Requisite Institutional Capacity

 
(b) Capability required: Capacity to undertake monitoring and evaluation.

  1. Demonstration of existing capacities for monitoring and independent evaluation consistent with the requirements of the Adaptation Fund.
  2. Evidence that a process or system, such as project-at-risk system, is in place to flag when a project has developed problems that may interfere with the achievement of its objectives, and to respond accordingly to redress the problems.
Good example on how to monitor:
The application included project guidelines on preparing a design and monitoring framework that is primarily for design teams government and ministries, nongovernment stakeholders, applicant staff, and consultants. The guidelines are a hands-on tool kit that describes—step-by-step—the participatory process to develop the design and monitoring framework and explains how to apply participatory design tools. The guidelines are practical with examples. There is also technical assistance available to prepare projects. These together with other manuals such as for disbursement and the semiannual monitoring make it clear that the applicant has the required capacity to meet this Fiduciary Standard. Monitoring reports from several projects demonstrate the system is working.

Good example on evaluation:
The applicant has an independent Evaluation Group that is directly responsible to the Board and links to its Evaluation Committee. They have their own section on the applicant web site that includes its annual report and summaries of the reports issued. There was an external peer review done of its evaluation function and that came out positively and is available under the documents of the latest Executive Board.

Example of inadequate procurement practices:
The applicant is part of a government structure and therefore subject to the country’s Public Procurement Authority. A report issued in June 2009 on a procurement review of the applicant concluded that unless the recommendations of the review are implemented the applicant will not comply fully with the Public Procurement legislation and the associated regulations and directives and punitive measures are considered. In this case accreditation cannot be recommended until the Public Procurement Authority comes to a positive conclusion on the basis of a full review and this should be supplemented by some mechanism to give assurance to the Accreditation Panel that the appropriate systems and procedures in place for procurement and adherence thereto is expected to continue to be in place for the duration of the accreditation period.

Good example on a disbursement system:
One of the attachments of the application is a Project Disbursement Handbook. It contains policies, guidelines, practices, and detailed instructions how to handle project disbursements and repayments. It is written for the applicant staff, borrowers including project staff from executing agencies. It demonstrates that disbursements are managed in accordance with the principles and procedures that are applicable to the investment projects or programs.