File

Report
UN Capital Development Fund
Improving the Selection Criteria for
Climate Resilience Projects
September 2013
Communes propose projects for financing
under PBCR grants
• Based on the range of projects selected, probably the
Communes do not understand well which projects will
have a strong chance of being selected.
• Instead, it is a bit like a lottery where the Communes
prepare and submit proposals: sometimes they are
lucky and the proposal is accepted.
Preparation of the District Climate Resilience
Strategy
Identification of Projects by Local
Communities
Linking the Strategy to the Projects
Linking the Strategy to the Projects
Selection Criteria are used when:
Communes choose proposal from CIP
District selects projects for funding
NCDDS evaluates project
Purpose of this Presentation
The purpose of this presentation is to:
 Improve understanding of how to choose project
selection criteria
 Improve understanding of how to use project selection
criteria
 Agree a work plan to review the District Climate
Resilience Strategy and in particular, the project
selection criteria
What is the Climate Resilience Strategy?
The District Climate Resilience Strategy is based on
Vulnerability Reduction Analysis in a sample of local
communities
The District Climate Resilience Strategy
• Identifies the negative impacts of climate change on
local communities
• Identifies the most vulnerable people and the most
vulnerable places
• Identifies actions that can build resilience to climate
change
• Sets criteria for allocating funds to projects that build
climate resilience
Purpose of the Selection Criteria
The Project Selection Criteria should help the District
Planning Committee and the Commune representatives
to identify:
 Which proposals relate to priority actions in the Climate
Resilience Strategy
 Which proposals assist beneficiaries identified as
vulnerable in the Climate Resilience Strategy
 Which proposals are located in areas identified as
vulnerable in the Climate Resilience Strategy
What is a good selection criterion?
 SIMPLE: the Communes should be able to
IMPLE
understand easily
 MEASURABLE: Based on the project proposal, we
should know whether a project fits the criterion
EASURABLE
 APPROPRIATE: the criterion should help identify
the best way to spend the Climate Resilience
PPROPRIATE
grants
 RANGE OF VALUES: the criterion should be
ANGE
chosen so some projects will score high and some
projects will score low
ARGETED
 TARGETED: ensure that the Climate Resilience
grants go to help the most vulnerable communities
S
M
A
R
T
What is NOT a SMART Criterion?
Criteria that only say the same a the basic eligibility rules.
 Example: “Project in the CIP” is NOT a useful criterion
because ALL project funded by PBCR grants must be in
the CIP
Criteria that are too general
 Example: “Project that fits the Climate Change
Strategy” is NOT a very good criterion because it is
very vague. Criteria should show HOW the project fits
the Climate Change Strategy.
Analysis of the Climate Resilience Strategies
Activity
In Strategy
In Proposals
#
%
#
%
15
33
37
8
10
77
5%
10%
12%
3%
3%
24%
28
28
8
10
2
18
18%
18%
5%
6%
1%
11%
Other
Infrastructure
31
10%
2
1%
Water and
Hygiene
16
5%
29
18%
30
60
9%
19%
19
16
12%
10%
Roads
Irrigation
Water Supplies
Drainage
Flood Refuge
Agriculture
CC Awareness
Other Services
Analysis of Selection Criteria
Criterion
Highly vulnerable area
In CIP
Responds to District CCA Strategy
Many beneficiaries
Benefits vulnerable groups
Can be implemented before end of
year
Uses budget effectively
Strengthens climate resilience
Has co-financing
Multi-sector benefits
Inter-Commune benefits
Average
Weight
27%
26%
14%
13%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
1%
1%
Are the Criteria SMART?
Criterion
Highly vulnerable
area
In CIP
Responds to District
CCA Strategy
Many beneficiaries
Benefits vulnerable
groups
Simple Meas- Appro?
urable? priate?
()




()

()



()


Are the Criteria SMART?
Criterion
Highly vulnerable
area
In CIP
Responds to
District CCA
Strategy
Range? Targeted?


SMART
Not useful
Too general

Many
beneficiaries
Benefits
vulnerable groups
Comment

Need to
compare cost
and size of
benefit as well
as number of
beneficiaries

SMART
Examples of SMART Criteria
 Project activity is mentioned as a priority in the Climate
Resilience strategy
 Project beneficiaries are identified as a vulnerable
group in the Climate Resilience Strategy
 Project is located in an area identified as vulnerable in
the Climate resilience strategy
Criteria can be very specific…
For example, if the District and the Communes agree that
the highest priority investments should be for irrigation
and agriculture extension, the criteria could include
 Irrigation Project
 Agriculture Extension Project
… 15%
… 10%
OR
 Irrigation or Agriculture Extension Project
… 25%
… but some general criteria can be included
Common examples of general criteria might be:





Many beneficiaries
High value for money
High Sustainability
High Commitment from the beneficiaries
Provides highest benefits to women, poor families or
other vulnerable groups
How Can We Measure Value For Money?
We should try to select the projects that have the highest
value for money. However it can be very difficult to say
which project gives highest value for money. Consider the
following examples:
Project Type
Cost
Benefits
# HH
benefit
Irrigation
$15,000
Farmers can grow two rice crops
instead of one
50
Road
$10,000
Can travel to and from village
even in the flood season
250
Water Education
$ 2,000
Women understand better how to 1,000
prevent children from getting sick
Elements of Value for Money
Value for Money can be considered to consist of:
 The COST of the project
 The NUMBER of beneficiaries
 The size of the benefit each household gets from the
project
 SO, if we only think about the number of beneficiaries,
but not the cost or the size of the benefit, our criterion is
not very useful
Examples of Value for Money Criteria
The simplest Value for Money criterion might be:
 Cost per beneficiary household
The District Planning Committee can easily calculate the
cost per beneficiary for each proposal and then group them
as High / Medium / Low.
We could try adding a second criterion:
 Size of benefits per household
We cannot calculate this as a number so this would depend
on the District Planning Committee using their judgement as
to which project have high / medium / low benefits per
household.
Remember that “low benefits per household” does NOT
mean that the project is bad.
A project with low benefits per household, and low costs
per household, may be just as good as a project with high
benefits and high costs for each household.
Next Steps
1. The PBCR Grant Allocations for 2014 will be
announced in November or December 2013 (at the
same time as the C/S Fund and D/M Fund allocations).
2. As soon as the PBCR Grant allocations are
announced, the Districts should organise a workshop
to review the Climate Resilience Strategy and instruct
the Communes to identify proposals
3. At this workshop, the District and Commune
representatives should review whether any changes
are needed to the Climate Resilience Strategy.
We expect that in most Districts there will be no need to
make big changes to the strategy.
However, each District should review the Project Selection
Criteria and try to improve them based on the training
today.
Then, the Communes should understand clearly about the
criteria and should choose projects from their CIP that
match the selection criteria so they have the best chance
of being selected.
UN Capital Development Fund
THANK YOU
Julian Abrams
LoCAL Technical Coordinator / LGCC Implementation
Adviser
[email protected]

similar documents