PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GEF Council Work Program Submission

Agency’s Project ID: PIMS 2838 Country: Global Project Title: Strengthening Global Capacity To Sustain Transboundary Waters: The International Waters Learning Exchange and Resource Network (IW:LEARN), Operational Phase GEF Agency: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), with United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Bank (IBRD) Other Executing Agency(ies): United Nations Office of Project Services (UNOPS), with activity-level NGO management (e.g., GETF, ELI, IUCN) Duration: 4 years GEF Focal Area: GEF Operational Program: OP10: Contaminant-based Operational Programme Regional/Global Technical Support Component	Financing Plan (US$) GEF Project/Component Project 6,000,000 PDF A -- PDF B 350,000 PDF C -- Sub-Total GEF 6,350,000 Co-financing[1] GEF Agency (UNDP) 1,200,000 GEF Agency (UNEP) 1,269,000 GEF Agency (IBRD) 510,000 Other UN, International NGOs, Multilateral, Regional /National Institutions 2,981,000 3,156,000 Sub-Total Co-financing: 6,135,0005,890,000 Total Project Financing: 12,485310,000 Financing for Associated Activities If Any: 1,470,000
GEF Strategic Priority: IW-2: Expand Global Coverage of Foundational Capacity-Building Addressing the Two Key Gaps and Support for Targeted Learning Pipeline Entry Date: 13 June 2003
Estimated Starting Date: July 1, 2004
IA Fee: UNDP: $282,000; UNEP: $282,000; IBRD: $150,000
Contribution to Key Indicators of the Business Plan: Contributes to all three key indicators under Strategic Priority IW-2.
Record of endorsement on behalf of the Government(s): Global Project, N/A

Approved on behalf of the UNDP. This proposal has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the standards of the GEF Project Review Criteria for work program inclusion.
Yannick Glemarec Deputy Executive Coordinator	Andrew Hudson PTA, IW
Date: 8 12 April 2004	Andrew.Hudson@undp.org Tel: 212.906.6228

1. Project Summary

a) Project rationale, objectives, outputs, and activities.

b) Key indicators, assumptions, and risks (from logical framework)

Project Rationale

1 IW:LEARN fosters structured learning, information sharing, collaboration and replication across the GEF’s International Waters (IW) portfolio. At local, regional and global scales, IW:LEARN stakeholders adapt and apply learning, information, skills and tools obtained through IW:LEARN to advance and sustain ongoing benefits of their respective IW projects.

Baseline and Alternative Scenarios[2]

2 In the baseline scenario, learning and information transfer across GEF IW projects remains piecemeal: Transboundary Waters Management (TWM) capacity builds gradually in isolated projects. This constrains the pace and quality of project implementation, thus limiting the potential depth and scope of success. There exists no mechanism to transfer – on demand – valuable experiences between projects. Technical support services within each IA are not responsive to stakeholders’ expressed needs across the entire GEF IW portfolio. Numerous opportunities are missed for projects to leverage emerging Information and Communications Technology (ICT) tools for greater stakeholder learning, transparency and participation in TWM. IW projects are disconnected from broader global initiatives to equitably share the natural resources of freshwater and marine ecosystems (e.g., the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)[3] and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)[4]). Project personnel operate in an experience vacuum, significantly limiting opportunities to improve the overall performance and impact of the GEF IW portfolio.

3 The IW:LEARN project develops an alternative scenario: Building upon the successful IW:LEARN pilot, the GEF actively promotes effective TWM through information sharing and targeted learning in support of its IW strategic priorities. Thriving face-to-face international exchange and accessible ICT infrastructure foster inter-project learning from community-level through freshwater basin and large marine ecosystem (LME) scales. Experiences resulting in good practices and lessons learned are transferred horizontally across projects, and fed back from GEF M&E Unit to projects in preparation and those underway. Structured learning and information exchange creates enduring in situ capacity to sustain TWM benefits well beyond the GEF project cycle. Information products generated by projects and through these exchanges are readily discovered, accessed and applied to improve TWM across the portfolio.

4 Under this alternative, IW:LEARN scales up and replicates its effective structured learning and information transfer activities among countries participating in GEF IW projects. This provides capacity-building support needed to realize IW-2 targets for waterbodies with country-driven, ecosystem based management programs. With an investment of $6.0 million and matching co-finance over four years, the GEF and its three IAs operationalize lessons learned from the IW:LEARN pilot project in order to advance portfolio-wide performance on a self-perpetuating basis (see Annex A, Incremental Cost Analysis). Successful pilot activities, such as biennial GEF IW Conferences and the International Waters Resource Centre, are enhanced and continued through ongoing stakeholder participation and feedback. Targeted technical assistance regularly characterizes and proactively addresses IW projects’ needs early and rapidly during their GEF project cycles.[5] Meanwhile, the GEF and IAs collaborate through IW:LEARN to test innovative approaches for meeting a select set of needs expressed by IW stakeholders.

5 Through IW:LEARN, the GEF pursues opportunities for collaboration with the Commission on Sustainabile Development (CSD) during its biennial focus on Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), 2004-2005. IW:LEARN includes several features to support such collaboration, consistent with GEF Council direction (GEF/C.22/13 of November 2003) and ongoing deliberations between the CSD and the GEF Secretariat..

6 IW:LEARN integrates active involvement by all three IAs – as well as the GEF Secretariat, M&E Unit, NGO Network and STAP – in exchanging practical experiences and learning across over 55 GEF-approved IW projects and projects in preparation. With the support of its Steering Committee (SC) members, their agencies and NGO partners, IW:LEARN facilitates the incorporation of successful measures into current and new projects, so that the GEF IW portfolio can expeditiously replicate positive results. IW:LEARN technical assistance to projects for appropriate use of ICT and the Internet also catalyzes increased transparency and participation. This, in turn, promotes greater stakeholder ownership and sustainability of transboundary management institutions assisted by the GEF. Thus by partnering through IW:LEARN, the three IAs advance their IW projects’ learning, replication efficiency, transparency, ownership and sustainability during and beyond the IW:LEARN Operational Phase project.

Project Objective

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

Targets for Project Objective

· 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.

7 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 five project components. These components, their associated activities, outputs and results/outcomes are presented below, then characterized along with key indicators, assumptions and risks in the enclosed Logical Framework (Annex B).

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

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

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

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-IWMS 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-IW-IMS resources to research and respond to at least 2 IW community-driven TWM requests per month by 2006.

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,[ii] and connect all GEF IW project Web sites to the GEF IW Information Management System.

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.

9 COMPONENT B. Structured Learning Among IW Projects And Cooperating Partners

Immediate Objective B: To establish and technically support a series of face-to-face and electronically-mediated structured learning activities[iii] – 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.

Activity B1 Organize 3-5 multi-project learning exchanges on a regional scale

Output B1.1: Caribbean inter-linkages dialog (with UNEP and in conjunction with 5^th Inter-American Dialog on Water (IAD5 and/or World Water Forum 4)

Output B1.2: Exchange across freshwater and marine GEF IW projects and partners in Africa (in cooperation with ANBO, AMCOWR, NEPAD and/or African Regional Seas Secretariats).

Output B1.3: Exchange among IW projects across Eastern Europe, Central Europe and Central Asia (in partnership with the UNECE Transboundary Waters Secretariat and the Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation)

Activity B2 Organize and conduct multi-project learning exchanges for 3-5 subsets of similar projects in the GEF portfolio.

Output B2.1: Exchanges among Freshwater Projects (with IUCN; including Groundwater/Aquifers, also with UNESCO/ISARM; River Basins, also with WBI and INBO; Lake Basins, also with LakeNet)

Output B2.2: Exchanges among Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) projects (with IUCN, IOC and URI)

Output B2.3: Exchanges among Coral Reef projects (with WorldFish Center)

Activity B3 Coordinate inter-project exchanges between GEF IW projects and partners

Output B3: 5-7 multi-week staff/stakeholder exchanges between pairs of 10-14 new (or pipeline) projects, at a rate of 1-4 exchanges per year for 4 years, through 2008.

Activity B4 Provide face-to-face and virtual training to enhance public participation in Transboundary Waters Management.

Output B4: Training for at least 15 projects (5 government-NGO partnerships per year for at least 3 years) to jointly develop, refine and/or implement activities to increase public access and involvement in TWM decision-making in their respective basins.

10 COMPONENT C. Biennial International Waters Conferences

Immediate Objective C: To hold GEF IW conferences in 2005 and 2007, gathering the IW community to showcase, share, and assess experience among GEF IW projects, stakeholders, evaluators and other IW programs and institutions.

Result C: The GEF hosts two global conferences for the GEF IW portfolio, including exchange of experience within the portfolio and with related transboundary waters programs.

Activity C1 Organize third GEF International Waters Conference, including contributions to CSD 13 (Rio de Janeiro, 2005)

Output C1: 3^rd IW Conference, documented recommendations from GEF IW portfolio to CSD-13 Policy Session (Spring 2005)

Activity C2 Organize fourth GEF International Waters Conference (Cape Town, 2007)

Output C2: 4^th IW Conference

11 COMPONENT D. Testing Innovative Approaches To Strengthen Implementation Of The IW Portfolio

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

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.

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.

Activity D2 Provide face-to-face and virtual training, knowledge sharing and capacity-building and cooperation between IW stakeholders in Southeastern Europe and Central Asia.

Output D3.1: Five 3-day roundtables for senior officials engaged in Southeastern European TWM by 2006.

Output D3.2: Internet-based targeted information exchange network on Transboundary Waters (for Southeastern Europe Transboundary River Basin and Lakes Management Program) launched by 2005, sustained through regional partners by 2006.

Activity D3: CSD/GEF Roundtable on IWRM or other priority issue to emerge from CSD-12 (April 2004).

Output D3: One roundtable meeting to clarify the role of IWRM or related IW issue of common priority to the CSD and the GEF.

12 COMPONENT E. Fostering Partnerships to Sustain Benefits of IW:LEARN and Associated Technical Support

Immediate Objective E: To sustain and institutionalise information sharing and structured learning across GEF IW projects, partners and stakeholders.

Result E: GEF agencies design and implement a strategic plan to sustain IW:LEARN project services and benefits to the GEF IW community.

Activity E1 Develop partnerships to sustain IW:LEARN’s benefits through dialog with GEF Implementing Agencies (IAs), Executing Agencies (EAs), and external organizations.

Output E1: By 2008 sustainability plans implemented, including transfer of various services to appropriate organizations.

Activity E2 Promote GEF IW contributions to sustainable development and participation of GEF IW projects in broader TWM community.

Output E2.1: At least 2 side events at TWM-related meetings each year for 4 years, with 2-3 GEF projects/year receiving IW:LEARN cost-share to participate.

Output E2.2: 1-2 GEF IW outreach publications, syntheses, videos and/or CD-ROMs disseminated to TWM community – including a co-produced LME video documentary – each year for 4 years.

These activities may be clustered according to those which serve specific GEF beneficiary region(s) or projects addressing similar types of ecosystems, as shown in the figure below. Further detail regarding each project activity can be found in the enclosed Logical Framework (Annex B).

2. Country Ownership

a) Country Eligibility

IW:LEARN support is made available to GEF projects of countries eligible under the GEF Instrument.

b) Country Drivenness

13 GEF-beneficiary nations have expressed explicit need for further capacity-building assistance and technical support in developing their own TWM capacity. Such is reflected in their GEF project briefs, Transboundary Diagnostic Analyses (TDAs), Strategic Action Programs (SAPs) and ongoing communications with GEF IAs and IW:LEARN.[6] National representatives conveyed similar sentiments at the 2000 and 2002 GEF IWCs and other recent regional IW meetings.[7] Many of these nations also search for practical TWM models and insights to guide their common pursuit of WSSD and MDG targets for sustainable freshwater and for marine fisheries resources. Furthermore, various IW-related treaties and conventions also call for increase TWM capacity-building assistance.[8]

14 IW:LEARN technically supports the national priorities and activities of over 120 nations in more than 55 International Waters (IW) projects that are now under implementation or in the GEF pipeline, as well as in water-related projects of other GEF focal areas. IW:LEARN thus addresses the needs of country-driven GEF IW projects and their staff. Country-drivenness is demonstrated through design of these activities to meet the expressed capacity-building and technical support demands of GEF IW projects receiving country-driven, focal point endorsements.

3. Program and Policy Conformity

a) Fit to GEF Operational Program and Strategic Priority

15 IW:LEARN directly contributes to the GEF’s OP10 objective[9] of developing several global International Waters projects aimed at:

· “Deriving and disseminating lessons learned from projects undertaken in the pilot phase and the permanent GEF,

· Sharing the learning experience with groups of countries cooperating on International Waters projects, and

· Addressing the technical and institutional needs of those countries cooperating on International Waters projects.”

16 The proposed Operational Phase project aims to strengthen global capacity to learn and apply the lessons of experience from TWM approaches rather than duplicate the mistakes. IW:LEARN is also instrumental the GEF Business Plan’s capacity-building strategic priorities (GEF/C.22.6). Strategic Business Planning (GEF/C.21/Inf.11 Annex 3, paragr. 14) particularly emphasizes IW:LEARN’s key role in the GEF’s Strategic Priority (IW-2) for targeted IW learning:

“The GEF Replenishment included a specific US$20 Million for targeted learning within the portfolio, based on the success of the IW:LEARN approach in OP 10 and piloted in GEF-2. The learning experiences among GEF projects undertaken within the IW portfolio [have] been successful as judged by survey, project evaluations and OPS2. The learning is aimed at exchanging successful approaches among existing projects and those under preparation so that they may be adopted within the framework of adaptive management that characterizes the GEF approach to transboundary water systems. They also help avoid problems that have been encountered by projects. Such South-to-South ‘structured learning’ contributes significantly to the success of GEF's foundational/capacity building work in IW.”

With design guided by the IAs’ IW leads, all IW:LEARN components and activities align within the OP10 technical support component to realize these strategic priorities.

b) Sustainability (including financial sustainability)

17 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

18 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.[10] 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.

19 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.[11] As a result, the project’s primary objective will be realized through progressive institutionalization and decentralization of services and benefits.

Financial Sustainability

20 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.

21 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.

22 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 Full Project.

Environmental Sustainability

23 The project directly contributes to the improvement of many IW projects’ respective process indicators for environmental sustainability.[12] 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 CSD and other institutions may further promote enhanced environmental sustainability across GEF operational programs and among related initiatives.

c) Replicability

24 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.

25 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.

26 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.

27 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 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.

d) Stakeholder Involvement

28 Since the last GEF International Waters Conferences (September 2002), substantial consultation with representatives from GEF IW projects and their partners (e.g., global, regional, national and local agencies, NGOs, etc.) informed design of this project. Continued consultation via electronic forums, one-on-one interviews and regional and global IW learning exchanges will ensure that stakeholder interests are regularly recorded, reviewed and systematically addressed by the project and its regional, thematic and institutional partners. Given the number of recent GEF IW project briefs and documents that explicitly identify planned cooperation with IW:LEARN, the project expects to establish more formal agreements to further incorporate stakeholder involvement through these partnerships.

29 To optimise GEF IW project stakeholder involvement, all IW:LEARN activities are aligned with a stakeholder involvement plan and outreach and dissemination strategy. These include five objectives based on lessons learned from the experimental phase:

1. Enhance ownership of and buy-in to IW:LEARN through participatory project development and implementation

2. Raise awareness about the role of IW:LEARN, GEF IW Portfolio and IW management in sustainable development (e.g., achieving Millennium Development Goals, Johannesburg and World Water Forum objectives, etc.)

3. Provide customized service through personal relations with key personnel at projects, partners and service providers.

4. Develop effective delivery mechanisms which leverage the use of appropriate tools for ICT-mediated dissemination to, for and through GEF IW projects and their partners.

5. Assist in replication of useful GEF IW experiences, innovations, lessons, opportunities and tools across the GEF IW portfolio.

30 In order to provide customized and targeted services and support to stakeholders, partners and on-the-ground beneficiaries, IW:LEARN is committed to developing personal relationships with all projects within the GEF IW portfolio. An open-source on-line collaboration tool will be used as a means to strengthen outreach to specific stakeholders and enhance participation and transparency in all project activities.

e) Monitoring and Evaluation

31 IW:LEARN’s Logical Framework (Annex B) includes both “output” (performance) and “outcome” (impact) indicators.[13] 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.

32 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.

33 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.

34 Independent mid-term (year 2) and final (year 4) Project Evaluations 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.

4. FINANCIAL MODALITY AND COST EFFECTIVENESS

35 The total GEF grant financing to realize this project is US$ 6,000,000 over four years, as presented in Table 1 below. The GEF’s support will be matched by comparable co-finance commitments to achieve IW:LEARN’s outputs and parallel financing for external activities associated with realizing this project’s intended outcomes, as shown in Table 2. Such contributions will come primarily from GEF Implementing Agencies (IAs), Executing Agencies (EAs) and NGO partners in IW:LEARN’s project management. A smaller portion of cost-sharing and cost-recovery through fee-for-services is also expected to continue as demonstrated during the IW:LEARN pilot project.

36 Incremental Cost Analysis is presented in Annex A. This GEF investment represents a modest increment to utilize structured learning and information sharing to integrate GEF-supported “transboundary” experiences with global efforts to improve water resource, coastal and marine management. As recent GEF Council information documents have emphasized, facilitating lateral transfer of insights and information between projects is an important investment: Its potential yield is large in terms of increased project efficiency and more affordable replication of successes. Independent evaluation of the IW:LEARN pilot project also confirmed IW:LEARN cost-effectiveness in leveraging the GEF’s support to nations by developing effective tools and methods for the dissemination of practical experiences among GEF IW projects. In the longer-term, the multi-stakeholder approach and the partnerships forged between EAs, IAs, projects and stakeholders through IW:LEARN will reduce the recurrent costs of "reinventing the wheel" and enhance TWM across basins from community to regional scales.

Table 1. IA oversight by component activity, along with associated GEF Finance for the activity, PCU and EA fee.

IA Oversight	Component Activity	GEF $ - Total	GEF $ - Activity	GEF $ - PCU	GEF $ - EA
All	Total of All Activities:	$ 6,000,000	$ 3,851,364	$ 1,756,113	$ 392,523
UNEP	A1 IW-IMS	$ 575,651	$ 320,000	$ 217,991	$ 37,659
UNEP	A2 Technical Assistance	$ 321,870	$ 155,000	$ 145,814	$ 21,057
UNEP	B1.1 Caribbean Region	$ 257,074	$ 200,000	$ 40,256	$ 16,818
IBRD	B1.2 Africa, B1.3 Europe	$ 236,618	$ 155,000	$ 66,139	$ 15,480
IBRD	B2 Portfolio Subsets	$ 1,332,632	$ 1,012,778	$ 232,673	$ 87,182
UNDP	B3 Stakeholder Exchanges	$ 384,101	$ 200,000	$ 158,973	$ 25,128
UNDP	B4 Public Participation	$ 493,473	$ 300,000	$ 161,189	$ 32,283
UNDP	C1 IWC3+CSD	$ 248,564	$ 161,764	$ 70,539	$ 16,261
UNDP	C2 IWC4	$ 684,446	$ 601,600	$ 38,069	$ 44,777
UNEP	D1 SEA-RLC	$ 336,939	$ 280,000	$ 34,896	$ 22,043
IBRD	D2 Petersberg/Athens	$ 209,868	$ 130,000	$ 66,139	$ 13,730
UNDP	D3 CSD Roundtables	$ 289,164	$ 200,000	$ 70,247	$ 18,917
All (split 1:1:1)	E1 Partnering	$ 356,638	$ 0	$ 333,307	$ 23,331
All (split 1:1:1)	E2 Outreach	$ 272,960	$ 138,000	$ 117,103	$ 17,857

Table 2. Co-financing sources by classification, type, amount and status. White cells indicate GEF Implementing Agencies, gray cells other partners. Bold face font indicates partners who have already contributed letters of intent or commitment. (Most letters of intent exist only in preliminary email format at this time, however.)

	Co-financing Sources
Name of Co-financier (source)		Classification	Type	Amount (US$)	Status*
IBRD-WBI		Multi-Laterals	Cash	100,000	Confirmed, letter pending
IBRD-WBI		Multi-Laterals	In-Kind	410,000	Confirmed, letter pending
UNDP Cap-Net		UN Agency	In-Kind	1,0400,000	Confirmed, letter pending
UNDP-EEG		UN Agency	In-Kind	200,000	Under discussion
UNEP-DEWA		UN Agency	Cash	497,000	Under discussion
UNEP-DEWA		UN Agency	In-Kind	772,000	Under discussion
UNEP-CEP		UN Agency	In-Kind	TBD	Unconfirmed
UNEP-ROLAC		UN Agency	Parallel	TBD	Unconfirmed
USA-NOAA		Government	In-Kind	200,000	Confirmed, letter received
ELI		NGO	In-Kind	300,000	Confirmed, letter pending
IUCN		NGO	In-Kind	700,000	Confirmed, letter pending
SEA-START RC (Chulalongkorn U.)		NGO	In-Kind	280,000	Confirmed, letter pending
UNECE		UN Agency	In-Kind	145,000	Confirmed, letter pending
UNECE		UN Agency	In-Kind	240,000	Under discussion
UNESCO-IHP/ISARM/IGRAC		UN Agency	In-Kind	208,000	Confirmed, letter pending
Germany-MoE		Government	In-Kind	150,000	Under discussion
Greece-MoFA		Government	In-Kind	150,000	Under discussion
GETF		NGO	In-Kind	68,000	Under discussion
GWP-Med		NGO	In-Kind	20,000	Under discussion
INBO		NGO	In-Kind	50,000	Under discussion
GETF-targeted Sponsors		Private Sector	Cash	75,000	Under discussion
EcoAfrica		NGO	In-Kind	170,000	Under discussion
Sub-Total Co-financing				56,135890,000

* Reflect the status of discussion with co-financiers. If there are any letters with expressions of interest or commitment, please attach them

5. Institutional Coordination and Support

a) Core Commitments and Linkages

37 In recent years, GEF support has fostered a broad body of experience and information regarding regional cooperation in TWM. As part of its structured learning activities, IW:LEARN will synthesize and disseminate information based on the experience and findings of GEF IW projects, IAs broader water programs, and related initiatives (e.g., French GEF projects, UNEP-GPA, UNESCO IHP & WWAP, ISARM-IGRAC, FAO, IUCN freshwater and marine programs, the “whitewater to bluewater” partnership, EU, Waterweb Consortium, USAID, etc) across the GEF IW community and IAs’ water resource management-related programs. Through the IW Information Management System (Component A), related information will be shared and disseminated reciprocally across GEF-affiliated (and, where valuable, non-GEF) partners.

38 Enhanced coordination with all three Implementing Agencies (IAs) and the GEF Secretariat is critical to the project’s success. Thus, the GEF IW leads from each of these agencies will serve in pivotal strategic roles on IW:LEARN’s SC. In addition, each IA will oversee one portion of the overall set of IW:LEARN activities. For such activities, the IA’s SC member will appoint a point-of-contact within the agency for day-to-day operational coordination with the PCU. IW:LEARN has also established liaisons and, in several cases, cooperative agreements with GEF executing agencies (e.g., UNESCO, OAS, IMO, UNIDO, CATHALAC) and international partners (e.g., GETF, IUCN) in order to further operationalize coordination and cooperation across agencies and GEF projects to benefit TWM world-wide.

39 IW:LEARN will also provide valuable opportunities for portfolio-wide reviews and assessments by the GEF M&E Unit. This includes assistance in identifying individuals and their contact information for IW Program Studies (via the IWRC Web site); provision of venues (such as the IW Conferences and structured learning exchanges) for face-to-face communication between GEF M&E representatives, IW projects and the partners; and supplying various avenues for dissemination of GEF’s M&E findings and recommendations to those in the field, who benefit most from constructive feedback.

b) Consultation, Coordination and Collaboration between IAs, and IAs and EAs (if appropriate).

40 This project has been developed in close consultation with UNDP, UNEP, and the World Bank, in order to design a package of GEF interventions to promote and replicate of TWM successes.

41 The IW:LEARN SC includes all three IAs’ and the GEF Secretariat’s leads for IW. The GEF M&E Unit may also utilize IW:LEARN activities as instruments for assessing emerging information needs and advising IW projects accordingly. The SC plays a pivotal role in coordinating IAs’ contributions to and use of IW:LEARN in their respective projects, so that technical services and comparative advantages[14] that each IA provides can benefit the GEF IW portfolio as a whole.

42 The project also benefits from ongoing communications with several EAs, notably UNIDO, OAS, IMO, and UNESCO, as well as various existing and pipeline GEF IW projects (e.g., PEMSEA, Volta River, Black Sea/Danube). EAs’ assistance is engaged in bringing additional institutional partners and resources to enhance project activities. (Non-GEF transboundary waters programs and funding agencies are also invited to participate in IW structured learning.) Through such partnerships, IW:LEARN integrates information sharing and structured learning with capacity-building activities among GEF IW stakeholders on-the-ground and across internal partner agencies. Through IW:LEARN, they will collaborate to replicate successful experiences and improve TWM globally at multiple geographic scales.

Annex A: Incremental Cost Analysis

Annex B: Project Logical Framework

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

COMPONENT A: FACILITATING ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IA oversight: UNEP; GEF $ 892,280 [Activity $475,000; PCU $363, 805; EA $58,716 ], Total co-finance: $ 1,771,667
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/Outputs[15]	Means of Verification	Assumptions
Result A: Partners/stakeholders access information and data across GEF IW portfolio, sharing ICT tools to improve TWM.	By 2008, >75% of projects use the GEF’s comprehensive IW Information Management System (“IW-IMS” including helpdesk) and >50% of its users obtain needed TWM data, information and/or tools; stakeholders increasingly use IWRC to obtain project data and information.	Results of surveys at 2007 IW Conference [IWC] and on-line, included in M&E reports to GEF IW-IMS usage statistics (e.g., system administrator records documenting source and number of data and information requests)	Projects continue to be willing and able to use Web software and ICT tools to help address TWM issues.
Activity A1 Establish a central metadata directory of all available IW project data and information as well as external information resources of benefit to GEF IW projects (GEF IW Information Management System: IW-IMS) $ 575,651 GEF $ 320,000 Activity $ 217,991 PCU $ 37,659 EA	A1.1 Demand-Driven System Design Protocols and Prototype IW-IMS (linking IAs’ project info.) by 2005 A1.2 IW-IMS includes at least 4 modules focused on regional, thematic or process-based subsets of TWM information resources by 2008 A1.3 By 2006, help desk (or water-net) responds to at least 4 IW community requests per month, extending IW-IMS contents with demand-driven research	IWRC and IW project Web sites; agreements with TWM content providers; Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) posted to IWRC; archive of email correspondence between helpdesk and inquirers; results of user surveys.	GEFSEC & IAs promote or mandate IW projects’ participation in IW-IMS; interest and commitment of partners to share data and information Web continues to be effective for global sharing of data and information; all projects recognize benefit of & access sufficient technical capability and resources to develop inter-linked Web sites.
Activity A2 Provide technical assistance to GEF IW projects to develop or strengthen their Web sites and ICT tools according to defined ICT quality criteria, and connect all GEF IW project Web sites to the GEF IW-IMS $ 321,870 GEF $ 155,000 Activity $ 145,814 PCU $ 21,057 EA	A2.1 At least 2 ICT Training Workshops over 4 years A2.2 By 2008, 95% of IW projects have developed Web sites, with ICT tools and information resources inter-linked and accessible through IW-IMS (in years 1 (25%), 2 (50%), 3 (75%) and 4 (95%))	Guidance posted to IWRC and disseminated to projects; IW project dossiers; workshop participant lists, affiliations, and post-training action plans; IWRC Web site. ICT solutions showcased at IWC3 and IWC4 (see Component C) IW project Web sites’ addresses, data, news and information listed, linked, accessible through International Waters Resource Centre [IWRC] Web site (central metadata directory) and other IW-IMS nodes	IW IATF consensus on minimum essential criteria for Web sites supported by GEF; continued co-location of workshops with other annual events; continued project demand to co-develop/adapt Web sites & ICT tools with IW:LEARN. GEF establishes policy requirement for IW projects to provide key information. Technical capabilities can be efficiently transferred to participating countries.

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 $ 2,703,899 [Activity $1,865,000; PCU $662,008; EA $176,891] Total co-finance: $2,722,000
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 capacity in at least half of GEF IW projects through sharing of experiences among subsets of the portfolio	30+ projects apply lessons from IW:LEARN structured learning activities to improve TWM within their respective basins by 2008.	Survey results and presentations at 2007 GEF IW Conference, posted thereafter to IW-IMS (accessible via IWRC); missions reports and recommendation documents; specific measures implemented by projects	Demand continues for structured learning activities. Stakeholders have (time and financial) resources to participate Political stability and security permit exchanges via international travel or viable alternative (virtual) means
Activity B1 Organize 3-5 multi-project learning exchanges on a regional scale $ 493,692 GEF $ 355,000 Activity $ 106,395 PCU $ 32,298 EA	By 2008, 3 multi-project regional TWM learning exchanges organized to assist total of at least 10 projects: B1.1 Caribbean Inter-linkages Dialog B1.2 Africa IW Network B1.3 Eastern/Central Europe and Central Asia	Participants’ lists, proceedings, summaries of lessons learned via exchanges; primers documenting exchanges’ insights, lessons as enduring knowledge products to address ongoing needs; lists of actions pursued by stakeholders as a result of these exchanges	Sufficient regional interest and capacity to support exchanges; Co-localization with larger relevant events wherever possible, to increase participation and reduce travel and logistical expenses
Activity B2 Organize and conduct multi-project learning exchanges for 3-5 subsets of similar projects in the GEF portfolio. $ 1,332,632 GEF $ 1,010,000 Activity $ 235,451 PCU $ 87,182 EA	By 2008, 5 multi-project thematic learning exchanges organized on a transboundary ecosystem basis assist at total of at least 15 projects: B2.1 Freshwater B2.1.1 Groundwater/Aquifers B2.1.2 River Basins B2.1.3 Lake Basins B2.2 LMEs (incl. MPAs) B2.3 Coral Reefs	Participants’ lists, proceedings, summaries of lessons learned via exchanges; primers documenting exchanges’ insights, lessons as enduring knowledge products to address ongoing needs; lists of actions pursued by stakeholders as a result of these exchanges	World Bank Institute Water Program leadership, coordination & in-kind contributions (leadership/ management); partnerships w/recognized leaders and providers of thematic expertise; Sufficient stakeholder interest and capacity to participate in exchanges; Co-localization with larger relevant events wherever possible
Activity B3 Coordinate inter-project exchanges between GEF IW projects and their partners or counterparts $ 384,101 GEF $ 200,000 Activity $ 158,973 PCU $ 25,128 EA	5-7 multi-week staff/stakeholder exchanges between pairs of 10-14 new (or pipeline) projects and experienced projects, at a rate of 1-4 exchanges per year for 4 years.	Mission reports from participants documenting experiences and lessons learned for future community reference	Projects or their stakeholder beneficiaries will have the time to write and assure co-finance for proposals, participate in exchanges
Activity B4 Provide face-to-face and virtual training to enhance public participation $ 493,473 GEF $ 300,000 Activity $ 161,189 PCU $ 32,283 EA	Training for a least 15 projects (5 government-NGO partnerships trained each year for 3-4 years) to jointly develop, refine and/or implement activities to increase public access and involvement in IW decision-making	Training materials, proceedings, participants’ evaluations, documented action plans posted to workshops’ Web sites. Stakeholder Involvement Plans (SIPs); public participation protocols; specific measures implemented to increase public access/involvement (e.g., social marketing campaign); pre- and post-training basin-wide assessments of water governance	GEF IW projects' success and sustainability are contingent upon effective public access and stakeholder involvement; projects, governments and (NGO) stakeholders are receptive and committed to develop SIPs, public participation protocols/measures via training process. Governments & NGOs willing/able to cooperate in development, assessment & exchange of lessons re: IW projects' progress towards public access & involvement.

COMPONENT C. BIENNIAL INTERNATIONAL WATERS CONFERENCES IA oversight: UNDP; GEF $ 933,010 [Activity $ 763,364; PCU $108,608; $61,038 EA]; Total co-finance :$ 143,000
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 global conferences (2005, 2007) for the GEF IW portfolio, including exchange of experience within the portfolio and with related transboundary waters programs.	Representatives from all GEF IW projects (including TWM agencies, governments, project principals, IAs, EAs, NGOs and private sector) participate in review of portfolio accomplishments, evaluate replication and partnership potentials at two IW conferences, as well as key preparatory or follow-up activities	Session agendas and proceedings reflecting considerations and insights from participating nations, project principals, GEF Eas, IAs, EAs, and other partners Evaluation surveys of participants	2005 and 2007 IWCs provide valuable benchmarks to evaluate the continuing successes of projects within the IW portfolio. Session agendas based on solid communication and on-going sharing of goals and accomplishments.
Activity C1 and C2 Organize 3rd & 4th GEF International Waters Conferences (2005, 2007) to bring together full spectrum of IW project stakeholders. C1: IWC3 + CSD $ 248,564 GEF $ 161,764 Activity $ 70,539 PCU $ 16,261 EA C2: IWC4 $ 684,446 GEF $ 601,600 Activity $ 38,069 PCU $ 44,777 EA	2 IWCs, with biennial needs assessments and portfolio-wide interactions, in 2005 (C1 in Brazil) and 2007 (C2 in South Africa) Documented recommendations from GEF IW portfolio to CSD-13 Policy Session (Spring 2005)	Posting to IW-IMS and dissemination of primers, conference participants lists, proceedings, summaries of lessons learned at conferences and results of needs assessment; lists of actions pursued by stakeholders as a result of these conferences; archive of electronic discourse among participants; submission on behalf of GEF IW portfolio to CSD-13	IW project principals and stakeholders actively engage in efforts to share best practices and develop mechanisms to support partnership strategies. Sufficient coordination w/ and substantive contributions from GEF Entities and their partners. Continued outreach to, interest of, contributions by and travel support for nations, NGO partners. Venue accessibility and geopolitical stability permit broad participation (GEF and non-GEF projects and donors)

COMPONENT D. TESTING INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IW PORTFOLIO IA oversight: UNEP [D1], IBRD [D2, D3]; GEF $948,009 [Activity $610,000; PCU $ 171,282; EA $54,690]; Total co-finance: $ 1,083,333
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 develop, test and, where successful, replicate demonstrations for improving TWM among GEF IW projects.	GEF IW projects and partners benefit from a set of demonstration projects integrating information sharing and structured learning	Participant lists, evaluations and follow-up assessments of impacts from participation.	Project partners and stakeholders have the time, interest and resources to participate in structured learning and information sharing demos.
Activity D1 Develop South East Asia Regional Learning Centre (SEA-RLC) $ 336,939 GEF $ 280,000 Activity $ 34,896 PCU $ 22,043 EA	D1.1 In 2004, SEA-RLC established to address regional TWM project needs (as identified during PDF-B) D1.2 SEA-RLC Web site launched (by 2005), addressing project needs through roster of IW experts (>100 by 2007) and other information resource (>1000 by 2008) D1.3 Regional IW GIS database operational online by 2006, with at least 3 prototype GIS-based decision support applications featured by 2007 and applied by SEA projects by 2008	Outreach materials disseminated to all GEF IW projects & partner institutions in region IWRC template online and customized to SEA region; updates to metadata database of information resources and linked to GEF IW-IMS. Regional GIS database and demonstration applications, SEA-RLC Library of Practical Experience and TWM distance learning materials online and interlinked w/SEA node of GEF IW-IMS	RLC partners able to solicit, access and provide sufficient TWM & ICT expertise to address identified needs of GEF projects/partners; GEF IW projects in region committed to contributing to and benefiting from SEA-RLC services Host has technical capacity to adapt develop ICT tools to meet project needs, adequate human resources to maintain outreach, assess and respond to GEF IW projects/partners needs, and research & 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-face and virtual training, knowledge sharing and capacity building, cooperation between stakeholders in Southeastern Europe and Mediterranean sub-region $ 209,868 GEF $ 130,000 Activity $ 66,139 PCU $ 13,730 EA	D2.1 Five (5) 3-day Southeastern Europe Transboundary Waters Roundtables for senior officials and experts by 2006. D2.2 Internet-based targeted information exchange network on Transboundary Waters (for Southeastern Europe Transboundary River Basin and Lakes Management Program) launched by 2005, sustained through regional partners by 2006. D2.3 Network for dissemination of Mediterranean experience in transboundary aquifer management [for Mediterranean Shared Aquifers Management Program] – as part of B2.1	Participant lists and evaluations; rapporteurs’ reports from Roundtables (posted to IW-IMS) Archives and evaluations of electronic discourse; information disseminated by GWP-Mediterranean via IW-IMS (and other media)	GWP brings expert facilitator(s) and rapporteur(s) to both Roundtables and network discussions GWP able to organize roundtables starting June 2004. Beneficiary countries willing and able to send senior officials and experts to participate. GEF projects in region have sufficient experience and resources to contribute. Coordination with Component A permits rapid deployment of network through IW-IMS; e.g., interlinking Web sites of GWP-Med., GEF projects & MAP. Participants are willing and able to convey inquiries 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 Roundtable $ 289,164 GEF $ 200,000 Activity $ 70,247 PCU $ 18,917 EA	D3 One global roundtable meeting to clarify the role of IRWM or related IW issue of common priority to the CSD and the GEF (in 2004) – e.g., bringing together select nations to build IWRM capacity to meet Millennium Development Goal for national IWRM strategies in 2005 and to support water-focus of CSD-12/CSD-13 biennium (2004-05)	Participant lists and evaluations; rapporteurs’ reports and guidance from roundtables (posted to IW-IMS and disseminated at IWC, CSD, WWF4, etc.)	Cap-Net brings expert facilitator(s) and rapporteur(s) to roundtable Cap-Net and IW:LEARN able to organize roundtables starting June 2004. Beneficiary countries willing and able to send senior officials and experts to participate.

COMPONENT E. FOSTERING PARTNERSHIPS TO SUSTAIN BENEFITS OF IW:LEARN AND ASSOCIATED TECHNICAL SUPPORT IA oversight: all IAs; GEF $ 629,599 [Activity $ 138,000; PCU $450,410; EA 41,189]; 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 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 designed, evaluated and implemented strategic plans to provide services & make benefits of IW:LEARN and its technical support available to GEF IW community on an on-going basis.	By 2008, successful IW:LEARN structured learning and information sharing services insitutionalized and sustained indefinitely through GEF and its partners. Partners’ strategic plans include role in sustaining one or more FSP product or service.	Development (through 2007) and documented implementation of 2008 work plan by sustaining partners. Annual work plans, PIRs an TPRs, as well as mid-term Review and Final Independent Evaluation Partners’ strategic plans (e.g., business plans, work plans, etc.)	A subset of FSP activities evaluated as "successful;" partners leverage GEF funds to commit and procure resources to support their successful activities beyond FSP Projects and NGO stakeholders are receptive to sustaining partners and continue to benefit from services and support.
Activity E1: Develop partnerships to sustain IW:LEARN’s benefits through dialog with GEF Implementing Agencies (IAs), Executing Agencies (EAs), and external organizations. $ 356,638 GEF $ - $ 333,307 PCU $ 23,331 EA	By 2008, Sustainability Plans implemented, including l transfer of various services to appropriate organizations, SC acceptance of associated financing and personnel TORs, etc. By end of project, IW:LEARN products and services are maintained and enriched in perpetuity through a network of partners	Annual FSP and partner work plans; Sustainability Strategy documented, ratified by SC; MOUs established; Activity-level Sustainability Plans; TORs for financing and dedicated staff for 1 year beyond end of FSP	IAs & Eas will take on responsibility to build sustaining capacity for IWL OP activities they respectively lead to serve full GEF IW portfolio in perpetuity. External partners will build capacity to sustain services and benefits they respectively lead to serve GEF IW portfolio; Co-financed partnerships will 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 IW contributions to sustainable development and participation of GEF IW projects in broader TWM community $ 272,960 GEF $ 138,000 Activity $ 117,103 PCU $ 17,857 EA	E2.1 Side events at TWM meetings (e.g., CSD, WWF4, IUCN Assembly): 2 GEF IW presentations, information kiosks, or side events per year for 4 years; 2-3 GEF IW projects/year receive cost-sharing to participate E2.2 Outreach Materials: 1-2 GEF IW outreach publications, syntheses, videos and/or (IW-IMS) CD-ROMs circulated to TWM community – including a co-produced LME video documentary – ea. year for 4 years.	Proceedings and presentations from side-events, archived and accessible via IW-IMS; participants lists, mission reports; IW-related articles and news posted items prepared and/or GEF IW project proponent submission of papers and news to scholarly and IW-community Publications and/or syntheses available on IW-IMS and CD.	Mutual acceptance between GEF and meeting hosts regarding GEF IW projects’ participation side-events

ANNEX C. RESPONSE TO PROJECT REVIEWS

a) Convention Secretariat – N/A

b) Review by Expert from STAP Roster

c) Response to comments from Secretariat and other Agencies: N/A

b) STAP ROSTER TECHNICAL REVIEW

STAP REVIEW

Richard Kenchington

RAC Marine Pty Ltd

PO Box 588

Jamison

ACT 2614

Australia

1. Introduction

There is no doubt that this is an important and urgently needed ongoing project that builds on a solid basis of experience. There is a global problem of duplicatory, inaccessible, overlapping, unevaluated “fuzzy” an artificially fragmented information relating to marine ecosystems and the management of human activities that affect or depend upon them. The IW:LEARN pilot has demonstrated the capacity and value of reducing wasteful activity in planning, management, preparation and delivery of a wide range of information materials.

Although the budget is not particularly large it appears well targetted to achieve leverage by augmenting internal resources of the implementing agencies and securing match funding from other sources. This is a complex project in terms of the number of participating agencies and thus, presumably of coordination. This is reflected in the log frame. The project is clearly designed to add more collective value than a “small grant” approach of allocating relatively small amounts to enable the participating agencies to continue current programs. Such a project requires active coordination and steering to ensure that lessons of experience are rapidly shared within and beyond the network of participating agencies.

2. Scientific and technical soundness

The broad technical basis of the project is sound. It builds upon the foundation of IW:LEARN and some related experience. The basis for identification of specific activities as priorities reflects an evolution on the basis of learning from earlier experience. The proposed activities are logical and respond to that experience The approach of identifying the broad objectives of areas of activities without detailed project specification helps to provide a context for adaptive management. But it follows that within the life of this phase project management should be able to respond to ongoing evolutionary experience.

3. Global environment benefits and costs

If it achieves its objectives the project will deliver clear and ongoing global environmental benefits by further developing a systematic and needs-based approach to sharing information and delivering appropriate training relating to management of human use and impacts and provision for conservation and sustainability of international waters.

The project should strengthen global capacity to learn and apply the lessons of experience from approaches to management of marine ecosystems rather than duplicate the mistakes.

The context of GEF goals and guidelines

The project is a core component of activities in the International Waters focal Area and it also clearly addresses marine components of the Biological Diversity focal area.

4. Regional Context

This is a global project but 9 of the 13 component tasks have strong regional focus.

5. Replicability

The project is designed to build on past and current activities and strengthen the basis for ongoing replication and expansion of capacity to manage information, deliver priority training and support continuous improvement of global capacity to design and implement sustainable management of International Waters.

This project addresses an important and dynamic area. It is important that its ongoing management can focus on maximising the learning process and minimising unproductive duplication. The collective lessons learned through this project should contribute to the global sum of experience and knowledge and certainly provide guidance in replication of International Waters management activities regionally and globally.

6. Sustainability

Effective use and management of information is an inextricably core component of IW and related ecosystem scale management. The project recognises the need to reach the situation where information and training activities are internalised in International Waters Management projects. Successfully implemented, this project should strengthen the case for such internalisation in future International Waters projects and in related projects however funded. In the long term it can reasonably be expected that there will be continuing need for projects such as this which provide the research and development of information materials and training capacities, skills and applications to effective management of marine environments and resources..

7. Contribution to future strategies and policies

Discussed above

8. Secondary Issues

Component A

Facilitating Access to Information on Transboundary Water Resources among GEF IW Projects

The proposal clearly identifies the importance of sharing, synthesis and dissemination of information resources developed by cross-sections of the GEF IW portfolio and their non-GEF counterparts. The detail refers to specific IW:LEARN and GEF materials. There are materials of transboundary marine resources that do not derive from IW:LEARN or GEF. It would be appropriate for this project to clearly address meta-data linkages outside the IW:LEARN/GEF core. This could well be addressed in the context of Biennial International waters Conferences. Absent such outreach beyond GEF there is a risk of unproductive duplication and competition.

Component B

Structured Learning Among IW Projects and Cooperating Partners

There is a wealth of training materials already prepared or under preparation under many projects. The vast majority of these are in the English language and many are developed without apparent awareness of what already exists. . There is often a lack of clarity of the specific needs of management training targets in the context of the tasks and responsibilities they will be expected to undertake as a result of being trained. The need for this is reflected in the proposal but I suggest it might be more strongly reflected as a core component of the structured learning activities.

A related issue in the area of specific needs is the lack of own language/own idiom training materials for people whose first language is not English and whose end-users are stakeholders with no English language skills. The constructs, idioms and imagery used in English can cause substantial confusion in literal translations and difficulty or cultural dissonance of text can discourage its use. I would urge that, while it may limit the number of training texts or materials that can be prepared, the issue of non-English language support be given high priority consideration in needs evaluation and project selection.

To the extent that IW:LEARN addresses the needs of end user managers and policy people in governments and agencies I would note that, particularly in developing countries, many such people have little time, inclination, confidence or quality of internet connection to burrow deeply into rich and complex data bases or books. It is important that core products for such end users are as far as practicable stand-alone with the options for further exploration identified but not assumed.

I am confident that these issues can be addressed within the project as proposed and I raise them in order to place them clearly on the agenda for the coordinating process of implementation.

9. Involvement of stakeholders

The primary stakeholders in this project are the GEF IAs and international and intergovernmental organisations with which they work. These stakeholders have experience and generally sound track records of consultation, public participation and involving “end users” in communities affected by management.

10. Conclusion

I consider this is a sound proposal for continuation of ongoing and complex GEF work implemented through the IAs. I commend it for support by GEF. As noted earlier, I consider that the concerns I have raised in this review are all relatively minor matters of emphasis than can be addressed within the proposed coordination and steering arrangements.

RESPONSE TO STAP REVIEW

1. Introduction

Relative to IW:LEARN’s objectives, the GEF budget for the project is indeed quite conservative in various places. The budget was formulated bottom-up, based on cost of proposed activities and then trimmed to accommodate constraints of available resources. Cost-share has been leveraged to extent possible to meet actual costs. Success will require clear focus on activity targets and notable cost share, leveraging of in-kind support from partners, and adaptive management with respect to changing conditions among the project’s beneficiaries.

Coordination will involve all IAs at the SC level, IA-specific guidance by activity, and specific PCU personnel charged with coordinating various subsets of activities (no more than 9 activities or sub-activities per personnel). The CTA, with support form the deputy director, will play key role in coordination and communication across activities, including monthly updates of progress across all PCT partners. IW:LEARN also aims to work with partners realizing associated OP10 MSPs (e.g., World Lakes Management Initiative, IWRN-DeltAmerica) to ensure that such “small grants” are also integrated into the whole of IW technical assistance services.

2. Scientific and technical soundness

As noted in section 1 above, project management will be closely linked with individual SC advisors to expedite decision-making and adaptive management throughout the project implementation period.

3. Global environment benefits and costs

Revised paragraph 24 to clarify this STAP insight as part of the rationale for the project.

The context of GEF goals and guidelines

Amended GEF Theme (focal area) line of coverpage: “with relevance to water-related projects of other focal areas” (as it was in IW:LEARN’s Concept Paper).

4. Regional Context

Indeed, the project has specific clusters of activities focusing on particular regions, as well as activities (e.g., B4) which will be adapted and delivered region-by-region. IW:LEARN activities are also open to non-regional projects as well as similar non-GEF TWM initiatives within those regions.

5. Replicability

Revised paragraph 19 to clarify this STAP insight as part of the replicability of this project

6. Sustainability

Revised paragraph 19 to clarify this STAP insight as part of the sustainability of this project.

7. Contribution to future strategies and policies

Discussed above.

8. Secondary Issues

Component A

Revised paragraph 14 to clarify that part of the role of the PCT is to enhance linkages between GEF IW and external TWM resources and organizations (both Component A and across all project Components). Activities A1, C2 and E2 also incorporate external contributions to (and benefits from) the IW learning portfolio. Updated paragraph 38 to reflect the importance of external linkages as well.

Component B

Structured Learning Among IW Projects and Cooperating Partners

A growing list of TWM-related training materials readily accessible via the Internet are already being catalogued through the GEF’s IWRC (managed by IW:LEARN). As additional training resources are identified, associated metadata will also be added to the Web site. All training materials developed through IW:LEARN will also be accessible through this and other dissemination pathways (see Annex I).

IW:LEARN’s training approach to date has emphasized individualized assessment of beneficiary projects and enrolled participants weeks to months prior to workshops, in order to ensure training meets project needs and it suited to projects’ business processes. Through Activity B4, for example, there will be specific emphasis on methods for developing and implementing an effective SIP as well as frameworks for ongoing P2 in TWM. Such assessment is also a vital part of IW:LEARN’s own SIP (see Annex I).

Risks associated with language, idiom and on-the-ground time constraints are raised in the risks section (of in the Logical Framework) and addressed in the prerequisites section of the Project Document. Language/idiomatic issues are among the hardest to overcome as a global-scale project aims to assist multiple regions at once. During the pilot project, prior translation of written materials and instantaneous translation for roundtables and workshops were an ever improving facet of all IW:LEARN activities in the LAC region, in particular. In Southeast Asia, where communal language is least assured, it is hoped that leadership by a prestigious Thai partner which deals with such issues regularly. will help to bridge such regional gaps. In Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe, however, the bilingual (or trilingual) model will likely be perpetuated wherever needed. Time-constraints are a primary reason why this project leans more towards the (quick response) people-interactive side of blended learning rather than strict “download the manual” or “attend the workshop” approach.

Paragraph 117 has been inserted to reflect customized delivery mode as a prerequisite which should be addressed in the context of targeting the right people (TWM managers and decision-makers) through appropriate delivery mechanisms.

9. Involvement of stakeholders

STAP insights here are addressed in revisions to paragraph 11 of the IW:LEARN pilot phase summary. A Stakeholder Involvement Plan (Annex I) also elaborates on this issue.

10. Conclusion

The STAP reviewer has noted that issues raised in this review are “relatively minor matters of emphasis” that can be addressed within the proposed coordination and steering arrangements. Such coordination and the dynamics of IW:LEARN’s adaptive project management are clarified in Sections VI-VIII. The methodology developed during IW:LEARN’s pilot phase for assessing high priority stakeholder needs will evolve from that characterized in annexes to the project’s Concept Paper, “IW:LEARN’s Demand-Driven Approach” (Annex 2) and “Priority Needs Expressed by GEF IW Projects and Participating Countries at 2002 GEF IW Conference” (Annex 7). With internal feedback mechanisms built into key aspects of SC oversight, PCU management and PCT delivery, the project designers are confident that the project will implement an adaptive management approach which is both proactive and responsive to the TWM needs of the GEF IW portfolio.

---

---

Converted with Word to HTML.