UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY
PROJECT DOCUMENT

SECTION 1 - PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

1.1 Sub-Programme Title:
International Waters -10: Contaminants

1.2 Project Title:
Strengthening Global Capacity to Sustain Transboundary Waters: The
International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network.

1.3 Project Number:

GFL / 2328 ­ 2732 ­ 4xxx
PMS:
GF/1020
­
04
-
xx

1.4
Geographical Scope: Global


1.5 Implementation:
United Nation Environment Programme/ Division of Early Warning
and Assessment (UNEP/DEWA)

Tel: +1-254-20-623231
Fax: +1-254-20-62

1.6 Duration of the Project: 48 months

Commencing: August 2004
Completion: July 2007
1.7
Cost of the Project:
US$
%
________________________________________________________
Cost to the GEF Trust Fund
1,346,534 50
Co-financing (in-kind):
UNEP



730,400

Sub-total
730,400 30
Co-financing (in-cash):
Environment fund


477,000
Sub-total
477,000 20
Total Cost of the Project


2,553,934
100

1.8
Project Summary

The International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network (IW:LEARN) will be co-implemented in
collaboration with UNDP and IBRD. UNEP led components are presented in this document as a sub-project,
other complimenting activities that contribute to the overall objectives of IW:LEARN are described in the
UNDP project document.

IW:LEARN aims to strengthen Transboundary Waters Management (TWM) by facilitating structured learning
and information sharing among stakeholders. In pursuit of this global objective, the aim is to improve the GEF
IW projects' information base and encourage better replication efficiency, transparency, stakeholder ownership
and sustainability of benefits through:
· Facilitating access to information about transboundary water resources among GEF IW projects
· Structured learning among GEF projects and cooperating partners aimed at promoting inter-linkages in
the Caribbean
· Testing innovative approaches to strengthen implementation of the IW portfolio through the
development of a regional learning center for the South East Asia Region (SEA-RLC)

---

The project builds upon the achievements of the experimental pilot phase IW LEARN project, incorporating
the findings of its final independent evaluation. In view of the great interest raised by and successes of the
UNDP-implemented pilot, all three Implementing Agencies have committed to jointly propose and realize this
operational phase IW:LEARN project and UNEP will oversee the implementation of the outlined components
based on it's comparative advantage as one of the implementing agencies in the GEF.




For UNEP





S. I. Kurdjukov, O-I-C,
Budget and Financial Management Service, UNON.
Date:
2

---

Table of Contents

I. DEVELOPMENT
OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................ 4
II. COMPONENTS, OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES, OUTPUTS, AND ACTIVITIES.................. 5
III. RISKS, ASSUMPTIONS, SUSTAINABILITY...................................................................... 13
IV. PRIOR OBLIGATIONS AND PREREQUISITES ................................................................. 15
V. IMPLEMENTATION
AND
EXECUTION............................................................................. 16
VI. MONITORING, EVALUATION, REPORTING, AND DISSEMINATION......................... 18
VII. BUDGET.................................................................................................................................. 18
ANNEX A: PROJECT LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................... 19
ANNEX B: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS.................................................................................. 33
ANNEX C: TERMS OF REFERENCE........................................................................................... 34
ANNEX D: LETTERS OF CO-FINANCING COMMITMENT ................................................... 36
ANNEX E: DETAILED WORKPLAN FOR YEAR 1 (2004-2005) .............................................. 38
ANNEX F: FORMAT FOR HALF-YEARLY PROGRESS REPORT........................................... 41
ANNEX G: FINAL INTERNAL PROJECTS ................................................................................. 45
ANNEX H: BUDGET IN UNEP FORMAT ................................................................................... 47

3

---

BACKGROUND AND PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TO OVERALL SUB-PROGRAMME
IMPLEMENTATION

I.
DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE

Global Objective1

1 IW:LEARN's global development objective is ­

To strengthen Transboundary Waters Management (TWM) by facilitating learning
and information sharing among GEF stakeholders.

2 To help the GEF achieve its Strategic Priorities for International Waters as well as stated objectives of the
Global Technical Support Component of OP10,2 project targets towards this objective include:

· From 2006 onward, all waterbodies developing country-driven, adaptive TWM programs with GEF
assistance benefit from participating in structured learning and information sharing facilitated by GEF
via IW:LEARN.
· From 2008 onward, successful IW:LEARN structured learning and information sharing services are
insitutionalized and sustained indefinitely through GEF and its partners.


1 Terminology for objectives derived from Juha Uitto. 2002. GEF M&E Policies and Procedures, with Emphasis on Indicators for International Waters
Projects (Presentation to GEF IWC 2002, on-line via http://www.iwlearn.org/iwc2002):
·
Goal (Global Objective) ­ Higher objective to which this project, along with others, will contribute
·
Purpose (Project Objective) ­ The impact of a project. The change in beneficiary behaviour, systems or institutional performance because of
the combined output strategy and key assumptions.
·
Outcomes (Immediate Objectives) ­ The main results [components of purpose] stemming from achievement of outputs.
·
Outputs -- distinct from Outcomes -- is used here to describe the products and services delivered by the project; whereas
·
Activities -- refers to the actions carried out by the project to create these outputs. (http://www.undp.org/seed/unso/capacity/documents/lfa-
support.pdf)
2 OP10, paragraph 10.4(d), as quoted here in Section 6.
4

---

II.
COMPONENTS, OBJECTIVES, OUTCOMES, OUTPUTS, AND ACTIVITIES

3 In pursuit of these targets, IW:LEARN will improve GEF IW projects' information base, replication
efficiency, transparency, stakeholder ownership and sustainability of benefits through the following five
components:
Figure 1 The Five Components of the IW:LEARN Operational Phase Full-Sized Project, built
upon information sharing and structured learning base



*A.
Facilitating access to information about transboundary water resources among GEF IW
projects
Outcome: TWM improved across GEF IW project areas through projects' and stakeholders' access to
TWM data and information from across the GEF IW portfolio and its partners

*B.
Structured learning among GEF IW projects and cooperating partners
Outcome: Enhanced TWM capacity at project- and basin-levels through sharing of experiences among
subsets of the GEF IW portfolio, including projects, their partners and counterparts

C. Organizing biennial International Waters Conferences
Outcome: GEF IW portfolio-wide increase in awareness and application of effective TWM
approaches, strategies and best practices; numerous new and enhanced linkages and exchanges
between GEF IW and other TWM projects with shared TWM challenges
5

---

*D.
Testing innovative approaches to strengthen implementation of the IW portfolio
Outcome: A widely available suite of tested and replicated ICT and other tools and approaches for
strengthening TWM
E. Fostering partnerships to sustain benefits of IW:LEARN and associated technical support
Outcome: TWM learning and information sharing mechanisms are mainstreamed and institutionalized
into GEF IA and ongoing projects, as well as institutional frameworks of completed projects (e.g.,
Regional Seas and freshwater basin secretariats)

4 UNEP/IW:LEARN components' objectives, outputs and activities are described below: Table 1 presents
outputs by activity and year, as indicators of project performance. This is followed by a more detailed
description of expected outcomes, and activities and outputs to realize those outcomes. The Logical
Framework (Annex A) further characterizes key indicators and associated assumptions and risks.

COMPONENT A. Facilitating Access to Information on Transboundary Water Resources Among GEF IW
Projects

5 Immediate Objective A: To facilitate the integration, exchange and accessibility of data and information among
GEF IW projects, their partners and stakeholders.3

Result A: Partners/stakeholders access information and data across GEF IW portfolio, sharing ICT tools to
improve TWM.

6 Rationale: The GEF's OP10 highlights the IW portfolio's need for increased access to and use of
information to benefit transboundary waters management (TWM). Currently, data and information generated
by IW GEF projects are often difficult to discover. For example, one GEF IW project has identified a score of
environmental indicators to track progress towards improving its transboundary river ecosystem. Another
project developed training modules to apply social marketing to support project-level IW outreach. A third
project created an ICT tool for tracking over 100 partnerships involved in various project-related activities and
initiatives. While virtually all GEF IW project documents include plans to create databases and Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) to collect and disseminate relevant data and information, only less than 20% have
made these information systems accessible on-line. In all these cases, there is virtually no means for other
projects to discover and apply this valuable information.
7 The conventional approach to developing GEF IW information systems tends to focus entirely on gathering
and repackaging information without addressing means of sustaining these efforts beyond the project cycle.
Subsequent to projects' conclusion, GEF's investment in project-generated information is essentially lost to
posterity. For instance, in the case of the recently concluded phase of the Black Sea Environmental
Programme, links to certain applications and tools developed during the project are no longer referenced and
have virtually disappeared since the end of the project cycle. Clearly a there is a need to track and archive such
useful project outputs.



3 Addresses priorities expressed in GEF Operational Program Number 10; "Program Objectives" section, paragraph
10.4(d)
( http://gefweb.org/Operational_Policies/Operational_Programs/OP_10_English.pdf ), the GEF Business Plan FY03-05
(GEF/C.19/10), GEF Council Meeting 19 Summary of the Charge (pagr. 61), GEF/C18/5 (pagr. 11), and Priority Issues
which STAP Should Address in GEF Phase III (section 3).
http://stapgef.unep.org/documents/PRIORITY%20ISSUES%20III.doc . Furthermore, this objective also facilitates the
lead responsibility of GEF IAs and EAs to "disseminate project level information, including lessons learned," as
expressed in the GEF's Clarifying the Roles and Responsibilities of the GEF Entities.
http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/Council_Documents/GEF_C19/C.19.8_Roles_and_Responsibilities.pdf
6

---

8 Absent IW:LEARN, there is no single coordinated mechanism to capture and retain projects' outputs,
intermediate data and information generated by these projects. Nor are projects generally aware of the
information resources and ICT tools developed by one another to sustain their respective transboundary water
bodies. Yet countries participating in TWM have expressed a strong need to access, adapt and apply such
information. They also yearn to have analogous projects' information (e.g., TDA and SAP documents, contact
information, etc.) at their fingertips, in order to spontaneously emulate models and seek and obtain answers to
the various day-to-day operational questions critical to project success. Where these questions go unanswered,
projects and their partners often meander in search of peer assistance or else re-invent the wheel, thus wasting
limited time and scarce resources. They have limited ongoing interactions with their peers around the world
since there is virtually no place where they can reliably find one another, on-line or off. They frequently have
no idea where to go to find existing valuable TWM information amidst the vast but superfluous reaches of the
Web.

9 Moreover, a large portion of GEF IW projects still have little or no Web presence themselves, outside of
their profiles in the GEF IWRC (www.iwlearn.net), developed and maintained by IW:LEARN. Most use
email, but few employ more advanced, yet increasingly accessible ICTs for project coordination (e.g., instant
messaging, Internet-based teleconferencing, shared document editing, etc.). All this limits the ability of their
national, sub-national and NGO partners ­ as well as key stakeholders ­ to keep appraised and fully involved
in project activities. It also prevents "incidental" discovery of useful project information by their peers through
Internet searches.

10 Past efforts of the GEF in collaboration with UNEP have put in place a mechanism for coordinated reporting of
project related information that is visualized through the GEF Project Tracking System (www.gefonline.org).
Recently, UNEP developed a prototype that enhanced the GEF Project Mapping System to demonstrate how data
and information generated by projects could be captured. The prototype linked in real-time with information from
another GEF-sponsored initiative, the "Environment-Directory" (http://www.environment-directory.org). Thus, a
two-way stream of project related information can be archived and customized for specific purposes by building
upon the existing business process and Internet applications already in place.
11 While this demonstration illustrated the utility of an established and coordinated information sharing
process among Implementing Agencies, there still remains a need for an ongoing mechanism to capture data
and information made available through the Internet (via project websites) from the various stakeholders
involved in GEF IW projects. At the same time, stakeholders also seek a well-known access point and
channels for sharing data, information and knowledge sharing that benefits all GEF projects and their on-the-
ground constituencies ­ a two way channel.
12 This component will catalyse the synthesis, collection and integration of information resources pertinent to
TWM ­ both within and from outside the GEF IW portfolio -- thereby enhancing information sharing among
GEF IW project regions and their access to priority water information. Specific objectives are to:
· build a globally-accessible electronic repository of useful GEF IW project data and information ­ as
well as of technical resources to address priority TWM information needs ­ which, for many project
stakeholders, is currently difficult (sometimes impossible) to acquire;
· implement policies and processes to capture and disseminate transferable TWM experiences gained
through GEF projects' execution;
· facilitate the development, application and inter-project replication of valuable ICT tools to support
improved TWM at the project-level as well as to increase both contribution and use of pertinent
information resources by those who need and can most benefit across all GEF IW projects and their
on-the-ground constituencies
· foster information exchange among the IW learning portfolio, including sharing, synthesis and
dissemination of information resources developed by cross-sections of the GEF IW portfolio and their
non-GEF counterparts
7

---

13 Through a systematic approach to information sharing, the GEF can increase IW projects' efficiency,
effectiveness, transparency and stakeholder ownership. This component develops such an alternative.

14 Activity A1 Establish a central metadata directory of all available IW project data and information (GEF IW
Information Management System: IW-IMS)



Output A1.1: IW-IMS prototype established through use of protocols to inter-link IW Resource Center,
projects' and partners' Web sites by 2005.



Output A1.2: At least 4 IW-IMS modules support information sharing among specific subsets of the GEF IW
portfolio (e.g., Africa, groundwater/aquifers, coral reefs) by 2008.



Output A1.3: An inter-agency GEF IW help desk (&/or water-net) uses IW-IMS resources to research and
respond to at least 4IW community-driven TWM requests per month by 2006.

15 The International Waters Information System (IW-IMS) will serve as single entry point for access to GEF
IW information. This activity will develop, test and institutionalize a supporting mechanism to enhance access
to high quality data and information. Extending the International Waters Resource Center (IWRC)
information system created during the IW:LEARN Pilot Phase, and utilizing the UNEP.Net Frame Work,4[3]
the IW-IMS will include a central database with supporting utilities that provide remote search and transparent
access to project profiles, contact information, publications, geo-referenced data, news, etc., that are available
on-line and are relevant to GEF priority areas (e.g. project websites, thematic portals and clearing houses,
other Resource Centers). Its interface will consist of a series of user prioritized "modules" that readily address
IW stakeholders' information needs and questions by harvesting and customizing information from a broader
network of information partners.
16 Activity A2 Provide technical assistance to GEF IW projects to develop or strengthen Web sites and apply
appropriate ICT tools according to defined ICT quality criteria,5 and connect all GEF IW project
Web sites to the GEF IW-IMS.


Output A2.1: At least 2 ICT training workshops over 4 years, through 2008.


Output A2.2: 95% of GEF IW projects have developed Web sites with ICT tools & information resources
inter-linked & accessible through IW-IMS by 2008.

17 The objective of this activity is to create and make GEF IW projects' and partners' Web sites
interoperable, build capacity for their continued upkeep and utility, and to assist projects in developing and
applying ICT solutions to TWM. It also repackages and applies the tools developed in Activity A1, and
serves as a feedback mechanism for practical refinement of the functions and services offered by the IW-IMS.

COMPONENT B. Structured Learning Among IW Projects and Cooperating Partners


4[3] UNEP.Net is a framework consisting of two distinct utilities:
· a discovery mechanism for UNEP and its partners to share and publicize high quality data and information about the
environment that they own or manage;
· supporting tools that allow users to use UNEP.Net to create and complement their own services;


5 ICT quality criteria include elements such as usability, accessibility in low-bandwidth contexts, and metadata standards
for effective information searching and discovery via search engines.
8

---

18 Immediate Objective B: To establish and technically support a series of face-to-face and electronically-
mediated structured learning activities6 ­ or learning exchanges ­ among related projects within the GEF IW
portfolio.


Result B: Enhanced TWM capacity in at least half of all GEF IW projects through sharing of experiences among
subsets of the portfolio.

19 Rationale: As presented in the Context section above, GEF IW projects and their partners have expressed
tremendous interest in learning from one another how to improve TWM.. The IW:LEARN solution addresses this
demand through three types of South to South structured learning activities:

1) Peer-to-peer blended learning for subsets of the IW portfolio (e.g., LME projects or African projects)
through a series of 2-3 facilitated face-to-face meetings, bridged by periodic electronic dialogue
(Activities B1 and B2)

2) Multi-week learning missions, whereby partners from one project area visit another project in order to
experience first-hand the approaches used and challenges faced by their counterparts working on
similar IW issues or under similar circumstances, or to acquire hands-on experience regarding a
specific IW issue or TWM approach (Activity B3)

3) Targeted training to fill critical gaps in many projects' TWM capacity (Activity B4 and some sub-
activities under B1 and B2).

20 Learning Missions: The inter-project stakeholder exchange activity (B3) aims to ramp up the global transfer
of TWM practical experience by increasing institutional capacity to replicate best practices and learn from
lessons among the GEF International Waters projects and their partners.

21 A six-month pilot program in 2003 tested the utility and mechanism for project-proposed stakeholder
exchanges. IW:LEARN requested that exchanges focus on one or more project management and/or ecological
issues identified as priorities by GEF IW projects and partners (e.g., as surveyed at the 2002 GEF International
Waters Conference in Dalian, China). Despite strong demand (exhibited by the number of inquiries and
proposals received), pilot funds limited support to a handful of "small" exchanges (<$10,000 each). Seven
exchanges spanning all GEF-supported regions and IAs, including lakes, rivers, bays, and marine ecosystems
were selected. Selection of exchange candidates was based on pragmatic objectives for knowledge transfer and
relevance to assessed GEF IW priorities.

22 Targeted Training: At the last International Waters Conference (September 2002), 50 participants from
GEF IW projects and partners identified "public participation" (P2) as their highest priority area of need for
further capacity building. GEF mandates that IW projects develop and implement stakeholder involvement
plans (SIPs) as part of the TDA/SAP process. Partners are also encouraged to promote more effective IW
decision-making by providing the public access to relevant information, meaningful opportunities to
participate in the decision-making process, and access to justice to redress harms that might arise. Projects aim
to do so through their respective SAP processes, legal frameworks, and institutions for governing
transboundary waters. Unfortunately, there is often a paucity of local, national, and regional experience to
guide and realize public participation efforts.

23 Across GEF IW projects and the wider international environmental community, however, there exist a
number of tested approaches, models, and tools for promoting more sustainable water governance through
improved public participation. These could be readily adapted and applied to achieve Transboundary Waters
Management (TWM) objectives at the local through basin-wide scales, from the early stages of project


6 E.g., conferences, meetings, workshops, virtual forums and e-learning exchanges.
9

---

formulation through to the implementation of transboundary agreements by permanent coordinating
institutions. There is thus a strong unfulfilled need to be met through capacity-building training for results-
oriented P2 in IW management.

24 Overall: Blended learning meets the needs of subsets of the learning portfolio through ongoing
opportunities to share respective experiences and lessons among similar TWM programs. Missions allow for
more intensive experiential learning to address specific capacity needs of either one or a reciprocating pair of
IW projects. Training, meanwhile, addresses highest priority learning needs expressed across the portfolio and
its partners by delivering specific expertise through series of instructional modules. The multi-institutional
Portfolio Coordination Team will ensure that all three types of activities provide sufficient external structure to
meet projects' outstanding learning needs.

25 Activity B1 Organize 2-5 multi-project learning exchanges on a regional scale.


Output B1.1: Caribbean Inter-linkages Dialog (in cooperation with UNEP and OAS)

26 This activity aims to enhance the implementation of regional subsets of the GEF IW portfolio by increasing
the overall capacity of managers, transferring capacity from within these portions and from outside partners, and
strengthening communication and learning exchanges across networks of GEF IW managers within theseregions.

27 As indicated by the DeltAmerica MSP and the GEF-IW-LAC fora of the IW:LEARN pilot phase,
facilitated dialog among different projects in the Caribbean geographic area may lead to improved efficiency
and effectiveness. This activity facilitates discourse among GEF projects in IW and other focal areas. As such,
it addresses STAP's 2004 discussion on such inter-linkages and supports the Barbados Programme of Action
(BPoA) for the sustainable development of Small Island Developing States (SIDS). With guidance from the
IWTF, UNEP's Caribbean Environmental Programme (CEP) is well situated to realize this activity through its
mandate under Cartagena Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the
Wider Caribbean Region (1983). CEP will link projects across GEF focal areas in dialog over a 3-year period.
This dialog for inter-project collaboration will be launched in conjunction with the fifth Inter-American Dialog
on Water (IAD5) in fall 2005 and continue through facilitated electronic fora, a potential WWF4 side event in
2006, and a final face-to-face wrap-up event in 2008.

28 The African exchange will aim to develop a network of mutually supportive GEF IW projects in the region.
The Eurasian exchange, meanwhile, will focus on supporting a subset of nationally-driven "Capacity for Water
Collaboration" training workshops under development in partnership with the UNECE Transboundary Waters
Convention Secretariat and regional NGOs over the 2004-2006 period.

COMPONENT D. Testing Innovative Approaches to Strengthen Implementation of the IW Portfolio

29 Immediate Objective D: To test, evaluate and replicate novel approaches and ICT tools to meet IW stakeholder
needs.7

Result D: GEF agencies develop, test and, where successful, replicate regional, sub-regional and thematic
demonstrations to improve Transboundary Water Management among GEF IW projects.

30 Rationale: A set of highly successful demonstration activities were realized during the IW:LEARN Pilot Phase,
in partnership with GEF IW stakeholders in all regions. Those most pertinent to the GEF IW learning portfolio are
now being scaled-up and operationalized, through Components A-C above. This underscores the utility of
continued support for testing innovative approaches to enhance information sharing and structured learning across
the portfolio. Within this component, four activities test a set of approaches that, if successful, can be


7 GEF OP 10, paragraph 10.4(d).
10

---

mainstreamed by lead partners to benefit GEF IW stakeholders during and beyond the Operational Phase
IW:LEARN FSP:

31 Activity D1 Develop South East Asia Regional Learning Center (SEA-RLC)


Output D1.1: SEA-RLC established by 2005 to address regional TWM needs and leverage regional
expertise to benefit global TWM


Output D1.2: SEA-RLC Web site provides roster of (>100) experts and (>1000) other information
resources to address IW projects' needs, by 2008


Output D1.3: Regional GIS database on-line by 2006, with at least 3 GIS-based decisions support system
(GIS-DSS) applications developed and applied in the field by Southeast Asian GEF IW projects by
2008.

32 The SEA-RLC (Regional Learning Centre) tests the decentralization of IW:LEARN structured learning
and information management through partnership with a university partner in Bangkok to develop sustaining
capacity to serve and foster enhanced cross-fertilization among a regional subset of freshwater and marine
projects in South East Asia.

33 The SEA-RLC will establish a regional IW Web site interlinked with the sites and data archives GEF IW
projects in the region and the broader IW-IMS. This site will include a regional roster of IW experts and a
virtual library of resource materials, both to be maintained by the center. The activity will then develop, deploy
and maintain a regional GIS database for IW projects, along with dissemination of materials relating its
application to TWM decision-making. Finally SEA-RLC will address GEF IW projects need for guidance
regarding financial sustainability though links to potential co-financing and aid and development agencies,
information regarding the generation of revenue streams for sustaining management-related activities
concerned with the aquatic environment









11

---

Table 1. IW:LEARN Project Timeline with Outputs (indicators of project performance) by Activity and Year
Component/Activity
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4

A. Information Sharing: >75% projects use IW-IMS and >50% of users obtain needed info by 2008.

A1. IW
IW-IMS protocols established,
IW-IMS populated; Helpdesk
Helpdesk responds to
Helpdesk fielding 48+
Info. Mgmt. System
prototype in place; 1 new
operational,
24 requests/yr; 1 new
requests/yr;
(IW-IMS)
module (Africa)
proactive & responsive;
module (TBD)
1 new module
1 new module
(TBD)
(groundwater/aquifers)
A2. ICT Technical
1 ICT Training Workshop; 25% 50% of projects' Websites
1 ICT Workshop; 75%
95% of projects'
Assistance
of projects' Websites linked to
linked to IW-IMS
of projects' Websites
Websites linked to IW-
IW-IMS
linked to IW-IMS
IMS

B. Structured Learning: 30+ projects apply lessons from IW:LEARN structured learning to improve TWM in the basins by 2008.

B1. Regional Multi-

One regional exchange launched
Learning products on
Project Exchanges
to build synergies among GEF
IW-IMS
projects in the Caribbean

D. Testing Innovative Approaches: GEF IW projects and partners benefit from a set of demonstration activities integrating TWM information
sharing and structured learning.

D1. S.E. Asia Regional SEA-RLC established to address Regional GEF IW GIS on-line,
Roster of >100 experts
>1000 IW resources
Learning Center
projects TWM needs; Web site
connected to IW-IMS
addresses projects'
added to IW-IMS; SEA
(SEA-RLC)
launched
needs; 3 GIS DSS
IW project applying
and linked to IW-IMS
modules featured
GIS modules

---

III.
RISKS, ASSUMPTIONS, SUSTAINABILITY

Risks and Assumptions
34 Risks and assumptions referenced in the Logical Framework primarily partners' receptivity to establishing
institutional infrastructure at the project's outset and leadership thereafter to sustain IW:LEARN services and
support beyond the end of the Operational Phase FSP. It is assumed that most or all of GEF IW services
(activities) will be evaluated as highly successful and beneficial to GEF IW portfolio members, thus meriting
continuation beyond four years. The project's designers also expect that partners internal and external to the
current GEF will both remain committed and capable of obtain and allocating resources to to assign staff and
procure funds to support successful activities in perpetuity. If such is not the case, IW:LEARN PCU will alert
the project's Steering Committee and consult in depth with those partner of concern at the earliest possible
opportunity, in order to resolve such issues early and thoroughly.

35 Semi-annual Steering Committee meetings will also help to adjust project plans as necessary to adapt to
unforeseen geopolitical conditions, such as regional or global travel restrictions, that may require adjustments
to the design and resources required to realize scheduled activities.

36 Further detail regarding each project activity's assumptions and risks can be found in the enclosed Logical
Framework (Annex A).
Sustainability
37 Project design includes Component E in order to ensure that strategic partnerships adopt and sustain
IW:LEARN benefits beyond the conclusion of the project. Activities E1 and E2 explicitly relate to
implementation of sustainability plans, while E3 provides outreach which promotes the ongoing utility of and
mandate for the IW learning portfolio to participate in wider IW community events and venues for knowledge
sharing. All component A-D activities are being developed with respective sustainability plans, which will be
integrated and implemented from the outset of the project, then revised following mid-term evaluation.
Specific elements of sustainability and replicability include:
Institutional Sustainability
38 The project's institutional sustainability is grounded in its ability to integrate broad collaborative
partnerships of, by and for GEF IW projects and their stakeholders. Through Component E activities,
IW:LEARN will define sustainability plans, foster partnerships and obtain commitments to establish
sustaining capacity within the respective GEF Implementing and Executing agencies as well as with external
partners. Wherever appropriate, IW:LEARN products and services may be progressively managed directly by
international agencies or NGO partners, in order to ensure institutional ownership as momentum grows over
the course of the project ­ thereby fostering longevity beyond the project's end.8 Thus, by conclusion of the
project in 2008, all services and benefits developed by IW:LEARN, and independently evaluated as successful
and in continuing demand, will be either mainstreamed into the GEF's IW projects and programs or else well-
established with appropriate service providers.

39 Facilitating dialog and collaboration across the three IAs and major EAs over the course of the project will
fully integrate IW:LEARN support mechanisms for TWM within these agencies. As the GEF IW community
matures over the next four years, a culture of inter-project information sharing, learning exchange, and
collaboration should become steadily operationalized into projects' lifecycles and more thoroughly supported
through the GEF's information management systems.9 As a result, the project's primary objective will be
realized through progressive institutionalization and decentralization of services and benefits.
Financial Sustainability


8 Section 14 of the IW:LEARN Concept Paper provides additional details regarding ensuring financial sustainability of
the project. http://www.iwlearn.org/ftp/iwl2_concept.pdf
9 As measured by the level of spontaneous interaction amongst GEF projects, unprompted by and independent of external
facilitation.

---

40 The extended financial viability of the IW: LEARN project relies on its ability to leverage incremental and
catalytic GEF funding into long-term sustainability through partnerships. Since this project primarily serves
the GEF IW portfolio, GEF and/or IA financing commitments will be needed to sustain many of its core
activities. A variety of collaborations and financing mechanisms will contribute to project cost-sharing for
IW:LEARN services during and beyond project implementation.

41 NGO partners are pursuing specific grants and service models to integrate the project activities they
manage into their long-term programs. In addition, GEF IW representatives from all three IAs have agreed in
principle that new projects should include specific budget lines to cover substantial services they receive via
IW:LEARN. Market-based mechanisms tested during the pilot project will also be further refined and
deployed (e.g., cost-recovery workshops, fee-for-service technical support to non-GEF IW projects). This does
not preclude the possibility of sustainability plans evolving such that IW:LEARN may become either a
corporate program of the GEF or its IAs, or else an independent NGO, if these structures would be most
effective at enabling key service areas to be financially self-sustaining.

42 The GEF Secretariat may also wish to consider whether it is appropriate to integrate the IW:LEARN
approach across focal areas into its core programs upon the conclusion of the FSP.
Environmental Sustainability
43 The project directly contributes to the improvement of many IW projects' respective process indicators for
environmental sustainability.10 Increased efficiency in GEF IW project implementation, combined with greater
integration with core IA programs and resources, is expected to expedite and increase achievement of positive
environmental impacts and concomitant change in environmental status. IW:LEARN-fostered interaction
between GEF IW projects and the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) and other institutions may
further promote enhanced environmental sustainability across GEF operational programs and among related
initiatives.
Replicability
44 Replication is intrinsic to this project's design. The project fosters replication and adaptation of best
practices, ICT tools, information products and expertise across GEF IW projects. Demonstrations of capacity-
building will be regularly co-developed with, transferred among, and replicated by project partners, with
funding from GEF and other donors, partners and market-based mechanisms. Whenever possible, capacity to
further adapt and replicate will be strengthened or transferred to on-the-ground project proponents and
partners, as a means to foster on-going replication of tested practical approaches at multiple scales within
project regions.

45 The project will work with existing capacity-building institutions, such as UNDP's Cap-Net, to develop
cross-cutting regional and thematic stakeholder alliances to strengthen and replicate its service lines.
Furthermore, by contributing the increment of transboundary knowledge-sharing to existing institutions which
address aspects of GEF projects' needs, and aligning GEF IW projects as partners and contributors in the
wider network of IW-related initiatives, IW:LEARN will ensure that its products and services are widely
adapted and replicated through GEF IW partner institutions.

46 Additional complementarities and synergies will be realized in positioning the GEF IW structured learning
among the GEF's contributions to the CSD framework as well as upcoming World Water Forums.

47 The GEF Secretariat may also consider, as part of the mid-term and/or final project review, replicating or
enlarging successes from the IW:LEARN approach to serve other GEF focal areas. IW:LEARN will work with
each IA and EA to build their dedicated capacity to replicate across GEF focal areas demand-driven services


10 GEF. 22 April 2002 [Draft]. Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators for GEF International Waters Projects.
Washington, D.C. p. 9
http://www.gefweb.org/ResultsandImpact/Monitoring___Evaluation/Evaluationstudies/M_E_WP__10.pdf

14

---

initiated by IW:LEARN. Support for an operational "GEF Learning Exchange and Resource Network" staff
lead within each IA may be explored as a means to expand provision of these services and benefits across
focal areas. This could open opportunities to more fully leverage the comparative advantages of IAs and EAs
across focal areas.

48 IW:LEARN demonstrated that IW:LEARN's products and services are valuable commodities among
partner organizations interested in adopting them in whole or in part. As a result, IW:LEARN will work
throughout the FSP to identify opportunities to "spin-off" portions of its activities to realize further co-
financing for its core initiatives.



IV.
PRIOR OBLIGATIONS AND PREREQUISITES

49 Successful FSP launch and ongoing sustainability should greatly benefit from an institutional host to
provide facilities, telecommunication and administrative assistance ­ and to promote the long-term viability of
IW:LEARN services to the GEF IW portfolio. IW:LEARN SC members have also emphasized that
IW:LEARN must have a physical presence along the New York to Washington corridor, close to GEF
Secretariat and US-based IAs. With these issues in mind, the SC will review options for hosting PCU in this
region at its May 2004 meeting, thus to be decided prior to signature of this Project Document.

50 Proposed 25% increase in the number of GEF-sponsored participants at future IW Conferences (relative to
past conferences) could result in a shortfall of up to $37,000 for the IWC4 unless resources are conserved or
additional cost-share is identified. Stock-taking prior and subsequent to IWC3 will ensure that IWC4 plans are
made accordingly.

51 Recent scope reductions, co-finance constraints and delay prior to FSP approval or final signature could
adversely impact the ability to realize one or more of the demonstration activities. PCU personnel will work
with its Steering Committee, IAs demonstration partners to map out contingency plans accordingly.

52 TWM managers and policy makers, particularly in developing countries, have little time, inclination,
confidence or quality of internet connection to burrow deeply into rich and complex data bases or books.
Hence, the IW:LEARN's core products will need to be well targeted both in terms of their contents and
delivery format (e.g.., as far as practicable stand-alone information services with option for further on-line
exploration identified but not assumed).

53 Details regarding the IWRM Roundtables and CSD-related elements of the IWC3 will further materials as
an output from IW:LEARN's participation in CSD-12 in April 2004. After this event, both activities should be
notably refined.

15

---

V.
IMPLEMENTATION AND EXECUTION

Project Implementation

The project duration is estimated to be 4 years. The proposed project will be guided by a Project Steering
Committee composed of representatives from all three agencies and the GEF Secretariat. A representative
from the collaborating executing agency (UNOPS) will also be invited to participate in the Steering
Committee C. The Steering Committee will approve project work plans and major project outputs. It is the
responsibility of the UNOPS/PCU to produce and distribute for comments all Steering Committee
correspondence including minutes of Steering Committee meetings. The Steering Committee will schedule its
meetings at least every six months and will be supported with funds provided by GEF through the
Implementing Agency.

Implementation of the activities outlined in the log frame matrix (Table 3) as UNEP led (i.e. Components A,
Activities B1.1 and D1), will be the responsibility of UNEP under the guidance of the UNEP/DEWA technical
staff and the UNEP/DGEF office in close consultation with UNDP and IBRD led activities through the Project
Coordination Unit (UNOPS/PCU). The UNOPS/CTA will work in close coordination with the UNEP
appointed Task Manager to ensure that activities being implemented by the other partner agencies are linked
and coordinated with the UNEP led activities. The UNEP Task Manager and the UNOPS/PCU will jointly
develop a unified annual work plan for the project for Steering committee approval. In addition, UNOPS/PCU
may support aspects of the implementation of UNEP led activities through Terms of Reference provided in the
UNDP implemented project documents.

On a quarterly basis, UNEP will prepare a status report of outputs, implementation issues and problems
encountered (if any) for Steering Committee attention, in accordance with the work plan and submit to the
UNOPS/PCU within three weeks of end of quarter. In addition, UNEP will prepare on a quarterly basis the
"QIR" which will be a bulleted summary of project impacts and submit to the UNOPS/PCU within three
weeks of end of quarter.

Every two weeks on an alternating basis, UNEP will initiate a teleconference with UNOPS/PCU or RLC-TCC
(see Annex B, Organization Chart) to assess progress relative to the work plan, and adjust plans accordingly to
meet expectations and to coordinate respective actions.

The project will be managed by the UNEP appointed Task Manager whom will liaise with the UNOPS/PCU.
UNEP/DEWA will hire a Technical Component Coordinators responsible for the timely execution of
component A and B1.1 and will coordinate the execution of component D1. Component D1 will be executed
by START RC and overseen by the UNEP appointed Task Manager. Modalities for the execution of
component D1 will be detailed in an MOU between START RC and UNEP in consultation with UNOPS/PCU
prior to execution of any of the activities outlined under Component D1.

UNEP through DEWA, and as the GEF Implementing Agency of this project, 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. UNEP also has the responsibility for
regular liaison with the UNOPS/PCU on substantive and administrative matters; assisting the Technical
Component Coordinators and related technical staff. The UNEP/GEF Coordination Office will provide
assistance and advice to UNEP/DEWA in project management (e.g. revisions of workplan and budgets) and
policy guidance in relation to GEF procedures, requirements and schedules.

The UNEP/DGEF Office in close collaboration with UNEP/DEWA will be responsible for clearance and
transmission of financial and progress reports to the Global Environment Facility. The UNEP/DEWA in close
collaboration with UNEP/DGEF Office retains responsibility for review and approval of the substantive and
technical reports and outputs produced in accordance with the work plan.
16

---

The following Annexes provide further details:
· Annex B describes the implementation structure for the overall proejcts' execution and coordination;
· Annex C outline terms of reference for personnel and sub-contracts.


All correspondence regarding substantive and technical matters should be addressed to:

At UNEP/DEWA
Sean Khan
P. O. Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Fax: (254) 20-624315
Phone : (254)20-623271
Email: Sean.Khan@unep.org

At UNEP/DGEF
Vladimir Mamaev
P. O. Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Fax: (254) 20-624041
Phone : (254)20-624607
Email: vladimir.mamaev@unep.org


All correspondence regarding administrative and financial matters should be addressed to:

At UNEP
Mr. S. Kurdjukov
O-I-C, Budget and Financial Management Service (BFMS)
UNON
P.O. Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: (254) 20 623637
Fax: (254) 20 623755

With a copy to:

Sandeep Bhambra
Fund Management Officer,
UNEP /DGEF Co-ordination,
P.O.Box 30552
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: 254-20-623347
Fax: 254-20-623162
Email: sandeep.bhmbra@unep.org


17

---

VI.
MONITORING, EVALUATION, REPORTING, AND DISSEMINATION

54 IW:LEARN's Logical Framework (Annex B) includes both "output" (performance) and "outcome"
(impact) indicators.11 Performance will be gauged according to specific milestones towards achieving outputs,
as documented in the project document and annual work plans. Data to measure outcomes will be derived from
follow-up surveys and interviews with participating stakeholders and beneficiaries in conjunction with
successive iterations of each activity. On a quarterly basis, project progress, as measured by these indicators,
will be reported to IW:LEARN's SC and interested stakeholders, and key impacts included in IW:LEARN's
Quarterly Operational Report (QOR) to the GEF.

55 Each May, progress will be assessed by a Tripartite Review (TPRs), comprised of representatives of the
Executing and Implementing Agencies which serve on the SC (UNOPS, UNDP/GEF, UNEP and the World
Bank). This annual review will focus on both performance (including effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness)
and impact. As part of this process, the Project Coordinating Unit (PCU) will submit and present a
consolidated APR/PIR (Annual Project Report/Project Implementation Review) in line with UNDP and GEF
reporting requirements.

56 Each November, the SC will meet again to review semi-annual progress, to recommend incremental
changes to the annual work plan, and to address any emerging needs among the GEF IW projects or new
operational challenges faced by the project. GEF STAP's IW leads and other experts may also be invited to
participate and provide their guidance during this meeting.

57 Independent mid-term (year 2) and final (year 4) Project Performance Reviews will help to further assess
progress and impact, as well as refine implementation (mid-term) and sustainability (final) of IW:LEARN
activities. These external reviews will also be presented at the following TPR, permitting the SC to endorse or
adapt independent findings or recommendations to subsequently guide the project.

66 Within 30 days of the end of reporting period, UNEP/DEWA will submit to UNEP/DGEF Coordination,
using the format given in Annex F, Half-Yearly Progress Reports as at 30 June and 31 December.
67 Within 60 days of the completion of the project, UNEP/DEWA will submit to UNEP/DGEF Coordination a
Final Report, using the format in Annex G, detailing the activities taken under the Project Document


VII. BUDGET


58 The total GEF grant financing to realize this FSP is US$ 6,000,000 over four years for which UNEP led
activities account for US$ 1,346,534 . The annual breakdown of the UNEP portion of the budget is provided in
ANNEX H . Such contributions will come primarily from UNEP/DEWA, Executing Agencies (EAs) and
NGO partners in IW:LEARN's project management

11 "Outputs are the specific products and services which emerge from processing inputs through [...] activities.
Outputs, therefore, relate to the completion (rather than the conduct) of activities and are the type of result over which
managers have a high degree of influence. Outcomes are actual or intended changes in development conditions that [...]
interventions are seeking to support. They describe a change in development conditions between the completion of
outputs and the achievement of impact." UNDP. 1 December 2000. Results Framework Draft Technical Note (Revision
5).

18

---

ANNEX A:
PROJECT LOGICAL FRAMEWORK

(Refer to activities A1, A2, B1.1 and D1 for UNEP led activities)


PROJECT GOAL: To strengthen Transboundary Waters Management (TWM) by facilitating structured learning and
information sharing among GEF stakeholders.

Internal, Specific Targets:
Project Strategy Indicators
Means of Verification Assumptions
IWL1. Coverage of Benefits
From 2006 onward, all
Participation lists and
Stakeholders have sufficient
(Components A-D)
waterbodies developing country- proceedings; After Action
capacity-building needs,
driven, adaptive TWM programs Reports, information access
awareness of IW:LEARN
with GEF assistance benefit
and post-intervention surveys
plans, & resources (time,
from participating in structured
and interviews, as synthesized
funding, ...) to participate in
learning and information sharing for each activity into Quarterly IW:LEARN activities and
facilitated by GEF via
Operational Reports.
convey their experience to
IW:LEARN.
IW:LEARN PCU; partners can
obtain post-intervention
feedback regarding benefits.
IWL2. Continuity of
From 2008 onward, successful
Development (through 2007)
A subset of services (activities)
Services
IW:LEARN structured learning
and documented
will be independently
(Component E)
and information sharing services implementation of 2008 work
evaluated as "successful;"
will be insitutionalized and
plan by sustaining partners.
partners remain committed and
sustained indefinitely through
able to procure funds to
GEF and its partners.
support their successful
activities.


19

---

COMPONENT A: FACILITATING ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES
IA oversight: UNEP; GEF $ 838,316 [Activity $412,500; PCU $370,093; EA $54,843 ], Total co-finance: $1,207,400

Immediate Objective A: To facilitate the integration, exchange and accessibility of data and information among GEF IW projects,
partners and stakeholders

Outcome A: TWM improved across GEF IW project areas through projects' and stakeholders' access to TWM data and
information from across the GEF IW portfolio and its partners.

Project Strategy Indicators/Outputs12
Means of Verification Assumptions
Result A:
By 2008, >75% of projects use
Results of surveys at 2007 IW
Projects continue to be willing
Partners/stakeholders access
the GEF's comprehensive IW
Conference [IWC] and on-line, and able to use Web software
information and data across
Information Management
included in M&E reports to
and ICT tools to help address
GEF IW portfolio, sharing
System ("IW-IMS" including
GEF
TWM issues.
ICT tools to improve TWM.
helpdesk) and >50% of its users

obtain needed TWM data,
IW-IMS usage statistics (e.g.,
information and/or tools;
system administrator records
stakeholders increasingly use
documenting source and
IWRC to obtain project data and number of data and
information.
information requests)

Activity A1 Establish a
A1.1 Demand-Driven System
IWRC and IW project Web
GEFSEC & IAs promote or
central metadata directory of
Design Protocols and Prototype
sites; agreements with TWM
mandate IW projects'
all available IW project data
IW-IMS (linking IAs' project
content providers; Frequently
participation in IW-IMS;
and information as well as
info.) by 2005
Asked Questions (FAQ) posted interest and commitment of
external information

to IWRC; archive of email
partners to share data and
resources of benefit to GEF
A1.2 IW-IMS includes at least 4 correspondence between
information
IW projects (GEF IW
modules focused on regional,
helpdesk and inquirers; results

12 For this logical framework, the indicators for a specific activity include that activity's output.

20

---

COMPONENT A: FACILITATING ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES
IA oversight: UNEP; GEF $ 838,316 [Activity $412,500; PCU $370,093; EA $54,843 ], Total co-finance: $1,207,400

Information Management
thematic or process-based
of user surveys.
Web continues to be effective
System: IW-IMS)
subsets of TWM information
for global sharing of data and

resources by 2008
information; all projects
$ 505,130 GEF


recognize benefit of & access
$ 267,500 Activity
A1.3 By 2006, help desk (or
sufficient technical capability
$ 204,584 PCU
water-net) responds to at least 4
and resources to develop inter-
$ 33,046 EA
IW community requests per
linked Web sites.
month, extending IW-IMS
contents with demand-driven
research
Activity A2 Provide technical A2.1 At least 2 ICT Training
Guidance posted to IWRC and IW IATF consensus on
assistance to GEF IW
Workshops over 4 years
disseminated to projects; IW
minimum essential criteria for
projects to develop or

project dossiers; workshop
Web sites supported by GEF;
strengthen their Web sites
A2.2 By 2008, 95% of IW
participant lists, affiliations,
continued co-location of
and ICT tools according to
projects have developed Web
and post-training action plans; workshops with other annual
defined ICT quality criteria,
sites, with ICT tools and
IWRC Web site. ICT solutions events; continued project
and connect all GEF IW
information resources inter-
showcased at IWC3 and IWC4 demand to co-develop/adapt
project Web sites to the GEF linked and accessible through
(see Component C)
Web sites & ICT tools with
IW-IMS
IW-IMS

IW:LEARN. GEF establishes

(in years 1 (25%), 2 (50%), 3
IW project Web sites'
policy requirement for IW
$ 333,187 GEF
(75%) and 4 (95%))
addresses, data, news and
projects to provide key
$ 145,000 Activity

information listed, linked,
information. Technical
$ 166,839 PCU
accessible through
capabilities can be efficiently
$ 21,797 EA
International Waters Resource transferred to participating
Centre [IWRC] Web site
countries.
(central metadata directory)
and other IW-IMS nodes


21

---

COMPONENT B. STRUCTURED LEARNING AMONG IW PROJECTS AND COOPERATING PARTNERS
IA oversight: UNEP [B1.1], IBRD [B1.2-1.3, B2], and UNDP [B3, B4]; GEF $ 2,875,522 [Activity $1,855,000; PCU $832,403;
EA $188,118]
Total co-finance: $1,963,000
Immediate Objective B: To establish and technically support a series of face-to-face and electronically-mediated structured
learning activities ­ or learning exchanges ­ among related projects within the GEF IW portfolio.

Outcome B: Enhanced TWM capacity at project- and basin-levels through sharing of experiences among subsets of the GEF IW
portfolio, including projects, their partners and counterparts.

Project Strategy Indicators/Outputs
Means of Verification Assumptions
Result B: Enhanced TWM
30+ projects apply lessons from Survey results and
Demand continues for
capacity in at least half of
IW:LEARN structured learning
presentations at 2007 GEF IW structured learning activities.
GEF IW projects through
activities to improve TWM
Conference, posted thereafter
Stakeholders have (time and
sharing of experiences among within their respective basins by to IW-IMS (accessible via
financial) resources to
subsets of the portfolio
2008.
IWRC); missions reports and
participate

recommendation documents;

specific measures implemented Political stability and security
by projects
permit exchanges via
international travel or viable
alternative (virtual) means
Activity B1 Organize 3-5
By 2008, 3 multi-project
Participants' lists, proceedings, Sufficient regional interest and
multi-project learning
regional TWM learning
summaries of lessons learned
capacity to support exchanges;
exchanges on a regional scale exchanges organized to assist
via exchanges; primers
Co-localization with larger

total of at least 10 projects:
documenting exchanges'
relevant events wherever
$ 551,848 GEF
B1.1 Caribbean Inter-linkages
insights, lessons as enduring
possible, to increase
$ 355,000 Activity
Dialog
knowledge products to address participation and reduce travel
$ 160,746 PCU
B1.2 Africa IW Network
ongoing needs; lists of
and logistical expenses
$ 36,102 EA
B1.3 Southeastern Europe and
actions pursued by
Mediterranean
stakeholders as a result of

22

---

COMPONENT B. STRUCTURED LEARNING AMONG IW PROJECTS AND COOPERATING PARTNERS
IA oversight: UNEP [B1.1], IBRD [B1.2-1.3, B2], and UNDP [B3, B4]; GEF $ 2,875,522 [Activity $1,855,000; PCU $832,403;
EA $188,118]
Total co-finance: $1,963,000
these exchanges
Activity B2 Organize and
By 2008, 5 multi-project
Participants' lists, proceedings, World Bank Institute Water
conduct multi-project
thematic learning exchanges
summaries of lessons learned
Program leadership,
learning exchanges for 3-5
organized on a transboundary
via exchanges; primers
coordination & in-kind
subsets of similar projects in
ecosystem basis assist at total of documenting exchanges'
contributions (leadership/
the GEF portfolio.
at least 15 projects:
insights, lessons as enduring
management); partnerships

B2.1 Freshwater
knowledge products to address w/recognized leaders and
$ 1,437,686 GEF
B2.1.1 Groundwater/Aquifers
ongoing needs; lists of
providers of thematic
$ 1,040,000 Activity
B2.1.2 River Basins
actions pursued by
expertise; Sufficient
$ 303,632 PCU
B2.1.3 Lake Basins
stakeholders as a result of
stakeholder interest and
$ 94,054 EA
B2.2 LMEs (incl. MPAs)
these exchanges
capacity to participate in

B2.3 Coral Reefs
exchanges; Co-localization
with larger relevant events
wherever possible
Activity B3 Coordinate inter-
5-7 multi-week staff/stakeholder Mission reports from
Projects or their stakeholder
project exchanges between
exchanges between pairs of 10-
participants documenting
beneficiaries will have the
GEF IW projects and their
14 new (or pipeline) projects
experiences and lessons
time to write and assure co-
partners or counterparts
and experienced projects, at a
learned for future community
finance for proposals,

rate of 1-4 exchanges per year
reference
participate in exchanges
$ 375,825 GEF
for 4 years.
$ 160,000 Activity
$ 191,238 PCU
$ 24,587 EA


23

---

COMPONENT B. STRUCTURED LEARNING AMONG IW PROJECTS AND COOPERATING PARTNERS
IA oversight: UNEP [B1.1], IBRD [B1.2-1.3, B2], and UNDP [B3, B4]; GEF $ 2,875,522 [Activity $1,855,000; PCU $832,403;
EA $188,118]
Total co-finance: $1,963,000
Activity B4 Provide face-to-
Training for a least 15 projects
Training materials,
GEF IW projects' success and
face and virtual training to
(5 government-NGO
proceedings, participants'
sustainability are contingent
enhance public participation
partnerships trained each year
evaluations, documented
upon effective public access

for 3-4 years) to jointly develop, action plans posted to
and stakeholder involvement;
$ 510,163 GEF
refine and/or implement
workshops' Web sites.
projects, governments and
$ 300,000 Activity
activities to increase public

(NGO) stakeholders are
$ 176,788 PCU
access and involvement in IW
Stakeholder Involvement Plans receptive and committed to
$ 33,375 EA
decision-making
(SIPs); public participation
develop SIPs, public

protocols; specific measures
participation
implemented to increase public protocols/measures via training
access/involvement (e.g.,
process.
social marketing campaign);

pre- and post-training basin-
Governments & NGOs
wide assessments of water
willing/able to cooperate in
governance
development, assessment &
exchange of lessons re: IW
projects' progress towards
public access & involvement.

24

---

COMPONENT C. BIENNIAL INTERNATIONAL WATERS CONFERENCES
IA oversight: UNDP; GEF $ 948,056 [Activity $ 763,364; PCU $122,670; $62,022 EA]; Total co-finance :$ 355,000

Immediate Objective C: To hold GEF IW conferences in 2004 and 2006, gathering the IW community for sharing experience among
GEF IW projects, stakeholders, evaluators and other IW programs and institutions.

Outcome C: GEF IW portfolio-wide increase in awareness and application of effective TWM approaches, strategies and best
practices; numerous new and enhanced linkages and exchanges between GEF IW and other TWM projects with shared TWM
challenges

Project Strategy Indicators/Outputs
Means of Verification Assumptions
Result C: The GEF hosts two Representatives from all GEF
Session agendas and
2005 and 2007 IWCs provide
global conferences (2005,
IW projects (including TWM
proceedings reflecting
valuable benchmarks to
2007) for the GEF IW
agencies, governments, project
considerations and insights
evaluate the continuing
portfolio, including exchange principals, IAs, EAs, NGOs and from participating nations,
successes of projects within
of experience within the
private sector) participate in
project principals, GEF IAs,
the IW portfolio.
portfolio and with related
review of portfolio
EAs, and other partners

transboundary waters
accomplishments, evaluate

Session agendas based on solid
programs.
replication and partnership
Evaluation surveys of
communication and on-going

potentials at two IW
participants
sharing of goals and
conferences, as well as key
accomplishments.
preparatory or follow-up
activities
Activity C1 and C2 Organize 2 IWCs, with biennial needs
Posting to IW-IMS and
IW project principals and
3rd & 4th GEF International
assessments and portfolio-wide
dissemination of primers,
stakeholders actively engage in
Waters Conferences (2005,
interactions, in 2005 (C1 in
conference participants lists,
efforts to share best practices
2007) to bring together full
Brazil) and 2007 (C2 in South
proceedings, summaries of
and develop mechanisms to
spectrum of IW project
Africa)
lessons learned at conferences
support partnership strategies.
stakeholders.

and results of needs
Sufficient coordination w/ and

Documented recommendations
assessment; lists of actions
substantive contributions from

25

---

COMPONENT C. BIENNIAL INTERNATIONAL WATERS CONFERENCES
IA oversight: UNDP; GEF $ 948,056 [Activity $ 763,364; PCU $122,670; $62,022 EA]; Total co-finance :$ 355,000
C1: IWC3 + CSD
from GEF IW portfolio to CSD-
pursued by stakeholders as a
GEF Entities and their
$ 255,836 GEF
13 Policy Session (Spring 2005) result of these conferences;
partners. Continued outreach
$ 161,764 Activity

archive of electronic discourse to, interest of, contributions by
$ 77,335 PCU
among participants;
and travel support for nations,
$ 16,737 EA
submission on behalf of GEF
NGO partners. Venue

IW portfolio to CSD-13
accessibility and geopolitical
C2: IWC4

stability permit broad
$ 692,220 GEF
participation (GEF and non-
$ 601,600 Activity
GEF projects and donors)
$ 45,334 PCU
$ 45,285 EA






26

---

COMPONENT D. TESTING INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IW
PORTFOLIO
IA oversight: UNEP [D1], IBRD [D2, D3]; GEF $874,994 [Activity $610,000; PCU $ 207,704; EA $57,239]; Total co-finance: $
2,110,400

Immediate Objective D: To test, evaluate and replicate novel approaches and ICT tools to meet IW stakeholder needs.

Outcome D: A widely available suite of tested and replicated ICT and other tools and approaches for strengthening TWM.

Project Strategy Indicators/Outputs
Means of Verification Assumptions
Result D: GEF agencies
GEF IW projects and partners
Participant lists, evaluations
Project partners and
develop, test and, where
benefit from a set of
and follow-up assessments of
stakeholders have the time,
successful, replicate
demonstration projects
impacts from participation.
interest and resources to
demonstrations for improving integrating information sharing
participate in structured
TWM among GEF IW
and structured learning
learning and information
projects.
sharing demos.
Activity D1 Develop South
D1.1 In 2004, SEA-RLC
Outreach materials
RLC partners able to solicit,
East Asia Regional Learning
established to address regional
disseminated to all GEF IW
access and provide sufficient
Centre (SEA-RLC)
TWM project needs (as
projects & partner institutions
TWM & ICT expertise to

identified during PDF-B)
in region
address identified needs of
$ 351,197 GEF



GEF projects/partners; GEF
$ 280,000 Activity
D1.2 SEA-RLC Web site
IWRC template online and
IW projects in region
$ 48,221 PCU
launched (by 2005), addressing
customized to SEA region;
committed to contributing to
$ 22,975 EA
project needs through roster of
updates to metadata database
and benefiting from SEA-RLC

IW experts (>100 by 2007) and
of information resources and
services
other information resource
linked to GEF IW-IMS.

(>1000 by 2008)

Host has technical capacity to

Regional GIS database and
adapt develop ICT tools to
D1.3 Regional IW GIS database demonstration applications,
meet project needs, adequate
operational online by 2006, with SEA-RLC Library of Practical human resources to maintain

27

---

COMPONENT D. TESTING INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IW
PORTFOLIO
IA oversight: UNEP [D1], IBRD [D2, D3]; GEF $874,994 [Activity $610,000; PCU $ 207,704; EA $57,239]; Total co-finance: $
2,110,400
at least 3 prototype GIS-based
Experience and TWM distance outreach, assess and respond to
decision support applications
learning materials online and
GEF IW projects/partners
featured by 2007 and applied by interlinked w/SEA node of
needs, and research &
SEA projects by 2008
GEF IW-IMS
catalogue relevant information


resources


National partners responsive to
SEA-RLC solicitation of needs
& offer of service; potential
national data and information
sharing restrictions

Activity D2 Provide face-to-
D2.1 Five (5) 3-day
Participant lists and
GWP brings expert
face and virtual training,
Southeastern Europe
evaluations; rapporteurs'
facilitator(s) and rapporteur(s)
knowledge sharing and
Transboundary Waters
reports from Roundtables
to both Roundtables and
capacity building,
Roundtables for senior officials
(posted to IW-IMS)
network discussions
cooperation between
and experts by 2006.


stakeholders in Southeastern

Archives and evaluations of
GWP able to organize
Europe and Mediterranean
D2.2 Internet-based targeted
electronic discourse;
roundtables starting June 2004.
sub-region
information exchange network
information disseminated by
Beneficiary countries willing

on Transboundary Waters (for
GWP-Mediterranean via IW-
and able to send senior
$ 216,499 GEF
Southeastern Europe
IMS (and other media)
officials and experts to
$ 130,000 Activity
Transboundary River Basin and

participate. GEF projects in
$ 72,335 PCU
Lakes Management Program)
region have sufficient
$ 14,163 EA
launched by 2005, sustained
experience and resources to

through regional partners by
contribute.
2006.


28

---

COMPONENT D. TESTING INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IW
PORTFOLIO
IA oversight: UNEP [D1], IBRD [D2, D3]; GEF $874,994 [Activity $610,000; PCU $ 207,704; EA $57,239]; Total co-finance: $
2,110,400

Coordination with Component
D2.3 Network for dissemination
A permits rapid deployment of
of Mediterranean experience in
network through IW-IMS; e.g.,
transboundary aquifer
interlinking Web sites of
management [for Mediterranean
GWP-Med., GEF projects &
Shared Aquifers Management
MAP. Participants are willing
Program] ­ realized in
and able to convey inquiries
conjunction with Activity B2.1
and insights via Internet and
contribute to electronic version

Networks are developed and
sustained in a manner
responsive and useful to
stakeholders
Activity D3 CSD/GEF
D3 One global roundtable
Participant lists and
Cap-Net brings expert
Roundtable
meeting to clarify the role of
evaluations; rapporteurs'
facilitator(s) and rapporteur(s)

IRWM or related IW issue of
reports and guidance from
to roundtable
$ 307,248 GEF
common priority to the CSD and roundtables (posted to IW-IMS
$ 200,000 Activity
the GEF (in 2004) ­ e.g.,
and disseminated at IWC,
Cap-Net and IW:LEARN able
$ 87,148 PCU
bringing together select nations
CSD, WWF4, etc.)
to organize roundtables
$ 20,100 EA
to build IWRM capacity to meet
starting June 2004. Beneficiary
Millennium Development Goal
countries willing and able to
for national IWRM strategies in
send senior officials and
2005 and to support water-focus
experts to participate.
of CSD-12/CSD-13 biennium
(2004-05)


29

---

COMPONENT E. FOSTERING PARTNERSHIPS TO SUSTAIN BENEFITS OF IW:LEARN AND ASSOCIATED
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
IA oversight: all IAs; GEF $ 713,162 [Activity $ 168,000; PCU $498,507; EA 46,655]; Total co-finance: $170,000


Immediate Objective E: To sustain and institutionalize information sharing and learning exchanges across GEF IW projects and
GEF entities.

Outcome E: TWM learning and information sharing mechanisms mainstreamed and institutionalized into GEF IA and ongoing
projects, as well as transboundary institutional frameworks of completed projects (e.g., Regional Seas and freshwater basin
secretariats)

Project Strategy Indicators/Outputs
Means of Verification Assumptions
Result E: GEF agencies have By 2008, successful IW:LEARN Development (through 2007)
A subset of FSP activities
designed, evaluated and
structured learning and
and documented
evaluated as "successful;"
implemented strategic plans
information sharing services
implementation of 2008 work
partners leverage GEF funds to
to provide services & make
insitutionalized and sustained
plan by sustaining partners.
commit and procure resources
benefits of IW:LEARN and
indefinitely through GEF and its
to support their successful
its technical support available partners.
Annual work plans, PIRs an
activities beyond FSP
to GEF IW community on an
TPRs, as well as mid-term

on-going basis.
Partners' strategic plans include Review and Final Independent Projects and NGO stakeholders

role in sustaining one or more
Evaluation
are receptive to sustaining

FSP product or service.

partners and continue to
Partners' strategic plans (e.g.,
benefit from services and
business plans, work plans,
support.
etc.)

Activity E1: Develop
By 2008, Sustainability Plans
Annual FSP and partner work
IAs & Eas will take on
partnerships to sustain
implemented, including l
plans; Sustainability Strategy
responsibility to build
IW:LEARN's benefits
transfer of various services to
documented, ratified by SC;
sustaining capacity for IWL

30

---

COMPONENT E. FOSTERING PARTNERSHIPS TO SUSTAIN BENEFITS OF IW:LEARN AND ASSOCIATED
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
IA oversight: all IAs; GEF $ 713,162 [Activity $ 168,000; PCU $498,507; EA 46,655]; Total co-finance: $170,000

through dialog with GEF
appropriate organizations, SC
MOUs established; Activity-
OP activities they respectively
Implementing Agencies
acceptance of associated
level Sustainability Plans;
lead to serve full GEF IW
(IAs), Executing Agencies
financing and personnel TORs,
TORs for financing and
portfolio in perpetuity.
(EAs), and external
etc.
dedicated staff for 1 year

organizations.

beyond end of FSP
External partners will build

By end of project, IW:LEARN
capacity to sustain services and
$ 390,019 GEF

products and services are
benefits they respectively lead
$ -
maintained and enriched in
to serve GEF IW portfolio; Co-
$ 364,503 PCU
perpetuity through a network of
financed partnerships will
$ 25,515 EA
partners
catalyze process of tapered


transition to full partner
financing.

Sustaining activities is
contingent upon effective
outreach and stakeholder
involvement, to ensure utility
of services and support
provided through partnerships.
Activity E2: Promote GEF
E2.1 Side events at TWM
Proceedings and presentations
Mutual acceptance between
IW contributions to
meetings (e.g., CSD, WWF4,
from side-events, archived and GEF and meeting hosts
sustainable development and
IUCN Assembly): 2 GEF IW
accessible via IW-IMS;
regarding GEF IW projects'
participation of GEF IW
presentations, information
participants lists, mission
participation side-events
projects in broader TWM
kiosks, or side events per year
reports;

community
for 4 years; 2-3 GEF IW

Sufficient source materials

projects/year receive cost-
IW-related articles and news
available to efficiently compile
$ 323,144 GEF

sharing to participate
posted items prepared and/or
outreach materials, including

31

---

COMPONENT E. FOSTERING PARTNERSHIPS TO SUSTAIN BENEFITS OF IW:LEARN AND ASSOCIATED
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
IA oversight: all IAs; GEF $ 713,162 [Activity $ 168,000; PCU $498,507; EA 46,655]; Total co-finance: $170,000

$ 168,000 Activity

GEF IW project proponent
some historical footage for
$ 134,004 PCU
E2.2 Outreach Materials: 1-2
submission of papers and news LME video.
$ 21,040 EA
GEF IW outreach publications,
to scholarly and IW-


syntheses, videos and/or (IW-
community Publications and/or Community-based initiatives
IMS) CD-ROMs circulated to
syntheses available on IW-IMS in GEF IW project countries
TWM community ­ including a
and CD.
able to host traveling exhibit;
co-produced LME video

GEF IW project proponents
documentary ­ ea. year for 4
Gender and Water exhibit
receptive to working with
years.
featured at IWCs, IAD5,
community-based gender &

WWF4 and at invitation of
water organizations to generate
E2.3 Gender and Water Exhibit
communities in GEF IW
contributions to exhibit.
(co-produced with Gender &
beneficiary countries.

Water Alliance)


32

---

ANNEX B: ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS

---

ANNEX C: TERMS OF REFERENCE

UNEP/IW:LEARN Task Manager (TM)
Co-Financed by UNEP (100%)

Directly manages overall execution of UNEP led activities under the IW:LEARN project.
Supervises all UNEP staff assigned to the project.
Works in close consultation and coordination with the UNOPs/PCU (i.e. CTA and DD)
Collates and delivers timely status and quarterly reports to CTA
Oversees SEA-START-RC's timely and quality delivery of Activity D3 deliverables, according to Project
Timeline and within that activity's budget.
Activity B1.1
· Supports and participates in collaborative goal and objective-setting strategic planning process.
· Leads planning, organization and implementation of a regional consultative workshop
(provisionally planned in conjunction with IAD5 in Jamaica, late 2005) bringing together
representatives of all GEF projects in the Wider Caribbean region, virtually facilitated follow-up, and
side event in conjunction with WWF4 in Mexico, 2006.
· Ensures that logistical planning and preparations are adequately staffed, supplied, and carried
out in a timely manner, including working with workshop partners to develop and disseminate
background information and participant support materials for the consultative workshop.
· Works with partners to prepare and implement a regional information and communications
strategy to support publicizing the coordination process and mtgs, ensure documentation of workshop
outputs, and support follow-on actions to promote on-going coordination across GEF focal areas in
the Wider Caribbean.
· Engages subcontractors as needed for dialogue process facilitation and workshop organizing,
preparation and delivery.
· Leads evaluative assessment of workshop outcomes, ensure preparation of reports and budget
reconciliation for the mtg
Oversees reporting and evaluation inputs from activity
Contributes to IW:LEARN's long-term sustainability planning (Activity E1).


Technology Component Coordinator (TCC)
Co-Financed by UNEP (50%)

Component A
Directly manages tasks, technology development assistant, and various sub-contractors to ensure timely and
quality delivery of Component A deliverables according to Project Timeline (Table 1 of ProDoc, pp. 19-20),
staying on schedule and within budget.
· Submits reporting and evaluation inputs from this component to the Task Manager.

Activity B1.1
Provides information and communications technology support to this activity.
Ensures interlinking with activity partners' information management systems and capture of outputs in IW-
IMS.
· TCC reports to UNEP Task Manager on substantive, administrative and managerial matters, and
consults with the PCU Deputy Director for strategic guidance.

Activity B1.2
Technically assists (or direct technical team to technically assist) and responds to ICT needs of partner activity
leads (PALs).

---

Implements interlinkages with Africa module of IW-IMS
· TCC reports to UNEP Task Manager on substantive, administrative and managerial matters, and
consults with the PCU Deputy Director for strategic guidance.

Activity B1.3
Technically assists (or direct technical team to technically assist) and responds to ICT needs of partner activity
leads (PALs).
Implements interlinkages with GEF IW-IMS.
TCC reports to UNEP Task Manager on substantive, administrative and managerial matters, and consults with
the PCU Deputy Director for strategic guidance.

Component D1
Works in close coordination with the START RC technical leads to ensure timely and quality delivery of
Activity D3 deliverables, according to Project Timeline and within that activity's budget.
Implements interlinkages with GEF IW-IMS.
· TCC reports to UNEP Task Manager on substantive, administrative and managerial matters, and
consults with the PCU Deputy Director for strategic guidance.

Component D2
Technically assists (or direct technical team to technically assist) and responds to ICT needs of partner activity
leads (PALs).
Implements interlinkages with GEF IW-IMS
· TCC reports to the UNEP Task Manager and consults with DD on substantive, administrative and
managerial matters, and to World Bank GEF lead for strategic guidance.

Component D3
· Incorporates D3 outputs in IW-IMS.

Technical Assistant (TA)
Co-financed by UNEP (100%)

Component A
Supports TCC in realization of IW:LEARN's Component A and ICT-related products and services.
Reports to UNEP Task Manager.

















35

---

Annex C: LETTERS OF FINANCING COMMITMENT
Annex D: LETTERS OF FINANCING COMMITMENT

---

No. 0512.62/47.090

23 April 2004

Dann M. Sklarew, Ph.D., Director
IW:LEARN
1630 Connecticut Avenue, 3rd Floor
Washington, DC 20009
USA

Dear Dr. Sklarew,

On behalf of the South East Asia Global Change System for Analysis, Research and Training
- for IGBP, WCRP and IHDP - Regional Centre (SEA START RC), located at Chulalongkorn
University, Bangkok, Thailand, I would like to affirm that our organization shares
IW:LEARN's aims to strengthen transboundary waters management (TWM) through learning
and information sharing among stakeholders.

SEA START RC expects to be working in partnership with the UNEP-GEF South China Sea
project and in collaboration with IW:LEARN, towards these ends. Within the context of the
SEA-START RC programme, we will be pursuing the following joint activity over the 2004-
2008 period:

IW:LEARN Component D1 South East Asia Regional Learning Centre (SEA-RLC): the
SEA-RLC will be established, with a website interlinked with the GEF IW-IMS (International
Waters Information Management System, to be developed in conjunction with UNEP.net),
containing a regional roster of experts, TWM information resources, and online GIS decision
support tools.

SEA START RC's efforts represent an equivalent of at least $290,400 over the 2004 -2008
period towards the implementation of this joint activity, which will contribute to achieving
our common goals.

I look forward to cooperating with you to ensure that our respective organizational activities
are mutually supportive, complementary and catalytic towards realizing our common agenda
to improve TWM world-wide.

Respectfully Yours,
Anond Snidvongs
Director
SEA START RC


Encl: Co-financing from SEA START RC

Cc: Dr. John Pernetta, UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project Director


Southeast Asia START Regional Center (SEA START RC),
Old SWU Pathumwan Building 5, 5th Floor, Henri Dunant Road, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
Tel: (66 2) 218 9464 to 9 Fax: (66 2) 251 9416 E-mail: info@start.or.th URL: http://www.start.or.th

START - the Global Change SysTem for Analysis, Research and Training
Of the International Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme (IHDP),
The International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), and the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP)

---

ANNEX E: DETAILED WORKPLAN FOR YEAR 1 (2004-2005)

Component A

Lead
Item Ref#
Activity/Output/Task Description
Start
Start
End
End
Mgr
Year
Qrtr
Year
Qrtr
Initials
TCC
A1.1-1
Prototype IW-IMS in place (updated
2004
2 2005
3
(Year 1)
and adapted from existing IWRC),
with protocols established
"
A1.1-1a
Initial protocol/system design
2004 3
2004 3
workshop with key partners (UNEP,
FAO, LakeNet, ICRI, IUCN,
developmentgateway...)
"
A1.1-1b
Prototype (alpha) design, incl. shared
2004 4
2005 1
protocols and IWRC updates
"
A1.1-1c
User needs assessment, feedback on
2004 3
2004 4
prototype
"
A1.1-1d
Prototype (beta) deployed
2005
1
2005
2
"
A1.2-1
Africa module developed and
2005
1 2005
2
operational via IW IMS helpdesk
"
A2.2-1
25% of projects' Websites linked to
2005
3 2005
4
IW-IMS








Activity B1.1

Lead
Lead
Item
Activity/Output/Task Description
Start Start End
End
Org
Mgr
Ref#
Year Qrtr Year Qrtr
Initials
UNEP IWL
B1.1-1
Liase with each IA focal point for
2004 3 2005 2

DD
(Year 1) respective projects and engage them
in identifying goals and objectives
for coordination across GEF focal
areas' projects. Output: Regional
Work shop planning team.

"
"
B1.1-1a Prepare background document for
2005 2
2005 3
dissemination to participants via
preparatory e-dialogue prior to
consultative workshop
Output: Background documents

38

---

Lead
Lead
Item
Activity/Output/Task Description
Start Start End
End
Org
Mgr
Ref#
Year Qrtr Year Qrtr
Initials

"
"
B1.1-1b Identify and engage facilitator to
2005 2
2005 3
moderate preparatory dialogue and
workshop
Output: TOR for facilitatator

"
"
B1.1-1c Identify and engage participants in
2004 2
2005 3
facilitated e-dialogue
Output: background materials
disseminated and discussed w/
participants

"
"
B1.1-1d Conduct consultative workshop in
2005 3
2005 4
conjunction with IAD5
Output: Strategic Action Plan for
collaboration across GEF focal areas

"
"
B1.1-1e Plan/implement follow-up e-
2006 1 2006 3
dialogue support to follow IAD5
workshop

Activity D1

2004 2005
Activity
3 4 1 2 3 4
Appointment of a Content Editor






Appointment of an Outreach Manager






Strategic planning for interactive IW SEA-RLC website/portal






Identifying, editing and integrating data and information






Seeking commitments from all GEF IW Projects in SEA region






Visits to GEF IW projects in SEA region






Appointment of a Computer System Specialist






Development of website databases and dynamic content






SEA-RLC website/portal officially launched













Establishment of `virtual IW communities of practice':






(1) Development of specialist networks






(2) Development of IW expert roster













Establishment of `Library of Practical
Experience':

(1) Module on demonstration site management













Exploration for sustaining RLC beyond GEF phase







39

---

Overview of links to GEF IW and other IW/IWM activities in SEA





Provide direct IT service to some GEF IW Projects in SEA






Kickoff Meeting








40

---

ANNEX F: FORMAT FOR HALF-YEARLY PROGRESS REPORT
As at 30 June and 31 December
(Please attach a current inventory of outputs/Services when submitting this report)

1. Background Information

1.1 Project Number:

1.2 Project Title:

1.3 Division/Unit:

1.4 Coordinating Agency or Supporting Organization (if relevant):

1.5 Reporting Period (the six months covered by this report):

1.6 Relevant UNEP Programme of Work (2002-2003) Subprogramme No:

1.7 Staffing Details of Cooperating Agency/ Supporting Organization (Applies to personnel / experts/
consultants paid by the project budget):

Functional Title
Nationality
Object of Expenditure (1101,
1102, 1201, 1301 etc..)







1.8 Sub-Contracts (if relevant):

Name and Address of the Sub-Contractee
Object of expenditure (2101, 2201, 2301 etc..)





2. Project Status

2.1 Information on the delivery of outputs/services

Output/Service
Status
Description of work
Description of problems
(as listed in the
(Complete/
undertaken during
encountered; Issues that
approved project
Ongoing)
the reporting period
need to be addressed;
document)
Decisions/Actions to be
taken
1.





2.





3.






2.2 If the project is not on track, provide reasons and details of remedial action to be taken:

41

---

3. Discussion acknowledgment (To be completed by UNEP)

Project Coordinator's General
First Supervising Officer's General Comments
Comments/Observations











Name:
Name:
____________________________
____________________________
Date:
Date:
____________________________
____________________________
Signature:
Signature:




____________________________
____________________________




42

---

Attachment to Ha lf-Yearly Progress Report: Format for Inventory of Outputs/Services

a) Meetings (UNEP-convened meetings only)
No Meeting Title Venue
Dates Convened
Organized by # of
List attached Report issued
Language Dated
Type
by
Participants
Yes/No
as doc no
(note 4)
1.












2.












3.













List of Meeting Participants
No. Name
of
the
Participant
Nationality








b) Printed Materials
No Type
Title Author(s)/Editor(s)
Publisher
Symbol

Publication
Distribution
(note 5)

Date
List Attached
Yes/No

1.








2.








3.










43

---

c) Technical Information / Public Information
No Description
Date
1.



2.



3.




d) Technical Cooperation
No Type
Purpose Venue
Durati
For Grants
on and Fellowships
(note 6)
Beneficiaries Countries/Nationalities Cost
(in
US$)
1.








2.









e) Other Outputs/Services (e.g. Networking, Query-response, Participation in meetings etc.)
No Description

Date
1.



2.



3.





Note 4: Meeting types (Inter-governmental Meeting, Expert Group Meeting, Training Workshop/Seminar, Other)
Note 5: Material types (Report to Inter-governmental Meeting, Technical Publication, Technical Report, Other)
Note 6: Technical Cooperation Type (Grants and Fellowships, Advisory Services, Staff Mission, Others)


44

---

ANNEX G: FINAL INTERNAL PROJECTS

1.
Project Title:

2.
Project Number: (include number of latest revision)

3.
UNEP Programme of Work (2000-2001) Component Number: (3 digits), or Relevant UNEP
Programme of
Work (2002-2003) Subprogramme Number and Specific Objective Number

Include a statement of how effective the project has been in attaining this
component/objective and its contribution to overall Subprogramme implementation

4.
Performance Indicators:

UNEP Programme of Work: {State the relevant Performance Indicators (with the Quantity
figure) from the Programme of Work, and compare against actual results}
5.
Scope:

6. Duration:

(a)
Initial {(as indicated in the original project document)


List day/month/year of start and end of project.


List project duration in terms of total months}.

(b)
Actual {(as indicated in the latest project revision)


List day/month/year of start and end of the project.


List project duration in terms of total months}.


(c) Reasons for the variance {When there is a difference between the initial and actual
duration, list the consecutive project revisions (number and date of approval), and
summarize justification for each revision}.
7. Cost:

(a)
Initial {(as indicated in the project document)


List the total project cost (UNEP and "Others") and give breakdown by funding source.
Give actual figures and contribution in terms of percentages}.


(b)
Actual {(as indicated in the latest project revision)


List the total project cost (UNEP and "Others" and give breakdown by funding source.
Give actual figures and contribution in terms of percentages}.


(c)
Reasons for the variance {(When there is a difference between the initial and actual
cost, list the consecutive project revisions (number and date of approval) involved in
amending the project costs. List any other reasons for discrepancy}.
(d) Relate expenditure to achievement of outputs (e.g. 100% expenditure and 82% output
completion).

8. Needs:


(a)
Identified needs (as indicated in the original project document).


(b)
Satisfied/realized needs (List needs fulfilled due to implementation of the project).

9. Results:


(a)
Expected Results (as indicated in the original project document).



(b)
Actual Results (indicate actual results achieved/attained from project implementation).


(c) Reasons for the variance (state the reasons for the difference between expected and
actual results).


(d)
State corrective action(s) to be taken.

10. Outputs:


(a)
Expected Outputs (as indicated in the original project document).


(b) Actual Outputs (List actual outputs resulting from project implementation
emphasizing activities undertaken).


(c) Reasons for the variance (state reasons for the difference between expected and actual
outputs).


(d)
State corrective action(s) to be taken.


45

---

11.
What are the catalytic effects of the project on other agencies or governments?
(a)
Intellectual:
(b)
Financial:

12.
Describe the problems encountered during project implementation:

Problems: Causes: Consequences:
(a) Substantial/Programmatic



(b) Institutional



(c) Financial



13. On Gender - describe:
(a)
Project's contribution to the advancement of women with regard to their participation in
ecosystem management and control of environmental degradation as envisioned by
UNEP's commitment to related provisions of Agenda 21, Chapter 24.
(b)
Gender sensitive activities carried out by the project, for example level of participation in
decision making process in the planning and development and implementation of the
project and women's participation in capacity building and awareness activities.
14. On Sustainability:
Describe sustainability of the project sustainability in terms of enabling environment (e.g.
national or regional legislation and policies; institutional capacity (human resource and planning
and management systems); and financial sustainability (reliability of funding sources).
15.
Lessons learned from the achievement and/or weaknesses of the project:

16. Recommendations:
Make
recommendations
to:

(a)
Improve effect and impact of similar projects in the future;

(b)
Indicate what further action might be needed to meet the project needs/results.

17.
Further follow-up action required:
(a) Action Required: (b)
Responsible
unit(s): (c)
Schedule:

18. Evaluated
by:


Name and position of Evaluator:

__________________________
Date:___________________________

19. Approved by:

Name of Programme Manager/Regional Director:
Chief, Project Design and Evaluation Unit:


________________________________
__________________________________
Date:____________________________
Date:______________________________


46

---

ANNEX H: BUDGET IN UNEP FORMAT





2004
2005
2006
2007
Total








10 PROJECT PERSONNEL COMPONENT













1100 Project Personnel Title Grade w/m






1101 Technology Comp. Coordinator (Part time 50%) 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 260,000

1199
Total
65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 260,000








1200 Consultants (Description of activity/service) w/m






1201
Consultants
5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000

1202 Expert - Interlinkage between Carrib & GEF
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000

1299
Total
15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000








1300 Administrative support Title Grade w/m






1321
Temporary Assistance
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000

1399
Total
10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000









1600
Travel
on
official
business


1601
Staff Travel
25,000 25,000 15,000 15,000 80,000

1699
Total
25,000 25,000 15,000 15,000 80,000









1999 Component Total
115,000 115,000 105,000 105,000 440,000
















20 SUB CONTRACT COMPONENT













2200 Sub-contracts (MOUs/LAs for supporting organizations)





47

---

2201
Activity A1.1: IW-IMS
100,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 175,000

2202
Activity A1.2: Modules
25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000

2203 Activity A1.3: Help-desk IW
15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000

2204 Activity D 1: SEA START RC
70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 280,000

2299
Total
210,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 585,000









2999 Component Total
210,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 585,000
















30 TRAINING COMPONENT














3200
Group
Training


3201 Activity A 2.1: Workshops, ICT
- 45,000 - 45,000 90,000

3299 Total
- 45,000 - 45,000 90,000








3300 Meetings/conferences (Title)






3301
Caribbean W/shop
- 100,000 30,000 30,000 160,000

3399
Total
- 100,000 30,000 30,000 160,000









3999 Component Total
- 145,000 30,000 75,000 250,000
















40 EQUIPMENT AND PREMISES COMPONENT





4100 Expendable equipment (items under $1,500 each)






4101
Office supplies
1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 4,000

4102 Software
10,000 10,000

20,000

4199
Total
11,000 11,000 1,000 1,000 24,000









4200 Non-expendable equipment (see items listed on budget worksheet)





48

---

4201
Computer Hardware
5,000 5,000 -
10,000

4299
Total
5,000 5,000 - - 10,000









4999 Component Total
16,000 16,000 1,000 1,000 34,000
















50 MISCELLANEOUS COMPONENT






5100
Operation
and
maintenance
of
equipment

5101
Miscellaneous
2,500 2,500 2,000 2,534 9,534

5199
Total
2,500 2,500 2,000 2,534 9,534









5200
Reporting
cost


5220
Translation/Publication/Edition/Printing
5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000

5299
Total
5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000









5300
Sundry


Communications (telephone, fax, internet
5301 services)
2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 8,000

5399
Total
2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 8,000









5999 Component Total
9,500 9,500 9,000 9,534 37,534
















99 GRAND TOTAL
334,500 394,500 270,000 315,534 1,346,534










49

---

---