The appraisal template below is for internal use by IUCN staff working on field projects, including all projects funded by the GEF through IUCN[1]. The template is used by the Project Review Committee, which is also responsible for coordinating the technical, financial and economic appraisal of the project proposal.
The IUCN unit leading the project submits the project proposal and related documents to the Project Review Committee. The project proposal appraisal is based on information as described below, but the IUCN unit submitting the proposal may submit additional relevant information that it believes will support the proposal.
The appraisal template below is based on the GEF secretariat full proposal review sheet with additional requirements internal to IUCN and conform to IUCN standards. The level of information provided/requested should aim to assess the feasibility and consistency of the proposal and not address details of implementation. Comments from the Project Review Committee must be addressed by the relevant IUCN Unit.
The Project Review Committee will complete the 3nd column and IUCN project managers may provide additional information in the 4th column as a response to the comments made by the Project Review Committee. Together, this information will be presented for approval to the Project Review Committee and subsequently to the Global Management Team.
Project title: / Project number:
Country/Region: / Project lead organisation and contact:
Total project financing:
Donor funding:
Co-funding: / IUCN: / Country: / Partners:
In-kind contribution: / IUCN: / Country: / Partners:
Type of GEF sources:
GEF focal area/s:
GEF funding:
Project proposal delivery Date: / Expected Project Start Date:
IUCN Programme Manager: / IUCN review supervisor:
Review Criteria / Questions / Project Review Committee / Project manager response (proposed rewording, additional documents, information or proposed activities during proposal development)
Project development process / Has a review of the project concept taken place according to the IUCN appraisal template for project concepts and have the reviewers’ comments been taken into account?
Have there been major changes in this proposal as compared to the project concept and if yes are these changes explained and justified?
IUCN endorsement / Project proposal accepted by IUCN peer reviewers (representing relevant IUCN units, technical, financial and economic experts, as well as IUCN country/regional offices if relevant)
Project Design / Is the theory of change and related results chain elements (outputs, outcomes, activities) of the project consistent with the problem analysis?
Does the results chain include outputs and outcomes that are precise in terms of quantitative and qualitative elements?
Does the results chain include the overall effects of an upscaling strategy?
Are the indicators in terms of outcomes in line with the IUCN programmatic objectives and the GEF focal area result based indicators?
Project organisation / Is there a clear management structure of the project that includes involvement of IUCN experts, national authorities, technical ministries, partners and if relevant GEF focal point?
Does the organizational management structure of the project reflect the partnership?
Are the selected project partners, their roles and responsibilities, organisational cooperation and available capacities adequate to meet the final project goals?
Are internal communication and decision-making flows clearly defined?
Does the project have an external communication plan, especially targeting relevant decision- and policy makers?
Project risks / Have measures been taken to minimize the identified delivery and financial risks of partner organizations?
Have measures been taken to minimize the identified risks of private sector engagement?
Have measures been taken to take into account identified risks of climate change, political context and other contextual issues?
Project environmental and social impacts / Has there been agreement on the project classification on the basis of ESMS screening?
Has a review taken place of the proposal on meeting ESMS requirements and is the result positive?
Are the mitigation measures resulting from the assessment integrated in the workplan and the monitoring plan of the project?
Project costs and benefits / Has an economic cost benefit analysis been carried out using robust tools?
Are the expected social, environmental and economic costs and benefits described and if possible quantified? Is the balance positive?
Are the assumptions and uncertainties in defining the costs and benefits well set out (with supportive evidence)?
Project Financing / Is there a balanced budget for this project that includes co-funding?
Has co-financing (possible including in kind financing) from all different sources been confirmed?
Project Monitoring and Evaluation / Has an adequate monitoring and evaluation plan been developed? Does it include the monitoring indicators of any ESMP?
Does the M&E plan include short-term results based indicators with which to monitor project progress?
Does the budget include provisions for mid-term and final evaluations?
Project sustainability / Will there be political and social support to the project after completion? Will it be clear who will manage, if necessary, the project results after completion?
Does the proposal indicate how the capacities/benefits developed across the country or region will contribute to sustainability and upscaling of the project outcomes?
Does the project have an adequate exit-strategy?
1
[1] This template uses relevant sections of the GEF Secretariat Project Initiation Forms while also meeting IUCN’s specific requirements.