Submission Date: 9/16/2008

Re-submission Date:

Expected Calendar
Milestones	Dates
Work Program (for FSP)	N/A
GEF Agency Approval	12/11/2008
Implementation Start	3/24/2009
Mid-term Review (if planned)	3/15/2011
Implementation Completion	2/28/2012

part i: project Information

GEFSEC Project ID: 3314

gef agency Project ID: P092062

Country(ies): Senegal

Project Title: Sustainable Management of Fish Resources

GEF Agency(ies):

Other Executing partner(s): Ministry of Maritime Economy

GEF Focal Area(s): International Waters

GEF-4 Strategic program(S): SO#1, SP#1

Name of parent program/umbrella project: Strategic Partnership for a sustainable fisheries investment fund in the large marine ecosystems of sub-saharan africa

A. Project framework

Project/Global Objective: To empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta). The project would achieve this objective by (i) promoting co-management of the coastal fisheries, (ii) contributing to the rehabilitation of the essential ecosystems for the coastal fisheries, and (iii) supporting alternative livelihoods and accompanying poverty reduction measures in targeted poor fishing communities. Successful experiences would be used to draw lessons for potential replication at a later date to the coastal fisheries in the other regions of the country.
Project Components	Indicate whether Investment, TA, or STA**	Expected Outcomes	Expected Outputs	GEF Financing*		Co-financing*		Total M$
				($) M	%	M$	%
1. Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries	Investment, TA, STA	Increase in average size of key fish species caught in targeted areas Reduction of fishing pressure in targeted areas	8 Local Fishers’ Committees (CLPs) legally established to manage the fisheries 8 communities and CLPs establish co-management agreements with Gov. 4 local fisheries management plans are approved by the relevant Local Artisanal Fishers’ Councils (CLPAs) and implemented	2.65	33	5.5	67	8.15
2. Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries	Investment, TA, STA	Restoration of key habitats for fish species in targeted areas	2 Protected Fishing Zones (ZPPs) are created and legally established (covering over 6 communities) At least 2 artificial reefs are submerged and co-managed with the local communities Fishing access rights are introduced in at least two key fisheries At least 1 fishery is eligible for eco-certification according to the criteria of the Marine Stewardship Council Feasibility study and consensus on a sustainable financing mechanism for the recurrent costs of ZPPs	2.85	47	3.2	53	6.05
3. Alternative Livelihoods and Accompanying Social Measures	Investment, TA	Reduced fishing effort and capacity, new jobs created in targeted communities	At least 8 communities receive grants, credit for alternative livelihoods to fishing 20% of women in participating communities are benefiting from micro-credit to develop activities outside the fisheries sector.	0	0	3.5	100	3.5
4. Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation	Investment, TA	Strengthened national fisheries management planning, project management, M&E	At least 2 national fisheries management plans developed, M&E system established, project management	0.5	7	6.7	93	7.2
Project management***				0.3		0.56		0.86
Total Project Costs				6.0		18.9		24.6

* List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively to the total amount for Cp.

** TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & technical analysis.

*** Project management costs are embedded in Component 4, and therefore the estimated PM costs shown are inclusive and should not be added on top of the total cost.

2. Financing Plan Summary For The Project

	Project Preparation* a	Project Grant b	Total c = a + b	Agency Fee (9%)	For the record: Project Grant at PIF
GEF	256,740	6,000,000	6,256,740	473,107	5,300,000
Co-financing	126,000	18,900,000	19,026,000	0	16,600,000
Total	382,740	24,900,000	25,282,740	473,107	21,900,000

* A PPG grant of US$ 256,740 was approved on April 18, 2007. The status of implementation and use of fund for the project preparation grant are detailed in Annex D.

C. Sources of confirmed Co-financing, including co-financing for project preparation for both the PDFs and PPG.

Name of co-financier (source)	Classification	Type	Amount ($)	%*
IDA			8,626,000	46
EU			9,200,000	49
Government of Switzerland	Bi-Lateral Agency	Grant	500,000	3
Government of France	Bi-Lateral Agency	Grant	700,000	2
Total Co-financing			19,026,000	100

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

D. GEF Resources Requested by Focal Area(s), Agency(ies) or Country(ies) – N/A

GEF Agency	Focal Area	Country Name/ Global	(in $)
			Project Preparation	Project	Agency Fee	Total
Total GEF Resources

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

E. Project management Budget/cost

Cost Items	Total Estimated person weeks	GEF ($)	Other sources ($)	Project total ($)
Local consultants*	759	250,000	509,000	759,000
International consultants*		0	0	0
Office facilities, equipment, vehicles and communications**		25,000	26,000	51,000
Travel**		25,000	25,000	50,000
Total	759	300,000	560,000	860,000

* Provide detailed information regarding the consultants in Annex C.

** GEF-funded office facilities and equipment include office furniture, computers and equipment for two offices, and communications costs over 4 years. Travel includes five trips by two persons (US$2,000/person/trip) from the project to Nairobi to present lessons learned to Strategic Partnership, as well as costs of supervision field visits by project staff within country over period of project.

f. Consultants working for technical assistance components:

Component	Estimated person weeks	GEF($)	Other sources ($)	Project total ($)
Local consultants*	920	444,000	476,000	920,000
International consultants*	225	90,000	585,000	675,000
Total	1,145	534,000	1,061,000	1,595,000

* Provide detailed information regarding the consultants in Annex C.

G. describe the budgeted m&e plan:

Please refer to GEF Project Document Main Text Section III.C and Annex 3 for detailed M&E arrangement and project indicators. The project has allocated $65,000 from GEF for M&E.

part ii: project justification

A. describe the project rationale and the expected measurable global environmental benefits:

This proposed project falls under the overall Strategic Partnership for a Sustainable Fisheries Investment Fund in the Large Marine Ecosystems of Sub-Saharan Africa, which was approved by the GEF Council in November, 2005. Senegal’s coastal fisheries and environment are heavily overexploited by an artisanal fishing fleet that is responsible for approximately 85 percent of the total fish catch in the country’s waters, and has outgrown Senegal’s marine resources to migrate all along the West African coast. The project’s development hypothesis is that in order to address the poverty-environment nexus driving these coastal fisheries and the excess artisanal fishing fleet, the local fishing communities should be empowered and where necessary organized (e.g. as legally recognized Local Fishers’ Committees) to collaborate with government institutions to sustainably utilize and manage the globally-significant coastal fisheries resources. The idea is that households in coastal communities will have greater incentives to sustainably use the resources and to invest in their rehabilitation, if they have the responsibility and authority to control their use. This development hypothesis is being tested in the GIRMaC project, and targeted communities have clearly validated and embraced the co-management model, by putting forward concrete proposals for management of the resources and entering into legal agreements with the Government to do so. The project will seek to consolidate and expand these examples, not only by expanding the coverage of the Government’s co-management initiative, but also by testing additional tools for rehabilitation of the coastal fisheries, such as co-managed protected fishing zones, market-based approaches to encourage sustainable resource management through eco-certification of fish products, and the establishment of artificial reefs, among others. Please refer to GEF Project Document Main Text Section I, II.C, and Annex 3 for more details.

The global environmental benefits of the project are reflected through the following key indicators: (1) Increase (by %) in the average size of fish caught for targeted species in co-management sites; (2) reduction (by %) in the level of fishing effort for targeted species in co-management sites; (3) 70 percent of community members surveyed in participating communities are satisfied with project activities to rehabilitate coastal fish stocks; and (4) a 20 percent increase in revenues from the sale of key fish products to commercial purchasers is achieved in targeted fishing communities.

B. Describe the consistency of the project with national priorities/plans:

Please refer to GEF Project Document Main Text Section I.A, I.C and Annex 1.

This proposed project responds directly to the Government’s Letter of Sector Policy and is a high priority for the government of Senegal. The Letter of Sector Policy emphasizes sustainable co-management of the coastal fisheries resources, as well as protection of the key ecosystems that underpin the health of the sector. Therefore, the support of the key ecosystems and rehabilitation of globally important fish stocks in Senegal is interlinked with the realization of the sector’s potential as a driver of accelerated growth. The proposed GEF support has thus been developed together with IDA support to the sector.

C. Describe the consistency of the project with gef strategies and strategic programs:

The sustainable fisheries management activities that will be supported by the project align with SO#1 and will contribute directly to the implementation of Strategic Program 1 of the International Waters Focal Area: Restoring and Sustaining Coastal and Marine Fish Stocks and Associated Biological Diversity. More specifically, the project will enable the country to work together with artisanal fishers to implement fisheries and habitat management reforms such as co-management plans and marine reserves, which will allow the country to address the overexploitation of both transboundary fisheries and fish stocks. The project would result directly in one of the four expected outcomes from this Strategic Program: institutions and reforms introduced to catalyze implementation of policies reducing overfishing and benefiting communities. The project’s results framework is therefore directly in line with the implementation of this Strategic Program and the expected outcomes and indicators

D. Outline the Coordination with other related initiatives:

Please refer to the GEF Project Document Main Text I.C and III.A. The project will support the Government of Senegal to help rehabilitate some of the most overexploited fish stocks in the Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem (CCLME), serving as a pilot for the other countries participating in the GEF-funded CCLME Program. The project will work closely with the CCLME Program, to ensure that the lessons learned are replicated widely by the Program. The project will also be implemented in partnership with several other donors, in order to help the Government finance the action plan in the Letter of Sector Policy. More specifically, the project includes direct co-financing from the World Bank (through the IDA resources of the GIRMaC, and a trust fund with resources from the Government of Switzerland), and parallel financing from (i) the European Union (through the STABEX project), and (ii) the Government of France (through support for improved practices and technologies in the industrial shrimp fisheries, both of whom are co-financiers to the project. These different donors will all be working together to support the Directorate of Marine Fisheries (DPM) within the Ministry of Maritime Economy to implement the Letter of Sector Policy for the fisheries, as a first step towards an eventual sector –wide approach (SWAp). In addition, the project will coordinate closely with the Government of the United States (USAID) – funded Natural Resource Management Project Phase II, which is preparing a coastal component in the southern region of the country.

E. Describe the incremental reasoning of the project:

Please refer to GEF Project Document Annex 15 Incremental Cost Analysis. The estimated baseline project cost for the project is US$18.9 million, with contributions from IDA, EU, and the Government of France. The GEF alternative is estimated to be US$24.9 million. Therefore the incremental cost for the project is estimated at US$6.0 million to address the protection of the ecosystems essential to the health of the transboundary coastal fisheries. Without this support to sustainably co-manage and protect the key coastal ecosystems, any efforts to rehabilitate the fisheries are unlikely to be successful.

F. Indicate risks, including climate change risks, that might prevent the project objective(s) from being achieved and outline risk management measures:

Please refer to the GEF Project Document Main Text Section III.E for risks and risk mitigation measures.

G. explain how cost-effectiveness is reflected in the project design:

Please refer to the Economic and financial analysis (Section IV.A in the Main Text and Annex 9), and incremental cost analysis (Annex 15) in the GEF Project Document. Overall the design of the project is the most cost effective in comparison to other alternatives that were considered but rejected (Section F in the main text, GEF Project Document)

part iii: institutional coordination and support

A. Project Implementation Arrangement:

Please refer to the GEF Project Document Main Text Section III.B and Annex 6. The ‘Direction des Pêches Maritimes’ within the Ministry of Maritime Economy is responsible for implementing the project.

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

The following changes have been made to the project design, and have been noted in a revised PIF submitted for non-objection in August 2008 (original PIF submitted on January 25, 2007) and cleared.

1. Project/Global objective: The project/global objective has been slightly modified to be more focused and precise, in response to requests from the Government, and to highlight empowerment of coastal communities as the means to ensure more sustainable resource management.

2. Overall Project Design: The key change to project design is that the project has been simplified and streamlined through the preparation phase, in order to reduce complexity and focus on achieving the objective. Although the number of components remains the same, the component scope and focus have been readjusted. Component 3 and 4 as described in the PIF no longer exist as components, but the key elements from the two components that were necessary to achieve the objective have been included as part of component 2.

Through preparation it became clear that a focus on industrial fisheries management (component 3 at PIF) would not be necessary to achieve the project’s objective, and would therefore be a distraction and should be dropped. This decision resulted from the fact that Senegal’s fisheries are characterized today by the excess artisanal fishing fleet (which is more aptly characterized as ‘small-scale’commercial vessels than artisanal). Through increased motorization and gear improvements in the 1970s and 1980s, the artisanal fleet has grown to an estimated size of over 12,000 vessels, and by the year 2000 was responsible for 85 percent of the fish caught in Senegalese waters. However, as this catch has declined with overfishing, the fleet travels farther and farther along the West African coast in order to maintain catch levels – north into Mauritanian waters, and potentially as far south as Ghana and the Gulf of Guinea. Government officials in Guinea-Bissau recently estimated that as many as 2,000 Senegalese artisanal vessels are fishing in their waters, generally illegally. A 2004 World Bank Economic and Sector Work on the fisheries in Senegal estimated that some 30 percent of the fish landed in Senegal by artisanal vessels was actually captured outside the country’s waters. In summary, the artisanal fishing fleet defines Senegal’s fisheries and the excess exploitation of the resources and habitats, and has grown into an environmental threat of regional proportions.

Thus, the following output envisaged from the project in the PIF has been dropped: completing a Code of Conduct for Industrial Fisheries (this may now be supported by FAO). This output was considered as non-essential to achieving the project’s objectives, and not feasible within the scope of the project. Furthermore, the establishment of a sustainable fisheries management fund has been included as an activity in component two (and in the Results Framework), rather than a stand-alone Component 4 as previously written in the PIF. At the same time, a new component has been considered necessary to address potential social risks from reductions in fishing effort, and this has been introduced as component 3 funded solely by IDA and the Government. Component 4 has been introduced to ensure necessary monitoring and evaluation, project management and institutional strengthening.

3. Specific Project components changes:

Component 1: The name has been modified from ‘Sustainable Management of Small-Scale Fisheries’ in the PIF to ‘Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries’ in the GEF Project Document, to reflect more precisely the emphasis on co-management as the instrument of sustainable fisheries management. The outputs from component remain the same as described in the PIF, e.g. expansion of community-based co-management to new pilot sites.

Component 2: The name of the component has been modified from ‘National MPA Network’ to ‘Rehabilitation of Ecosystems Essential for Coastal Fisheries’, of which MPAs are one sub-component or instrument. One precision reflected in the GEF Project Document is the Government’s decision to focus on ‘no-take’ marine fish reserves to rehabilitate fish stocks, in line with international good practice, rather than multi-use marine protected areas. The output from this component would remain essentially the same, except that the Government has chosen to focus on local-scale MPAs, i.e. ‘no-take’ marine fish reserves, rather than on large-scale MPAs. The objective remains the same, but the instrument has been refined. This instrument reflects the current legal framework in Senegal, and the project will through this component also assist the Government to develop consensus on legal framework for large, multi-use marine protected areas. The component now includes all essential elements from the earlier defined components 3&4 at the PIF stage.

Component 3: New component introduced since PIF (Alternative Livelihoods and Accompanying Social Measures). It became clear that the project would be unlikely to achieve its objectives without offering support to fishers for alternative livelihoods and various social measures to accompany reductions in fishing pressure on the resources. For this reason, the component 3 currently in the GEF Project Document was introduced, to provide development alternatives to overexploitation of the fisheries. This component is based on good practice throughout World Bank projects on local community development, and is being financed entirely by IDA.

Component 4: New component introduced since PIF (Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, and Monitoring and Evaluation). It will focus solely on the institutional capacity building necessary to sustain the investments of the project, and to manage the funds and conduct monitoring and evaluation.

4. Project indicators and targets: The results framework of the project is consistent with the presentation in the PIF, but has been refined in line with the above mentioned changes to the components.

5. Project cost and financing: The total project cost and co-financing are increased as a result of the availability of increased co-financing from the EU, from US$7.5 million to US$9.2 million.

part v: Agency(ies) certification

This request has been prepared in accordance with GEF policies and procedures and meets the GEF criteria for CEO Endorsement.
Steve Gorman GEF Executive Coordinator The World Bank	Christophe Crepin, Regional GEF Coordinator Africa Region
Date: September 16, 2008	Tel. and Email: (202) 473-9727 / ccrepin@worldbank.org

Annex A: Project Results Framework

PDO	Project Outcome Indicators	Use of Project Outcome Information
Project Development Objective/Global Objective: The combined development objective/global objective of the project is to empower communities to reduce fishing pressure on the fish stocks supporting the central coastal fisheries of Senegal (from the Cap Vert Peninsula to the Saloum River Delta).	Development Objective Indicators: Increase (by %) in the average size of fish caught for targeted species in co-management sites Reduction (by %) in the level of fishing effort for targeted species in co-management sites Co-management of coastal fisheries indicator: 8 new co-management sub-project proposals are approved as legal agreements with the Government and successfully implemented by EOP Rehabilitation of coastal ecosystems indicator: 70 percent of community members surveyed in participating communities are satisfied with project activities to rehabilitate coastal fish stocks (ZPPs, artificial reefs, ecolabelling) Alternative livelihoods to fishing indicator: 20 percent increase in the average first-sale price of key fish products harvested by targeted communities participating in co-management	Gov. gauge of impact of co-mgt. measures (including ZPPs, artificial reefs, ecolabelling) on coastal fisheries resources and on fishing community livelihoods. Gauge of efficiency of co-management model implementation, benchmark for progress. MTR and EOP measure by Gov. of perceived impact of project on coastal fish stocks and ecosystems. MTR and EOP measure by Gov. of socio-economic impact of project on beneficiaries (i.e. targeted fishing communities).
Short-Term Outcomes	Short-Term Outcome Indicators	Use of Short-Term Outcome Monitoring
Component 1: Co-Management of Coastal Fisheries A system of local coastal fisheries governance based on co-management that is coherent, well understood and institutionally strengthened, is established.	8 new CLPs legally established in the central coastal region, within the first 18 months of implementation 4 consolidated local fisheries management plans are approved by the relevant Local Artisanal Fishers’ Councils (CLPAs) before MTR, and implemented by EOP	Measure of legal recognition of co-management partners Measure of operationally capabilities of the Local Councils
Component 2: Rehabilitation of Coastal Ecosystems Critical habitats for key coastal fish species are protected in a participatory manner, through the establishment of ZPPs, the immersion of artificial reefs, the introduction of access rights to targeted fisheries, and efforts towards eco-labelling of small-scale fish products.	2 protected fisheries zones (ZPPs) are created and legally established At least 2 artificial reefs are expanded/submerged and co-managed with the local communities by EOP Access rights are defined, legally recognized and introduced in 2 of fisheries under co-management All small-scale fishing and transport vessels originating from within the central coastal region are registered by the National Registration Program (PNI) within the first six months of project implementation At least 1 fishery is eligible for eco-certification according to the criteria of the Marine Stewardship Council by EOP Feasibility study and consensus on a sustainable financing mechanism for the recurrent costs of ZPPs	Measure of the output of the investment in protected fisheries zones Measure of the output of the artificial reefs investment Measure of output from investment in the introduction of access rights Measure of output from investment in small-scale vessel registration Measure of success of project to introduce eco-certification pilots Measure of sustainability of project interventions
Component 3: Alternative Livelihoods & Poverty Reduction Measures Alternative revenue generating activities are developed for fishers and their families areas targeted by the project, within the fisheries sector though better access to higher value markets, or outside of the sector with training and cash support (micro-finance) from the project for communities to compensate for the loss of fishing effort and income, and to invest in alternative livelihoods.	Percentage of women in participating communities that are benefiting from micro-credit to develop activities outside the fisheries sector Percentage of targeted fishing communities receiving micro finance, and number of families in targeted communities that are entering new commercial markets Percentage of alternative livelihoods undertaken by fishers receiving micro finance access and small-enterprise training from the project, sustained profitably at EOP	Indicator of participation of women in project activities Indicator of sustainability and success of alternative livelihoods to fishing in targeted communities Indicator of potential for, and sustainability of, alternative economic livelihoods for fishers in targeted communities
Component 4: Institutional Strengthening for Fisheries Management, Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation Efficient management, monitoring and evaluation of project and dissemination of implementation results	Annual M&E reports with all data on results indicators and M&E plan completed Participating communities receive information on key indicators in a timely manner Annual audit opinion has been unqualified	To ensure that technical and fiduciary management is adequate and that mitigation measures are in place for timely action.

Arrangements for results monitoring

* Many of the indicators are output-based and thus start from a baseline of zero, for others, baseline data will be collected as a condition of effectiveness.

Annex B: Responses to Project Reviews (from GEF Secretariat and GEF Agencies, and Responses to Comments from Council at work program inclusion and the Convention Secretariat and STAP at PIF)

A. Response to Comments from GEF secretariat ( Review sheet of April 19, 2007)

Comment 1: A complete Logical Framework Analysis and a description of possible interactions with other donor financed interventions expected at CEO endorsement

Response: The Government has included this analysis in the Action Plan of the Letter of Sector Policy, included in Annex 16 of the GEF Project Document, which provides a matrix of objectives, key actions, indicators of success, estimated costs, and the different donors financing each. Additionally, see Annex 2 of the GEF Project Document.

Comment 2: An analysis of financial and institutional sustainability including an updated description of GoS activities and approved plans expected at CEO endorsement.

Response: A sustainability plan is included in Annex 4 of the GEF Project Document. Additionally, the Annex 16 of the GEF Project Document includes the Government of Senegal’s Letter of Sector Policy, with a 3-year action plan of key sector activities planned by the Government, within which this project would fit.

Comment 3: A plan for replication to the other countries of the Strategic Partnership is expected at CEO endorsement

Response: A replication plan is included in Annex 4 of the GEF Project Document.

Comment 4: A stakeholder participation plan is expected at CEO endorsement.

Response: A stakeholder participation plan elaborating the roles, capabilities and interests of all stakeholders is included in Annex 16 of the GEF Project Document.

Comment 5: M&E plan expected at CEO endorsement.

Response: A M&E plan is included in Annex 3 of the GEF Project Document.

Comment 6: Detailed financing plan with specification of costs, especially those financed by GEF funds or related to project management, expected at CEO endorsement.

Response: Details on the financing have been provided in the Incremental costs analysis, Annex 4 component descriptions and Annex 5 of the GEF Project Document. See Table E in this Memo for details on project management costs.

Comment 7:A detailed description of the project organisation is expected at CEO endorsement, addressing the competence of the involved ministries, and specifically describing the institutional arrangement for the MPA component.

Response: The institutional arrangements for project management and implementation are described in Annex 6 of the GEF Project Document.

B. Response to Comments from the STAP reviewer

N/A

C. GEF Council comments (not applicable under streamlined procedures of the Strategic Partnership for Fisheries in Africa)

Annex c: consultants to be hired for the project

Position Titles	$/ person week	Estimated person weeks	Total Amount (US$)	Tasks to be performed
For Project Management
Local	Total	759	$759,000
Project Coordinator	$1500	190.5	285,750	Project supervision and management
Asst. Coordinator	$500	138.5	69,250	Support Coordinator
M&E Specialist	$1000	158	158,000	Project M&E
FM Specialist	$1000	158	158,000	Project financial management
Proc. Specialist	$1000	114	114,000	Project procurement
For Technical Assistance
Local	Total	920	$920,000
Co-Management Facilitators	$1000	352	352,000	Support communities to prepare and implement co-management plans
Coordination of artificial reefs program	$1000	88	88,000	Coordinate implementation of artificial reefs activities
Technical assistance to alternative fishing technologies	$1000	88	88,000	Support to alternative fish catching technology activities
Coordination of eco-certification activities	$1000	88	88,000	Coordinate implementation of eco-certification activities
Facilitation for alternative livelihoods to fishing support	$1000	84	84,000	Identification of fishers, communities for support for alternative livelihoods
Technical assistance to support alternative livelihoods	$1000	176	176,000	Provide support to communities and fishers to launch alternative livelihoods
M&E support to communities	$1000	44	44,000	Support community-based monitoring
International	Total	225	$675,000
Technical oversight of co-management	$3000	88	200,000	Technical support to oversee co-management initiatives
Support to identify and assist establishment of marine reserves	$3000	137	650,000	Technical support to help identify, establish and monitor marine reserves

Annex d: status of implementation of project preparation activities and the use of funds

1. explain if the ppg objective has been achieved through the ppg activities undertaken.

Yes, the PPG objectives have been met. PPG completion report will be enclosed with the finalized CEO package after negotiations are complete.

2. describe if any findings that might affect the project design or any concerns on project implementation.

No

3. provide detailed funding amount of the ppg activities and their implemtation status in the table below:

The entire amount is expected to be disbursed prior to effectiveness. But the current disbursed amount will be available at appraisal.

Project Preparation Activities Approved	Implementation Status	GEF Amount ($)				Co-financing ($)
		Amount Approved	Amount Spent To-date	Amount Committed	Uncommitted Amount*
Study on replication of co-management pilots	Dropped	$29,020	0	0	0	20,000
Preparation of reports, studies to design marine reserves, artificial reefs sub-components	Completed	$66,900	8,663	55,295	0	0
Preparation of eco-certification pilots	Completed	$17,400	7,068	28,273	0	0
Preparation of alternative fishing technologies sub-component	Completed	$22,920	12,830		0	0
Feasibility study for establishment of a sustainable fisheries management fund	Completed	$9,400	4,219	16,884	0	0
Study to develop a Code of Conduct for Fisheries, support to participation in CCLME	Dropped	$26,900	0	0	0	15,000
Feasibility study for phasing out fishing fuel subsidies	Completed	$18,700	17,266	4,317	0	0
Feasibility study for establishment of a donor coordination unit (institutional audit, gov. scorecard/sector strategy)	Completed	$20,500		13,189	5,000	6,000
Environmental Assessment and Process Framework	Underway	0	21,871	5,468	4,746	0
Study to establish information system, M&E	Dropped	$12,000	0	0	0	2,000
Preparation Coordinator to draft Project Document, Operational Manual, Preparation Management	Underway	$33,000	41,651	0	10,000	83,000
Total		$256,740	$113,568	$123,426	$19,746	126,000

· Uncommitted amount as of July 29, 2008. These funds will be committed prior to negotiations.

Converted with Word to HTML.