Supporting Country Action on the CBD Programme of Work on ...

By Connie Harper,2014-01-21 21:09
11 views 0
Supporting Country Action on the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas APPLICATION FOR FUNDING 1. Country Nepal 2. Agency and/or ministry responsible for protected areas Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation 3. CBD ratification date November 23, 1993 4. GEF OFP endorsement February 4, 2008 5. CBD POWPA Activities (out of those eli..

    Supporting Country Action on the CBD

    Programme of Work on Protected Areas


    Nepal 1. Country

    Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation 2. Agency and/or ministry responsible for protected areas

    November 23, 1993 3. CBD ratification date

    February 4, 2008 4. GEF OFP endorsement

    Activities 3.2.1 capacity building assessment 5. CBD POWPA Activities (out of those eligible)

    and vocational training system to be supported

    Yes 6. LDC country (Yes/No)

    No 7. SIDS country (Yes/No)

    September 10, 2008 8. Application submission date

    24 months 9. Duration: (24 months maximum)

    Name: Shyam Bajimaya 10. Contacts

    Title: Joint Secretary

    Agency: Ministry of Forest and Soil

    Conservation/ Department of National Parks

    and Wildlife Conservation

    Phone: 977 1 4227926

    Fax: 977 1 4227675


    11. Financing plan (in US$*)

Funding requested from GEF: 150,000 1Co-financing total, including: 89,000, including:


    (in-kind) 76,000

    (Cash) 13,000



     International multilateral organizations

     Private Sector




I.1.A Rationale and objective of the country project

There is now a global concern of people’s participation and benefit sharing in the field of

    management of protected areas (PA). This is true for Nepal too and as a result there has been a shift in conservation paradigm from isolated and species focused approach to the participatory, ecosystem and integrated landscape level approach. However, this has added additional working responsibilities for PA staffs to deal with social aspects along with technical aspects of management. For instance, the buffer zone which has been added as a zone of multiple land and resource use has increased the workload to the PA staffs. On the other hand, the ever increasing demand for natural resources has threatened PA system. Illegal activities, such as poaching, illegal grazing, NTFP collection, encroachment, poisoning etc. are likely to threat the long term existence of the ecosystem and their components in and around the PAs. This could also be due to low level of conservation awareness among the communities or local people. So, though several efforts have been initiated for avoiding such unintended misconducts, the capacity of protected area managers to address with these issues

    So, these should be timely addressed and appropriate actions need still requires further enhancement.

    to urgently planned and implemented in order to avoid further degradation of forests resource base, wetlands, and other important ecosystems. Moreover, there should be regular assessment on effectiveness of management in order to understand dynamics of important ecosystems and findout practical solutions to address the management issues. To address these issues capacity enhancement of the PA staff and community leaders and raising awareness among local communitis is imperative. This finally leads to effective management modifications to achieve the management goals.

    Moreover, Nepal has obligations to implement Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Programme of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA). Although the government has already started working on this, there have been significant hinderances due to inadeqate technical knowhow and financial resources. The initial PoWPA analysis carried out with support from the Country Action Grant Programme identified several priority areas in ecology, PA representation, legal framework, infrastructure, financial sustainability, institutional set up, PA capacity (HR), research, monitoring & evaluation and tourism. However, two major priorities namely Capacity Enhancement and PA Governance Monitoring and Evaluation were identified as the major areas that need immediate interventation.

    This project is the result of PoWPA assessment, which helped crystallized those PoWPA activities least covered so far. Nepal has a robust system of PAs covering over 20% of the country, key habitats and species, and it has fewer problems on the side of PA representativity and legislation, and more on qualifications of site managers and personnel. As any country, Nepal strives to constantly improve its PA legislature and on-the-ground management, but in the course of the PoWPA analysis one aspect came out as most urgent in the current political and post-conflict context namely, identification of

    the needs for training in PAs, and actual setting up of the system to train protected areas in ecology and site management. Hence, the project team believes that the added value of the project is exactly that: covering the least covered yet most needed aspect of national protected area development, in its current-post conflict situation. Hence one prong of the project is on 3.2.1, which will help conduct a

    detailed capacity assessment and then set up a vocation training system. At the same time, we also believe that training should be coupled with parallel assessment of management effectiveness of PAs hence the second prong 4.2.1. Indeed, however, given the time and resource constraints, as well as given the fact that WWF has been doing work on METT, we have further reduced the scope of the project to just 3.2.1 the assessment of needs for training, and actual setting up of the system for training. We will continue to tackle the management effectiveness evaluation from other sources.

The main objective of this project is to establish a sustainable vocational capacity building

    programme on the basis of assessments (PoWPA Activity 3.2.1).


    The project activities have been designed with extracting useful lessons from parallel PoWPA projects already funded in a number of countries.

I.1.B Expected outcomes, indicators, risks and mitigation measures

    Risk associated with attaining Expected Indicators the indicator (high, medium, Risk mitigation measures outcomes or low)

    Number (180) of Staff motivation to participate in Outcome 1 ; Appropriate (applicable, cost

    Management staff trained as per the programme effective, professional etc) training

    capacity of PA the Training Need [Low] package will be developed

    staffs and Buffer Assessment ; Experts on specific field will Zone Committee conduct the training

    members enhanced ; Trainees will be selected as per (Activity 3.2.1) Number (24) of Difficulties to understand by the the working responsibilities trainings local people ; Strong and locally acceptable conducted [Low] communication and translation mechanism will be developed In adequate financial resource to ; Sustainability: costs for trainings continue the program at after the project will be shared community level between central authorities and 2 buffer zones. Arrangements will be [Middle to High] made for the training program to be

    taken over by Buffer Zone

    Programs of the respective PAs; the

    project team will sit with Buffer

    Zone programme officers to

    integrate PA training into their 5-

    year work-plans after the project is

    terminated, including seeking

    necessary financial resources

    necessary for trainings. In this

    process, other funding resources

    will also be explored from the

    conservation partners, such as



    This project has been designed based on the findings of a study and three consultation workshops (7, 11, 24 February 2008) carried out for Initial PoWPA Analysis of potential PoWPA Activities. This was made on participatory basis with community leaders, PA managers, private sectors, conservation partners and policy makers. A total of 57 issues were identified in nine assessed elements during the

     2 This is a firm idea and commitment of project partners, but the details of that mechanism will be elaborated as the project runs. We remain strongly committed to the idea of having the Buffer Zone Programmes inheriting the hosting function of the training system, initiated by the project, and we would like to provide the following additional information: Each protected area and each buffer zone in Nepal has a 5-year plan and funding for it. Protected areas generate revenue, which is split so that part of it is retained for the PA itself, and part goes for funding of activities in buffer zones (this is what actually constitutes Buffer Zone Programmes). It is envisaged that after project ends costs for continuation of training will be shared between central authorities (Ministry of Forestry and Soil Conservation) and sites. The Ministry will fund costs related to the organization of the courses (room, materials, etc), while each PA and buffer zone will allocate resources from their 5-year management plans to send site managers/personnel to the courses. As said, this is a preliminary, yet firm commitment. Besides, the DNPWC will also work jointly with partner organizations (WWF, IUCN, ICIMOD, NTNC etc) to secure additional financial resources (if needed) to continue programs of this kind once it is successfully piloted. The National Trust for Nature Conservation has already made its commitment for financial and technical supports to continue the training program during and after the termination of the this project.More detail of the mechanism of sustainability will be developed in the course of the project


    consultation workshops. They were later prioritized by stakeholders. Among them, two highly prioritized elements by the stakeholders are selected for PoWPA funding. They are as follows:

    ; Establishment of capacity building programme on the basis of assessments [involving

    PoWPA Activity 3.2.1]

    ; Development of system of monitoring and evaluation of management effectiveness of PAs

    [involving PoWPA activity 4.2.1].

    Given the time and resource constraints, as well as given the fact that WWF has been doing work on METT, we have further reduced the scope of the project to just 3.2.1 the assessment of needs for

    training, and actual setting up of the system for training. We will continue to tackle the management effectiveness evaluation from other sources


    There has been no dedicated planning for the implementation of PoWPA before this grant. The Initial PoWPA Analysis represents a preliminary attempt to plan and prioritise activities for implementation of PoWPA. This project is the result of PoWPA assessment, which helped crystallized those PoWPA activities least covered so far. Nepal has a robust system of PAs covering over 20% of the country, key habitats and species, and it has fewer problems on the side of PA representativity and legislation, and more on qualifications of site managers and personnel. The analysis thus focused on 2 major

    activities eligible for funding under this Global UNDP/GEF/UNOPS Project to support country action. The activities proposed in this application are taken out of a broader PoWPA programme developed as the result of the Initial PoWPA Analysis (the action plan can be submitted on request). Selected outcomes will help to fulfil the 2 most appropriate PoWPA gaps and provide direction for the future implementation of PoWPA.

    Partner organizations including NTNC, WWF and CBOs are working in the different aspects of PoWPA. These organizations are mainly focussing on the areas like ICDP, landscape level management, corridor management, legal & policy aspects, infrastructure development, institutional set up and tourism. PA capacity enhancement and management effectiveness monitoring have so far received low priority by the government as well as donor agencies. There are always inadequate government funds for such activities. On the other hand, the donor agencies have their own priorities and limitations to conduct these activities. Therefore, the PoWPA request is considered to be very timely and non-overlapping with any of the on-going or expected donor programmes.


I.4.A Overview of the national protected area system

    Nepal, despite covering a small fraction of (0.1 percent) total land surface ( of the earth is protecting very rich biological wealth. The country accomodates 118 ecosystems, 75 vegetation types and 35 forest types. In order to conserve the biodiversity, Nepal has established a network of protected areas covering about 20% of its total land mass including buffer zones that provide access to resources for local use (Table-1). There has been a remarkable shift in management of PAs in Nepal from strict protective philosophy to participatory conservation approach, which has not been paralleled by a corresponding system to build capacity of PA staff and assess the quality of their work. The protected areas of Nepal cover High Himalayas, Middle Hills and lowland representing 80 out of 118 ecosystems found in the country. Terai Arc Landscape, Annapurna Conservation Area and Sacred Himalayan Landscape Program are the landscape level approaches being implemented in the country to ensure long term survival of rich biodiversity.

    The legal basis for the conservation of biodiversity of the country are provided by the Nepal Biodiversity Strategy (2002) and Nepal Biodiversity Strategy Implementation Plan (2006), National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973, National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Regulation 1979 and Buffer Zone Management Regulation 1996 and Guideline, Environment Protection Act


    1996, Forest Act 1993, Water Resources Act 1992 at the national level. There are specific regulations of some PAs as well.

The PA system has been managed under the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 th(2029 B.S). The Act has been amended four times in 1975, 1983, 1990 and 1993. The 4 amendment

    made in 1993 (2049 B.S.) has made a provision of declaring buffer zones, the BZ Management Regulation 1996 (2052 B.S.) and BZ Management Guideline 1999 (2056 B.S.). These developments have provisioned 30-50 % of the park revenue to be ploughed back to the BZ for conservation and development.

    Nepal is signatory to many international conventions and treaties. These include; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Ramsar Convention, World Heritage Convention, CITES and Kyoto Protocol etc. Two of the PAs have been listed in World Heritage Sites and six PAs include several sites that have been inscribed in Ramsar sites.

Table 1: List of nationally designed protected areas in Nepal

SN PA Category Area ( IUCN Management

    category authority

    1 Chitwan National Park 1,628 (932 core and 750 buffer) II Department of

    National Parks and

    Wildlife Conservation

    of the Government of


    2 Bardia National Park 1,296 (968 core 328 buffer) II ,,

    3 Lantang National Park 2,130 (1710 core and 420 buffer) II ,,

    4 Khaptad National Park 331 (225 core and 106 buffer) II ,,

    5 Rara National Park 2,095 (106 core and 1989 buffer) II ,,

    6 Shey Phoksumdo National 4,004 (3555 core and 409 buffer) II ,,


    7 Sagarmatha National Park 1,423 (1148 core and 275 buffer) II ,,

    8 Makalu Barun National 2,330 (1500 core and 830 buffer) II ,,


    9 Shivpuri National Park 144 core II ,,

    10 Suklaphata Wildlife Reserve 548.5 (305 core and 243.5 buffer) IV ,,

    11 Parsa Wildlife Reserve 797.17 (499 core and 298 buffer) IV ,,

    12 Koshi Tappu Wildlife 348 (175 core and 173 buffer) IV ,,


    13 Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve 1,325 VI ,,

    14 Manaslu Conservation Area 1,663 VI National Trust for

    Nature Conservation

    (a national NGO)

    15 Annapurna Conservation 7,629 VI ,,


    16 Kanchanjunga Conservation 2,035 VI Buffer Zone

    Area Management

    Committees of


    Conservation Area

     Total 28,998.67 (19.7% of

    the country


I.4.B Threats to protected areas

    There is a number of threats to PAs in Nepal. Many study findings documented these threats directly or indirectly anthropogenic in origin. The 2 key threats in PAs are summarised briefly below.

1. Illegal collection of NTFP and poaching


    The increasing human populations have caused over exploitation of biological resources.

    Although there is legal provision for resource sharing, people are found to indulge in illegal

    extraction of park resources such as NTFP, fuel wood, fish, etc. from the park. Poaching is

    another serious threat in all PAs. The reasons for such activities are the low level of awareness on

    conservation and inadequate human and financial resources to control such illegal activities.

2. Invasion of alien species and loss of habitat due to soil erosion

    Degradation of wildlife habitats are becoming serious problem due to invasion of alien species,

    particularly Mikania macarantha in Chitwan and Lantana camera in Bardia Similarly, most of the

    wetland ecosystems suffer from a number of alien species, such as water hyacinth, lotus etc. Soil

    erosion in and around PAs are also prevalent. There is insufficient information on cause and

    impact of alien species and soil erosion.

    I.4.C Barriers and limitations preventing the existing PA system from achieving the targets of

    the CBD PoWPA

    The issues identified by stakeholders as part of the PoWPA analysis and priority setting reflect several barriers in achieving the targets of the PoWPA. These include:

1. Inadequate capacity among PA staff and BZ representatives

    PA staff members do not have adequate capacity to understand the dynamics of the PA systems and are poorely equiped with management skills. Although they are provided with some training, the PA vocational training has not been systemic and does not adequately meet in the changing context. So, it is important to enhance the capacity of the staff members, mainly working at the field level as the management challenges are changing day by day.

2. Biodiversity information database

    Documentation of informations required for planning and management is weak. The gap analysis indicated need of gathering and collating basic scientific and socioeconomic data, which are prerequisite for scientific management of PAs. PA officers are not well trained in collecting and analysing sceitific data. At the same time, the central level biodiversity database lacks a module on the quality of work of protected area officers, and this further deprives authorities from proper PA decision making.

3. Low level of conservation awareness

    The level of conservation awareness among local communities is still low. Any intervention in the area would positively or negatively effect biodiversity and livelihood of local people. This understanding along with willingness for conservation and sustainable development is essential.

4. Legal instruments and institutional capacity

    Though there are several legal documents and an institution for conservation and management of these areas, the practicality of legal provisions and capacity of institution have been barriers to achieve conservation goal.

    I.4.D The objective of the project, outcomes and activities, and PoWPA indicators related to outcomes

    PoWPA Activities to be Project outcomes Activities per each outcome

    addressed that correspond to

    PoWPA activities

    1.1 Put in place a team of consultants, Activity 3.2.1 Outcome 1

    Complete national protected areas Capacity building consisting of 2 key consultants hired by the

    capacity need assessment and programme assessed project and officers of international NGOs

    establish capacity building and established present in Nepal. The team will start with

    programs on the basis of these assessment what needs exist among PA

    assessments including the creation officers and other PA stakeholders which

    of curricula, resources and need particular focus in training. Particular

    programs for the sustained attention will be given to the capacities of


    PoWPA Activities to be Project outcomes Activities per each outcome

    addressed that correspond to

    PoWPA activities

    delivery of protected area PA staff for (i) collecting necessary management training. ecological and social data for the central

    MIS system, (ii) business planning

    capacities in order to ensure better financing

    of their PAs, (iii) social interaction with

    local people in order to improve conflict

    resolution skills, etc. (iv) knowledge of

    Nepal laws and enforcement methods in


    1.2 On that basis, and for those topics, the team

    will prepare the training curriculum, with

    manual for trainers and any additional

    materials/software that might be required

    for trainings.

    1.3 The team will develop a time-table for

    conducting the trainings. For each training

    session the team will identify and agree

    about (i) place of training, (ii) target

    audience of training, (iii) procedure to

    identify/select trainers, (iv) use of materials

    developed in the previous point.

    1.4 Terms of reference will be drafted for

    trainers; they will be identified, invited and

    agreed for the training sessions. The trainers

    can be national or international.

    1.5 Trainees will be invited and accommodated.

    All trainings will take place during the 2-

    year of project implementation.

    1.6 Post project surveys of the effectiveness of

    the trainings will be conducted right after

    the training and 6 months after

    1.7 The project management team will conduct

    a series of targeted discussions/workshops

    with Buffer Zone Programmes,

    Governments (including central

    government) to agree on a concrete 5-year

    plan for continuation of similar trainings.

    This plan will concretely stipulate financing

    of such trainings beyond the project. This 5-

    year plan (2011 2016) for Vocational

    Training Plan of Protected Areas will be

    adopted by WildLife Department, Minsitry

    of Forestry and between Ministry of Soils

    and Buffer Zone programmes

I.4.E. Related projects and initiatives

The Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), the main governmental

    organization responsible for the management of protected areas has been putting greater efforts in

    collaboration with various governmental and non governmental organizations.

    Project name Funding source Implementing Which PoWPA activities are supported and

    and amount agency how

    Western Terai UNDP, SNV, DNPWC Sustainable forest management, Species & Landscape Project WWF habitat management conservation, Awareness

     & education, Tran border cooperation

    - for 8 years (2003-(1.4.3.,3.1.6, 3.5.1,1.3.3, 1.3.4)


    Terai Arc WWF DNPWC/ WWF Policy & advocacy, Institution &


Project name Funding source Implementing Which PoWPA activities are supported and

    and amount agency how

    Landscape Project - for 10 years Nepal coordination, Sustainable forest management,

    (2004-2014) Species & Ecosystem conservation, Churia

    watershed conservation, Awareness &

    education (1.1.4,1.4.3 3.5.1),

    Sacred Himalayan DNPWC/ WWF Social mobilization, Community forest

    Project Nepal management, Species & Ecosystem

    conservation, Conservation Awareness &

    education (1.1.4,2.1.2., 3.5.1, 3.5.6)

    Conservation and UNDP/GEF/IUCN/MoFSC Sustainable use of wetland, Conservation

    Sustainable Use of GoN awareness (1.4.3,3.5.6,)

    Wetlands in Nepal (US$ 4.2 Million)

     for 5 years


    National Trust for Darwin Initiatives, NTNC and its Research and monitoring, Training,

    Nature American field Community development, ICDP, Species

    Conservation Himalayan offices/about US conservation (both exsitu & insitu),

    (Various projects Foundation $ 3.3 million per Conservation Education and awareness,

    in 5 different year Community forest management (4.3.1, 4.3.2, locations) 4.3.3, 3.5.6,)


The different stakeholders to be directly involved in implementing the project are listed in the Table

    below. Major stakeholders are government agencies, non-governmental organizations and local people.

    Stakeholder Mechanism for involvement in the project

    Ministry of Forests and Soil MoFSC will oversee the project by nominating one of its senior officers as Conservation (MoFSC) a member in Project Management Committee (PMC) and have interest

    under Activities 3.2.1, and 4.2.1.

    Ministry of Finance (MoF) MoF will oversee the project by means of one of its senior officer as a

    member in PMC. The potential role will be facilitation.

    Department of National Parks DNPWC is the main leading and central agency with overall responsibility

    and Wildlife Conservation for coordination and implementation of the project.

    (DNPWC) All these implementing agencies will be involved in each level of activities

     as necessary.

    Department of Forests (DoF) DoF is responsible to manage forest outside the protected areas, it will

    play important role especially to implement activity 3.2.1.

    National Trust for Nature NTNC will participate on the PMC and participate actively in stakeholder Conservation (NTNC) forums. The potential roles will be facilitation and PA awareness rising.

    District Development DDC is the local government, and will be involved in the Local Working Committee (DDC) Committee as a member. They have interest to develop and implement the

    management plans of protected areas under Activities 3.2.1

    Buffer Zone Management BZMC is the body of the local community to involve in the management Committee (BZMC) of the Buffer Zone. The chairperson will be involved in the Local Working

    Committee and have interest under Activities 3.2.1, and 4.2.1.

    Local Schools The schools have the interest to aware students about the conservation of

    local areas under Activity 3.2.1.

    Local FM Local FM is quite useful tool for the mass media. They can play the

    important role on the conservation awareness program and have interest

    under Activity 3.2.1.

    Local communities/CBOs Local communities currently benefit from the management of protected

    areas through Buffer Zone Program. They have interest in the

    development/implementation of protected area management plans and

    declaration of Buffer Zone under Activities 3.2.1.

    INGOs Facilitation and coordination



    The project will be executed by the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC) in close association with the concerned government agencies, particularly Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation (MoFSC). A Project Management Committee (PMC) will be formed at the national level comprising the senior officers from MoFSC, Ministry of Finance, Department of Forest, and National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC), and Project Manager (PM). In addition to these five members in PMC, other relevant institutions can be invited but the total membership will not exceed nine. The PMC will be chaired by the Director General of DNPWC and PM will act as the Member Secretary.

    At local level, to facilitate the project, a 5 member Local Working Committee (LWC) comprising representatives from District Development Committee (DDC) of respective districts, District Forest Officer of respective district and Chairperson of Buffer Zone Management Committee. The working committee will be chaired by the Chief Warden of respective PAs. Regular consultation and coordination will be maintained with respective stakeholders.

    The project activities and progress will be evaluated each year by the Government of Nepal. Similarly, an independent auditor from Auditor General Office will undertake financial audits on a yearly basis. All other administrative and financial reporting required for UNDP/GEF will also be met.

    The Table below outlines the schedule of reporting on project implementation to UNDP/GEF, in line with its monitoring process. Reporting template for the Completion Report will be followed as outlined in Annex 5 of the Information Kit for Countries (please refer

    It is envisaged that after project ends costs for continuation of training will be shared between central authorities (Ministry of Forestry and Soil Conservation) and sites. The Ministry will fund costs related to the organization of the courses (room, materials, etc), while each PA and buffer zone will allocate resources from their 5-year management plans to send site managers/personnel to the courses.

Type of M&E activity Responsible party/ies Time frame st Project Management Unit, endorsed 1 November 2008 (within one month 1. Inception report by Project Management Committee of receipt of first instalment of funds)

    2. Quarterly technical and Project Management Unit, in October 2008,

    financial reports collaboration with Department of January, April, July, November 2009

    National Parks and Wildlife April 2010


    3. Project completion Project Management Unit, with June 2010 (last month of project)

    report support from national consultant


    For the Nepal Country Project, GEF funding of US$ 150,000 will be requested. The focal agencies and other stakeholders will be contributing to the project by in-kind assistance, such as providing staffs for the project, providing office space, and participation in the travels & field activities. The table below outlines estimated project costs:

I.7.A Estimated project costs

    Outcome GEF Co-financing Total (US$)

    (US$) (US$)

    Outcome 1. Capacity building programme 137,000 41,500 178,500 assessed and established

    Project management budget/costs*, 13,000 (including audit cost specified 47,500 60,500 (1,000) separately in the brackets)

    TOTAL Project Cost 150,000 89,000 239,000

    * A maximum of 10% of the funding request may be spent on project management, not taking into account

    audit costs.


Outcome 1: Capacity building programme assessed and established

    Budget category GEF(US$) Co-financing Total (US$)


    Local consultants (including fees for 24,000 24,000 lecturers who will conduct trainings)

    Production of training materials 15,000 15,000 International consultants to help develop 10,000 10,000 the training materials

    Training (payment of stay and travel of 36,000 16,500* 52,500 participants)

    Travel of international consultants 10,000 10,000 Workshops, seminars, consultations (other 10,000 10,000 than trainings)

    Publications (other than production of 20,000 20,000 training materials)

    Equipment for training 10,000 25,000* 35,000 Miscellaneous (room rent, etc.) 2,000 2,000 TOTAL for Outcome 1 137,000 41,500 178,500

    PROJECT MANAGEMENT: (maximum 10% of the total amount requested from the GEF):

    Budget category GEF(US$) Co-financing Total (US$)


    1. Project Coordinator (24months) - 10,000 13,000 Project assistant (1 @ 24 months) 3,000

    2. Office rent *20,500 32,500 Utilities (electricity, water etc) *12,000

    3. Stationery and disposable items 2,000 *2,000 4,000 4. Travel 8,000 Local consultant 6,000

    International consultant 2,000

    5. Inception and closing workshops (2 2,000 2,000 maximum)

    TOTAL, before audit costs 12,000 59,500 6. Audit cost 1,000 1,000 TOTAL project management, including 13,000 47,500 60,500 audit

    * In kind contribution


Report this document

For any questions or suggestions please email