“Act”

Delivering through projects (Part 1)

Effective Country Programme = Effective Projects

Purpose of the New Project Cycle (PC): Effective Projects Delivery

New Guide to Project Cycle aims to:

• Improve strategic alignment of projects and their contribution to country results

• Improve accountability

• Support decentralization

• Support Results Based Management of projects

• Mainstreaming quality standards through the projects cycle steps including the mainstreaming of the UN common programming principles

Overview of the new PC• Upgrade of PC management based on best

practices

• Applies to all projects, including emergency and UNJP.

• Supersedes previous Field Programme Circulars

and TC procedures concerning the Project Cycle.

• PC composed of guidelines, practical guidance, FPMIS web-based workflows and users manual.

• Support available: TCDM advice, training sessions, FPMIS help desk .

FAO Project Cycle - phases

Identification

Formulation

Appraisal and Approval

Implementation and Monitoring

Evaluation

Closure

Project document

Terminal report Concept Note

Progress reports

Five Steps:

1. Identification of a project to address specific problem/need of

members to support the achievement of agreed

higher level outcomes (CPF)

2. Establishment of a Project Task Force

3. Preparation of the Concept Note (CN)

4. Appraisal and endorsement of the CN

5. Formalization of relations with Resource Partners

Identification Phase: 5 Steps

More holistic and reinforced Project Task Force (PTF) Roles and responsibilities of the PTF members clarified The PTF operational at the identification stage PTF under the authority of a Chair It would evolve at subsequent stages into a fully-fledged

structure with appropriate skill mix

Composition of the PTF

Type of Project Chairperson Members

National FAO Representative Project formulator, LTO, Funding Liaison Officer, other relevant technical officers.

Subregional Subregional Representative/CoordinatorRegional Regional RepresentativeInterregional/Global Head of technical division

Identification: establishment of the Project Task Force (PTF)

Designation of Lead Technical Officer (LTO) and Lead Technical Unit (LTU)

• FAO Circular on Responsibilities and Relationships

• LTO is identified by the PTF chair as far as possible based on geographic proximity (from the nearest decentralized offices). LTU always consulted.

• ROs are accountable for assessing their capacity as LTU.

• Functional relationship is always maintained between LTO and technical divisions.

Identification: establishment of the Project Task Force (PTF)

Identification Step - Concept Note

The Project Concept Note is necessary for all type of projects:

• Ensures strategic fit between a project idea and higher level outcome (CPF/OR)

• Structures preliminary stakeholders and problem analysis in terms of relevance, feasibility and potential sustainability (preliminary analysis of the UN PPs)

• To be downloaded from FPMIS

Identification: the Concept Note

Concept Note Work Flow

__ Applies to regional, sub-regional and national projects Steps__ Applies to global and interregional projects Responsible officer__ Applies both

Endorsement of the CN

MDT officers and other representatives of technical divisions not represented in the MDT for all substantive issues which are relevant for the project ;NR officer validates the categorization

Technical divisions’ officers as well as DOs officers relevant for the project ; NR validates the categorization for categorization

Project formulator

PTF chairperson:

RR/SRC/FAOR or a delegated officer

Head of the technical division/service or delegated officer

Funding Liaison Officer

Project formulator

Peer Review of the CN

The CN is finalized and uploaded into FPMIS

Review of resource mobilization opportunities

Preparation of the CN

Group exercise From CPF outcome:

• identify a project within an existing programmatic framework (CPF, SRF, RF)

• propose a title and an outcome statement for your project

• identify an OR to which this project will contribute to

• If you can:

• Participants & other stakeholders• Sustainability of the proposal• Synergies with other FAO projects/programmes

“Act”

Delivering through projects (Part 2)

• The PD is formulated by the Project formulator with the full support of the PTF members.

• The PD is further supported by FPMIS tools for the preparation of the logical framework matrix, results-based budget which feeds into Oracle, work plan and risk matrix.

• Formulation phase: Key Outputs: Project Document (25 pages + annexes) project agreement and funding agreement.

Phase 2 : Formulation – Project Document

Project Document Template

25 PAGES

The New Appraisal Process• Applies to all projects including emergency and

UNJP

• A two step process which cover all current technical, financial, operational and PPRC clearances

• FPMIS based transparent work flow

• Supports retrieval of lessons learned

1. Interdisciplinary Technical Review: the project document is submitted to MDT and other relevant officers.

2. Quality Assurance Review: the project is submitted to a project appraisal committee for financial, technical and operational clearance and adherence to the programming principles: one submission for all clearances.

3. Two QA reports per year are produced by TCDM in collaboration with ROs on the results of the appraisal providing a picture of the quality of project documents by quality criteria.

4. The lessons learned are available to inform future design of projects.

The New Appraisal Process

• The project appraisal committee is coordinated by a project appraisal officer (PAO) based at regional office level for national, sub regional and regional projects.

• The appraisal is done using a check list.

The New Appraisal Process: the Quality Assurance Review

•Project Appraisal Officer

Relevance

•LTU

•CSF

•LEG

•Operational clearance by BH, SFPO

Feasibility

• Project Appraisal Officer

Sustainability

Work Flow for Project Appraisal

Preparation of the Project Document

Interdisciplinary Technical Review

Project formulator

MDT and other technical divisions not represented in the MDT which are relevant for the project. (regional, sub-regional and national projects)

All Technical divisions and relevant DOs officers. (global and interregional projects) 3. Revision of the

Project Document based on the comments

provided

1. Submission of the Project Document

2. Review of the Project Document by

the ITR

__ Applies to regional, sub-regional and national projects Steps__ Applies to global and interregional projects Responsible officer__ Applies both

Project formulator

Project formulator

5 days

Revision of Project Document

Endorsement of PD

Approval of PD

Quality

Assurance

Review

Submission of the Project Document to the PAO

Review of the QAR criteria on line

Consolidation of the QAR on line and provision of a global rating

Project Formulator

PAC Regional Office

PAC HQ

PAO Regional Office

PAO HQ

Project Formulator

PAO Regional Office

PAO HQ

ADG RR

ADG TC

Rating?

Reformulation of project

OK

NO

NO

2. Some comments need to be addressed

3. The project is not ready for approval

1. The project is ready for approval

5 days

UNJPs

UN Joint Programmes procedures in FAO:the current picture

• Until now, no formal procedures or workflow (only ad hoc e-mails and guidance)

• UNDG standard format for UNJP document exists, but JPs vary considerably in quality and depth

• FAO components in UNJPs not always well defined and info provided not sufficient for smooth operations

• Most of the clearances in FAO are given post-factum, not allowing for proper quality assurance

The new Project Cycle Hanbook incorporates UNJPs

• A common approach to UNJPs across the Organization

• FAO components in UNJPs technically sound as any other FAO project

• Proper quality assurance in place for FAO to delivery on its joint commitments (and to secure funding, when UNJP allocation criteria is based on performance!)

• There is no duplication - not a full SPD needed, but only a short “FAO project description” (see page 21)

1

2 3

4

8

6

5

7

The UNJP cycle in FAO based on the timeline at the country level

Last but not leastProject Support Cost (PSC) for UNJPs

• Although FAO usually charges 13% PSC, in the case of Joint Programmes there is an inter-agency agreement to apply a 7% PSC.

• For UN Organizations where the PSC policies foresaw higher PSC rates reimbursements than 7%, it was accepted that support costs that could be identified at country level would be budgeted and charged as direct costs (6%) against the extrabudgetary funds channeled to the Organization for implementation of the joint programmes.