-
Safeguard Screening Results
Please refer to the attached “Appendix III Safeguard screening results.pdf"
-
Project Results Monitoring Plan.
Metrics
|
Methodology
|
Baseline
|
Location
|
Frequency
|
Responsible Parties
|
Objective: To implement a comprehensive, multi-government ratified and regionally articulated mangrove conservation strategy in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Seascape (ETPS) countries of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia and Ecuador through on-the-ground management activities and the strengthening of national and local policies that inform ridge-to-reef development planning and practices relevant to mangrove conservation.
|
Objective Indicator (a):
Official endorsement of a regionally articulated multi-government mangrove conservation and sustainable development plan by the four ETPS countries (Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Ecuador) with a coordinated action plan to restore and protect mangrove systems beyond the funded scope of the two year project.
|
# of countries officially endorsing the Plan through CPPS channels and # which subscribe through this instrument to a shared action plan/ agenda.
|
Use documented CPPS proceedings and published plan to verify development of coordinated country action plans.
|
No ETPS-wide country endorsed regional plan at project inception date.
|
Between the four ETPS countries (Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador).
|
Y2 Q4 with updates every 6 months.
|
CPPS member countries (Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador) and Costa Rica as a participating non-party.
|
Objective Indicator (b):
At least 2 ETPS countries with improved legislation governing national ridge-to-reef spatial planning (e.g. upstream watershed management) and policy development that positively influences mangrove conservation in different ETPS countries.
|
# of countries with improvements in national legislation attributable to the project.
|
Before-after comparison of legislation (active and pending) for contributions attributable to the project in each ETPS country.
|
No national policy improvements attributable to the project at its inception date.
|
Between the four ETPS countries (Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador)
|
Y2 Q4 with updates every 6 months.
|
ETPS country authorities with support from Conservation International.
|
Objective Indicator (c):
At least 2 examples of supported local private and/or community based mangrove initiatives that strengthen local planning, improve awareness of key issues, build local capacity, reduce mangrove degradation, instigate reforestation, and improve the retention of ecosystem goods, services with economic and cultural dividends for sustainable societies.
|
# demonstration projects successfully implemented by the project at the local level across ETPS region.
|
As part of the design of each demonstration project undertaken develop before-after metrics to evaluate the success with stakeholders (gender disaggregated where possible).
|
No demonstration projects and no improvements to local management planning attributable to the project at project inception date.
|
The local sites of Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Málaga (Colombia) and El Morro (Ecuador).
|
Y2Q4 with updates every 6 months.
|
Local involved resource managers and communities with support from CI-country field teams.
|
Component 1: Regional mangrove strategy development and implementation.
|
Outcome Indicator 1.1.:
A regional strategy approved by and published for the appropriate authorities of the four ETPS countries by Y2Q1.
|
A published regional mangrove plan in circulation by Y2Q1.
|
Verify Plan is published and its level of distribution.
|
No plan has been published.
|
Regional ETPS countries
|
Updates every quarter until Y2Q1.
|
CPPS member countries (Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador) and Costa Rica as a participating non-party.
|
Output Indicator 1.1.1.:
A Mangrove Technical Working Group is convened by Y1Q3 as part of the CPPS Operating Plan with a 2015-2017+ commitment.
|
# technical publications generated over project cycle by group members.
|
Maintain a shared publication log for the working group.
|
No publications exist.
|
An international group convened by CPPS
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CPPS
|
Output Indicator 1.1.2.:
# Technical Working Group Meetings generating recommendations towards improved regional mangrove conservation strategy by Y2Q2.
|
# technical meetings/ year and # invited experts and ETPS government technical staff.
|
Maintain a registry of the meetings and attendance by experts and authority figures
|
No working group
|
An international group convened by CPPS
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CPPS
|
Output Indicator 1.1.3.:
# ETPS country governments that officially endorse a regional strategy compatible with their National Planning Instruments and policies by Y2Q1.
|
Number of ETPS Countries (of four)
|
Verify with CPPS documentation of proceedings/ government communications.
|
No endorsed CPPS regional mangrove strategy exists.
|
ETPS region
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CPPS
|
Outcome Indicator 1.2.:
Costa Rica is an active participating member of the CPPS Open Initiative for Mangrove Conservation and Sustainable Development.
|
# of CPPS Mangrove Initiative technical meetings in which Costa Rica is a represented and active member.
|
Verify meeting/ event attendance records
|
Costa Rica is not a participating member of the Regional mangrove Open Initiative.
|
Costa Rica
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CPPS with support from CI-Costa Rica
|
Output Indicator 1.2.1.:
CPPS - Costa Rica MOU (or legally equivalent documentation) signed with CPPS before Y1Q3.
|
# documentation of the working Costa Rica-CPPS arrangement
|
Verify with CPPS MoU or equivalent communication.
|
Costa Rica is not part of the CPPS Regional Open Mangrove Initiative.
|
Costa Rica
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CPPS
|
Outcome Indicator 1.3.:
# of countries that have tools generated by the project that assist and inform integrated regional and national planning (by Y2Q4).
|
# of tools or communication products available and # applied/ ETPS country.
|
Project products and their applications are registered by PMU.
|
No project generated tools.
|
ETPS region
|
Quarterly reporting
|
UNESCO with project partners
|
Output Indicator 1.3.1.:
# of thought leaders trained per country actively working in aspects of mangrove policy and resource planning by Y2Q4.
|
# and % of trained leaders/ country working in mangrove related policy or planning
|
Check attendance records for events and collect baseline information on leader roles during training events.
|
No ETPS leaders working in aspects of mangrove policy/ planning have received training.
|
ETPS region
|
Semi-annual reporting
|
UNESCO with project partners.
|
Output Indicator 1.3.2.:
% completion of communication products (as described in Section 4B) by Y1Q3.
|
# of communication products produced and # examples distributed/ ETPS country
|
Communications project records
|
No communication products produced by the project.
|
ETPS region
|
Quarterly reporting
|
UNESCO with project partners.
|
Component 2: National mangrove action plans and policy strengthening.
|
Outcome Indicator 2.1.:
# of ETPS country updated national plans supported by the regional mangrove strategy.
|
# and % of national plans that reference the regional strategy
|
Revision of National Plans and any policy changes.
|
National plans do not reference a regional plan.
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 2.1.1.:
# of updated and ratified national mangrove action plans (and in development) by Y2Q4.
|
# of national plans that are updated that influence mangroves
|
Updates by CI-country teams
|
No updated national plans
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Outcome Indicator 2.2.:
# of countries with stronger regulations or incentives that improve mangrove conservation underway and established at the national level by Y2Q4.
|
# of ETPS countries with stronger regulations
|
Updates by CI-country teams against a checklist of the types of mangrove improvements
|
Regulations/ incentives at project start taken as baseline reference.
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 2.2.1.:
# of ETPS countries with an updated (post PPG) mangrove base-line, national policy and threat assessment by Y1Q4.
|
# of ETPS countries with updated threat assessments
|
Updates by CI-country teams on base-line and threat assessment work.
|
No threat assessments updated by project at startup.
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 2.2.2.:
# of new policies containing elements attributable to the project national assessment exercises.
|
#new policies/ country
|
Revision of policy for adopted recommendations.
|
No new policies at startup
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Component 3: Local conservation action.
|
Outcome Indicator 3.1.:
# of site level management or local development plans generated with stakeholders directly and indirectly as a result of project developments.
|
% of site level plans developed with stakeholders
|
CI field team updates and revision of local policy documents
|
Zero new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 3.1.1.:
# of improved site level management plans or local development plans in effect by Y2Q4 and/or % completion.
|
# site level plans in effect by project end, or their % completion
|
CI field team updates and revision of local policy documents
|
Zero new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Outcome Indicator 3.2.:
# of GEF-UNEP Blue Forests method and/or analogous economic evaluations and tools developed and presented to project stakeholders.
|
# stakeholders and # different stakeholder groups that have access to tools and evaluations
|
CI-Global Marine project reports
|
Zero new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CI- Global Marine with support from CI-Costa Rica and CI-Ecuador
|
Output Indicator 3.2.1.:
# of completed site studies presented to stakeholders by Y2Q1.
|
# sites tested / evaluated with BF and analogous methods
|
CI-Global Marine project reports
|
Zero project sites evaluated at startup
|
Gulf of Nicoya (Costa Rica), Gulf of Guayaquil (Ecuador)
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CI- Global Marine with support from CI-Costa Rica and CI-Ecuador
|
Output Indicator 3.2.2.:
% completion and presentation of outreach document with decision support strategy presented to ETPS decision makers by Y2Q4.
|
# ETPS decision makers with outreach document
|
Beneficiaries registered via CI distribution list and/ or sign up for documents on-line.
|
Outreach documents yet to be elaborated
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Quarterly reporting
|
CI-Global Marine with CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 3.2.3.:
# of outreach and communication media/ platforms/ packages generated, aimed at national, regional and global mangrove conservation, science and policy fora by Y2Q4.
|
Audience by #, type and geographic scope for each produced project outreach materials
|
Updates from CI-Global Marine and outreach project registry.
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Costa Rica, Panamá, Colombia, Ecuador.
|
Annual reporting
|
CI-Global Marine with support from UNESCO-Quito and CI ETPS country teams.
|
Outcome Indicator 3.3.:
# policymakers and stakeholders trained per ETPS country.
|
# individuals trained (male and female) and institutions/ per country
|
CI field team updates and revision of local policy documents
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahia Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 3.3.1.:
# of events and training hours received per stakeholder in each ETPS country by Y2Q4.
|
# events/ site/ year & # training hours (gender disaggregated where possible).
|
Training logs
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Málaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Outcome Indicator 3.4.:
# of demonstration projects successfully implemented in high priority mangrove conservation areas.
|
# site level plans developed with stakeholders
|
CI field team updates and revision of local policy documents
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Málaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 3.4.1.:
MOUs with local associations that outline commitments to participate in mangrove conservation and restoration activities signed by Y1Q3.
|
# and % of agreements implemented successfully as conservation and restoration actions.
|
CI field team updates and revision of local policy documents
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Málaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Output Indicator 3.4.2.:
% increase in number of stakeholders (and/or their time invested) for each demonstration project between Y1Q4 and Y2Q4.
|
# site level plans developed with stakeholders
|
Each site demonstration project will monitor stakeholder participation.
|
No new site level plans at start of project
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Málaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Annual reporting
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
Safeguard Plans:
|
SEP-1:
Proportion of relevant stakeholder institutions/ groups identified , approached and involved in the project during the PPG Phase also involved in the Start-up phase of the Full Project (August - October 2015) and by project end.
|
% of institutions/ groups involved in project compared to PPG base-line by stakeholder category (see SEP) and country.
|
Before-after comparison of involved institutions and individuals through field updates.
|
Please refer to the SEP Appendix VIa, Table 4 for stakeholder categories and identified institutions
|
ETPS region, all levels.
|
Project start-up (3 mo), end of Yr 1 and Yr2
|
CI ETPS country teams
|
SEP-2:
Number and regularity of Project Management and Steering Committee meetings between Project Partners.
|
# of PMU and PSC meetings/ quarter
|
Meeting registry
|
Zero at project inception.
|
ETPS region, all levels.
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU with project partners
|
SEP-3:
Regular Project Updates/ quarter provided to National Authorities and/or the GEF country focal point.
|
# updates/ quarter/ country
|
SEP project log sheet of meetings and updates.
|
Project begins with country OFPs familiar and involved with the project.
|
ETPS region, all levels.
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU with CI-Country teams
|
SEP-4:
Number of official complaints and grievances levied against the project and sustained after review by the EA and/or Project Agency.
|
# Complaints registered/ year
|
Refer to any EA or CI-GEF registered complaint for the project.
|
None at project inception.
|
ETPS region, all levels.
|
Quarterly updates
|
EA/ PMU
|
IPP-1:
Number of Indigenous Peoples and/or Afro-Colombian communities that benefit from the project (NOTE: only Afro-Colombian communities planned).
|
# IP and ADC communities/ project area
|
Evaluate project success (formally or informally) with involved IP and ADC leaders
|
No prior project activities in area
|
Bahia Malaga, Colombia
|
Per local demonstration project
|
CI-Colombia
|
IPP-2:
Level of compliance of project with established approach protocols for Colombian Indigenous Peoples and/or Afro-Colombian communities in the Bahia Malaga region.
|
% compliance by community
|
The 10 steps FPIC toolbox will be used to follow process on a 10 point scale (see IPP Appendix VI[b]).
|
Early approaches through CVC late PPG phase.
|
Bahia Malaga, Colombia
|
Per local demonstration project
|
CI-Colombia
|
PRFAR-1:
Number of individuals, groups, or communities that adopt voluntary incentive agreements or concessions in exchange for an altered level of access to mangrove resources as a result of the project (gender disaggregated).
|
# individuals; # groups; # communities/ country
|
Project team interviews and results of demonstration projects.
|
None at project start-up
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Yearly
|
CI-country field teams
|
PFRAR-2:
Number of individuals, groups or communities with involuntarily restrictions to mangrove resources imposed as a result of the project.
|
# individuals; # groups; # communities/ country
|
Field teams will canvas communities in study sites.
|
None
|
Chira (Costa Rica), David (Panamá), Bahía Malaga (Colombia), El Morro (Ecuador)
|
Yearly
|
CI-country field teams
|
Gender-1:
Number/percentage of women/men attending activities & trainings & meetings.
|
# and % of men and women attending / event
|
Event attendance register.
|
No events at project start-up.
|
ETPS region, all levels
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU coordinating with all project partners
|
Gender-2:
Number/percentage of women/men actively participating in activities & trainings & meetings.
|
# and % of men and women actively involved / event
|
Event moderator estimates the level of involvement using a simple qualitative scale.
|
No events at project start-up.
|
ETPS region, all levels
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU coordinating with all project partners
|
Gender-3:
Number of men/women benefitting from the project.
|
# men and women receiving project benefits/ country
|
Recorded during project work using simple classification criteria to define benefits.
|
None at project start up
|
ETPS region, all levels
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU coordinating with all project partners
|
Gender-4:
Number of men/women demonstrating leadership in project implementation.
|
# men and women demonstrating leadership/ country
|
Recorded during project work using simple qualification criteria to define leadership.
|
None until project start-up
|
ETPS region, all levels
|
Quarterly reporting
|
PMU coordinating with all project partners
| -
-
GEF Tracking Tool by Focal Area
Please refer to the attached Excel file “# Appendix V GEF-IW5 Tracking Tool.xls"
-
-
Safeguard Compliance Plan
Please refer to the following attached Safeguard documents:
Triggered Safeguard Plan
|
Document
|
I. Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
|
# Appendix VI (a) SEP.docx
|
II. Indigenous People Plan.
|
# Appendix VI (a) IPP.docx
|
III. Process Framework for Involuntary Restriction of Access to Resources.
|
# Appendix VI (a) PFRAR.docx
|
IV. Gender Mainstreaming Strategy.
|
# Appendix VI (a) Gender Strategy.docx
|
-
-
Detailed Project Budget
Please refer to the following attached Budget documents:
Budget Detail
|
Document
|
I. Conservation International Budget
|
# Appendix VII (a) CI Budget.xls
|
II. Comisión Permanente del Pacifico Sur Budget
|
# Appendix VII (b) CPPS.xls
|
III. UNESCO-Quito Budget
|
# Appendix VII (c) UNESCO-Quito.xls
|
-
Co-financing Commitment Letters
TO BE OBTAINED BEFORE 11th JUNE 2015
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
