SP1: Restoring and Sustaining Coastal and Marine Fish Stocks and Associated Biological Diversity

Name of Parent Program/Umbrella Project: Coral Triangle Initiative

A. Project Framework

Project Objective: To improve the condition of the fisheries and their habitats in the SCS through an integrated, collaborative and sustainable tri-national management
Project Components	Indicate whether Invest-ment, TA, or STA**	Expected Outcomes	Expected Outputs	Indicative GEF Financing*		Indicative Co-financing*		Total ($M)
				($M)	%	($M)	%
1.Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis for SC LME	TA	Regional consensus on transboundary priorities, their immediate and root causes	1. Completed biophysical profile of the SCS and coastal areas including comprehensive evaluation of fisheries, important habitats, such as mangroves, sea grass beds Completed socio-economic and governance profile of the SCS and resource user groups, market networks, productive value chains, and market access opportunities, as well as economic valuation of ecosystem services and goods Causal chain analysis on unsustainable exploitation of fisheries conducted and options to address national and transboundary problems proposed TDA approved by National Inter-ministerial Committees and tri-National Steering Committee. Comprehensive stakeholder assessment completed and stakeholder integration and engagement plan developed for the entire LME	0.300	61	0.190	39	0.490
2. Agreement on regional and national legal, policy and institutional reforms for improved ecosystem and fisheries management (Strategic Action Programme)	TA	Agreement on regional and national legal , policy and institutional reforms for improved ecosystem and fisheries management	The SAP, together with the national action programs are completed and adopted Collaborative agreements with relevant regional and sub-regional organizations have been initiated, signed and implemented over the life of the Project	0.570	70	0.240	30	0.810
3. Introduction of institutional reforms to catalyze implementation of policies on reducing overfishing and improving fisheries and overall ecosystem management in the SCS and strengthening national fisheries laws and policies	TA	Strengthened existing institutions and introduction of reforms to catalyze implementation of policies on reducing over-fishing and improving fisheries and ecosystem management in the SCS that will benefit the SCS coastal communities; strengthened national fisheries laws and policies	Institutionally strengthened Tri-Com and Sub-Com on Sustainable Fisheries and agreement on options for the regional mechanism e.g., evolution of the Tri-Com into a Commission for the SCS as may be decided by the countries. Options for long-term financing for SSME are developed and additional cofinancing is raised for project activities. Strengthened national working groups/ presidential commission; existing national fisheries laws are reviewed.	0.550	42	0.756	58	1.306
4. Demonstration of best management practices in critical sites of the SCS	TA	Increased fish stocks at demonstration sites (5-10 percent increase) Per capita income at demonstration sites increased by 10 percent	Establishment of one demonstration site and another replication site for each country Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) plans for fisheries management, prepared and implemented at each demonstration site and initiated at each replication site Establishment of new or strengthening of existing local inter-sectoral committees for effective implementation of local ICM plans Better understanding of stocks of small pelagic fisheries in the SCS, to include the following: a) estimates of populations levels of target species groups; b) biology and ecology of target groups of small pelagic fishes	1.000	39	1.555	61	2.555
5. Knowledge management and replication of lessons learned		Facilitated uptake of knowledge and lessons learned	Captured, applied and disseminated knowledge, lessons and best practices within the SCS and other LMEs Creation of a project website that is linked to the websites of participating government agencies, UNDP, CI and IWLEARN.net	0.190	48	0.206	52	0.396
Project management				0.280	50	0.283	50	0.563
Total project costs				2.890	47	3.230	53	6.120

* List the dollar amount by project components/activities ** STA = Scientific & technical analysis.

B. Sources of Confirmed Co-financing for the Project ($ million)

Name of co-financier (source)	Classification	Type	Project ($)	%*
The Department of Fisheries, Sabah, Malaysia	National Government	Cash	400,000	12.4
Conservation International	NGO	Cash	140,000	4.3
Department of Agriculture, Philippines	National Government	Cash/in-kind	1,000,000	31.0
Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Indonesia	National Government	in-kind	1,000,000	31.0
The Department of Fisheries, Sabah, Malaysia	National Government	In-kind	600,000	18.6
UNDP-BDP	Impl. agency	In-kind	40,000	1.2
UNDP Philippines	Impl. agency	In-kind	50,000	1.5
Total Co-financing			3,230,000	100

* Percentage of each co-financier’s contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.

C. Financing Plan Summary for the Project ($)

	Project Preparation a	Project (b)	Total c = a + b	Agency Fee	For comparison: GEF and Co-financing at PIF
GEF	85,000	2,890,000	2,975,000	297,500	3,300,000 (incl IA fee)
Co-financing	100,000	3,230,000	3,330,000		3,520,000
Total	185,000	6,120,000	6,305,000	297,500	6,820,000

D. GEF Resources Requested by Agency(ies), Focal Area(s) and Country(ies) –

* No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.

GEF Agency	Focal Area	Country Name/ Global	(in $)
			Project	Agency Fee2	Total
		Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines	2,975,000	297,500	3,272,500
Total GEF Resources			2,975,000	297,500	3,272,500

¹ No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project

² Refers to the project and any previous project preparation funding that have been provided and for which no agency fee has been requested from the GEF Trustee

E. Consultants Working for Technical Assistance Components

Component	Estimated Person-months	GEF amount ($M)	Co-financing ($M)	Project Total ($M)
Local consultants*	725 – GEF 349 – Others 1,074 - Total	0.902	0.450	1.352
International consultants*	71 – GEF 29 – Others 100 – Total	0.632	0.250	0.882
Total	796 – GEF 378 – Others 1174 – Total	1.534	0.700	2.234

* Details to be provided in Annex C.

F. Project Management Budget/Cost

Cost Items	Total Estimated Person-months	GEF amount ($)	Co-financing ($)	Project Total ($)
Local consultants*	46 – GEF 46 – Others 92 – Total	46,000	23,000	69,000
International consultants*	21 – GEF	184,002		184,002
Office facilities, equipment, vehicles and communications*		36,825	300,000	336,825
Travel*		13,175	37,000	50,175
Others**		0	0	0
Total		280,002	360,000	640,002

* Details to be provided in Annex C. ** For others, it has to clearly specify what type of expenses here in a footnote.

G. Does the Project include a “Non-Grant” Instrument? No

(If non-grant instruments are used, provide in Annex E an indicative calendar of expected reflows to your agency and to the GEF Trust Fund).

H. Describe the budgeted M&E Plan:

Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established UNDP and GEF procedures and will be provided by the project team and the UNDP Country Office with support from the UNDP/GEF Regional Coordination Unit in Bangkok. Below is a summary of the M&E plan described in the Project Document (Part IV).

Indicative Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Workplan and Corresponding Budget

Type of M&E Activity	Responsible Parties	Budget (US$)*	Time Frame
Inception Meeting	· Regional Project Manager · UNDP CO · UNDP/GEF	$20,000	Within first two months of project start up
Inception Report	· Project Team · UNDP CO	None	Immediately following inception meeting
Measurement & Verification for IW Indicators and Project Performance Indicators	· Oversight by Project GEF Technical Advisor and Regional Project Manager · Measurement by regional field officers and local IAs	$50,000	Start, mid and end of Project
PIR	· Project Team · UNDP CO · UNDP/GEF	None	Annually
GEF IW Results template reporting and IW Tracking Tool reporting	· PMU · Project Steering Committee Review · Implementing Agencies	None		Annually
TPR and TPR Report	· Government Counterparts · UNDP CO · Project Team · UNDP/GEF Regional Coordinating Unit (RCU)	None	Every year, upon receipt of APR
Steering Committee Meetings	· Regional Project Manager · UNDP CO	None	Following Inception and subsequently at least once a year
Periodic status reports	· Project Team	$5,000 miscellaneous)	To be determined by project team and UNDP CO
Technical reports	· Project Team · Hired consultants as needed	$5,000	To be determined by project team and UNDP CO
Mid-Term (External) Evaluation (MTE)	· Project Team · UNDP CO · UNDP/GEF RCU · External (i.e. evaluation team)	$20,000	At the mid-point of project implementation
Final External Evaluation	· Project Team · UNDP CO · UNDP/GEF RCU External (i.e. evaluation team)	$20,000	At the end of project implementation
Terminal Report	· Project Team · UNDP CO · External Consultant	None	At least one month before the end of the project
Lessons learned	· Project Team · Consultancies · UNDP/GEF RCU (suggested formats for documenting best practices, etc.)	$50,000	Yearly
Audit	· UNDP CO · Project Team	$5,000
Visits to field sites (UNDP staff travel costs to be charged to IA fees)	· UNDP Country Offices · UNDP/GEF RCU (as appropriate) · Government representatives	$10,000	Yearly (average one visit per year)
TOTAL INDICATIVE COST · Excluding project team staff time and UNDP staff and travel expenses		US$185,000

*Excluding project team staff time. This expenditures are embedded in the various component budgets, particularly in the travel and fees of local and international consultants, as well as the budget and time of counterpart staff from government.

Results from the Project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through a number of existing information sharing networks and related forums. This also includes participation in all GEF’s International Waters Conferences and to contribute to IWLearn, including production of at least one IWLearn Experience Note (IWEN), establishment of a project website and participation in LME networks, thematic and regional workshops, etc. as appropriate. For this purpose, the Project will identify, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial to other projects under implementation or in the design and implementation of similar future projects.

PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

A. State the issue, how the project seeks to address it, and the expected global environmental benefits to be delivered:

Issues. The SCS large marine ecosystem (SCS-LME) of the Indo-Malay (Borneo)-Philippines archipelago (IMPA) is at the heart of the Coral Triangle and is among the world’s most biologically diverse marine environments. It covers an area of about 900,000 km² which is essentially composed of two large seas, the Sulu and Celebes/Sulawesi Seas and smaller inland seas. Coral reefs, sea grass meadow and mangrove ecosystems contribute to the marine mega biodiversity of the LME. These ecosystems support considerable numbers and species of sea turtles, marine mammals, elasmobranchs, marine fishes, invertebrates, seaweeds and sea grasses and other less known but equally important marine flora and fauna.

An estimated 35 million people live in association with the SCS and the population is expanding at 2-5% annually. Major economic activities include agriculture, fishing, aquaculture, tourism, and mining. Being at the heart of the most bio-diverse marine area in the world, the SCS is also a very rich fishing ground for large and small pelagic as well as demersal and reef fishes. The capture fisheries production alone is placed at over US$1.0 billion a year. The Celebes/Sulawesi Sea, particularly the Moro Gulf and Sulu Sea have been known as a major spawning grounds for tuna. Moreover, the human populations in the SCS area rely heavily on its fisheries as the main source of animal protein and livelihood. Thus, fish is a vital food security item in the three countries.

The growing needs of the collective population of coastal areas, increases in economic activity and the limitations of the government to support ecological services, legislation and marine law enforcement have allowed various forms of threats to overcome the marine environment of the SCS. Specifically, these pressures include unsustainable fishing practices, destructive fishing techniques, negative impacts of mismanaged aquaculture practices, pollution and poorly planned and inappropriate land use. Barriers that limit local ability to address these threats include insufficient understanding of the connectivity of marine biodiversity and the ecological processes that support it, generally ineffective and under-supported conservation management and enforcement regimes, limited capacity, and lack of coordination among natural resource managers, and economic incentives that favor short-term resource exploitation over sustainable use. All these have resulted in losses that are in the magnitude of millions of US dollars annually and a fisheries industry that is now summarized as illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU). The SCS fisheries is overexploited whereby the number of fishing vessels operating is approximately thrice the number required to harvest the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) of the fishery resource. This situation brings about low fisheries productivity, equity problems and undermined environmental integrity.

The Project. To address the foregoing issues, a SCS-LME Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis (TDA) will be conducted to jointly identify and prioritize transboundary fisheries management concerns that need prompt tri-national action by the three countries. The TDA will be used to identify priorities for joint action, root causes and scope for the concerns or opportunities, and serve as the basis for reforms and investments to be included in the Strategic Action Program (SAP). The SAP will serve as a sub-regional framework for a prioritized set of national and regional actions to achieve the objective of improving the condition of fisheries in the SCS. The rationale for its preparation is the common understanding that fish stocks in the region are shared whereby activities of one country within its territorial waters would have transboundary implications. This implies that effective management of fisheries requires regional action.

This Project will address institutional and related challenges at the national and regional levels to ensure that the SSME governance structure will be able to implement the SAP and other activities of this Project, as well as its other initiatives. The Project will establish collaborative agreements with relevant regional and sub-regional organizations in the pursuance of the objectives, outcomes, outputs, and activities of the Project as embodied in the SAP. The collaborative agreements to be set up will be consistent and complementary to the themes of the mission and vision, programs, projects and activities of each organization. Collaboration will support the achievement of specific outcomes, outputs and activities of the Project.

The Project will implement a continuing process of visioning and definition to ensure a sustainable institutional foundation for the management of SCS fisheries. This process will give due consideration to the long-term needs of the SCS and how this program can transcend short-term concerns such as transient politics. Furthermore, the process will involve the scientists, and other experts in the fields of social sciences, institutions, law and partners from the government, NGOs and the private sector and others of relevance to SCS management. Recognizing the need to strengthen the national working groups/presidential commission for the management of the SCS, during the first year of the Project, the specialists to be hired by the Project will conduct meetings and consultation in each of the SCS countries to develop measures to address the institutional and related problems these national institutions are facing, for implementation by these institutions themselves. An important work in this area is the assessment of the options for the long-term institutional arrangement for the management of the SCS fisheries. The Project will provide strategic assistance to the SSLME Tri-National Committee and its Sub-Committee on Sustainable Fisheries to implement the desired long-term institutional arrangement for SCS management.

The Project, within the context of the TDA and SAP, will aim to promote and adopt an integrated fisheries management approach of Growth, Control, and Maintenance mechanisms to achieve the target of increasing fish stocks at one demonstration site to be established in each country. The GCM approach will be applied through a collaborative, integrated, and participatory management of the small pelagic fisheries in selected demonstration sites. The Growth mechanisms entail pursuit of ecosystem-based fisheries management best practices and closed areas. The Control mechanisms will address the excess fishing effort by reducing the current fishing fleet operating in the SCS. In each demonstration site, an Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) Plan will be prepared which will apply the GCM mechanisms. A multi-sectoral committee will be created to enforce the ICM Plan and to endorse and support its implementation. Eventually, the outputs from the site-based activities will be enriched and guided by the results from the TDA and the SAP.

Global Environmental Benefits. The Project will foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority transboundary water concerns through more comprehensive ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries management and Strategic Program 1 on restoring and Sustaining Coastal and Marine Fish Stocks and Associated Biological Diversity. The Project will build foundational capacity and pilot some innovative demonstration on fisheries conservation and management in the SCS for replication and on-the-ground implementation in a subsequent phase and/or under the wider Asia Coral Triangle Initiative Program. Through institutional strengthening, policy reforms at the global/regional, national and local levels and implementation of concrete actions focused on demonstration sites, the Project is expected to bring about regional, national and local benefits. At the regional level, the three countries stand to benefit through the conservation of shared fish stocks.

The regional actions of IMP will contribute to international initiatives specifically the following:

a) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries in line with the requirements of the FAO Conference; and

b) WSSD targets which include the application of the ecosystem approach, maintenance or restoration of stocks to levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield with the aim of achieving these goals for depleted stocks and the WSSD Joint Plan of Implementation (JPOI)

In addition to meeting national commitments to WSSD and the Code of Conduct, the Project will also enable the participating countries enhance their contribution to regional initiatives, beyond the SSME Tri-National Committee. The three countries are among the 10 countries that have been participating actively in the East Asian Seas in the Regional Seas Program of UNEP. More recently, the Coordinating Body of the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) has now adopted a New Strategic Direction for the period 2008-2012. The Philippines and Indonesia are also active members of Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) and are currently implementing ICM at several demonstration sites in the SCS with the support of PEMSEA.

The conservation of these economically important fish species will redound to the benefit of each country and local communities through the supply of some of the cheapest sources of fish protein, provision of sustainable livelihoods among the marginalized sectors and supporting the web of life in the coastal and marine ecosystems. At the national level, the Project will also contribute to national targets as specified in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), in particular Goal 7: Ensuring Environmental Sustainability, Goal : Eradication of Poverty and Hunger, Goal 8: Developing a Global Partnership for Development. The Project will also facilitate the countries’ ability to meet their commitments in the UNCBD and MARPOL. At the local level, the Project will, as mentioned earlier, contribute to sustainable livelihoods and provision of some of the cheaper sources of fish protein. The inclusive approach employed in the demonstration sites will empower communities in directly planning for and management of their coastal resources. The lessons learned in the process will guide the up-scaling efforts at the national and regional arenas.

B. Describe the Consistency of the Project with National and/or Regional Priorities/Plans

At the sub-regional level, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines (IMP) are already cooperating to pursue biodiversity conservation and sustainable development of the SCS. It started from the formulation of a tri-national vision in 2001 and in developing the multi-stakeholder Ecoregion Conservation Plan (ECP). The ECP was adopted through a ministerial signing of a tri-national Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) during a side event held at the Seventh Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD-COP7) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in 2004. The ECP embodies four action plans, one each for the countries sharing the SCS LME and an ecoregion-level action plan that should be pursued jointly by the countries. The action plans are hinged on a tri-national vision and a common set of 10 objectives, one of which is a fisheries objective. The ECP incorporates the Framework for a Fishery Management Program (FMP) for SCS in the fisheries objective of the Ecoregion-level Action Plan. By adopting the ECP, the countries effectively adopted the FMP framework. Additionally, the ECP is aligned with the national priorities, plans and programs of the three countries as well as with the common international commitments, such as the SDS-SEA, CBD and the WSSD. At the first meeting of the Tri-national Committee (Tri-Com) held in Balikpapan, East Indonesia on 1 March 2006, the committee decided to focus on the following three major concerns of the SCS under the leadership of concerned countries: sustainable fisheries and livelihood (chaired by Malaysia); conservation of endangered, charismatic and migratory species (chaired by Indonesia); and establishment of network of marine protected areas (chaired by Philippines). The sub-committees have since organized their terms of reference and work objectives. The proposed Project will contribute to the implementation of relevant fisheries components of the work plans of the sub-committees.

This Project is aligned with the CTI program. The CTI is a regional program by the governments of countries in the Coral Triangle area including Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Timor Leste, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. This Project is part of the CTI program. CTI is supported and carried forward by private sector, multilateral agencies (GEF, ADB, UNDP, FAO, etc), bilateral donor agencies (e.g, USAID, AUSAID) and civil society (NGO) partners. The CTI aims to provide a major contribution toward safeguarding the region’s marine and coastal biological resources for the sustainable growth and prosperity of current and future generations. At present, the CTI has already drafted a Regional Program of Action that outlines its plan to attain its objectives in the Coral Triangle area (CTI 2009). The first goal of the plan is “Priority Seascapes Designated and Effectively Managed”. Under this goal is Regional Action 1, which adopts a general model for the sustainable management of seascapes by working closely with existing seascape partners including the SSLME Tri-Com to jointly adopt a set of “Key Elements for Sustainably Managed Seascapes”. Also under first goal of the plan is Regional Action 2 which aims to establish seascape capacity-building and learning mechanisms which could include the Tri-Com and Sub-Committees of the SSME[1]. The Project will therefore explore with CTI possibilities on how Regional Actions 1 and 2 of Goal 1 of the RPOA could be implemented in the case of the Tri-Com and Sub-Com on Sustainable Fisheries of the SSME and eventually establish actual cooperative agreements.

The previous section outlines the consistency of the Project with East Asian Seas in the Regional Seas Program of UNEP, with COBSEA, with ICM activities of PEMSEA and the contribution of the Project to relevant targets of WSSD to the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

C. Describe the Consistency of the Project with GEF Strategies and Strategic Programs

The Project is consistent with the first objective of the IW focal area to foster international, multi-state cooperation on priority transboundary water concerns through more comprehensive ecosystem-based approaches to management and, its Strategic Program 1 on Restoring and Sustaining Coastal and Marine Fish Stocks and Associated Biological Diversity, which targets Southeast Asian Seas as one of the global hotspots. The Project will build foundational capacity and pilot some innovative demonstration on fisheries conservation and management in the SCS for replication and on-the-ground implementation in a subsequent phase and/or under the wider Asia Coral Triangle Initiative Program.

The consistency of the Project is discussed in Part II.A above, particularly the contribution towards international agreements and related initiatives. The formulation of TDA and subsequently the SAP, support for the strengthening of the SSME Tri-Com and the Sub-Committee on Sustainable Fisheries and the potential evolution into a more permanent intergovernmental body through institutional reforms and site-based work generating political commitments towards employing integrated approaches that is consistent with ecosystem-based approaches through ICM are all consistent with IW-SP1.

D. Justify the type of financing support provided with the GEF resources.

GEF resources are provided as grants to the three SCS countries to support activities at the regional and national levels for policy reforms and foundational capacity strengthening and at the local level for pilot demonstration activities and other support activities.

E. Outline the Coordination with Other Related Initiatives

This Project is one of the subprojects of the CTI program. Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines have declared regional cooperation for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use of marine resources within the Coral Triangle. Two of the goals of the Regional Plan of Action for the CTI are on the Conservation of the Sulu-Sulawesi Seascape (Goal 1) and Goal 2 is on Sustainable Fisheries. National Plans of Action for Indonesia and the Philippines have now been prepared while the National Plan of Action for Malaysia is being discussed. All the National Plans of Actions are geared towards achieving the Goals in the Regional Plan of Action. The Project will coordinate closely with all the CTI subprojects that are being led by ADB, FAO and UNDP itself, which are currently in the PPG phase.

The growing limitations of national governments to individually address marine environmental concerns, especially those with transnational flavor, spurred the conceptualization and development of the Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia (SDS-SEA) under the Partnerships for Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA 2003). The SDS-SEA provides the regional framework for cooperation, consensus-building, developing ocean governance, and establishing monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system. During the 2^nd East Asia Seas Congress held in Haikou in December 2006, a Partnership Council was established to serve as one of the implementation mechanisms of the SDS-SEA. The Congress also recognized the potential contribution of sub-regional initiatives and programs to the implementation of the SDS-SEA, thus the basis for this fisheries project concept for the SCS that will make major contribution to the SDS-SEA’s objective for equitable and sustainable fisheries and conservation of fish stocks. To address the major concern of poaching of fisheries resources by foreign vessels and IUU fishing, the SDS-SEA will provide the platform for engaging with other concerned countries in the region.

The Project will establish synergies and linkages with the UNDP/GEF funded project on Oceanic Fisheries Management (OFM) involving the Pacific SIDS and the West Pacific-East Asia Oceanic Fisheries Management Project under development with Indonesia, Philippines and Vietnam as well as with the UNEP/GEF funded project for the South China Sea. It will also collaborate with the project on Conserving Marine Biodiversity through Enhanced Marine Park Management and Inclusive Sustainable Island Development (Malaysia). In addition, it will build on the experiences and lessons learned from the following completed GEF projects in the Philippines: 1) Conservation of the Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park (Tubbataha Ecosystem); and 2) Biodiversity Conservation and Management of Bohol Island Marine Triangle.

To promote strengthened regional coordination, the Project will link with the Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia-Malaysia-the Philippines – East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) initiative, a sub-regional cooperation forged in 1994 by Heads of State of BIMP, with the main goal of increasing trade, investments and tourism in the designated growth area. It encompasses the SCS, spans many sectors, and operates through 11 Working Groups (WGs) grouped into four Clusters. The WGs on Fisheries and Environment are lodged under the Natural Resources Development (NRD) Cluster (chaired by Indonesia). The SSME FMP framework on which this proposed Project was based was adopted by the BIMP-EAGA 11^th Senior Officials and Ministers Meeting in Davao City, Philippines in 2003. The main strength of BIMP-EAGA is its established coordination and collaborative mechanism anchored on a permanent central secretariat (BIMP Facilitation Center) based in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. Furthermore, it has organized institutional mechanisms such as regular meetings of the Ministers, Senior Officials, Clusters, WGs and the four country National Secretariats. It allows flexibility in cooperative arrangements and engagements (either bilateral, trilateral or quadrilateral). For better implementation of the Project, the mechanisms of the IMP Tri-National Committee and BIMP-EAGA can be tapped and streamlined. The agencies in the Tri-Com are represented in the BIMP-EAGA, while NGO members in the Tri-Com and its sub-committees have links to country EAGA leads and members.

In the Philippines, members of the Presidential Commission for the Integrated Conservation of Sulu-Celebes Seas (PCICDSCS) are delegates to Tri-Com and BIMP-EAGA. NGOs are also well-linked. For example, the Conservation International-Philippines is a member of the PCICDSCS, an official delegate to the Tri-Com and its three sub-committees and a participant to country and regional BIMP-EAGA meetings. Member agencies and NGOs of Tri-Com are implementing various related initiatives in key marine areas in the SCS-LME in partnership with local government units and other stakeholders. This proposed Project will enhance and complement such initiatives on the ground.

F. Discuss the value-added of GEF involvement in the project demonstrated through Incremental Reasoning

The transboundary fisheries conservation and management issues facing the three countries sharing the SCS cannot be solved by the nations individually but jointly. Since the late 1990s, the IMP have been discussing common fisheries issues in the tri-national area, that is, SCS and at best formulated the framework for Fisheries Management Program for SSME in 2002. Although BIMP-EAGA adopted the framework in the same year and the tri-nationally-adopted ECP embodies it, the lack of funds and the absence of a tri-national platform prevented the framework from taking off the ground. However, the creation of the Tri-National Committee for SSME in March 2006 provides the platform to pursue the implementation of the FMP framework. Without GEF catalytic support, the three countries will not, together, be able to determine and agree on joint priorities in the SCS. Among these are the critical fish species which need immediate management measures and the identification of fisheries hot spots and corresponding actions to take. Hence, without GEF assistance critical fish species will continue to be depleted or lost and joint actions at hotspots will not take place in the foreseeable future.

With GEF assistance, stakeholder capacities to manage regional, national and local fisheries will be improved. It will also contribute to improved and stabilized fish populations in the SCS. Appropriate policies will be developed to integrate management of natural and biological resources as well as economic development, fisheries business ventures and investments. It will expand regional cooperation to conserve and manage environmental resources, including overexploited and endangered migratory species and coastal areas of transboundary importance, and addressing the major concern for poaching. It will enable the IMP to put in place sub-regional institutional measures to monitor the effectiveness of resource management measures, building on the Tri-National Committee for SCS. This will allow the three countries to integrate their fisheries management into their coastal management programs at the local level.

G. Indicate Risks, Including Climate Change Risks, that Might Prevent the Project Objective(s) from Being Achieved and Outline Risk Management Measures

The risks faced by the Project summarized below, proceeds directly from the Project Logical Framework. For the policy components of the Project, institutional risks could be the major concerns at the regional, national and local levels. The formulation and the subsequent implementation of the SAP would depend on stakeholder support at the national and local levels. The stakeholders include regional and national government institutions, non-government organizations and the private sector. The private sector is a critical partner particularly in the implementation of measures that would address the overexploitation of fishery resources. The institutional risks at the local level mirror those at the national and regional levels, although at a much smaller geopolitical scale. Climate change risks are relevant to the Project. The uncertainties about the negative impacts of climate change would affect the long-term impacts of the Project.

The risk mitigation measures may be grouped according to the type of risk. To address the institutional risks, an inclusive approach will be employed by drawing all the stakeholders into the project activities, particularly in the formulation and implementation of the SAP and local regulations. The consultation mechanisms and the project implementation arrangements at the local, national and regional levels will strengthen institutional capacity to carry out project activities and achieve the objectives. Climate change risks will be addressed by increasing the resiliency of coastal and marine ecosystems. The Project will benefit from adaptation measures that will be demonstrated in other CTI subprojects.

Risks and Assumptions by Outcome and Output

H. Explain How Cost-effectiveness is Reflected in the Project Design

Cost-effectiveness at the regional, national and local level activities is achieved through the following:

a) Working through or building on existing institutional arrangements in the implementation of regional, national and local activities; and

b) Applying agreed operating principles of the SSME Tri-National Commission and the corresponding national-level institutional frameworks.

The institutional arrangements for the Project that will ensure cost-effectiveness is further discussed in Part III below.

The Project will employ lessons learned from UNDP/GEF’s portfolio of IW projects under implementation to ensure cost-effectiveness. Among these lessons are the following:

• Project design can only be effective if the following key ingredients are present: 1) a clear shared vision, 2) inclusive, multi-level partnerships, 3) active stakeholder participation sustained through appropriate incentive mechanisms, 4) adequate funding streams marked with resource counter parting, 5) science-based management support, 6) purposive capacity building and organizational strengthening, and 7) active communication and advocacy. The role of partnership building must be given importance at all times and fostered at all levels. Participation, not mere consultations, needs to be ensured and sustained through both financial and non-monetary incentives such as mechanisms to foster team building, community spirit and concern for the common good. In addition, partnership development should be supported by resource mobilization from all partners that are both willing and able to contribute to the advancement of the Project’s development and immediate objectives.
• Political commitment to the Project at the highest level (Ministerial and Presidential) is very critical for sustainability. At least at the Ministerial level Project Officers (National Directors and Programme Assistants) should interact continuously with political leaders. The Inter-Ministerial Steering Committees should be encouraged to meet regularly and give feedbacks to their respective Ministers.

The proposed Project builds on these and other lessons, which will ensure its cost-effectiveness. The political support to the CTI at the highest level, manifested by the recent CTI Summit in Manado, provides a strong platform for the SCS LME Project. The implementation of the Project will build on existing institutions to further reduce overlaps and minimize bureaucratic inertia. The project implementation arrangement is further discussed below.

part iii: institutional coordination and support

A. Institutional Arrangements

UNDP will be the Implementing Agency (IA). Each of the three countries has an active UNDP CO which will provide in-kind support to project development and implementation. UNDP has supported coastal and marine projects in the SCS region through a number of national and regional projects.

The UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS) through its Global and Inter-Regional Division will execute the SCS SFM Project, in accordance with standard operational, financial guidelines and procedures. UNOPS will be accountable to UNDP for the delivery of agreed outputs as per agreed project work plans, and for financial management and reporting as well as ensuring cost-effectiveness.

B. Project Implementation Arrangement

As a general principle, the Project will not create new institutions at least at the start of project implementation but ensure that the existing ones are enhanced and capacitated to properly perform their functions. The organogram of the Project is presented in Figure 2 below. The Project will have a Project Steering Committee (PSC) to provide overall guidance and advise related to the regional, national, local and overall activities of the Project. The PSC will be composed of one representative each from the UNDP, UNOPS and CI and three representatives from the SSME Sub-Com on Sustainable Fisheries representing the three countries. In the conduct of its functions, the PSC will interact and receive inputs from the CTI which covers the SSME as a sub-region, GEF which mainly funds the Project, UNOPS which is the executing agency and UNDP/PPR which is the implementing agency.

Under the PSC is the regional Project Management Unit (PMU) which is the overall implementing unit. The PMU will be headed by the RPM to be hired on a full-time basis, following UNOPS guidelines, to perform the overall management duties for the Project. The RPM will be in-charge of the supervision of project activities and deliverables, hiring, contracting and supervision or oversight of regional staff and regional and national consultants, project procurement and disbursement, budget management, reporting, evaluation and monitoring. The RPM will be assisted by a Regional Technical Staff (RTS) to be recruited on a full-time basis to provide technical backup to the RPM and the Project and perform other assigned duties. A regional Administrative and Financial Officer will also be hired on a full-time basis also to provide secretarial support and other assigned duties. Among its functions, the PMU will interact and provide guidance to CI and other regional, national and local NGOs, academicians and other collaborating agencies and stakeholders on the progress and overall implementation of the Project.

At the national level, the Project will establish a National Project Unit (NPU) in each of the SCS countries to coordinate the activities between the demonstration sites and the PMU on one hand, and the national executing agencies on the other. The NPU will be headed by a National Coordinator (NC) who will be a part-time seconded staff from the executing agency of the particular country. The NC will be assisted by the National Project Assistant (NPA) who is also a part-time seconded staff. A full-time coordination specialist will be hired by the Project to assist the NC. At the demonstration site level, the Project will establish a Demonstration Site Unit (DSU) in each of the SCS countries. Arrangements will be made with the local government partner to host the DSU. The DSU will be headed by a Site Coordinator (SC) who will be hired on a full-time basis to perform the overall management duties in the demonstration site. Specifically, the SC will be in-charge of the supervision of activities and deliverables, hiring and contracting of local staff and local consultants, procurement and disbursement, budget management, reporting, evaluation and monitoring related to the demonstration site. The SC will also be responsible for the supervision of the demonstration site consultants of the Project, including the ICRM expert, fisheries specialist, IEC expert, and institutional social expert who will hold formal office at the DSU during the terms of their project engagement. The SC will be assisted by a monitoring and administrative staff to be recruited by the Project and another staff to be seconded by the local governments, regional offices of national fisheries agencies and other local partners.

The implementation of the SAP, national strategic action plans and ICM plans by the Project and its various partners and stakeholders at the regional, national and local demonstration site levels may require other temporary management staff and personnel in addition to the ones already aforementioned. These potential additional staff will be established by the Project as the need arises with funding to be generated from sources outside of the current project budget. These new sources may include counterpart funding and future commitments by various partners and stakeholders. The hiring of additional staff will be done based on objectives, resource constrains and other important project considerations.

Since the management of project activities at the regional, national and local levels require an adequate degree of cohesion and integration, the regional, national and demonstration site coordinators of the Project will regularly and continuously coordinate, communicate and disseminate data and information on project activities to the various stakeholders at all levels. To do this, the coordinators will present updates and developments of project activities within their domain following the M&E plan and through meetings and conferences and similar direct contact presentations and through electronic and other indirect means of communication. A schedule of periodic direct contact presentations will be developed at all levels and implemented by the project coordinators. Electronic methods and traditional mail communication methods will also be developed and implemented to enhance the integration and coherent conduct of project activities with other fisheries activities in the relevant regional, national and local areas during the entire duration of the Project.

Finally, since the lessons learned at the regional, national and local demonstration sites in each of the SCS countries will be disseminated to other areas for broader application of knowledge learned and mainstreaming of project activities, the management of the Project at all levels will establish knowledge management activities designed for outreach to non-project areas. Detailed discussion is in Outcome 5 and Output 5.1 in the project strategy. The project coordinators will devise and implement specific IEC activities utilizing appropriate forms of traditional and electronic media that will enhance the impact of the Project not only in its sites but in the broader SCS arena.

Organogram of the Sulu-Celebes Sea Sustainable Fisheries Management Project

part iv: explain the alignment of project design with the original PIF:

The overall logic of the Project as embodied in the PIF is closely reflected by the outcomes and outputs in the project logical framework in Annex A. The regional and national activities are basically the same as in the PIF, which have been validated in the consultations with national stakeholders and with the SSME Tri-National Committee and the Sub-Committee on Sustainable Fisheries.

The national consultations during the PPG phase provided further guidance on the design of the site-based activities. One demonstration site will be covered by the Project while a replication site will be initiated towards the end of the Project. At the same time, additional outputs have been specified to ensure consistency of the Project with the IW Strategic Program and to strengthen the Project’s ability to meet the objective of improving fish stocks and increasing incomes by 10%. More importantly, higher GEF funding has been allocated to activities to deliver the outputs, compared to the initial allocation in the PIF. The higher allocation is prompted by the scope of the expected outcomes from this component. A component on Knowledge Management and Replication of Lessons Learned (Component 5) has been added to ensure that the best practices derived from project activities are shared through IWLEARN, the broader CTI program and stakeholders within the SCS countries and beyond.

There is a slight deviation in the co-funding amount indicated at PIF stage and co-funding confirmed at CEO endorsement. This is caused by the fact that Conservation International’s co-funding policy only allows their contribution in the first year to be counted at this stage, although their co-financing letter states that there will be renewed commitments in project years two to four. UNDP will therefore instead report these ‘new’ contributions in its annual PIR report to GEFSEC. Total co-funding to the project by its completion date is therefore expected to exceed the original target in the PIF.

part v: Agency(IES) certification

This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for CEO Endorsement.
Yannick Glemarec UNDP/GEF Executive Coordinator	Anna Tengberg Regional Technical Advisor Project Contact Person
Date: 31 August 2009 Email: Yannick.Glemarec@undp.org	Tel: +66 2288 2730 Email: Anna.Tengberg@undp.org

ANNEX A

DESIGN AND MONITORING FRAMEWORK

Annex B

Responses to Project Reviews

A. GEF Council Comments: Switzerland

1. It is not evident from the project document, by what stage TDA as well as SAP shall be completed. This should, in the eyes of the reviewer, be stated already at this early PIF-state.

Response: The schedule and completion of the TDA (end of first year) and SAP (end of the third year) have now been incorporated in the Project Document.

2. Strengthened national fisheries laws and policies are envisaged to attain sustainable fisheries management practices. The funds available seem to be inordinately small to reach this goal.

Response: The Project activities will build on existing fisheries policies and laws in each of the countries where much has been accomplished to date. The strengthening will focus on the gaps that will be identified in the SAP. During implementation, additional cofinancing from governments is expected to be generated beyond those that have been committed at CEO endorsement.

3. ”The number of people affected is given as 35 million, expanding at 2.5% annually. The capture fisheries production alone is placed at over USD1.0 billion a year. Pressures on the marine environment are listed as:

· Destructive fishing techniques

· Mismanaged aquaculture practices

· Pollution

· Poorly planned and inappropriate land use

Additional barriers for remedial action are:

· Insufficient understanding of the connectivity of marine biodiversity and its supporting ecological processes

· Generally ineffective and under-supported conservation management and enforcement regimes

· Limited capacity

· Lack of coordination among natural resource managers

· Economic incentives that favour short-term resource over exploitation

· All these have resulted in losses that are in the magnitude of millions of US dollars annually”….

Therefore, summary “Concern 3”: By simple arithmetic, some millions of USD losses annually are a negligible amount compared to the one billion dollar catch annually. Furthermore, the sheer task of properly outlining the underlying problems (cited above) seems to take on mammoth proportions. An inherent discrepancy between the scale of the problem stated and the small size of funds to be made available is evident.

Response: The realization of the magnitude of the problem provided the impetus for this Project. The approach, however, is to tackle problems underlying the SCS fisheries one step at a time. The first step, which is this Project, is to build the foundational capacity and road map (the SAP) towards better management of the fishery resources. At the same time, limited pilot activities that demonstrate the gains from proper management will be initiated for subsequent replication. The envisioned next step through a follow-up project is to fully implement the SAP and nurture the institutions created in this Project (first phase) to capitalize on the initial gains and reap the full benefits from better management. Further, it is expected that, as the Project is able to demonstrate success, it will leverage additional financial resources during project implementation from the government and other development partners such as the NGOs, the communities themselves and from local and national governments.

Further, the Project should be seen from the context of the CTI program that aims to implement activities that would have direct and spill-over effects on the SCS fisheries. For instance, the strengthening of MPA systems in the three countries through the ADB-led subprojects in the CTI is bound to protect the spawning areas and feeding grounds of the small pelagic fisheries in the SCS. The programmatic CTI will pave the way for closer collaboration across its subprojects to maximize their synergy.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

The task undertaken is inappropriately complex compared to the funds requested. The question seriously arises whether there is a mistake in the project document. The reviewer therefore earnestly proposes that either:

a) the expected objectives and outcomes are scaled down considerably;, and/or

b) the funds are increased several fold. The funds available are – in the opinion of the reviewer – grossly insufficient to even formulate proper TDA and SAP, not to speak of the other stated goals and/or actions.

The reviewer therefore earnestly requests a Council Discussion on the project for a proper reconsideration – either way – in order to match the magnitude of the problems stated with the financial and managerial resources for remedial action requested.

Response: UNDP and its partners appreciate the comments from Switzerland. As mentioned above, the phased approach to address the issues and threats facing the SCS fisheries will be the strategy of the Project. The response is already articulated above.

B) STAP Comments

1. Based on this PIF screening, STAP’s advisory response to the GEF Secretariat and GEF Agency(ies):

Consent

2. STAP considers this proposal an important step towards improving the condition of fisheries and their habitats in the Sulu-Celebes Sea. STAP encourages UNDP to specify how the results from the "growth" mechanism and the "control" mechanisms will be measured and monitored. More specifically, STAP believes that considering data collection would be a good idea for the adequate management - monitoring of ecosystem based fisheries, and control efforts to reduce fishing in the project area. STAP would be happy to offer further advice on this as the proposal is developed further.

Response: The indicators are specified for each output and outcome as indicated in Section II, Part II – Project Logical Framework of the Project Document and in Annex A above. The specification and monitoring of the “growth” and “control” indicators will be done during the preparation of the ICM plans for each demonstration site. At this time, the specific growth and control measures will be formulated which should pave the way for the identification of appropriate indicators.

3. Regarding partnerships and historical information relevant to the TDA, STAP suggests that several NGOs, such as CI, WWF which have worked in the region be explicitly included, and that special attention be paid to the tuna fisheries of the area, which have an active, long and sometimes contentious history between the countries, especially between Indonesia and Philippines (see Butcher, J G. The closing frontier: a history of the marine fisheries of Southeast Asia c. 1850-2000. Singapore, ISEAS, 2004. and some of the more recent WWF work on western and central Pacific tuna fisheries.)

Response: The formulation of the TDA and the SAP will involve CI as the lead group, in consultation with other stakeholders. The TDA and SAP will build on the SSME-ECP that was finalized through the active participation of WWF. All the fisheries and key marine habitats of the SCS will be covered in the TDA and SAP.

Annex C:

GEF-Financed Consultants to be Hired for the Project

Position Titles	Rate ($)	Duration	Tasks to be Performed/Relevant Outcomes and Outputs
For Project Management
International
Regional Project Manager (RPM)	8,762/ person- month	21 person- months (part-time)	Manage the project activities, supervise all the project activities and ensure completion of deliverables, hire and supervise regional staff and regional and national consultants, project procurement and disbursement, and attend to all other related duties. Reports to the Project Steering Committee.
Local
Project Administrative and Financial Officer (1)	1,000/ person month	46 person-months (full-time)	Manage the daily administrative operations of the PMU, ensure that the financial, personnel and procurement matters of the PMU and the Project are adequately addressed, and attend to all other related duties. Reports to the RPC.
Office facilities	36,825		16,825 – Computers and office equipment for PMU 10,000 – laptops for national coordinators 10,000 – rent of temporary office space at demonstration sites
Travel	13,175		Regional travel for project steering committee meetings and CTI meetings
For Technical Assistance
International
TDA-SAP Coordinator (Regional)	9,000/ person-month	27 person-months	Provide overall responsibility and leadership during the entire TDA-SAP preparation and the submission of the final TDA-SAP and attend to all other related duties related to Outcomes 3 and 5 [all Outputs in Outcomes 1, 2, 3 and 5]. These tasks will be added to the TOR of the RPM, with the RPM to be hired for a total of 28 months for the duration of the Project.
Regional Fisheries Biologist	8,800/ person-month	26 person-months	Provide regional and sub-regional physical, biological and related technical analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and undertake all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation, provide inputs to relevant activities in the three demonstration sites [all Outputs in Outcomes 1, 2, 4]. These tasks will be form part of a Technical Staff that will assist the RPM and will be based at the PMU. The option is to hire a full-time qualified expert as a national staff at a rate of $5,000 per person-month.
Regional Legal and Institutional Expert	400/ person-day	165 person-days	Provide regional and sub-regional legal, policy, institutional and related analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and undertake all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Regional Socio-Economist	400/ person-day	126 person-days	Conduct regional and sub-regional social, economic and related analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and attend to all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and 2.1]
GIS Specialist	400/ person-day	33 person-days	Provide GIS-related services and support for the TDA-SAP and undertake all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Resource Mobilization Specialist	350/ person-day	88 person-days	Develop a plan for the sustainable financing of the Tri-National Committee, Sub-Committee on Sustainable Fisheries and the Project as a whole and take the lead in implementing the plan, and generating funds [Output 3.1]
Local
Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist	250/ person-day	132 person-days	Undertake a study on the policy, legal and institutional improvements that need to be done to strengthen the Tri-National Committee and the Sub-Committee on Fisheries, develop a plan to monitor and evaluate the performance of these management organizations and the Project as a whole and take the lead in implementing it [Output 5.1]
Knowledge Management Specialist	250/ person-day	264 person-days	Prepares the communication plan for the Project and implement it, including designing the project website, providing inputs to IWLEARN.net, preparing project brochures and briefs. Coordinates the work of the site-based IEC experts. [Output 5.1 primarily and all relevant outputs]
Editor	150/ person-day	44 person-days	Edit the TDA-SAP and attend to all other related duties (may be sub-contracted) [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Lay-out Artist	100/ person- day	11 person-days	Lay-out the TDA-SAP and attend to all other related duties (may be subcontracted) [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Local Fisheries Biologists	2,500/ person-month	21 person-months	Provide national and local physical, biological and related technical analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and undertake all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and Output 2.1] Technical assistance in the conduct of special and appropriate fisheries studies at the local/site level such as those pertaining to fishing gears and selectivity, fisheries biology, etc., and provision of corresponding technical analysis and reports for the Project [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs]
Local Legal and Institutional Experts	2,500/ person-month	39 person-months	Provide national and local legal, policy, institutional and related analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and undertake all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation and providing guidance to site-based work [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Local Socio-Economists	2,500/ person-month	21 person-months	Conduct national and local social, economic and related analysis and reports for the TDA-SAP and attend to all other relevant activities during the TDA-SAP preparation and providing guidance to site-based work [Output 1 and 2.1]
Facilitators	200/ person-day	39 person-days	Attend and facilitate and all relevant meetings, consultations and other regional and sub-regional gatherings related to TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
Documenters	100/ person-day	39 person-days	Attend, document and prepare a report of proceedings of all relevant meetings, consultations and other regional and sub-regional gatherings related to TDA-SAP preparation [Output 1 and Output 2.1]
SSME Sub-Com / National Coordination Support Staff (1 for each country)	1,100/ person-month	138 person-months	Serve as focal persons for coordinating the activities of the Sub-Committee on Sustainable Fisheries with the relevant institutions in the three countries and the other international, regional, national and local partners of the Sub-Committee, plan and implement the training plan for sub-committee and national technical working groups/presidential commission members and staff [Output 3.1 and Output 3.2]
Demonstration Site Coordinators (1 for each site)	1,000/ person-month	135 person-months	Daily supervision and coordination of project implementation and activities at the local demonstration site; ensuring that procedures are followed for procurement, accounting, etc. at the local site; Provision of support in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and reporting of the AWP to achieve the project objectives in accordance with the guidelines set by the PMU [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs.]
Demonstration Site ICM Expert (1 for each site)	2,500/ person-month	48 person-months	Technical assistance in the formulation and implementation of an Integrated Coastal Resource Management (ICRM) Plan for the demonstration site, including consultations with stakeholders [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs.]
Demonstration Site IEC Expert (1 for each site)	1,500/ person-month	24 person-months	Formulation and implementation of a site-based Communications Strategy and Plan that would convey project information, updates and accomplishments to all concerned stakeholders in an effective and timely manner, and in popular form when necessary, with guidance from the Knowledge Management Specialist [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs; Output 5.1]
Demonstration Site Institutional / Social Expert (1 for each site)	1,500/ person-month	15 person-months	Provide local legal, policy, institutional and related analysis and reports for the ICM and site-based policy reforms and undertake all other relevant activities with guidance from the Legal/Institutional Specialist [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs; Output 5.1]
Site Monitoring Staff (1 per site)	600/ person-month	126 person-months	Collection and processing of relevant fisheries data at the local site and reporting results to the Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs; Output 5.1]
Site Administrative Support Staff (1 per site)	300/ person-month	135 person-months	Administrative and logistical assistance to the Site Coordinator and the site office to meet project objectives [Outcome 4 – all relevant outputs]

Annex D:

Status of Implementation of Project Preparation Activities and the Use of Funds

A. Explain if the PPG Objective has been Achieved Through the PPG Activities Undertaken

The planned activities during the PPG were carried out as planned and provided sufficient information to finalize the project design that will ensure the achievement of the Project objectives.

Stakeholder consultation and engagement. The national consultants undertook research and participatory discussions with key stakeholders at the national and local levels. The international consultants, together with the national consultants sought the inputs of the SSME Tri-Com and the Sub-Com on Sustainable Fisheries and other regional bodies such as BIMP-EAGA. The list of persons and institutions consulted is in Annex 6 of the Project Document.

Analysis of best fisheries management practices. Through research and consultations, the PPG team analyzed the best management practices in the SCS. The suite of GCM measures are discussed in the Project Document, particularly those pertaining to Component 4.

Appraisal of fisheries, management systems, governance structures, and policies and gap analysis. Through the SWOT analysis involving the SSME Tri-Com and Sub-Com members, supplementary research and consultations, the alternative management systems, governance structures and policies were analyzed. The inputs of Conservation International staff who have been involved for a long time in the development of the SSME ECP and the creation of the SSME Tri-National Committee were vital in this activity.

Institutional reforms to address capacity gaps/need. The planned PPG activities were undertaken, involving primarily consultations with the SSME Tri-Com and the Sub-Com. The planning of site-based activities will be further strengthened during the preparation of the ICM plans, which will outline the strategies for the effective implementation of fisheries management measures.

1. describe findings that might affect the project design or any concerns on project implementation, if any:

These considerations are already discussed in Part IV pertaining to the alignment of the Project to the original PIF. The site-based activities have been expanded to ensure the achievement of the project outputs and outcomes.

B. Provide Detailed Funding Amount of the PPG Activities and their Implementation Status in the Table Below:

Project Preparation Activities Approved	Implementation Status	GEF Amount ($)				Co-financing ($)
		Amount Approved	Amount Spent To Date	Amount Committed	Uncommitted Amount*
Stakeholder consultation and engagement	Completed	40,000	40,000			40,000
Analysis of best fisheries management practices	Completed	15,000	15,000			10,000
Analysis of existing regional agreements and governance structures	Completed	10,000	10,000			10,000
Institutional reforms to address capacity gaps/needs	Completed	20,000	20,000			10,000
Project Scoping and Definition	Completed	0				30,000
Total project preparation financing		85,000	85,000			100,000

* Any uncommitted amounts should be returned to the GEF Trust Fund. This is not a physical transfer of money, but achieved through reporting and netting out from disbursement request to Trustee. Please indicate expected date of refund transaction to Trustee.

---

Converted with Word to HTML.