GEF-6 GEF Secretariat Review for Full-sized/medium-sized projects
The GEF/ldcf/sccf Trust Fund

  
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

GEF ID:	9241	
Country/Region:	Kenya	
Project Title:	Sixth Operational Phase of the GEF Small Grants Programme in Kenya	
GEF Agency:	UNDP	GEF Agency Project ID:		
Type of Trust Fund:	GEF Trust Fund	GEF Focal Area (s):	Multi Focal Area	
GEF-6 Focal Area/ LDCF/SCCF Objective (s):	BD-4 Program 9; CCM-1 Program 1; LD-1 Program 1; 	
Anticipated Financing  PPG:	$91,324	Project Grant:	$3,561,644	
Co-financing:	$4,820,000	Total Project Cost:	$8,381,644	
PIF Approval:		Council Approval/Expected:	June 01, 2016	
CEO Endorsement/Approval		Expected Project Start Date:		
Program Manager:	Maria Del Pilar Barrera Rey	Agency Contact Person:	Nick Remple	

PIF Review	
Review Criteria	Questions	Secretariat Comment 	
Agency Response 	
Project Consistency	1.	Is the project aligned with the relevant GEF strategic objectives and results framework?	The proposed project is aligned with the GEF-6 strategic objectives approved for the GEF SGP, particularly with the following: (a) Community Landscape and Seascape 
Conservation and (b) Climate Smart Innovative Agro-ecology.

With respect to the 20 Aichi biodiversity categorized into five strategic goals, the GEF SGP will contribute to each of the goals, by addressing at least one target in each category.

Please, consider revising output 1.3 to reflect LD-1 Program 1: agro-ecological intensification. Revise the corresponding outcome as well focusing on how LD-1 funding will contribute to genetic resources and use of inputs, institutional frameworks to strengthen capacity of smallholder farmers, and efficient marketing and extension programs in the Kenya Lake System and the Sacred Kaya Forests landscapes. This is important to rationalize LD-1 funds towards this project.

Additional information is requested 08/06/2015

Provided. Cleared 08/13/2015		
	2.	Is the project consistent with the recipient country’s national strategies and plans or reports and assessments under relevant conventions?	Yes. The proposed project is consistent with the Government of Kenya's Vision 2030, the Strategic Plan 2013 – 2017 of the Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, the NBSAP, the NAP and other plans and strategies in the country.

Cleared 08/05/2015	
	
Project Design	3.	Does the PIF sufficiently indicate the drivers of global environmental degradation, issues of sustainability, market transformation, scaling, and innovation? 	In the section ‘The problem to be addressed,' p12 please consider relating the institutional weakness to identified environmental issues in the three target areas. Consider revising

Additionally, without necessarily giving estimates at this stage of the GEBs that will be generated, give an indication of which GEBs you will focus on, taking into account environmental issues in the target areas. Consider revising

Lastly, the use of the word ‘global' in component 1 and p12 indicates global environmental protection. Interventions in the three areas will contribute to GEBs, but they are not in themselves ‘global' environmental protection areas. Consider revising 

Additional information is requested. 08/06/2015

Provided. Cleared 08/13/2015		
	4.	Is the project designed with sound incremental reasoning?	In terms of financial sustainability, please elaborate on how the micro-credit lending program will work. 

Additional information is requested. 08/05/2015

Provided. Cleared 08/13/2015		
	5.	Are the components in Table B sound and sufficiently clear and appropriate to achieve project objectives and the GEBs?	There are some problems with the figures between Table A and Table B: The totals for the GEF Grant in tables A and B don't match (table A is $3,561,644 and table B adds up to $ 3,564,644 

Please revise.

Additional information is requested. 08/05/2015

Corrected.  Cleared 08/13/2015		
	6.	Are socio-economic aspects, including relevant gender elements, indigenous people, and CSOs considered? 	Yes. Cleared 08/05/2015		
Availability of Resources
	7.	Is the proposed Grant  (including the Agency fee) within the resources available from (mark all that apply):			
	•	The STAR allocation?	Yes. $4 million from Mexico's STAR allocation for GEF-6 as follows: 
BD: $1,994,445 
CC: $1,495,833 
LD: $507,722 
 
All inclusive of agency fees.

Cleared 08/05/2015		
	•	The focal area allocation?	N/A		
	•	The LDCF under the principle of equitable access	N/A		
	•	The SCCF (Adaptation or Technology Transfer)?	N/A		
	•	Focal area set-aside?	N/A		
Recommendations	8.	Is the PIF being recommended for clearance and PPG (if additional amount beyond the norm) justified?	Not at this stage. Please answer the questions above.

Also consider improving table 2. What risks would be associated with the trade-offs between the interventions such as regulations and the livelihoods of communities? What about issues to do with land ownership and governance and the sustainability of outcomes of this project? Not recommended at this stage, please respond to the issues raised. 

08/06/2015

Provided. 08/13/2015

The Program Manager recommends CEO PIF clearance.		
Review Date
	Review	August 05, 2015		
	Additional Review (as necessary)	August 13, 2015		
	Additional Review (as necessary)			

CEO endorsement Review	
Review Criteria 	Questions	Secretariat Comment at CEO Endorsement	
Response to Secretariat comments  	
Project Design and Financing	1.	If there are any changes from that presented in the PIF, have justifications been provided?			
	2.	Is the project structure/ design appropriate to achieve the expected outcomes and outputs?			
	3.	Is the financing adequate and does the project demonstrate a cost-effective approach to meet the project objective? 			
	4.	Does the project take into account potential major risks, including the consequences of climate change, and describes sufficient risk response measures? (e.g., measures to enhance climate resilience)			
	5.	Is co-financing confirmed and evidence provided?			
	6.	Are relevant tracking tools completed?			
	7.	Only for Non-Grant Instrument: Has a reflow calendar been presented?			
	8.	Is the project coordinated with other related initiatives and national/regional plans in the country or in the region?			
	9.	Does the project include a budgeted M&E Plan that monitors and measures results with indicators and targets?			
	10.	Does the project have descriptions of a knowledge management plan?			
Agency Responses 
	11.	Has the Agency adequately responded to comments at the PIF stage from:			
	•	GEFSEC 			
	•	STAP			
	•	GEF Council			
	•	Convention Secretariat			

Recommendation 	12.	Is CEO endorsement recommended?			
Review Date	Review			
	Additional Review (as necessary)			
	Additional Review (as necessary)