GEF Project Concept Review Criteria

The objective of this note is to supplement the review criteria for all concept proposals seeking entry to the GEF pipeline under the Review Criteria for GEF Full-Sized Projects[1]. The note includes most of the current review criteria but provides further clarification and strengthening of the criteria as well as the level of requirement for some of the criteria.

The criteria will be applied to all concepts currently in the pipeline as well as all future concept proposals that would be submitted for pipeline entry.

  1. Co-financing: The usual co-financing table with all the sources of co-financing, types, classifications, etc. In addition, the level of co-financing amount that is certain at concept stage, and the amount that is uncertain and that will be confirmed at work program inclusion, needs to be clearly presented.

See co-financing table in Project Executive Summary.

  1. Timeframe: Indicate the start and ending dates for project preparation and implementation.

Project preparation:

PDF B from June 2003 to March 2006. Project technically cleared for June 2006 Work Programme, but not funded due to shortage of funds in GEF-3.

Project implementation: May 2007 to April 2012

  1. Impact: Indicate the kind of impact that the project will have on the global environment or any other significant impact.

Sustainable land and agro-ecosystem management practices implemented on 43,700 hectares of land by PY3 and 100,000 by PY5; 10% increase in NRM-based income for 120,000 farmers/herders; 20% increase in carbon stores on 30,500 ha of land; 10% reduction in sediment load in 4 representative micro-catchments; 1,035,200 people benefiting from training in SLM; enabling environment for regional cooperation in SLM established.

For more details consult the project logical framework in Annex B of the Project Executive Summary

  1. Financing: include all the proposed activities in the project and their associated budget to undertake these activities.

Financing by project component is provided in the Incremental Cost Analysis, giving breakdowns of GEF financing and co-financing by donor.

  1. Administrative Budget: Indicate the administrative cost associated with the project, including international and local consultants that will be hired to undertake the tasks in the project and the estimated budget for each of the items.

The administrative budget amounts to zero, as the Implementing Agency cost for the project will be covered by the project fee and no additional costs will be incurred for project staff or consultants by UNEP. All project staff, consultancy costs, etc. will be incurred by the project Executing Agency and the participating countries.

  1. Risk: Identify possible project risk, analyze the risk and proposed risk mitigation measures.

Project sustainability will depend on minimizing / avoiding deleterious impacts of the following risks:

Environmental /
  • drought/unreliable rains
  • flood

Human /
  • diseases (particularly impacts of HIV/AIDS, leading to labour shortages)
  • refugee movements
  • rural exodus of youth

Crop and Livestock shocks /
  • crop and livestock pest & disease outbreaks (in-country; transboundary)
  • crop failure

Economic shocks /
  • seasonal price fluctuations, inflation, market failures, fluctuations in exchange rates (relative to the US dollar)
  • lack of district funds/allocations to agriculture/environment

Political /
  • government staff mobility
  • civil strife
  • within and between country instability / insecurity giving rise to issues of public, personal and/or property safety

The potential risks have been taken into account and minimized through project flexibility. The adoption of a decentralized and participatory management approach should also minimize risks. The extensive consultation at local to basin-wide level with the wide range of stakeholders, together with the planned co-ordination mechanism should minimize threats against the continuity of activities. Institutions in all four countries have already demonstrated their commitment to support the adoption of an environmentally sound and sustainable approach to the development of the transboundary agro-ecosystem to benefit local people, which will also contribute to minimizing risks. Finally, FAO as the Project’s executing agency, will ensure that most potential risks are identified and addressed at an early stage and that an adaptive management approach is adopted.

  1. Innovation: Identify if the project has any innovative measures in its design or implementation.

Kagera TAMP offers a unique and innovative approach, using agriculture as the engine for combining productivity improvement and sustainable livelihoods with reversing land degradation, enhancing biodiversity conservation and carbon sequestration across the Kagera river basin and, thereby also contributing to the protection of international waters. The key entry point for TAMP will be sustainable land management practices, to enable local farmers and herders to break out from the vicious cycle of land degradation into a virtuous cycle of land restoration and sustainable use.

Alternatives to traditional practices that are no longer viable (rotations, fallow, shifting cultivation, nomadic livelihoods) and to practices that negatively impact on the environment (burning, repetitive tillage etc) will be developed: to improve land cover, nutrient cycling and biological control, water quality and quantity; to reduce biomass losses; and to enhance systems’ diversification and resilience. Improved practices include, for example, agroforestry, crop-livestock integration, inter- and relay-cropping and species/varietal improvements, conservation agriculture, pasture improvement and sustainable harvesting and improved marketing of products from endemic plant and animal species (including medicinal, wild food and local agroforestry species).

  1. Fitness in respective focal area strategy: Each focal area has prepared a strategy in accordance with the GEF global environmental objectives. The concept proposal should describe how the proposed concept/project will best fit the respective focal area strategy.

The project will specifically contribute to SLM-2 “Demonstrate and up-scale successful SLM practices for the control and prevention of desertification and deforestation” by promoting adaptive management for SLaM practices, community planning and integrated ecosystem approaches for the range of cultivated and grazing lands, forested areas and wetlands in the basin. Replication of successful practices and diversified land use systems will be ensured through demonstrating the local, national and global benefits gained through sustainable and productive farm-livelihood systems and integrated watershed management that sustain the resource base and its biodiversity, and enhance ecosystem functioning and the goods and ecosystem services provided. The project will support SLM-2, in 46 priority micro-catchments and 35 agro-ecological units representing threatened or degraded common property resources (pasture/range, wetlands, riverbanks/riverine forest etc.). It will catalyze inter-sectoral partnerships between institutions in all four countries to overcome barriers to SLM, including enhancement of institutional and human resource capacity for land use/resources planning thus contributing to the objectives of SLM-1. The project will also contribute to SLM- 4, through demonstrating how SLM contributes to the conservation and sustainable use of agro-biodiversity, to carbon sequestration and protection of the hydrological regime, and through close collaboration and partnership with the regional programmes that address the international waters of Lake Victoria and the Nile River (in line with OPs 9, 12 and 13).

The concept proposals which met the above criteria as well as those criteria in the Review Criteria for GEF Full-Sized Projects will be admitted into the GEF pipeline.

[1] Review Criteria for GEF Full-Sized Projects, August, 2006