Basic Data
2019Project Implementation Review (PIR)Forest Nature ReservesTOC \o 1-1 \h \z \uBasic DataPAGEREF _Toc1 \hOverall RatingsPAGEREF _Toc2 \hDevelopment ProgressPAGEREF _Toc3 \hImplementation ProgressPAGEREF _Toc4 \hCritical Risk ManagementPAGEREF _Toc5 \hAdjustmentsPAGEREF _Toc6 \hRatings and Overall AssessmentsPAGEREF _Toc7 \hGenderPAGEREF _Toc8 \hSocial and Environmental StandardsPAGEREF _Toc9 \hCommunicating ImpactPAGEREF _Toc10 \hPartnershipsPAGEREF _Toc11 \hAnnex - Ratings DefinitionsPAGEREF _Toc12 \hBasic DataProject InformationUNDP PIMS ID5106GEF ID5034TitleEnhancing the Forest Nature Reserves Network for Biodiversity Conservation in TanzaniaCountry(ies)Tanzania, TanzaniaUNDP-GEF Technical TeamEcosystems and BiodiversityProject Implementing PartnerGovernmentJoint Agencies(not set or not applicable)Project TypeFull SizeProject DescriptionThe Forest Nature Reserve (FNR) category of protected area (PA) offers the highest level of protection under the Forest Act in Tanzania. FNRs are state-owned and managed by Tanzania Forest Service (TFS). No extraction of woody or animal species is allowed in FNRs and activities are generally restricted to research, education and nature-based tourism. To date, five FNRs - Amani (8,380ha); Uluguru (24,115ha); Kilombero (134,511ha); Nilo (6,225ha); and Rungwe (13,652ha) - have been formally proclaimed. Of these, one – Rungwe - is however not yet fully operational. A further six sites representing centers of high biodiversity and endemism – Chome (14,283ha), Magamba (9,283ha), Mkingu (23,388ha), Uzungwa Scarp (32,763ha), Rondo Plateau (14,000ha) and Minziro (25,000ha) - have been proposed for proclamation as FNRs. Of these, only one – Rondo Plateau – is in the process of proclamation and operationalisation.
The project comprises two components, and will be implemented over a period of five years. 1) The first component of the project will support the continued expansion of the FNR network by facilitating the gazetting of five new FNRs (Chome, Magamba, Mkingu, Minziro and Uzungwa Scarp) and improving the planning, operations and governance of these five new FNRs, as well as one existing FNR (Rungwe). It will also encourage a more consistent and cohesive approach to the planning and management of the six targeted FNRs as an integral part of the broader network of 11 FNRs. Component 1 has four key areas of project support: (i) securing the conservation status and boundaries of the six FNRs; (ii) supplementing the core staffing complement, infrastructure and equipment in the six FNRs; (iii) strengthening the governance of, and benefit sharing in, the six FNRs; and (iv) enhancing the capacity of the TFS to plan and administer the six FNRs as an integral part of the wider FNR network. 2) The second component of the project is focused on enhancing the financial sustainability of the entire network of 11 FNRs to ensure that they incrementally develop the capacity (over the longer-term) to generate adequate financial resources to cover the full costs of their management. Component two has three key areas of project support: (i) facilitating public-private partnerships in the commercial development of tourism and recreational facilities and services in FNRs; (ii) marketing the destinations, attractions, facilities and services of FNRs; and (iii) implementing other income-generating activities in targeted FNRs.Project ContactsUNDP-GEF Regional Technical AdviserMs. Saskia Marijnissen (saskia.marijnissen@)Programme AssociateMs. Munini Teferra (munini.teferra@)Project Manager Ms. Amina Akida (amina.akida@)CO Focal PointGertrude Lyatuu (gertrude.lyatuu@)GEF Operational Focal PointMs. Fainahappy Kimambo (Fainahappykimambo@)Mr. William Mwegoha (william.mwegoha@vpo.go.tz)Project Implementing PartnerMr. Dos Santos Silayo (dsilayo@)Other Partners(not set or not applicable)Overall RatingsOverall DO RatingModerately SatisfactoryOverall IP RatingSatisfactoryOverall Risk RatingLowDevelopment ProgressDescriptionObjectiveTo expand, financially secure and strengthen the management of Tanzania’s Forest Nature Reserve network in response to the threats to biodiversity.Description of IndicatorBaseline LevelMidterm target levelEnd of project target levelLevel at 30 June 2018Cumulative progress since project startNumber and extent (ha) of formally gazetted FNRs.5 - 186,883 ha(not set or not applicable)11 - 305,600 haFormally gazetted
Number:12 Forest Nature Reserves
Extent :313,059.26 ha
17 NFRs covering a total of 901,083 ha.
Financial sustainability scorecard for FNR network.0.21(not set or not applicable)0.35 51%0.51Capacity development indicator score for TFS.Systemic: 59%
Institutional: 50%
Individual: 55%(not set or not applicable)Systemic: 62%
Institutional: 58%
Individual: 62%Systemic 62%
Institutional 58%
Individual 625
Not assessed this year, however, final assessment of this indicator will be assessed before the Terminal EvaluationManagement Effectiveness Tracking Tool scorecard METT (average)
All FNRs
Existing FNRs (6)
Proposed/New FNRs (5)All FNRs: 38%
Existing FNRs:42 %
Proposed FNRs: 33%(not set or not applicable)All FNRs: >51%
Existing FNRs: >52%
Proposed FNRs: >48%For all Forest Nature Reserves = 64%
Not assessed this year, however, final assessment of this indicator will be assessed before the Terminal EvaluationIncome/annum (US$), by source, from:
- TFS budget
- Donor income
- Own incomeTFS budget: US$1,763,000
Donor income: US$150,000
Own income: (not set or not applicable)TFS budget: >US$2,500,000
Donor income: >US$300,000
Own income: >US$100,000TFS Budget >US$ 2,500,000
Donor Income = >US$300,000 (no new donors since last period - despite trying)
Own Income = >US$100,000 TFS Budget = $555,620
Donor Income = $137,568
Own income =- $40,783
Number of endemic and threatened species effectively conserved in formally gazetted FNRs.Site level endemics: 129
Threatened animals: 12(not set or not applicable)Site level endemics: >195
Threatened animals: >34Number of endemic and threatened species effectively conserved in the 12 formally gazetted FNRs.
Site level endemic >195
Threatened animals effectively conserved in formally gazetted FNRs= 34 >266 site level endemics
> 93 threatened animals
> 201 threatened plants
--(not set or not applicable)-(not set or not applicable)(not set or not applicable)The progress of the objective can be described as:AchievedOutcome 1Consolidating and improving the management of the FNR networkDescription of IndicatorBaseline LevelMidterm target levelEnd of project target levelLevel at 30 June 2018Cumulative progress since project startNumber of active Reserve Management Plans in the six targeted FNRs0 (4 outdated)(not set or not applicable)6The 12 FNR have approved and signed management plan for each
14 NFRs have approved and signed management plansExtent (km) of boundaries adequately demarcated and routinely maintained in the six targeted FNRs~210km(not set or not applicable)661kmExtent of boundaries:"
Demarcated = 1,399 km
Maintained = 929.2 km1,540 km of boundaries clearly demarcated and 519 km routinely maintained in all NFRs. Number of the targeted FNRs with all entry points adequately signposted and secured0(not set or not applicable)6Number of the targeted FNRs with all entry points adequately signposted and secured=1212 NFRs have entry points adequately signposted and securedNumber of ranger staff in the six targeted FNRs who are adequately equipped0(not set or not applicable)60Ranger Staff
Across all 12 Nature Reserves there are 80 staff (this is a decline from 2017 as temporary staff were not included this year)107 ranger staff in place in all 12 NFRs. Process to replace 7 conservators who retired during the period is at an advanced stage while recruitment to fill in the post of those transferred to new posts is ongoing. Number of the targeted FNRs with functional basic transport and infrastructure (i.e. minimum of 2 operational vehicles, 4 operational motorbikes, one administrative office and 3 functional ranger outposts).2 (but not fully functional)(not set or not applicable)6Functional basic transport and infrastructure
FNR=12 (Officially gazetted)
Vehicles = 19
Motor bikes = 40
Admin offices = 10
Ranger outposts = 25Vehicles 17
Motorbikes 35
Administration office 9
Ranger posts 24Extent (km) of footpaths and roads in the six targeted FNRs under routine maintenance (clearing, steps, drainage, signage)Roads: ~17km
Footpaths: ~34km(not set or not applicable)Roads: 158km
Footpaths: 230kmExtent of Roads & Footpaths
Roads = 186.6 km
Footpaths = 237 km
Roads: 174 km
Footpaths: 249 km
Number of targeted FNRs with signed MOUs with all affected villages, and an operating joint co-management structure.0(not set or not applicable)6Number of targeted FNRs with signed MOUs with all the affected villages and and an operating joint co-management structure=6
Assessment and feasibility of a range of funding mechanisms/tools for communities surrounding the Nature Forest Reserves (NFRs) was fielded in in each of the NFR. Potentials to improve the livelihoods of the communities through non-extraction use were collaboratively identified. MOUs have been developed and signed to formalize the cooperative relationships with forest adjacent communities to facilitate the implementation of development opportunities taking conservation objectives as a priority e.g. creating employment; revenue sharing; rental income; capacity building; joint ventures in tourism development; equity partnerships in private sector tourism concessions; access/traversing rights; non-extractive resource use; preferential contracting; and participation in management decision-making. In addition, plans are underway to support the establishment and functioning of an ‘umbrella’ co-management structure covering all NFRs.
Total of 169 MoUs were completed during the reporting period including Chome (24) and Mkingu (25), Uzungwa (19), Magamba (20), Rungwe (32), Minziro (8), Kilombero (21); and Amani NFR has signed MoU with 20 village governments. Villages that have not signed the MOUs consultations are ongoing including Magamba, Minziro, Mount Rungwe and Uzungwa, Rondo & Mt. Hanang NFRs.
structureValue (US$) of funding raised in support of the development and implementation of community-based livelihood opportunities for villages with signed MOUs with the six targeted FNRs(not set or not applicable)>US$100,000/annumValue of Funding raised
US$ 100,652.75 (from combination of Eastern Arc Mountains Conservation Endowment Fund, local government and other minor donors)
US$ 5,268
Number of FNR and TFS-support staff completing technical, conservation, enforcement, communications and tourism skills development courses and training programmesN/A(not set or not applicable)40Staff training:
Number of FNR and TFS-support staff completing technical, conservation, enforcement, communications and tourism skills development courses and training programmes=60
108 FNR and TFS-support staff completing technical, conservation, enforcement, communications and tourism skills development courses and training programmes in varios institutions
Number of FNR working forum meetings/annum0(not set or not applicable)4Number of FNR working forum meetings/annum=4
29 working forum/meetings conducted per annum The progress of the objective can be described as:On trackOutcome 2Strengthening the financial sustainability of the FNR networkDescription of IndicatorBaseline LevelMidterm target levelEnd of project target levelLevel at 30 June 2018Cumulative progress since project startNumber of subsidiary FNR Tourism Development Plans0(not set or not applicable)1112 Subsidiary FNR Tourism Development Plans For the 12 FNRs13 Subsidiary NFR Tourism Development Plans in place for the 12 NFRsNumber of nature-based tourism and/or recreational concessions/leases awarded and under development in FNRs0(not set or not applicable)2Number of nature-based tourism and/or recreational concessions/leases under development = 2
1. M/s Grewal at Magamba
2. PPP at Amani Nature Forest Reserve
One (1) nature-based tourism and/or recreational concessions/leases between TFS and M/s Grewal at Magamba is at an advance stage (maybe concluded anytime) while a PPP at Amani Nature Forest Reserve is under discussionIncome/annum (US$) to FNRs from nature-based tourism concessions/leasesUS$0(not set or not applicable)>US$10,000US$ 13,831
Nature base tourism has increased to over 1,200 tourists (average in Magamba) contributing about USD 8,900 (average per annum) to the nature reserve. Number of individuals from FNR-adjacent villages benefiting directly from tourism concessions/leases (construction and/or operational phases)0(not set or not applicable)>100Beneficiaries 206
over 200 individuals from adjacent villages are are directly benefiting Number of visitors/annum to FNRsDay:
Overnight: (not set or not applicable)Day: >5000
Overnight: >500Day > 5,000 (mainly coming to the reserves to walk in forest and surrounding farmlands)
Overnight = 627 (primarily nature interested visitors)
Total 3,488
Jan-June 1,560 day
Jan to June 68 overnight
Number of, and income (US$/annum) from, joint venture bee and butterfly farms in FNRsNumber: 0
Income (US$/annum): 0(not set or not applicable)Number: >4
Income (US$/annum): >US$50,000Number = 5
Total USD$ > 50,000Number = 2
Bees US$ 403
Financial plan for FNR networkYes(not set or not applicable)NoFinancial plan for FNR network (Under development) NoAdditional ring-fenced income (US$/annum) raised from new/additional donor sources for FNR development and managementN/A(not set or not applicable)>US$300,000Additional ring - fenced income US$ > 300,000 (the Leonardo di Caprio Foundation and the AV Jensen Foundation did not provide funding in this year, but we continue to try to persuade them to help)
US$ 72,421
--(not set or not applicable)-(not set or not applicable)(not set or not applicable)The progress of the objective can be described as:On trackImplementation ProgressCumulative GL delivery against total approved amount (in prodoc):86.59%Cumulative GL delivery against expected delivery as of this year:86.59%Cumulative disbursement as of 30 June (note: amount to be updated in late August):3,550,211Key Financing AmountsPPG Amount130,000GEF Grant Amount4,100,000Co-financing19,600,000Key Project DatesPIF Approval DateNov 15, 2012CEO Endorsement DateJul 1, 2014Project Document Signature Date (project start date):Jun 29, 2015Date of Inception WorkshopSep 29, 2015Expected Date of Mid-term ReviewDec 1, 2018Actual Date of Mid-term ReviewApr 27, 2018Expected Date of Terminal EvaluationDec 1, 2020Original Planned Closing DateJun 30, 2020Revised Planned Closing Date(not set or not applicable)Dates of Project Steering Committee/Board Meetings during reporting period (30 June 2018 to 1 July 2019)2018-08-092018-12-102019-06-19Critical Risk ManagementCurrent Types of Critical Risks Critical risk management measures undertaken this reporting periodAdjustmentsComments on delays in key project milestonesProject Manager: please provide comments on delays this reporting period in achieving any of the following key project milestones: inception workshop, mid-term review, terminal evaluation and/or project closure. If there are no delays please indicate not applicable.n.a. Country Office: please provide comments on delays this reporting period in achieving any of the following key project milestones: inception workshop, mid-term review, terminal evaluation and/or project closure. If there are no delays please indicate not applicable.n.a.UNDP-GEF Technical Adviser: please provide comments on delays this reporting period in achieving any of the following key project milestones: inception workshop, mid-term review, terminal evaluation and/or project closure. If there are no delays please indicate not applicable.n.a.Ratings and Overall AssessmentsRole2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingProject Manager/CoordinatorModerately Satisfactory- IP Rating provided by UNDP-GEF Technical Adviser and UNDP Country Office only - Overall AssessmentThis has been a challenging year for the project with the sudden death of the former project manager – Mr. Gerald Kamwenda. However, a new project manager - Amina Akida - has assumed the coordination role covering the PC post and the project is running smoothly again.
Aspects of the project relating to the creation of new Nature Reserves and putting in place some basic management have been progressing well beyond the expectation of the project team thanks to the increased awareness on the need to strengthen conservation efforts at the national level. Currently there are 17 Nature Reserves covering over 900,000 ha in Tanzania. New Reserves declared in 2019 include the Magombera NFR (2,615.32 ha) GN. 48 of 2019; Mwambesi NFR (112,901 ha) GN. 128 of 2019; Pindiro NFR (12,249 ha) GN. 126 of 2019; Itulu hills NFR (388,512.4 ha) GN. 124 of 2019.
Considerable progress has also been made to establish MOUs and agreements with communities surrounding the older and more established Nature Reserves. This greatly facilitates effective management of the sites in partnership with communities.
There has also been an upgrading of the Tanzania Forest Service within the Tanzania government system, with the provision of more equipment including uniforms and other symbols of authority. Training has also been provided to Nature Reserve staff. The TFS is undergoing transformation of the management systems from civilian to a paramilitary operations with emphasis on strengthened forest protection.
In addition the TFS structure has been improved and set in a position for Tourism officers to be employed and deployed to stations to boost the tourism activities in NFRS. It is soon coming
Aspects of the project that relate to enhancing the number of tourists, increasing self-generated revenue, promoting income generation with local communities, and partnerships with foreign and national NGOs to help with management and development of the nature reserves have proven a lot of more challenging. This aspect is being addressed with major efforts including :
(i) the government effort to establish the Safari Channel to advertize tourism activities including the NFRs,
(ii) deliberate welcoming of the Chinese people to Amani, Magamba, and Mt. Hanang as sample areas to be advertised in China with intention of getting tourist from China;
(iii) Undergoing efforts to translate the promotion materials in Chinese language;
(iv) Different promotion materials have been produced to attract the tourists e.g. the eco-passport;
(v) Improvement of infrastructure – toilets, roads, etc.
With all these efforts the revenue trend is increasing; even the targets for the number of tourists has been increased but depends with infrastructure.
There are also a number of partnerships with local and international NGOs (e.g. STEP in Uzungwa; Raleigh in Mkingu, and the EAMCEF – which provide financing to the eight EAM- NFRS). This helps the sustainability of the FNR network.
The following Table summarizes the financial resources as TFS annual budgets.
FUNDS ALLOCATION PER FIANCIAL YEAR (TZS)
STATION 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020
AMANI 143,526,000 158,493,200 239,385,000
CHOME 60,720,600 106,833,400 110,606,500
MAGAMBA 52,908,402 70,645,500 125,106,000
NILO 55,471,000 55,124,100 148,416,058
MT. HANANG 112,722,000 106,762,000 104,405,000
MINZIRO 43,915,200 76,596,100 101,870,000
RONDO 125,584,000 108,325,000 98,396,000
MKINGU 130,522,000 122,751,000 139,997,200
ULUGURU 166,470,000 163,480,000 175,205,900
UZUNGWA SCARP 112,264,900 94,715,700 206,812,000
KILOMBERO 235,585,000 244,846,700 246,049,200
MT. RUNGWE 115,094,000 97,793,000 272,393,000
Role2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingUNDP Country Office Programme OfficerSatisfactorySatisfactoryOverall AssessmentOverall the project has performed well despite challenges experienced and late start of the annual activities during the reporting period following the sudden demise of the National Project Coordinator (Mr Gerald Kamwenda) who was the strong engine of the project. There were some delays in filling his gap, and when decision was made for the new PC to assume the position, the team needed some time to orient the current coordinator in terms of project activities and process for the preparation of Annual Work Plan for the year 2019 including initiating its implementation. Nevertheless, with cooperation from all conservators and partners, the planning process was concluded in good time and activities continued well without much difficulties. It was gratifying to see most of activities that were initiated by the former coordinator including upgrading of targeted forest reserves to new Nature Forest Reserves were concluded in a timely manner.
Overall the project indicated good progress warranting a satisfactory rating in achieving its Development Objective (DO) which is to expand, financially secure and strengthen the management of Tanzania’s Forest Nature Reserve network in response to the threats to biodiversity. Among of major activities for the project without which the DO would not have been achieved was to ensure by the end of the project, at least 11 Nature Forest Reserves are formally gazetted, covering 305,600 ha as compared to a base line of 5 NFRs covering 186,883 ha. This target has been exceeded way beyond our expectations. Today we have 17 NFRs covering a total of 901,083 ha and few more are expected. The process has benefited from the awareness created from the start of the project and lessons learned on the potential contribution of the NFRs to the tourism sector as well as to the national economy. The satisfactory rating is also supported by the good progress in achieving outcome 1 of the project which focused on consolidating and improving the management of the NFR network, has demonstrated excellent progress in all four output with most of indicators exceeding the set target of the end of project level. The conservation status of 17 NFR has been achieved, 14 out of 17 has both status and boundaries secured with approved and signed management plans. It should also be noted that about 1,540 km of boundaries is clearly demarcated, and 519 km routinely maintained in all NFRs. Staffing has improved tremendously and are provided with infrastructure and working equipment. 107 ranger staff are in place in all 12 NFRs and a process to replace 7 conservators who retired during the period is at an advanced stage while recruitment to fill in the post of those transferred to new positions is ongoing. To strengthen governance and ensure benefits to surrounding villages, 12 NFRs have in place signed MOUs with surrounding villages and an operating joint co-management structure that is been implemented, this has enhanced the capacity of the TFS to plan and manage all the NFRs as part of a wider network of PAs.
Outcome 2 which focused on strengthening the financial sustainability of the NFR network has demonstrated lower progress than expected. Partly due to expectation that after the NFRs are declared and boundaries secured, quickly the private investors or PPP initiatives will come in as well as improved tourism activities. In hind site, this was a little too ambitious. Negotiations to involve private sector has proved to need more time when in involve government institutions than anticipated. Despite the existence of subsidiary NFR Tourism Development Plans in place for the 12 NFRs, there has been only 2 nature-based tourism concessions under development since the start of the project 1. M/s Grewal wishing to invest in Magamba that is at an advanced stage and a PPP at Amani Nature Forest Reserve which is still under discussion. With Government push to improve PPP in the country, we are still positive to achieve good result albeit belated. Nature base tourism has increased to over 1,200 tourists (average in Magamba) contributing about USD 8,900 (average per annum) to the nature reserve which is a big jump as compared to the baseline. While some of the NFRs like Magamba and Amani are doing relatively well due to good accessibility, availability of accommodation and wide promotion, other NFRs are not so lucky, they are located within difficult terrains, poor road access coupled with poor or completely lack of accommodation facilities. Nonetheless, each NFR has unique attraction as well as unique challenge in terms of tourism promotion and the project team is keen to continue pursuing all possible options to ensure the number of tourists is increased in partnerships with foreign and national NGOs. This would help to strengthen the management and development of the nature reserves that have proven to be more challenging. The government is also putting some efforts to promote tourism though various ways including advertisements, this year some Chinese media was invited to Amani, Magamba, and Mt. Hanang as sample areas to be advertised in China with intention of attracting tourist from China. Improvement of infrastructure through government resources is on-going and more deliberate effort to ensure financial sustainability is achieved is contained in the developing exit strategy. Existing partnerships with local and international NGOs such as STEP in Uzungwa; Raleigh in Mkingu, and the EAMCEF – which provide financing to the eight NFRs in the Eastern Arc Mountains is helping to ensure the sustainability of the FNR network. In 2019 UNDP in collaboration with TFS engaged the TOTAL SA which is one of the three oil companies involved in the East African Crude Oil Pipeline Project (EACOP). The EACOP is a 1,445km crude oil export pipeline that will transport Uganda’s crude oil from Kabaale-Hoima in Uganda to the Chongoleani peninsula near Tanga port in Tanzania. The pipeline will be traversing eight regions and 24 districts in Tanzania, potentially affecting 260 communities. TOTAL is currently exploring ways for mitigating any potential adverse impacts triggered by the construction of the Pipeline. In compliance with international standards and requirements, including through ensuring a human-rights based approach, TOTAL is specifically seeking partnerships with UNDP in the implementation of the “Minziro Nature Forest Reserve Rehabilitation or mitigation Project however, this is likely to extend to other areas where UNDP is working. A commitment latter has been issued to UNDP CO for the initial US$ 50,000 and we have initiated a Due Diligence (DD) process to ensure no issues arise from the risk monitoring that could affect the partnership or reputational risks to UNDP. All these actions are showing pointing to positive results making us to hold on the possibility to achieve the target set for the financial sustainability and the likelihood of achieving all two project outcomes at the end of the implementation period in June 2020 making it possible to also achieve the development objective of expanding, financially secure and strengthen the management of Tanzania’s Nature Forest Reserve network as per design.Role2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingGEF Operational Focal point(not set or not applicable)- IP Rating provided by UNDP-GEF Technical Adviser and UNDP Country Office only - Overall Assessment(not set or not applicable)Role2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingProject Implementing Partner(not set or not applicable)- IP Rating provided by UNDP-GEF Technical Adviser and UNDP Country Office only - Overall Assessment(not set or not applicable)Role2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingOther Partners(not set or not applicable)- IP Rating provided by UNDP-GEF Technical Adviser and UNDP Country Office only - Overall Assessment(not set or not applicable)Role2019 Development Objective Progress Rating2019 Implementation Progress RatingUNDP-GEF Technical AdviserModerately SatisfactorySatisfactoryOverall AssessmentDelivery of the project received a setback with the sudden demise of the National Project Coordinator from the Tanzania Forest Service, Mr Gerald Kamwenda in September, 2018. A new Project Manager, Amina Akida, was appointed a towards the end of 2018, and work then gradually resumed on project activities, but delays were experienced in the preparation and implementation of the 2019 Annual Work Plan.
It should be noted that in spite of this setback, substantial efforts were made by the project team to get the project back on track, and financial performance is satisfactory as a result. The project also made substantial progress in achieving the intended development objectives and in some areas even exceeding its targets. One side note is that there are concerns in terms of financial sustainability of all Forest Reserves. While the number of tourist to the area has overall been increasing and the project team has stepped up its efforts to engage private sector and donors in providing financial support to the management of the reserves, they are not all equal in terms of tourism potential. It is recommended that the project team continues to work very closely with TFS to ensure that funding allocations to each reserve take into account these inequalities in order to sustain the achievements and impacts made with GEF investments. GenderProgress in Advancing Gender Equality and Women's EmpowermentThis information is used in the UNDP-GEF Annual Performance Report, UNDP-GEF Annual Gender Report, reporting to the UNDP Gender Steering and Implementation Committee and for other internal and external communications and learning.? The Project Manager and/or Project Gender Officer should complete this section with support from the UNDP Country Office.??Gender Analysis and Action Plan: not availablePlease review the project's Gender Analysis and Action Plan. If the document is not attached or an updated Gender Analysis and/or Gender Action Plan is available please upload the document below or send to the Regional Programme Associate to upload in PIMS+. Please note that all projects approved since 1 July 2014 are required to carry out a gender analysis and all projects approved since 1 July 2018 are required to have a gender analysis and action plan.(not set or not applicable)Please indicate in which results areas the project is contributing to gender equality (you may select more than one results area, or select not applicable):Contributing to closing gender gaps in access to and control over resources: YesImproving the participation and decision-making of women in natural resource governance: YesTargeting socio-economic benefits and services for women: YesNot applicable: NoAtlas Gender Marker RatingGEN2: gender equality as significant objective Please describe any experiences or linkages (direct or indirect) between project activities and gender-based violence (GBV). This information is for UNDP use only and will not be shared with GEF Secretariat.
Not applicablePlease specify results achieved this reporting period that focus on increasing gender equality and the empowerment of women.
Please explain how the results reported addressed the different needs of men or women, changed norms, values, and power structures, and/or contributed to transforming or challenging gender inequalities and discrimination. Involving both men and women, boys and girls to ensure gender equality is considered in all aspects of project implementation including distribution of benefits among stakeholders. Such areas include participation and involvement of both gender in the governance mechanisms such as the establishment of Village Natural Resource Committee (VNRCs). Most VNRCs’ have at least 30% of its members being women (most VNRCs have between 10 – 15 members). However, women are given priority in many forest activities. In the case of employment opportunities (e.g. Casual labour) such as conducting joint patrols; boundary maintenance or clearance; road maintenance and nursery operations women are prioritized for this work. The money earned benefits the family at large.
Please describe how work to advance gender equality and women's empowerment enhanced the project's environmental and/or resilience outcomes.tbdSocial and Environmental StandardsSocial and Environmental Standards (Safeguards)The Project Manager and/or the project’s Safeguards Officer should complete this section of the PIR with support from the UNDP Country Office. The UNDP-GEF RTA should review to ensure it is complete and accurate.1) Have any new social and/or environmental risks been identified during project implementation?NoIf any new social and/or environmental risks have been identified during project implementation please describe the new risk(s) and the response to it. Not applicable2) Have any existing social and/or environmental risks been escalated during the reporting period? For example, when a low risk increased to moderate, or a moderate risk increased to high. NoIf any existing social and/or environmental risks have been escalated during implementation please describe the change(s) and the response to it. Not applicableSESP: not availableEnvironmental and Social Management Plan/Framework: not availableFor reference, please find below the project's safeguards screening (Social and Environmental Screening Procedure (SESP) or the old ESSP tool); management plans (if any); and its SESP categorization above. Please note that the SESP categorization might have been corrected during a centralized review. (not set or not applicable)3) Have any required social and environmental assessments and/or management plans been prepared in the reporting period? For example, an updated Stakeholder Engagement Plan, Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) or Indigenous Peoples Plan. NoIf yes, please upload the document(s) above. If no, please explain when the required documents will be prepared.Not applicable4) Has the project received complaints related to social and/or environmental impacts (actual or potential )? NoIf yes, please describe the complaint(s) or grievance(s) in detail including the status, significance, who was involved and what action was taken. Not ApplicableCommunicating ImpactTell us the story of the project focusing on how the project has helped to improve people’s lives.
(This text will be used for UNDP corporate communications, the UNDP-GEF website, and/or other internal and external knowledge and learning efforts.)Communities living adjacent to NFRs received Latent lamps as an alternative source of light for lighting at night. The lamps were distributed to Hospitals, schools etc. The lights save the students for extra studying time at night – towards preparations/ attempts to pass examinations – hence better future. The lights helps hospitals to attend the sick even at night on emergencies.
Communities have benefited from a variety of alternative income generating activities, including apiculture / beekeeping and sales of agroforestry products, . The project conducted training to local tour guides as a means of distributing benefits of forest reserves among stakeholders and enabling local communities to participate in managing tourism enterprises. Tour guiding activities benefited communities adjacent to the forest receives, including in Amani, Magamba, Uzungwa, and Uluguru. In addition, the Amani community benefits from cultural tourism and sales of agricultural products to visitors.
Knowledge Management, Project Links and Social MediaPlease describe knowledge activities / products as outlined in knowledge management approved at CEO Endorsement /Approval.
Please also include: project's website, project page on the UNDP website, blogs, photos stories (e.g. Exposure), Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, as well as hyperlinks to any media coverage of the project, for example, stories written by an outside source. Please upload any supporting files, including photos, videos, stories, and other documents using the 'file lirbary' button in the top right of the PIR.
UNDP in collaboration with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism organized a forum in early December 2018 to showcase the beauty of Tanzania through various projects implemented in the country. The forum aimed at sharing information with newly appointed Ambassadors and Heads of Missions, Private Sectors representatives and other stakeholders who are directly engaged or potential investors in the tourism sector. The forum also intended to inform Development Partners, environmental and tourism actors from both public and private sector about successes of the UNDP/GEF supported projects and the potential for eco-tourism opportunities within the Protected Areas such NFR in the country. The project team in collaboration with UNDP produced a video covering four major nature Forest reserves under the project for with the aim of capturing, documenting and sharing of the lessons and best practices.
PartnershipsPartnerships & Stakeholder EngagmentPlease select yes or no whether the project is working with any of the following partners. Please also provide an update on stakeholder engagement. This information is used by the GEF and UNDP for reporting and is therefore very important!? All sections must be completed by the Project Manager and reviewed by the CO and RTA.??Does the project work with any Civil Society Organisations and/or NGOs?YesDoes the project work with any Indigenous Peoples?NoDoes the project work with the Private Sector?NoNoDoes the project work with the GEF Small Grants Programme?NoNoDoes the project work with UN Volunteers?NoNoDid the project support South-South Cooperation and/or Triangular Cooperation efforts in the reporting year?NoNoCEO Endorsement Request: PIMS 5106 Tanzania FNRs-CEO ER FOR SUBMISSION 16-05-2014 Revised.docxProvide an update on progress, challenges and outcomes related to stakeholder engagement based on the description of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan as documented at CEO endorsement/approval (see document below). If any surveys have been conducted please upload all survey documents to the PIR file library.A number of partners are working together with Tanzania Forest Service to support the delivery of improved nature reserve management
Uzungwa Scarp - STEP - Southern Tanzania Elephant Program and Tanzania Forest Conservation Group
Rungwe - until recently AWF & WCS - but have phased out.
Uluguru and Amani - UNDP GEF Sustainable Land Management project
Mkingu - Raleigh (Non profit NGO)
Mgombera. - Tanzania Forest Conservation Group and Udzungwa Conservation Project
There are 8 NFRs supported by the Eastern Arc Mountains Conservation Endowment Fund (EAMCEF) annually. There is fixed budget for each once they submit a kind of proposal. These are the Eastern Mountain Nature Forest Reserves. They are Mkingu, Uluguru, Chome, Magamba, Kilombero, Uzungwa, Nilo and Amani.
Coming in to Minziro are----TOTAL, & Wet Land International
Annex - Ratings DefinitionsDevelopment Objective Progress Ratings Definitions(HS) Highly Satisfactory: Project is on track to exceed its end-of-project targets, and is likely to achieve transformational change by project closure. The project can be presented as 'outstanding practice'.(S) Satisfactory: Project is on track to fully achieve its end-of-project targets by project closure. The project can be presented as 'good practice'.(MS) Moderately Satisfactory: Project is on track to achieve its end-of-project targets by project closure with minor shortcomings only.(MU) Moderately Unsatisfactory: Project is off track and is expected to partially achieve its end-of-project targets by project closure with significant shortcomings. Project results might be fully achieved by project closure if adaptive management is undertaken immediately.(U) Unsatisfactory: Project is off track and is not expected to achieve its end-of-project targets by project closure. Project results might be partially achieved by project closure if major adaptive management is undertaken immediately.(HU) Highly Unsatisfactory: Project is off track and is not expected to achieve its end-of-project targets without major restructuring.Implementation Progress Ratings Definitions(HS) Highly Satisfactory: Implementation is exceeding expectations. Cumulative financial delivery, timing of key implementation milestones, and risk management are fully on track. The project is managed extremely efficiently and effectively. The implementation of the project can be presented as 'outstanding practice'.(S) Satisfactory: Implementation is proceeding as planned. Cumulative financial delivery, timing of key implementation milestones, and risk management are on track. The project is managed efficiently and effectively. The implementation of the project can be presented as 'good practice'.(MS) Moderately Satisfactory: Implementation is proceeding as planned with minor deviations. Cumulative financial delivery and management of risks are mostly on track, with minor delays. The project is managed well.(MU) Moderately Unsatisfactory: Implementation is not proceeding as planned and faces significant implementation issues. Implementation progress could be improved if adaptive management is undertaken immediately. Cumulative financial delivery, timing of key implementation milestones, and/or management of critical risks are significantly off track. The project is not fully or well supported. (U) Unsatisfactory: Implementation is not proceeding as planned and faces major implementation issues and restructuring may be necessary. Cumulative financial delivery, timing of key implementation milestones, and/or management of critical risks are off track with major issues and/or concerns. The project is not fully or well supported. (HU) Highly Unsatisfactory: Implementation is seriously under performing and major restructuring is required. Cumulative financial delivery, timing of key implementation milestones (e.g. start of activities), and management of critical risks are severely off track with severe issues and/or concerns. The project is not effectively or efficiently supported. ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- data analysis quantitative data importance
- example of data analysis what is data analysis in research
- data scientist vs data analyst
- data science vs data analysis
- basic data types in python
- key data elements data quality
- key data elements data governance
- data analytics vs data science
- basic excel data spreadsheet example
- basic data analysis techniques
- structured data vs unstructured data examples
- data collection and data analysis