1	Pacific Islands Oceanic Fisheries Management Project
2	Introduction This presentation relates to the 2007 Annual Review ProDoc indicative monitoring & evaluation work plan (3 annual reviews)‏ 1^st Annual Review TORs: - identify specific issues, difficulties or problems in the implementation and performance of the Project that involve risks to the achievement of Project objectives, particularly any such aspects that might not have been identified in the Project reporting and review processes to date; and - make recommendations for necessary amendments and improvements for the implementation of the project associated with the risks identified.
3	Terms of Reference Timing of review (early) in the project implementation meant focus was on aspects related to inputs, since it is too early to comprehensively & realistically measure achievements of outputs and outcomes Also focused on specific issues identified (review & highlight issues, difficulties, & problems faced, lessons learned & sucesses, specifically:
4	Specific issues identified The level of project awareness by stakeholders; Impacts of negative financial events (salary increases, exchange rate losses etc) on the overall project budget; The value and delivery of the project and overall progress by countries in meeting their Commission commitments; Identification of activities and outputs not on target and recommend ways in which to address matters (briefly); Impact of schedule of regional fisheries meetings on benefits that Pacific SIDS should incur from the project; and Level of communication across line ministries at national levels on matters relating to the Commission and country obligations.
5	Review Process Preliminary review of project documentation Informal interviews by consultant in the margins of WCPFC4 (7 of 15 countries) – not taken as representing official government views, nor cleared with governments General discussions with SPC/OFP manager Meetings with FFA staff and PCU Draft report (reviewed by PCU, FFA & SPC)‏ Circulated wider for comments
6	Section 3 - Findings Project design (ProDoc, financing, risk analysis & management, linkages) – issues to be addressed Project delivery – volume & quality of inputs, management, coordination & ops issues, NCC weakness, impact of regional meeting schedule, participation, knowledge management, monitoring & evaluation Finances – budget, disbursements, financial management, co-financing – issues to be addressed Results – Outcomes, sustainability & follow-up (WP8)‏
7	Outcomes (Page 25)‏ Too early to make firm assessments of core output gains (capacity building & institutional development) but some responses to key outcomes from interviews: Is your delegation better prepared for WCPFC4 than WCPFC2 (2005) or not? Are your national oceanic fisheries management arrangements better than in 2005 or not? What progress has your country made in meeting its WCPFC commitments? Is the Commission being effectively established (in terms of staffing, headquarters, budget, research etc ? Is the Commission functioning effectively? Are FFA Pacific Island Countries participating effectively in the work of the Commission?
8	Summary of Outcomes all felt their delegations were better prepared for the Commission meeting in 2007 than two years earlier, and that Pacific SIDS are participating effectively in the Commission most reported improvement in their oceanic fisheries management arrangements and others were optimistic about future improvement progress on meeting WCPFC commitments was mixed the Commission is regarded as being generally effectively established in terms of staffing budget etc but opinions vary about whether it is functioning effectively
9	Recommendations Recommendations & progress as at September 2008: The key recommendation - implement a programme of targeted support to PacSIDS struggling to participate at WCPFC (reporting requirements etc). Other recommendations: the IUCN contribution to the OFMP should be speedily re-designed and committed, to include activities are appropriate, high quality, and can be effectively implemented within the remaining Project life; the OFMP should seek to create opportunities for improved linkages with Indonesia and the Philippines; there should be more engagement with SPREP and GEF focal points; the opportunity provided by the quality of the Knowledge Management Strategy Consultancy Report should be taken to seriously consider the role and shape of information/ understanding/awareness/communication in oceanic fisheries management generally, as well as within the OFMP specifically;
10	Recommendations OFMP-supported meetings should be planned to reduce the impact/burden of the regional meetings schedule a Baseline Study should be prepared revisions to OFMP budgets needed to manage the impact of exchange rate movements and associated cost movements should ensure that the planned level of commitment to in-country activities is maintained consideration should be given to the preparation of a simple analysis of co-financing to assist the Mid-Term Review team. The Project should support the preparation of a simple summary of the achievements and shortfalls of WCPFC commitments by SIDS, based on the information in the Annual Part II Reports.
11	RSC4 is invited to ii) take the opportunity to further comment on the first annual evaluation of the project noting the recommendations and the progress made towards addressing those recommendations
12