UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY
PROJECT DOCUMENT
SECTION 1 - PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
1.1 Title of Sub-Programme:
POPS projects
1.2 Title of Project:
Regional Program of Action and Demonstration of
Sustainable Alternatives to DDT for Malaria Vector
Control in Mexico and Central America
1.3 Project Number:
GF2760-03-
1.4 Geographic Scope:
Regional: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, and
Panama:
1.5 Implementation:
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and
National Executing Agencies: Ministries of Health
of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Panama
1.6 Duration of the Project:
36 months
Commencing:
April, 2003
Completion:
April, 2006
1.7 Cost of Project (millions US$):
Cash
In-Kind
%
Cost to GEF Trust Fund
7.165
53.9
Subtotal
7.165
Cofinancing
Cost to Govts
5.865*
38.5
Cost to PAHO
0.654
5.4
Cost to CEC
0.200
2.2
Subtotal
0.200
6.519
Subtotals
7.365
6.519
100
Grand Total Project Cost
13.884
*Increase due to increase in Nicaragua's contribution
1.8 Project Summary:
During the last decade Mexico and Central American countries have gradually discontinued DDT
sprayings for vector control. Malaria, however, still poses a serious risk for the population of
these countries. This proposal aims to prevent reintroduction of DDT for malaria control by
promoting new integrated vector control techniques and implementing a coordinated regional
program to improve national capacities. Major project components will be: the implementation
of demonstration projects of vector control without DDT or other persistent pesticides that can be
replicable in other parts of the world and which are cost-effective, environmentally sound, and
sustainable; the strengthening of national and local institutional capacity to control malaria
without the use of DDT; and the elimination of DDT stockpiles in the eight participating
countries.
Signature:
For PAHO
For the UNEP Environment Fund
___________________________ ___________________________
Dr. Irene Klinger
E.F. Ortega
Director, Office of External Relations
Chief
Pan American Health Organization
Budget and Financial Management
Washington D.C.
Service, UNON
Date:___________________________
Date: ___________________________
GEF PROJECT BRIEF COVER PAGE
APPROVED AT THE 19TH MEETING OF THE GEF COUNCIL, MAY 2002
IDENTIFIERS
PROJECT NUMBER:
[Implementing Agency Project No not yet assigned]
PROJECT NAME:
Regional (Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Panama): Regional
Program of Action and Demonstration of Sustainable
Alternatives to DDT for Malaria Vector Control in
Mexico and Central America
DURATION:
3 years
IMPLEMENTING AGENCY:
United Nations Environment Program
EXECUTING AGENCIES:
Regional: Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
National: Ministries of Health of Belize, Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, and
Panama
ELIGIBILITY:
The participating countries are eligible under paragraph 9
(b) of the Instrument for the Restructured GEF. The
proposed intervention is consistent with the provisions of
the POPs Convention.
GEF FOCAL AREA:
International Waters
GEF PROGRAMMING FRAMEWORK: Global Contaminants, Operational Program Number 10
Draft Operational Programme 14 on POPs
________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY:
During the last decade Mexico and Central American countries have gradually discontinued DDT
sprayings for vector control. Malaria, however, still poses a serious risk for the population of
these countries. This proposal aims to prevent reintroduction of DDT for malaria control by
promoting new integrated vector control techniques and implementing a coordinated regional
program to improve national capacities. Major project components will be: the implementation
of demonstration projects of vector control without DDT or other persistent pesticides that can be
replicable in other parts of the world and which are cost-effective, environmentally sound, and
sustainable; the strengthening of national and local institutional capacity to control malaria
without the use of DDT; and the elimination of DDT stockpiles in the eight participating
countries.
COSTS AND FINANCING (MILLION US $):
GEF
Project
:
6.599
Project Support Costs
:
0.528
i
PDF B
:
0.330
Project Preparation Costs
:
0.038
Sub-Total GEF
:
7.495
Co-financing
PDF-B (all sources)
:
0.440
CEC
:
0.200
PAHO
:
0.654 (in kind)
Governments
5.1164 (in cash & kind)*
Sub-Total Co-Financing
:
6.4104
_____________________________ ________________________________________
Total Project Cost
:
13.9054
* This figure represents an in principle commitment from the participating countries to redirect
their malaria program budgets in the demonstration areas to project activities.
OPERATIONAL FOCAL POINT ENDORSEMENTS:
COUNTRY
OPERATIONAL
POSITION
DATE OF
FOCAL POINT NAME
ENDORSEMENT
Belize
Nancy Namis
AG Chief Executive Officer
8/1/02
Ministry of Economic Development
Costa Rica
Licda. Guaria Vargas Executive Director , FUNDECOOPERACION
28/9/01
El Salvador
Ana Maria Majano
Minister of Environment and Natural Resources
29/10/01
Guatemala
Dr. Sergio Augusto
Minister of the Environment
20/10/01
Lavarreda Anieu
Honduras
Ing. Xiomara Gomes Minister of Environment and Natural Resources
25/9/01
de Caballero
Mexico
Lic. Ricardo Ochoa
Ministry of Finance of Mexico, Director,
5/12/01
International Financial Institutions (SHCP)
Nicaragua
Garcia A. Cantero
Advisor to the Minister
24/9/01
Coordinator for PROTIERRA
Panama
Ing. Ricardo R.
General Administrator, National Environmental
26/10/01
Anguizola M.
Authority
IA CONTACT:
Name: Mr Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Coordinator, UNEP/GEF Co-ordination Office, UNEP,
ii
Nairobi, Tel: (254-2) 624165, Fax: (254-2) 624041, Email: ahmed.djoghlaf@unep.org
iii
SECTION 2 - BACKGROUND AND PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TO OVERALL
SUBPROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION
BACKGROUND BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION
1.
Malaria is a transboundary problem affecting most tropical countries. It is a protozoal
infection transmitted to human beings by an infected anopheline mosquito bite mainly between
sunset and sunrise. Human malaria is caused by four species of Plasmodium protozoa: P.
falciparum, P. vivax, P. ovale and P. malariae. In Central America and Mexico the main malaria
vectors are A. pseudopunctipenis, A. albimanus, and A. vestitipenis. It is estimated that
89,128,000 people in Mesoamerica live in areas environmentally suitable (high temperatures and
humidity) for the transmission of malaria, of which 23,445,000 (35%) live in highly endemic
areas. Migration of infected people and environmental conditions such as rainfall patterns,
altitude and temperature all facilitate the movement of the disease across national borders. Only
an integrated regional approach can address the human and environmental challenges in malaria
prone areas.
2.
DDT has been extensively used as an insecticide for malaria vector control and in
agriculture in Mexico and Central America since the 1950's; sprayed not only in households but
also on water surfaces in an attempt to control mosquito breeding. Concerns regarding
environmental contamination by DDT compounds as well as the development of vector
resistance to the organochlorine insecticides, motivated the countries to initiate policies to
gradually discontinue DDT sprayings during the 1980's and the 90's. Belize, for example, had
been using DDT up to the year 1999 and Mexico, up to the year 2000. The assessment made
during the PDF-B phase revealed that at least 85,000 tons of DDT was sprayed in households and
its surroundings in malaria endemic areas in the last 40 years. Malaria endemic areas in
Guatemala received an average of 204 tons of DDT per year between 1958 and 1979. Nicaragua
sprayed 268 tons/year between 1959 and 1962. Mexico sprayed 5,110 tons/year of DDT between
1957 and 1960, going down to 290 tons/year between 1992 and 1999. El Salvador sprayed 198
tons/year from 1960 to 1973.
3.
DDT and its metabolites, especially p,p'-DDE, are highly stable toxic compounds that
persist in the environment for many years and can accumulate in living organisms. They can
persist decades in soils in association with organic matter and clay particles. DDT is transported
though the water cycle by rainfall and surface water runoff, and can be carried to remote areas by
the atmosphere as well, thus contributing to environmental contamination at global level.
Concerns about DDT residues in water, sediment and soil, as well as in the food chain in Mexico
and Central America were reinforced by data brought forth sub-regional and national reports
developed during the PDF-B phase. An assessment of DDT and deltamethrin exposure was
carried out in Mexico in the two states with the highest prevalence of malaria and a history of
pesticide application. In Chiapas, samples were obtained at the time when DDT was being used
in the malaria control program. In Oaxaca, samples were collected two years after the final
spraying of DDT and two days after deltamethrin (a pyrethroid used as a substitute for DDT)
1
application. Soils samples collected from the bare dirt floor inside a house that had been sprayed
with DDT and analyzed during the PDF-B phase showed 83 mg/kg of DDT, 41 mg/kg of DDD
and 14 mg/kg of DDE, compared to 0.37 mg/kg of DDT, 0.02 mg/kg of DDD and 0.2 mg/kg of
DDE found in a house that had not been sprayed. Outside the same house, the soil samples had
49 mg/kg of DDT, 13 mg/kg of DDD and 5.7 mg/kg of DDE, compared to 0.6 mg/kg of DDT,
0.6 mg/kg of DDD and 0.2 mg/kg of DDE in the control area. In Nicaragua, samples of
sediments taken from coastal lagoons in malaria endemic area had 50 µg/kg of DDT, 46 µg/kg of
DDD and 94 µg/kg of DDE.
4.
Long-term health effects of these compounds on the malaria campaign personnel that
were exposed by spraying DDT, or populations residing in villages where these pesticides were
applied are also of concern, although the specific effects are not well understood. Mean
concentration of DDT and DDE, as measured in whole blood, were 68 and 87 µg/l for children
living in Chiapas and 27 and 61 µg/l for adults respectively. Sprayers in Chiapas had the highest
levels of exposure with 170 and 190 µg/l of DDT and DDE. As expected, DDT levels were lower
two years after the final application in Oaxaca (20 and 13 µg/l for children and adults
respectively). 60 newborn had their umbilical chord blood tested in Oaxaca coastal zone and
DDE was found in a mean level of 13 µg/g. Deltamethrin exposure was assessed only in children
in Oaxaca: 50% of the exposed group had urinary levels above the limit of detection and 6% had
levels above 25 µg/l (five times the limit of detection), with a negative trend with age.
Information related to Central America is reported in the regional report, however, most of these
countries do not have data or documentation on the level of DDT residues.
5.
These environmental and health effects are compounded by the fact that Central
American countries are particularly vulnerable to natural hazards such as hurricanes and
earthquakes. After Hurricane Mitch in 1998, approximately one ton of DDT that was poorly
stored was washed into the Caribbean Sea in Nicaragua. Preliminary studies conducted in
Honduras after the hurricane indicated the presence of DDT in the environment and human
population, probably originating from an industrial plant that had been flooded. The existing
DDT stockpiles in these countries, which generally are stored in improper conditions, therefore
pose a great risk of contamination of national and international waters as well as the possibility
of harm to human health and environment under disaster situations.
6.
In the absence of GEF intervention, given the low national budgets for malaria control,
weak national health systems, and lack of institutional and community level awareness about the
effects of DDT exposure on environment and human health, the reintroduction of DDT for
malaria control is likely. Particularly considering its low cost and relative effectiveness as an
insecticide. Countries such as Guatemala, Honduras and Belize, where national malaria
campaigns have been weak, might contribute to increase the regional problem because of
transboundary spread of the malaria disease. The benefits of the isolated initiatives to develop
new techniques of malaria vector control, that have flourished in Mexico, Costa Rica, Nicaragua
and Panama during the last few years, could be lost in the long run due to lack of coordination
and exchange of experience. The recent experience of South Africa that has had recently to
2
resolve itself using DDT to fight a malaria outbreak exemplifies the difficulty of phasing-out
DDT in a sustainable manner, and the need to demonstrate conclusively the efficiency of an array
of alternative methods.
GEF Programming Context
7.
This project conforms with the "Contaminant-based" Operational Programme No 10 and
will "help demonstrate ways of overcoming barriers to the adoption of best practices that limit
contamination of the International Waters environment". The proposed activities are also
consistent with several provisions of the recently adopted Stockholm Convention on POPs, and
with the draft Operational Programme on POPs under development. Five of the participating
countries have already signed the POPs convention: El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua
and Panama. The other three countries have expressed their intention to sign it.
Implementing Agency Programming Context
8.
UNEP is the task manager for chapter 19 of agenda 21 on toxic substances and the
Secretariat for the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants which was adopted in
May 2001. UNEP will facilitate the coordination between this project and the other POPs
projects developed under its aegis. In particular links with the UNEP/GEF project under
development "Reducing Pesticide Runoff to the Caribbean Sea" which is focused on Colombia,
Costa Rica and Nicaragua will be consolidated through participation of the national coordinators
to the respective national committees and participation of the regional project manager to the
respective steering committees. Contacts have been established with the regional coordinator of
the GEF/UNDP/UNEP project "El Corredor Biologico Mesoamericano: una iniciativa regional
de Desarrollo Sostenible" for future coordination of environmental activities, particularly related
to community participation and awareness in the areas of demonstration projects in Costa Rica
and Panama.
Executing Agency Context
9.
PAHO has an office in each country in the region and has a central role in providing
technical cooperation for both the establishment of malaria control programs and prevention of
adverse effects related to the use of pesticides. PAHO has been called upon by UNEP to play a
strategic role in Latin America and the Caribbean in the implementation of Governing Council
Decision 19/13C (1997) which mandates a series of immediate actions on POPs, including
exchange of information. As part of the initiative for the Sustainable Development of the Central
American Region, PAHO, with strong support of the Nordic Countries, has launched the
"Program on Health and Environment in the Central American Isthmus", known by its Spanish
acronym MASICA (1990). This program has focused on obtaining political commitments to
integrate environment, health and development actions. One of its main components is the
Project PLAGSALUD (Occupational and Environmental Aspects of Pesticides in the Central
American Isthmus), established in 1994 with funding from DANIDA. Using a bottom-up
approach, this project has been active in all seven Central American countries for the last six
3
years. Enjoying government and civil society support, it has already achieved important results
such as the improvement of the surveillance and control of acute intoxication from pesticides, the
revision of pesticide legislation, the establishment of local pesticide committees, and more
specifically the improvement of the protection of malaria and other vector control personnel from
exposure to pesticides. This proposal will build on and complement the groundwork already
accomplished by PLAGSALUD.
National and Regional Context
10.
In 1996 the Parties to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), working
with the Secretariat for the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC),
approved a North American Regional Action Plan (NARAP) to reduce the exposure of humans
and the environment to DDT compounds through phasing out the use of DDT for malaria control
in Mexico, transferring this experience to other countries, and eliminating illegal uses of DDT.
The CEC continued its holistic approach to malaria control in Mexico during the PDF-B phase
by executing demonstration projects which brought together an integrated vector control
management strategy with the full spectrum of related public health activities and services. This
program maintains a regional perspective that encourages sharing of experiences with other Latin
American and Caribbean countries to ensure that malaria is controlled throughout the Region by
environmentally sound methodologies, with participation of local communities, non-
governmental organizations, business and industry sectors, state and municipal government
institutions, academia, and technical and policy experts. The proposed project has received very
strong support from the health sectors of the participating countries, as evidenced by the letters of
support received from the Ministries of Health (Annex X).
11.
In 1991, 1260 tons of DDT were sprayed in Mexico, in 1997 477 tons, and in the year
2000 no DDT was sprayed. Belize discontinued the use of DDT during the PDF-B phase. Three
different pilot projects were undertaken in the State of Oaxaca in Mexico to assess the
effectiveness of alternative malaria control measures including field assessment of bed nets as a
complementing measure to control malaria and field evaluation of delthametrin as a substitute to
DDT as well as environmental actions to prevent the proliferation of malaria vector. The
successful methodologies tested in these pilot projects will be replicated in the demonstration
projects. Guatemala, Nicaragua and Honduras have had positive experience in using Bacillus
thurigiensis and Bacillus sphaericus as a biological tool for malaria vector control. Honduras
and Guatemala have also experimented controlling mosquito breeding by using larvae eating
fishes. Guatemala has been experimenting with Neem tree, an African specie of plant with
repellent properties. Costa Rica, El Salvador and Panama reported positive malaria vector control
by improving the sanitary conditions in malaria endemic areas. Physical barriers such as
mosquito nets have also been adopted as complementary strategies in all participating countries.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
12.
There is a need to strengthen institutional technical capacity at a regional scale for
4
assessment and control of malaria disease vectors. Countries with less capacity to address
malaria control without DDT need help from their neighbors who have had successful
experiences. Only a long-term regional cooperative program can help deter some countries from
returning to use DDT or using other persistent pesticides to control endemic malaria vectors.
The participating countries are committed to developing and implementing comprehensive
management practices that will build and strengthen awareness about the importance of
environmental conservation and sound water management in the control and prevention of
endemic diseases with the active participation of local communities, particularly in immigration
corridors. The principles which form the basis for the proposed project are: integrated inter-
institution and inter-sectoral (environment and health) approaches; broad community
participation in all steps of the project; integration of the work to existing national institutions so
that no parallel structures are created; technical, financial and organizational sustainability of the
new approaches to malaria control; and widespread dissemination of the information generated
by the project.
13.
The proper storage and eventual disposal of POPs presents a problem throughout the
Region. The PDF-B has identified approximately 135 tons of DDT stored throughout the region,
some in very bad conditions in leaking containers as the 15 tons in Guatemala. Current methods
of storage in old warehouses are insufficient to prevent environmental contamination and human
contact. Nicaragua and Honduras have already received international help to dispose of their
DDT stockpiles, but assistance is required for the other six countries for this endeavour.
14.
In the execution of the PDF-B Grant, the following lessons were learned: (i) The
experimental projects developed in Mexico showed that integrated vector management with
community participation, in addition to new ways of monitoring and treating the disease, can
eliminate the use of pesticides after 2 years of continuous actions; (ii) The communication
network initiated during the PDF-B facilitates the exchange of technologies in use in different
countries as was seen in the 3 regional meetings where the participating countries presented and
were questioned about their malaria control strategies; (iii) In order to be replicable in other parts
of the world, in different ecosystems and socio-economic conditions, the Mexican and Central
American experiences of malaria control without DDT need further detailed documentation and
close monitoring of activities and results; (iv) There is a need for standardization and validation
of laboratory procedures for monitoring the presence of DDT in the environment and in people,
and for malaria detection, in order to have comparable data; (v) there is a need for national and
local institutional capacity building in order to achieve sustainability of the new methodologies
of malaria control, and (vi) a specially designed Webpage and the application of a GIS are useful
tools for malaria risk assessment, epidemiological analysis, monitoring and evaluation of the
effectiveness of interventions, decision making in health/environment related issues, and will
contribute to the sustainability and replicability of the project activities.
15.
The overall objective of the project is to demonstrate that methods for malaria vector
control without DDT or other persistent pesticides are replicable, cost-effective and sustainable,
thus preventing the reintroduction of DDT in the region. Human health and the environment will
5
be protected in Mexico and Central America by promoting new approaches to malaria control, as
part of an integrated and coordinated regional program. The establishment of a regional network
will facilitate the exchange of best practices and lessons learned among neighboring countries. A
major outcome will be increased government and local community awareness of DDT and other
pesticides hazards to the environment and human health, and adjustment of future behavior
regarding the use of persistent pesticides.
16.
The results of this project will be felt at three levels: (i) At the national level, each one of
the 8 participating countries will have the documented results of a well monitored demonstration
project of malaria vector control without DDT or other persistent pesticides; (ii) At the regional
level the lessons learned in each country will be exchanged and a regional consensus will be
built; (iii) At the global level the results of this project will define replicable models for malaria
control based on cost effective, environmentally sound and sustainable strategies. These models
which will be thoroughly tested and documented in a series of interconnected demonstration
projects will constitute a set of best practices which may be applied in other regions of the world.
PROJECT ACTIVITIES / COMPONENTS AND EXPECTED RESULTS
17.
After a consultation process, led by PAHO and the CEC, consisting of meetings and
studies implemented during the PDF B phase, four different groups of actions were identified as
necessary to address countries' needs to lower their vulnerability to using DDT for malaria
control. The actions, as presented in Annex II (Logical Framework), are organized under the
following four components:
18.
Component 1: Demonstration Projects and Dissemination. The objective is to
implement, evaluate, and disseminate the alternative strategies of malaria vector control without
use of DDT which were developed during the PDF-B phase. The main outcome is to avoid
future reintroduction of DDT or other persistent pesticides in national malaria control programs.
This component represents a major part of this project and most of the resources will be
concentrated on it. A total of nine demonstration projects will be implemented under specific
ecological conditions in each of the participating countries, using a set of integrated methods of
malaria control according to the RBM/WHO and the Mexican experience of malaria control
without DDT. The nine sites for demonstration projects were defined and delimited in each
country during the PDF-B according to government suggestions about local needs. The
alternatives tested in each demonstration projects will be closely assessed and evaluated in terms
of their technical and economic effectiveness.
19.
The activities that will be implemented in the demonstration projects are described in
Annex VII. The settings for demonstration areas include different malaria vectors, endemic levels
of the disease, and environmental and social-economical conditions. A technical manual will
provide basic information on malaria vector control without use of DDT while confronting
different vector species and different ecological conditions in each country. Workshops will be
6
organized locally for health and environment personnel, community leaders, and NGOs involved
in each demonstration project. The exchange of information and experiences of all 8 participating
countries on malaria vector ecology and entomology, integrated malaria vector control methods,
field operations, as well as community participation techniques will be facilitated. Community
awareness, community training and public participation are important tools in the
implementation of integrated vector control strategies and will be encouraged and supported
through workshops, training courses, participation in demonstration projects, preparation of
material for wide diffusion, media campaigns, educational activities, etc.
20.
A region-wide information system on DDT and malaria control will be the basis for
gathering and disseminating data adequate to the needs of government in the decision-making
process. Links with other regions of the world will facilitate the exchange of information related
to malaria control, and the sharing and dissemination of the results of the demonstration projects
on a world-wide basis. The electronic platform developed during the PDF B phase includes a
Web and an Intranet page. It will provide access to project documents, national reports, technical
studies, reports of meetings and workshops, as well as results of demonstration projects and will
facilitate communication among project participants.
21.
In the demonstration projects areas, the population and environmental compartments
(water, soil, sediment and biota), as well as the malaria programs personnel, will be monitored
for exposure to DDT and newly introduced pesticides for malaria control. An inter-laboratory
control program will be implemented to ensure that analytical results are reliable and comparable
across the participating countries and at the international level. A current baseline of DDT
exposure will be established in each demonstration project area. Training on exposure
assessment techniques will be provided, including sampling and laboratory techniques. Exposure
risk areas will be identified and mapped, and the generated data will integrate national and
regional information systems. Epidemiological assessment of malaria personnel will be
implemented in each participating country. Educational and public information material will be
formulated to raise awareness about the risks of exposure to DDT and other pesticides.
22.
The outcomes of this project component address needs at several levels. Local health
services will be strengthened and communities involved in demonstration projects will learn
participatory and integrated techniques for malaria control and will become aware of DDT
exposure hazards. National institutions in the health, environment and other sectors will establish
links in formulating an integrated and preventive approach to malaria vector control. At the
Global level, the documented experience of each demonstration project will constitute a set of
malaria control techniques replicable in other parts of the world under similar ecological
conditions. This component includes workshops and training of local technicians and
community, assessment of all activities, and evaluation of results. The estimate of costs for each
demonstration project was based on the Mexican experience. Each country will contribute to this
component through redirection of its budgetary malaria control program in the demonstration
areas. Based on information provided by each participating country after definition of the areas
where the demonstration projects will be implemented, the total cost of demonstration projects is
estimated at US$ 8,873,400. Of this amount, US$ 5,026,400 will be provided by the countries
7
and US$ 350,000 by CEC and PAHO (Table 2). GEF is requested to provide US$ 3,497,000 (for
details see Annex VI).
23.
Component 2: Strengthening of national institutional capacity to control malaria
without DDT. The objective is to strengthen national and local institutional capacities to control
malaria with methods that do not rely on DDT or other persistent pesticides. The outcome of this
component will be strengthened national capacities of malaria risk assessment, development of
analytical laboratory infrastructure, community participation and training regarding malaria
vector control and pesticide management. The activities described in Annex VI will provide the
tools for countries to make well-informed decisions about malaria control based on new methods.
National Action Programs aiming at decentralization and implementation of integrated methods
will be reinforced. Government authorities of health, environment, and agriculture of the
participating countries will have the opportunity to exchange and discuss the existing alternative
strategies that will be tested and documented through the demonstration projects.
24.
Laboratory analysis capacity for chemical assessment will be strengthened in Mexico
(Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí and Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados
del Instituto Politécnico Nacional - CINVESTAV Unidad Merida), Guatemala (Laboratorio
Unificado de Control de Alimentos y Medicamentos - LUCAM), Nicaragua (Centro para la
Investigación en Recursos Acuáticos de la Universidad Autonoma de Nicaragua
CIRA/UNAM), Panama (Instituto Gorgas de Estudio de la Salud), Costa Rica (Laboratorio del
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia - MAG), El Salvador (Ministerio de Agricultura y
Ganaderia), and Central Laboratory of Belize.
25.
The Geographic Information System which was developed during the PDF-B phase (cf.
Annex VIII for demonstration) will include geo-referenced data on malaria control, population at
risk, environmental and ecological factors related to vector distribution, malaria vector control
interventions, health system coverage, etc. A specific GIS will be developed for use at local
levels with selected indicators to monitor project data related to pesticide use and environmental
and health impacts of DDT. These computerized tools will strengthen: the institutional
capacities to monitor and disseminate information related to malaria control under integrated
health/environmental approach; the regional capacity for epidemiological analysis; the national
epidemiological surveillance systems; the regional epidemic forecasting and preparedness; and
the detection of insecticide resistance, inter alia.
26.
A substantive Final Report will be printed in book format and CD to disseminate the
results of the project and the methodologies for malaria control without DDT tested in the
demonstration projects. It will include maps of malaria risk areas, extensive descriptions of the
methodologies and results of each demonstration project, the effects of DDT exposure
documented during the implementation of this project. The document will provide national
governmental institutions with the information needed to support the sustained phasing-out of
DDT in public health programs.
27.
Details of these activities and their related costs are shown in Annex VI (Description of
8
Project Activities and Costs). The electronic platform containing Webpage, Intranet, and GIS
will be developed by the Special Program for Health Analysis (SHA) of PAHO which will
facilitate the future maintenance and continuation of the services. A special effort aimed at the
sustainability of these activities will be made by building local capacity. Specific detailed Terms
of Reference for all contracted services will be prepared by HEP/PAHO in close consultation
with UNEP during the first quarter of the project. The total cost of this component will be US$
1,608,000.
28.
Component 3: Elimination of DDT stockpiles. This component will address the existing
problem of stockpiles in six of the eight participating countries (Nicaragua and Honduras have
already received international support for final disposal of their DDT stockpiles). All activities
will be documented and management plans will be put into place to prevent further accumulation
of stockpiles of pesticides. During the PDF-B, approximately 135 tons of DDT were identified in
Belize (13 tons), Costa Rica (9 tons), El Salvador (6 tons), Guatemala (15 tons), Mexico (87
tons), and Panama (5 tons). The national inventories will be completed, including finding and
quantifying evidence of DDT uses in agriculture or other sectors. All obsolete stocks in leaking
containers will be repackaged and prepared for shipment. The objective of this component is to
eliminate the existing DDT stockpiles, repack materials as required, and arrange ways to
eliminate DDT in an environmentally sound manner consistent with the provisions of the
Stockholm and Basel Conventions. Activities related to building capacity on suitable measures to
prevent the recurrence of obsolete pesticide accumulation and promoting the involvement of
major stakeholders, particularly the chemical industry and the owners of the stockpiles, are also
parts of this component. The total cost of activities under this component is US$ 450,000.
29.
Component 4: Coordination and Management. A regional coordinator will be hired for
this project under terms of reference established by the steering committee. The regional
coordinator be hired by PAHO and be based in one of the participating countries. Each country
will have a national coordinator, based in the PAHO country office, with the main tasks of
organizing and coordinating all activities implemented in the demonstration projects, facilitating
local community participation, and monitoring and evaluating all activities, results, and data
generated by the demonstration projects. This component also includes three annual meetings of
the steering committee, three regional meetings for planning and evaluation of activities, and
three regional annual reports. The total costs are US$ 1,638,000.
RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY
30.
Drawing on the experience gained during the PDF-B phase, when participants from the
eight participating countries were brought together in regional meetings, several assumptions
about inherent risks can be made. These include: the possibility of a large scale malaria
resurgence; unexpected natural hazard phenomena (earthquakes and hurricanes) that could create
difficult conditions for implementing the proposed vector control strategies; lack of adequate
community participation in the demonstration projects; lack of capacity of national malaria
control surveillance systems; persistent transmission of malaria in areas close to demonstration
projects. These risks will be mitigated by monitoring them very closely and by the
9
communication network which will be put into place and will facilitate rapid discussion and
search for adequate solutions.
31.
All participating countries are signatories of several international conventions and their
governments have decided to use this project as an instrument to update and upgrade their
malaria control programs for the benefit of public health, the environment and sustainable
development. Consequently, significant co-financing is available in each of the participating
countries which can ensure post-project sustainability of the initiatives developed in the course of
the project. Local communities will be involved in each demonstration project and public
awareness on the problems related to DDT use will be the key factors for the sustainability of the
new approaches to malaria vector control generated by this project.
32.
Sustainability will also result from the integration of project activities with the ongoing
work of participating institutions. For example, epidemiological surveillance of pesticide
problems is already an integral part of the national health surveillance systems supported by
national Health Ministries in most countries. The PLAGSALUD project has activities related to
agricultural use of pesticides, community involvement and public awareness on pesticides. The
integration among these projects will enhance sustainability of pesticide control strategies
developed by the DDT phase out effort. At the local level the project will work through the
existing health service structure, thus avoiding distorting host country activities and resource
capabilities in an unsustainable way. Regional level activities that enhance local and national
level capacities will be emphasized. This approach is consistent with the increasing emphasis on
decentralization promoted by PAHO within the health sector throughout the region.
33.
It is expected that the local level experience generated by the demonstration projects will
form a model that will be adopted at country level and later can be applied at a global level. The
"bottom-up" approach based on the active participation of local communities, government
technical officers, NGOs and local level institutions is designed to bring the desired sustainability
to the models introduced by this project.
STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
34.
The primary beneficiaries of this project will be: a) populations in poor rural communities
who are affected by malaria, b) public sector institutions that have to deal with the malaria
problem, and c) agricultural workers and health workers who have been exposed to DDT and
would be again if DDT is reintroduced. All stakeholders from the public sector and the civil
society will be involved in and benefit from the incorporation of integrated malaria vector control
principles into the existing framework of national health policies; the strengthening of the new
strategies for malaria control without DDT or hazardous pesticides; the involvement and training
of local communities in malaria vector control techniques; the elimination of the existing DDT
stockpiles; improved inter-sectoral collaboration especially between the health, environment
ministries and customs; and the strengthening of health surveillance and monitoring systems both
for use and import of pesticides. The Governments of the 8 participating countries, local NGOs,
10
research centers, and universities have demonstrated their willingness to cooperate and
coordinate activities during the implementation of this project. This proposal has been
formulated with the active participation of representatives of the governments and other
stakeholders. The final draft was presented and discussed during the 2nd Steering Committee
Meeting in Mexico City.
35.
One of the main strategies of this project is to strengthen local capacities to control
malaria without DDT. Great emphasis will be given to strengthening civil society's role in
addressing the problems caused by POPs and other pesticides, by integrating local NGOs, church
groups, institutions related to migrant farm workers and customs officers in specific areas of
transboundary migrant farm workers and illegal imports of pesticides, into meetings, workshops
and planned actions related to the demonstration projects. The project will provide information
and technical support to civil society initiatives by providing technical manuals and reports on
Malaria control without DDT in an accessible language.
36.
PAHO, due to its historic involvement in the region and its role in implementing
activities under related projects, will be the lead regional Executing Agency. The Division of
Health and Environment (HEP) in Washington D.C. PAHO headquarters will be responsible for
the management of the project. PAHO will be implementing the actions with close participation
of its local officers in each of the participating countries. Technical assistance will be provided
by other PAHO units: Office of External Relations (DEC), Program on Human Resources
Development (HSR), Special Program for Health Analysis (SHA), and Program on
Communicable Diseases (HCT). The lead institution responsible for project execution in each
country will be the Ministry of Health. Additionally, the project will involve the Ministries of
Environment and Agriculture, the Plagsalud national pesticide commissions, and the local health
care systems, as well as civil society organizations such as NGO's, research centers, and
universities.
37.
The project will have a regional coordinator contracted by PAHO, living in one of the
participating countries. Each country will have a national focal point for this project, appointed
by the executing ministry, and a national technical coordinator to be contracted by PAHO in
consultation with the governments and UNEP for the full 36 months of the project. A National
Operational Committee will be established in each participating country under the coordination
of the national focal point, with the participation of the technical coordinator and representatives
of community organizations and NGOs involved in the project. Its role will be to promote the
active participation of all stakeholders and to advise on the orientation of the project. It will be
co-chaired by the national focal point and technical coordinators and will be the mechanism for
the coordination of national actions. A Regional Operational Committee will be formed by the
national focal points (Ministries of Health and national technical coordinators) and will be
chaired by the regional coordinator. This will be a technical body to discuss, plan and evaluate
the technical activities of the project.
38.
The Steering Committee will be composed by representatives of the Ministers of Health,
PAHO, UNEP, CEC, CCAD, other relevant projects in the region and NGOs, as well as the
11
national focal points and technical coordinators. This will be the highest organ of the project and
will meet at least once a year to approve the workplans of the countries, the terms of reference of
the demonstration projects, and provide advisory functions. Any significant change to programs
and budgets must be approved at this level.
INCREMENTAL COST AND PROJECT FINANCING
39.
Table 1 presents the baseline of this intervention and the incremental costs of achieving
global environmental benefits. This is discussed in Annex I. Table 2 presents the project
financing by components. During the Steering Committee meeting in Mexico City, on September
11-12, 2001 the average cost per capita for alternative techniques of malaria vector control was
established, based on Mexico's experience during the PDF-B phase, at $2.2 US dollars. This cost
includes various activities such as community training, campaigns for creating community
awareness, local environmental actions related to cleaning vector breeding sites, treatment of
infected people, etc. The amount necessary for each country to develop their demonstration
project was then established by multiplying the per capita cost by the inhabitants present in the
malaria risk areas chosen by the countries as their demonstrative sites. It was asked to the
governments that they should meet at least 50% of the expenses related to their demonstrative
projects by redirecting part of their national malaria program budgets, to be used in the
demonstration areas, especially in actions related to the treatment of infected people. Significant
co-financing is available from malaria control programs in the participating countries as seen in
the letters of endorsement (Annex X). The estimated co-financing includes US$ 5,026,400 from
national budgets for malaria control programs specifically oriented to the population of the
demonstration project areas. US$ 654,000 are in kind contribution from PAHO (10% of 3 PAHO
Technical Regional Advisors, 10% of 7 PAHO's PLAGSALUD Technical Support Agents, 5%
of 7 PAHO National Environmental Health Advisors, 15% of PAHO's Environmental Health
Advisor in Mexico, and 5% of 3 PAHO Supervisors. The CEC is contributing US$ 200,000 to be
directed to assessment of pesticides residues in the two demonstration project areas in Mexico.
The total Cost of the project is estimated at US$ 13,905,400 of which US$ 7,495,000 is
requested from the GEF.
12
Table 1 Baseline & Incremental Costs of achieving domestic & global environmental benefits
000 US$
Baseline
Alternate
Increment
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
1,733
9,268
7,495
PDF-B phase
440
770
330
Comp. 1 Demonstration projects and dissemination
1,064
4,561
3,497
Comp. 2 Strength. Natl. capacity to ctrl malaria without DDT
64
1,308
1,244
Comp. 3 Elimination of DDT stockpiles
25
425
400
Comp. 4 Coordination and Management
180
1,638
1,458
Executing Agency Project Support Costs
0
566
566
DOMESTIC ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
1,825
1,825
0
PDF-B phase
0
0
0
Comp. 1 Demonstration projects and dissemination
1,500
1,500
0
Comp. 2 Strength. Natl. capacity to ctrl malaria without DDT
300
300
0
Comp. 3 Elimination of DDT stockpiles
25
25
0
Comp. 4 Coordination and Management
0
0
0
Table 2. Project budget summary and component financing (000 US $)
Co-financing
COMPONENT
GEF
TOTAL
PAHO Government CEC
1. Demonstration Projects and Dissemination
3,497
150*
5,026.4**
200
8,873.4
2. Strengthening of national capacities to
1,244
364*
1,608
control malaria without DDT
3. Elimination of DDT stockpiles
400
50*
450
4. Coordination and Management
1,458
90*
90*
1,638
SUB-TOTAL
6,599
654*
5,116.4
200
12,569.4
Project Support Costs PAHO (8%)
528
528
Project preparation costs recovering***
38
38
PDF-B phase
330
100*
240*
100
770
TOTAL
7,495
754
5,356.4
300
13,905.4
* In kind contribution
** National budget for malaria control program in the demonstration areas
*** As of writing agreement reached during the PDF negotiations
(Updated Tables 1 and 2 can be found in Annex XX with updated values for incremental costs
and increase in co-financing.)
13
MONITORING, EVALUATION AND DISSEMINATION
40.
The administrative, technical and financial reporting framework will be provided in the
framework of the standard UNEP and GEF reporting protocols. Indicators will be implemented
through the establishment and integration of monitoring tools into project components, as agreed
by the Steering Committee. A monitoring and evaluation plan, consistent with GEF criteria, will
be prepared by the PAHO and CEC, and submitted to the Steering Committee and UNEP. The
objective of this monitoring is to contribute to improving, and, if needed, adapting management
of work program activities as well as creating the basis for project evaluation. The work plan and
terms of reference for project staff and consultants will be discussed and agreed at the first and
second meetings of the Steering Committee. A post project implementation review will be
undertaken by UNEP two years after the end of the project.
41.
Incorporated into the action plan are specific components (see Components 1 and 2)
which explicitly aim to promote and disseminate the experiences obtained through the project
implementation process to the Mexican and Central American stakeholders and communities
within the region. Program activities encourage and facilitate technology transfer and information
dissemination through programs of public participation, stakeholder involvement, and
professional and community-based education and information dissemination. States and
municipal governmental organizations, NGOs and citizen involvement in project execution will
also contribute to the dissemination of information on specific technologies and techniques that
contribute to the sustainable environmental management and public health development. Finally,
the electronic platform with a web site and GIS will also facilitate the dissemination of the results
of the project as well as the new strategies and techniques of malaria vector control.
42.
The Final Report of this project will have a book format consisting of an extensive report
on different strategies for malaria control without DDT under different ecosystems and socio-
economic conditions, containing data and results from all the five project components, illustrated
by data, maps and pictures showing and/or reflecting the following achievements:
· An established regional epidemiological information system for malaria control and related
pesticide problems integrated into the national health surveillance systems of each country.
· Improved diagnosis of the effects of pesticides used in public health for the control of malaria
in people and the environment in each country.
· Strengthened involvement at local, national and regional levels of NGO's, research
institutions, and other civil society organizations on avoiding DDT reintroduction and
supporting new strategies of malaria control.
· Strengthened reliance upon the results of the demonstration projects developed in the region,
and strengthened promotion of these alternatives by organizations and institutions
collaborating with this project.
· Established regional and local capacities to monitor and respond to DDT related problems in
a multi-sectoral and coordinated fashion.
· Strengthened inter-institutional cooperation and dialogue on malaria problem-solving, with
particular attention to improving the capacity of the health, environment, and agriculture
14
sectors to counteract the more traditional set of interests involved in pesticide application
policy.
· Achievement of pesticide policy reforms, in particular the banning of persistent pesticides.
SECTION 3 WORKPLAN AND TIMETABLE, BUDGET, FOLLOW-UP
3.1 WORKPLAN AND TIMETABLE
As seen in the logical framework (Annex II), this project contains a significant number of
activities and various outputs. Table 3 explains the key components and subcomponents with
their primary outputs. Detailed information, including the timetable for implementation can be
found in the Gantt chart in Annex II.
3.2 Project Budget
A summary of GEF Contribution budget (in US$) is provided here. GEF contributions for
budget details in UNEP format can be found in Annex XII. The umbrella fund will be
transferred to the PAHO country offices as soon as the funds are received in Washington, and it
will be transferred to others through contracts, agreements and other regular PAHO managerial
tools that are already in place and utilized during the PDF phase. The cash contribution from
CEC will be directed to the two demonstration projects in Mexico to cover expenses regarding
analysis of environmental exposure to DDT and the funds will be managed in coordination with
the Steering Committee. The country contributions will be kept within the country budgets but
will be spent on the demonstration projects and staff within their countries.
SUMMARY OF GEF CONTRIBUTION BUDGET
Executing Agencies
2003
2004
2005
GEF Total
Umbrella Budget (PAHO):
1,009,000
864,500
877,300
2,750,800
Belize
88,083
85,783
65,634
239,500
Costa Rica
87,250
84,650
64,400
236,300
El Salvador
104,950
102,350
82,700
290,000
Guatemala
166,850
164,250
144,600
475,700
Honduras
135,250
133,650
114,900
383,800
Mexico
798,317
729,317
702,166
2,229,800
Nicaragua
112,550
110,950
92,300
315,800
Panama
88,417
87,817
67,066
243,300
Grand Total
2,590,667
2,363,267
2,211,066
7,165,000
15
TABLE 3 TIMETABLE, WORKPLAN AND GEF DISBURSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
COMPONENTS AND ACTIVITIES (IN MILLIONS US $).
Duration of the Project - 36 months
Total
COMPONENT/ACTIVITIES
6
12
18
24
30
36
COMPONENT #1 DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS AND DISSEMINATION
9 Demonstration Projects of malaria control in 8 different countries/ecosystems
0.600 0.600 0.600 0.600 0.600
0.185
3.185
Local meetings for preparing community participation and training
0.040
0.040
Communication plan to promote public awareness on DDT and educational campaign
0.020
0.020
0.016
0.056
Implement Web and Intranet pages
0.025
0.025
0.050
Assessment of environmental, biota, and human exposure to DDT and newly introduced pesticides
0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
0.020
0.120
DDT compounds risk evaluation and risk maps
0.010
0.010
Local meetings for annual evaluation project)
0.015
0.015
0.006
0.036
SUB-TOTAL: COMPONENT #1
0.660 0.680 0.630 0.680 0.620
0.227
3.497
COMPONENT #2 STRENGTHENING OF NATIONAL CAPACITIES TO CONTROL MALARIA
Workshop for government authorities of health, environment and agriculture (decision making personnel) to promote
0.030
0.030
the new techniques for malaria control without DDT and create awareness on DDT hazards
Technical Manual with the main guidelines for malaria vector control without DDT to guide the demonstration projects
0.015
0.015
A total of 8 training courses (one in each Demonstration Project area) for health and environment personnel
0.032
0.032
Regional technical workshop to exchange experience and information on new approaches to malaria control
0.040
0.040
Improve laboratory analysis capacity
0.160
0.160
0.160
0.480
Strengthen reference centers for malaria control
0.060
0.060
0.120
Workshop for lab technicians on laboratory analysis standardization and quality control
0.030
0.030
Rapid test validation
0.030
0.020
0.050
Inter-laboratory quality control program and capacity building
0.050
0.050
0.100
Malaria surveillance system and exchange of information on malaria control
0.015
0.015
Travel fellowship for technical training
0.050
0.050
Implement GIS application and specific GIS
0.100
0.050
0.050
0.200
Travel and local meetings for technicians to exchange experience on alternative malaria vector control techniques
0.016
0.016
0.032
Publication of the Final Report on strategies for malaria control without DDT (book and CD format)
0.025
0.025
0.050
SUB-TOTAL: COMPONENT #2
0.517 0.111 0.320 0.036 0.235
0.025
1.244
COMPONENT #3 ELIMINATION OF DDT STOCKPILES
Repack and elimination of stocks (Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Panama
0.200 0.200
0.400
SUB-TOTAL: COMPONENT #3
0.200 0.200
0.400
16
Duration of the Project - 36 months
Total
COMPONENT/ACTIVITIES
6
12
18
24
30
36
COMPONENT #4 COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT
Regional coordination and supervision
0.076 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.102
0.095
0.573
8 national project coordinators
0.103 0.123 0.123 0.123 0.123
0.065
0.660
3 Steering Committee meetings
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.090
3 Regional Technical meetings for planning and evaluation (Operational Committee)
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.120
3 Regional annual reports with results and geo-referred data
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.015
SUB-TOTAL COMPONENT #4
0.209 0.268 0.223 0.298 0.225
0.235
1.458
SUB-TOTAL: PROJECT COMPONENTS
6.599
PROJECT SUPPORT COSTS PAHO (8%)
0.528
PROJECT PREPARATION COSTS RECOVERY
0.038
PDF-B PHASE (already disbursed)
0.330
TOTAL GEF
7.495
17
SECTION 4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND EVALUATION
4.1
Institutional Framework
The project will be implemented by PAHO under the overall responsibility of the Director,
Division of Health and Environment. The UNEP Division of GEF Co-ordination, in association
with PAHO will monitor implementation of the activities undertaken during the execution of the
project. The Director, Division of Health and Environment, PAHO will maintain systematic
overview of the implementation of the project by means of monthly project monitoring meetings or
other form of consultation, as well as by regular quarterly reports and a terminal report.
PAHO will be responsible for the implementation of the project in accordance with the objectives
and activities outlined in Section 2 of this document. UNEP as the GEF Implementing Agency will
be responsible for overall project supervision to ensure consistency with GEF and UNEP policies
and procedures, and will provide guidance on linkages with related UNEP and GEF-funded
activities. The UNEP DGEF Coordination will monitor implementation of the activities
undertaken during the execution of the project. The UNEP DGEF Coordination will be responsible
for clearance and transmission of financial and progress reports to the Global Environment Facility.
UNEP retains responsibility for review and approval of the substantive and technical reports
produced in accordance with the schedule of work.
All correspondence regarding substantive matters should be addressed to:
For PAHO:
Dr Luis A.C. Galvăo
Regional Advisor
Environmental Quality Program-HEQ
Health Environment Division-HEP
Pan American Health Org.-PAHO
Tel: (202) 974-3156
Fax: (202) 974-3988
18
For UNEP:
Walter Jarman
Programme Officer
Division of GEF-Coordination
UNEP, P. O. Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254-2-623911
Fax: +254-2-624041
With a copy to:
Mr Ahmed Djoghlaf
Director
UNEP/Division of GEF Coordination
UNEP, PO Box 30552,
Nairobi, Kenya
Fax: 254 2 624041
Correspondence regarding financial and budgetary matters should be addressed to:
For UNEP:
Mr. E. F. Ortega
Chief,
Budget and Financial Management Services
UNON, PO Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Fax: 254 2 623755
19
With a copy to:
Mr. Victor Ogbuneke
Fund Management Officer
UNEP Division of GEF Coordination
UNEP, PO Box 30552,
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254-2-623780
Fax: +254-2-623162
For PAHO:
Mrs. Marina Molina
Administrator
Environmental Quality Program-HEQ
Health and Environmental Division-HEP
Pan American Health Org.-PAHO
Tel: (202) 974-3312
Fax: (202) 974-3645
4.2 Evaluation:
An evaluation of the project will be carried out by UNEP (Division of GEF Coordination) at the
end of the project (format for self-evaluation fact sheet in Annex XV).
SECTION 5 MONITORING AND REPORTING
5.1 Management Reports
5.1.1 Progress Reports:
20
Within 30 days of the end of the reporting period, PAHO will submit to the UNEP-Division of GEF
Co-ordination, using the format given in Annex XIII, quarterly progress reports as at 31March, 30
June, 30 September and 31 December.
5.1.2 Terminal Report:
Within 60 days of the completion of the project, PAHO will submit to UNEP a terminal report
using the format given in Annex XIV.
5.1.3 Substantive Reports
PAHO will submit to the Programme Officer, in UNEP Division of GEF Co-orditation, three
copies in draft of any substantive project report(s) for clearance prior to their publication in final
form. UNEP's views on the report(s) and any suggestions for amendments of wording will be
conveyed expeditiously to PAHO with an indication of any disclaimer or recognition which UNEP
might wish to see appear in the publication.
Both the cover and title page of all substantive reports will carry the approved UNEP logo and
the title "United Nations Environment Programme", together with the GEF logo and the title
"Global Environment Facility". PAHO will also identify all reports as GEF sponsored activities,
and acknowledge the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as the source of funds for the project.
Copyright and royalties will normally be claimed by UNEP on publications produced under a
UNEP Project and financed by UNEP. UNEP will receive 10 free copies of the published work in
English for its distribution purposes.
5.1.4 Financial Reports
5.1.4.1 Project Expenditure Accounts
PAHO shall submit to UNEP quarterly project expenditures accounts and final accounts for each
project, showing amount budgeted for the year, amount expended since the beginning of the year,
and, separately, the unliquidated obligations as follows:
a) Details of project expenditures (Format Annex XVIII), on a project-by-project basis,
reported in line with project budget codes as set out in the project document (Annex XII)
as at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December each year, providing details of
unliquidated obligations separately (Format Annex XVI). The expenditure accounts will
be sent to UNEP within 30 days after the end of each quarter to which they refer.
b) The expenditure account as at 31 December is to be received by UNEP by 15 February
21
each year, in order to allow for PAHO to obtain its final closure report.
c) A final statement of account, in line with UNEP project budget codes, reflecting actual
final expenditures under the project, when all obligations have been liquidated.
5.1.4.2 Cash Advance Accounts
A statement of advances of cash provided by UNEP will be submitted quarterly (format Annex
XVII) at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December.
5.1.5 Terms and Conditions
5.1.5.1 Non-expendable equipment
PAHO will maintain records of non-expendable equipment (items costing US$1,500 or more as
well as items of attraction such as pocket calculators, cameras, computers printers etc. costing
US$500 or more) purchased with UNEP funds (or with Trust funds or Counterpart funds
administered by UNEP), and submit an inventory of all such equipment to UNEP four a year
following the format contained in Annex XIX, attached to the quarterly progress report,
indicating description, serial number, date of purchase, original cost, present condition, location
of each item. Non-expendable equipment purchased with funds administered by UNEP remains
the property of UNEP until its disposal is authorized by UNEP, in consultation with PAHO.
PAHO shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to equipment purchased with UNEP funds.
The proceeds from the sale of equipment, (duly authorized by UNEP) shall be credited to the
accounts of UNEP, or of the appropriate trust fund or counterpart funds.
PAHO shall attach to the terminal report mentioned in paragraph above a final inventory of all
non-expendable equipment purchased under this project following the format in Annex XIX
indicating description, serial number, original cost, present condition, location and a proposal for
the disposal of the said equipment. The inventory should be physically verified by a duly
authorized official of the GEF Co-ordination Division.
5.1.5.2 Responsibility for cost overruns
PAHO is authorized to enter into commitments or incur expenditures up to a maximum of 20 per
cent over an above the annual amount foreseen in the project budget under each budget subline,
provided the total cost of the UNEP annual contribution is not exceeded. This may be done
without prior authorization, but once the need for these additional funds becomes apparent, a
revised budget request should be submitted to UNEP immediately. Cost overruns are the
22
responsibility of PAHO unless a revised budget has been agreed with UNEP.
Any cost overrun (expenditure in excess of the budgeted amount) on a specific budget sub-line
over and above the 20 percent flexibility mentioned above should be met by the organization
which originally assumed responsibility for authorizing the expenditure, unless a revision has
been agreed to by UNEP prior to the authorization to cover it. Savings in one budget subline may
not be applied to overruns of over 20 per cent in other sub-lines, even if the cost to UNEP
remains unchanged, unless this is specifically authorized by UNEP upon presentation of the
request. In such a case, a revision to the project document amending the budget will be issued by
UNEP.
5.1.5.3 Claims by Third Parties against UNEP
PAHO shall be responsible for dealing with any claims which may be brought by third parties
against UNEP and its staff, and shall indemnify UNEP and its staff against any claims or
liabilities resulting from operations carried out by PAHO under this project document, except
where such claims or liabilities arise from gross negligence or misconduct by the staff of UNEP.
5.1.5.4 Cash advance requirements
Taking into account all its signed projects with UNEP, PAHO will estimate is aggregate cash
requirements for each quarter, including a reasonable amount to cover "lead time" for the next
remittance, and send a request accordingly to the Chief, Budget and Financial Management
Service. In addition, PAHO will submit a project expenditure account showing expenditures
incurred for the six month for each project. On the basis of the expenditure account and the
request for an additional advance, UNEP will remit through UNON funds to PAHO in the form
of a lump sum for all projects combined. (formats annexes XVI, XVII, and XVIII).
5.1.5.5 Audit
Any financial contribution received and administered by PAHO in connection with this
Agreement shall be subject to the usual auditing procedures of PAHO and will be performed by
the auditors appointed by PAHO Directing Bodies. Copies of the audit report will be made
available to the UNEP upon request.
5.1.5.6 Privileges and immunities
Nothing in or related to this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute any waiver, express or
implied, of the immunities, privileges, exemptions and facilities enjoyed by the PAHO/WHO and
UNEP under international law, international conventions or agreements, or the domestic
legislation and laws of its Member States.
23
5.1.5.7 Force majeure
Neither Party shall be responsible for obligations arising out of this Agreement with which it is
unable to comply in whole or in part, due to reasons of force majeure, including wars, natural
disasters, civil or labor disturbances, or any other cause beyond the control of the Parties.
5.1.5.8 Conflict Resolution
Any dispute between the Parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement that is not settled
amicably shall be submitted to arbitration at the request of either Party, in accordance with the
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules.
5.1.5.9 Entry into Force and Termination
This Agreement shall enter into force upon its signature by all the Parties and shall remain
effective for the period of the project duration. This Agreement may be renewed or extended
upon mutual written consent of the Parties.
24
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex I:
Incremental Costs Analysis of the Project "Regional Program of Action and
Demonstration of Sustainable Alternatives to DDT for Malaria Vector
Control in Mexico and Central America"
Annex II:
Logical Framework Matrix
Annex III: Reviews and responses: (1) STAP Roster Technical Review and response to
STAP/Council/IA comments (2) Response to the comments of Germany
Annex IV:
Letters of endorsement from GEF Operational Focal Points.
Annex V:
Outline of the Root Causes of the Contamination of the Environment by
DDT in Mexico and Central America
Annex VI: Detailed Description of Project Activities and Costs to the GEF
Annex VII: Demonstration Projects: Objectives, Strategies, and Activities
Annex VIII: Examples of Products of the Geographic Information System Developed in
the Framework of the PDF-B Phase.
Annex IX: Bibliographical References of the Documents Produced in the PDF-B Phase.
Annex X:
Commitment of Co-financing and support from Ministries of Health of
Participating Countries.
Annex XI: List of Acronyms/Abbreviations
Annex XII: Budget in UNEP format
Annex XIII: Format for Quarterly Reports to UNEP
Annex XIV: Format for Terminal Reports (For external projects only)
Annex XV: Self Evaluation Fact Sheet
Annex XVI: Format for Quarterly Financial Statements Reporting Unliquidated
Obligations
Annex XVII: Cash Advance Statement
Annex XVIII: Format for Quarterly Project Expenditure Accounts for Cooperating Agency
Annex XIX: Format for Equipment Inventory
Annex XX: Updated Tables
25