Request for CEO endorsement/Approval
Project Type:
the GEF Trust Fund
Submission Date: 03/30/2010
Expected Calendar (mm/dd/yy)Milestones / Dates
Work Program (for FSP) / Feb 2009
CEO Endorsement/Approval / March 2010
GEF Agency Approval / April 2010
Implementation Start / July 2010
Mid-term Review (if planned) / November 2012
Implementation Completion / July 2015
part i: project Information
GEFSEC Project ID: 3860
gef agency Project ID: 0
Country(ies):Global
Project Title: Save Our Species
GEF Agency(ies):,
Other Executing partner(s): IUCN
GEF Focal Area(s):
GEF-4 Strategic program(s): BD SP1, SP2, SP3 and SFM
Name of parent program/umbrella project: N/A
- Project framework (Expand table as necessary)
Project Objective: Improve the conservation status of globally threatened species and their critical habitats by mainstreaming biodiversity conservation
Project Components
/Indicate whether Investment, TA, or STA**
/ Expected Outcomes /Expected Outputs
/Indicative GEF Financing*
/ IndicativeCo-financing* / Total ($)
($)
/%
/($)
/%
1. Threatened Species Program1a. Targeted conservation actions for priority threatened species
1b.Catalyzing early action / Investment / Improved conservation of at least 20 threatened species and their critical habitats
Improved protection and/or management of at least 40 threatened species and their critical habitats / At least 20 projects that support conservation of threatened species & their habitats
At least 40 small grants that catalyze early action on the conservation of threatened species and their habitats / 3,460,000
0 / 23
0 / 11,864,000
750,000 / 77
100 / 15,324,000
750,000
2. Action Strategies and Monitoring
2a. Species Action Plans
2b. Monitoring status of threatened species / TA / At least 3 new profiles developed and under implementation
Status of and project impact on SOS target species effectively monitored / Development of new profiles for 3 priority species groups to guide investments
Red List updated annually, including information on targeted species / 200,000
100,000 / 32
7 / 420,000
1,300,000 / 68
93 / 620,000
1,400,000
3. Fundraising and Communications
3a. Fundraising
3b. Communications & marketing & website / TA / At least an additional $10 million secured from private sector for conservation action targeted to threatened species
Increased awareness and fund-raising for threatened species. Project transparency ensured / At least 5 new private sector contributors
Effective communications and marketing programs implemented. Website with information on species & projects / 200,000
450,000 / 32
87 / 515,000
969,000 / 68
13 / 715,000
1,419,000
4a. Project Management / TA / Project managed effectively / Quarterly and annual technical and financial reports / 490,000 / 13 / 3,026,000 / 87 / 3,516,000
Total project costs / 4,900,000 / 21 / 18,844,000 / 79 / 23,744,000
1 List the $ by project components. The percentage is the share of GEF and Co-financing respectively of the total amount for the component.
2 TA = Technical Assistance; STA = Scientific & Technical Analysis.
B. Sources of confirmed Co-financing for the project(expand the table line items as necessary)
Name of Co-financier (source) / Classification / Type / Project / %*Project Government Contribution / 0 / 0
FFEM / Multilateral agency / Grant / 1,500,000 / 8
World Bank / Impl. Agency / (select)GrantSoft-loanHard-loanGuarantee / 5,000,000 / 26.5
IUCN / Exec.. Agency / In-kind / 2,344,000 / 12.5
Private Sector (unconfirmed, to be raised) / Grant / 10,000,000 / 53
Total Co-financing (confirmed) / 18,844,000 / 100%
* Percentage of each co-financier’s contribution at CEO endorsement to total co-financing.
C. Financing Plan Summary For The Project ($)
Project Preparation a / Projectb / Total
c = a + b / Agency Fee / For comparison:
GEF and Co-financing at PIF
GEF financing / 200,000 / 4,900,000 / 5,100,000 / 510,000 / 5,410,000
Co-financing / 190,000 / 8,844,000 / 9,034,000 / 8,700,000
Co-financing to be raised from the private sector / 0 / 10,000,000 / 10,000,000 / TBD
Co-financing to be raised from other donors / 0 / TBD / TBD / TBD
Total / 390,000 / TBD / TBD / 510,000 / TBD
D. GEF Resources Requested by Agency(ies), Focal Area(s) and Country(ies)1
GEF Agency / Focal Area / Country Name/Global / (in $)
Project (a) / Agency Fee ( b)2 / Total c=a+b
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic PollutantsNDI/CSPSGP/CB/LDC-SIDS Support / Global / 4,900,000 / 510,000 / 5,410,000
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
(select)World BankUNDPUNEPAsDBAfDBEBRDIADBFAOUNIDOIFAD / (select)BiodiversityClimate ChangeInternational WatersLand DegradationOzone Depletion SubstancesPersistent Organic Pollutants
Total GEF Resources / 4,900,000 / 510,000 / 5,410,000
1No need to provide information for this table if it is a single focal area, single country and single GEF Agency project.
2 Relates to the project and any previous project preparation funding that have been provided and for which no Agency fee has been requested from Trustee.
E. Consultants working for technical assistance components:
Component*
/Estimated person weeks
/GEF amount ($)
/Co-financing ($)
/Project total ($)
Action Strategies and Monitoring
/ 25 / 200,000 / 333,000 / 533,000Communications and Fundraising
/ 120 / 275,000 / 1,715,000 / 1,990,000Total
/ 145 / 475,000 / 2,048,000 / 2,523,000* Details to be provided in Annex C.
f. Project management Budget/cost
Cost Items
/Estimated person months
/GEF amount
($) /Co-financing ($)
/Project total ($)
SOS Secretariat staff*
/300
/ 490,000 / 2,550,000 / 3,000,000Project Monitoring & Evaluation
/ 370,000 / 370,000External Audit
/ 10,000 / 100,000 / 100,000IUCN overhead
/ 600,000 / 600,000Total / 490,000 / 3,620,000 / 4,070,000
*Details to be provided in Annex C.
G. Does the project include a “non-grant” instrument? yes no
(If non-grant instruments are used, provide in Annex E an indicative calendar of expected
reflows to your agency the GEF Trust Fund).
H. describe the budgeted m&e plan
The project will support the establishment of appropriate systems for monitoring and evaluation. Project outcomes and monitoring indicators are defined in Annex A. Project outcome indicators cover a range of biological, social, and institutional parameters. Monitoring and evaluation will occur at three levels: SOS program level; target threatened species and critical habitat level; and project level (that is, achieving objectives and outcomes at the sub-grant level).
Adequate funding has been provided in the project costs to strengthen existing and relevant baselines (biological, socio-economic and capacities) and measure the impact of project interventions on these baselines. Monitoring of project progress and impact will be undertaken with participation of local communities and other conservation partners, including government resource specialists. Funding for undertaking monitoring has been incorporated in Component 4 Program Management and includes the hiring of project monitoring species conservation specialists and their partners. The SOS Secretariat will also be responsible for program-level monitoring and will have the staff and resources necessary to carry out this task. Independent third-party evaluation of the project will be undertaken prior to the completion of the project to provide feedback and guidance for project continuation. The independent evaluation will be undertaken by a competent party identified by the SOS Donor Council. The project will strengthen impact monitoring, including biodiversity monitoring, throughout the countries and regions targeted by SOS grants, with a particular focus on threatened species, protected area management effectiveness, and participatory monitoring of biological and social impacts of conservation interventions.
part ii: project justification: In addition to the following questions, please ensure that the project design incorporates key GEF operational principles, including sustainability of global environmental benefits, institutional continuity and replicability, keeping in mind that these principles will be monitored rigorously in the annual Project Implementation Review and other Review stages.
A. State the issue, how the project seeks to address it, and the expected global environmental benefits to be delivered:
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment showed that over the past 50 years, human activities have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than at any comparable period of time in human history. These changes have contributed too many net gains in human well-being and economic development but have been achieved at growing environmental costs, biodiversity loss and the exacerbation of poverty for some groups of people. The degradation of ecosystem services and loss of biodiversity could grow significantly worse during the first half of this century and is a barrier to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Unless addressed, these problems will substantially diminish future options and the ecosystem goods and services available to future generations.
Species are critical units of biodiversity-ecosystem productivity, resiliency, and processes are all dependent upon the diversity and nature of the species present. Arguably, the loss of the Earth’s slowly accreted biodiversity is the single greatest threat to mankind’s future on this planet. All the plants and animals that make up Earth’s biodiversity have a specific role and contribute to essentials like food, medicine, oxygen, pure water, crop pollination, carbon storage and soil fertilization. Mankind needs them all, in large numbers, and, quite literally, cannot afford to lose them. Economies are utterly dependent on species diversity. To lose even a single species represents a loss of millions of years of selection and adaptation, with the potential of any given species providing an inestimable benefit to human society through its genetic diversity, proteins, structural adaptations, and ecological role.
Species loss is at one of the highest levels in the planet’s entire history and is accelerating dramatically over the past few decades. The recent update of the Red List (November 3rd, 2009) revealed that 47,677 species have been assessed against the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Criteria[1] and of these, 875 species are Extinct or Extinct the Wild and this figure rises to 1,159 if the 290 Critically Endangered species tagged as Possibly Extinct are included. Overall, a minimum of 17,291 species are threatened with extinction. Considering that only 2.7 percent of the 1.8 million described species have been analyzed, this number is a gross underestimate, but it does provide a useful snapshot of what is happening to all forms of life on Earth.
The complete analysis of the Red List data revealed10 that one third of amphibians, more than one in eight birds, and nearly a quarter of mammals are threatened with extinction. For some plant groups, such as conifers and cycads, the situation is even more serious, with 28 percent and 52 percent threatened respectively. For all these groups, habitat destruction, through agriculture, logging and development, is the main threat and occurs worldwide. A broad range of marine species are also experiencing potentially irreversible loss due to overfishing, climate change, invasive species, coastal development, and pollution. At least 17 percent of the 1,045 shark and ray species, 12.4 percent of groupers and six of the seven marine turtle species are threatened with extinction, and 27 percent of the 845 species of reef building corals are threatened.
As shown with an increasing number of conservation successes, species can recover with concerted conservation efforts, but to mitigate the extinction crisis much more needs to be done, and quickly. Already the GEF and the Bank are contributing to threatened species conservation through support for key protected areas and specific initiatives such as the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) and the Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE). SOS grants fill a critical gap for medium-sized grants ($25,000 - $200,000) that can be applied to threatened species projects that: (1) can occur worldwide; (2) benefit a wide range of threatened species that currently receive little or no conservation attention; (3) are targeted to clear priorities derived from recent and comprehensive analyses of threatened species; and (4) will receive technical support from the IUCN and Species Survival Commission, the worlds’ largest network of species conservation specialists.
Additional funding to underpin conservation efforts remains a critical need for many species. A key rationale for Save Our Species (SOS) is to address that funding gap, and complement current conservation efforts, by leveraging innovative and additional funding through the private sector. The core program will be resourced with (a) initial funding from the GEF grant and the World Bank and supplemented by (b) a complementary, innovative fundraising initiative that will seek contributions from private corporations. The project will provide the private sector and other donors with a mechanism to contribute to and support efficient, credible, and coordinated conservation action.
Save Our Species is intended to be a long-term global program to improve the conservation status of globally threatened species. This GEF project would support a specific five year time slice of that program, through a grant to IUCN from the GEF Trust Fund of $4.9 million complemented by additional co-funding of $5m over three years from the Bank’s Development Grant Facility. Co-funding of $3.9 million will be provided to the GEF project by both IUCN and the FFEM (Fonds Français pour l'Environnement Mondial).
Save Our Species is uniquely positioned to engage international corporations, foundations, individual donors, and governments at the highest level. In addition to GEF and World Bank funding, the partnership is expected to benefit from additional contributions for species conservation from the private sector. Save Our Species has both the credibility and scope to offer meaningful and high profile return on investment from the private sector and others. It is the reputation and credibility of the association with WB and GEF that enables Save Our Species to request support at relatively high levels. Save Our Species offers private sector partners a highly attractive opportunity to help prevent biodiversity loss on a truly global scale.
Save Our Species (SOS) will provide grants for conservation of threatened species globally. SOS activities and investments to support on-the-ground action will be guided by species conservation priorities identified through the IUCN Red List and SSC Species Profiles and Action Plans, which are science-based, global in scope, and current. By strategically focusing on species conservation priorities identified by the SSC and by providing rapid action funding that can be mobilized quickly during crises, SOS would provide critically-needed resources where and when they matter most.
SOS will operate using the principles of openness, transparency, and partnerships as part of its commitment to strengthen and empower civil society and avoid potential conflict of interest. Project design has benefited from extensive stakeholder consultations with international, national and local conservation organizations. The SOS project will include four integrated components. All groups seeking funding from SOS and implementing projects with SOS support will be required to fulfill the defined protocols and methodologies established for the program, as outlined in the Operational Manual. The SOS project will be executed through IUCN, with a secretariat in the IUCN Species Program. The SSC will provide technical guidance and review.
Component 1: Threatened Species Grants Program
This component will support a competitive grants program for threatened species conservation with two subcomponents. Grants will be selected according to criteria outlined in the Operational Manual. Grants will be awarded according to 3 strategic directions: (1) threatened species; (2) vulnerable ecosystems; and (3) corporate priorities (species or species conservation actions of particular interest to corporate and private sector donors). Every year, candidate taxa or ecosystems will be proposed by the IUCN Secretariat, following consultations of the SSC to the Donor Council for review and approval. The Donor Council will endorse the annual work plan provided by the SOS Secretariat that includes the budget envelope for each strategic direction. Support for corporate priorities will run for the life of the project.
For the first year’s pilot grants, WB, GEF and IUCN agreed that the following strategic directions will be supported: (1) threatened species: a) Asian mammals, b) threatened amphibians, and c) threatened birds; (2) vulnerable ecosystems: a) oceanic islands, b) tropical mountains; and (3) corporate priorities (species or taxonomic groups or species conservation actions of particular interest to corporate and private sector donors). Detailed procedures for the eligibility and selection criteria as well as the selection process are spelled out in the Operational Manual. To avoid conflict of interest, IUCN will not be eligible to apply for SOS grants, although IUCN member organizations may be eligible to do so.
Sub-component 1a: Threatened species grants program
This sub-component will provide grants for threatened species from $25,000 to $800,000 over 2 years to civil society individuals or organizations working on species needs identified under the strategic directions. At least 60 threatened species grants are expected to be made over the 5-year SOS program with the majority being made as medium-sized grants from $25,000 to $150,000. Proposals for medium-sized ($25,000 to $150,000) and larger grants ($150,000 to $800,000) will be generated by a Call for Proposals. However, some larger grants will be sole source selections by the Secretariat for a few special cases (subject to a no objection by the Bank) where existing conservation programs have a close link to an SOS strategic direction. (All grants above $200,000 require prior Bank review). Such programs are typically implemented by NGOs and would be global, target threatened species, be locally-based (i.e., working with local partners), have a proven track record of project management and conservation effectiveness based on comprehensive priority-setting analyses and promote cooperation and complementarity with SOS priorities. Such larger grants will be awarded only where the potential for synergies and successful conservation is deemed high and the organizations have experience of exceptional worth. No grants will be awarded beyond Year 4 unless further funding is available.
Grantees will be encouraged to undertake stakeholder consultations with other conservation agencies and government departments to ensure that projects are complementary and avoid duplication of ongoing conservation efforts. The grants will be targeted to improving conservation status of targeted species and their critical habitats, including, but not restricted to, species identified by private donors. Priority will be given to actions that are clearly identified in existing action plans and conservation strategies, including national biodiversity strategies.