PIF co-financing

[Mary Jean Caleda]

Dear Grace,

 

Since we are at the 11th hour and in case we cannot get the 1:3 co-financing at this late stage, may we suggest to just keep the co-financing as is at 1:2, esp. as the PIF has already been endorsed by NFP and OFP to IA at this ratio.

 

Also, if it is the GEF Council that makes the final determination of the co-financing ratio, we can just wait for them to tell us what co-financing they will require. I hope this is okay.

 

Hi George, what's your total based on the inputs from others?

Hi Anabelle, any update from FPE, PTFCF and PhilAm Fund?

 

Thanks,

 

 

 

--

-------------------------------------------------

Mary Jean A. Caleda, PhD, EnP
Ateneo School of Government
Ateneo de Manila University
Katipunan Avenue, Loyola Heights
Quezon City, 1108 Philippines

Tel. No.  :  +632 426 6001 local 4624
Fax No.  :  +632 426 5997
Mobile    :  +63 918 930 2638
E-mail    :   mj.c...@gmail.com

URL       :   www.asg.ateneo.edu, www.ateneo.edu

Transforming communities, building the nation.

[Marian Delos Angeles]

You can include $300k to return reflect Bwiser's work in Mt Apo.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UNDP-GEF Proposal" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to undp-gef-propo...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to undp-gef...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/undp-gef-proposal.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Mary Jean Caleda]

Thanks Ma'am Ann.

[George Banez]

Hi Jean and Grace,

Here is the version of the PIF after the discussion last monday. I realized there were questions or missing parts (in yellow highlights) that need a bit of research e.g. scaling up, global benefits.  After attending the GEF council, the importance to GEF of these questions became more clear to me.  Give me a bit of time to draft these sections.  

I also need time to collate the information on the new co-financing pledges; and more importantly the budget based on the new sequence of  components.  I will work on the numbers tonight, as we need to look at the original budget allocations.

In the meantime, please go over the wording of the outcome/output table and text and see if it captured the discussion last meeting and most of the original intent of project plus what each of the proponents are capable and ready to commit to accomplish.

Thanks,

George

[Mary Jean Caleda]

Thanks George. I encourage  others in this loop do the same thing,

[George Banez]

Good Day Jean and Grace,

Here is the version of the PIF with the budget numbers (attachment 1). Please note that in the PIF template, Table A. Indicative Focal Area Strategy Framework, I have included the cost of the Agency Fee, PPG, PPG Management Cost and the Project Management Cost. They all come out of the GEF allocation of $ 4,350,000.  After the fee, PPG and management costs etc has been taken out, the money to fund the 3 components remain unchanged at a total of $3,667,380.  

The co-financing at 1:3 comes to a total of $13,050,000 (or $4,350,000 x 3).  Attached is an excel file of the proposed co-financing breakdown.  Please note:

1.  The numbers in black have already been officially committed.

2.  The numbers in green will have to be confirmed....To facilitate the process, I made some assumptions and assigned the amount of co-financing that each stakeholder / proponent may be able to contribute.

3.  Each of those institutions included in the table with amounts in green color need to be contacted (at least by email).  I have spoken to Terrence Dacles of GIZ and he is for complementation (specially Panay) / thus committing the co-financing money...the reception was not clear and all I wanted to ask was ACCCoast which apparently is ending. Anyway, the GIZ website lists other projects...He needs an email (tpda...@yahoo.com) brief of the project (maybe a presentation).  I have included La Salle because of the university's possible involvement in the biophysical /biodiversity assessment component, I will need an institutional "yes" but the unit that will be involved (in assessment component) has already committed.

4.  All those we met e.g. COA, DBM, NCSO, DILG seemed very willing to collaborate, maybe they are also willing to contribute, but need to be asked, perhaps list possible In-Kind contribution for their professional services to be rendered. Asking them now may also make them "feel' included and take ownership of crucial project components involving government units. I based the number of $25,000 for each from PAWB's submission of $60,000 for In-Kind co-finanicng.

5. CCC is a shot, maybe there is complementation in LGU training and ICE components that has to do with the economic value of conserving biodiversity for climate change resilient communities. 

6. An NGO that is involved in Business Development needs to be on board, and also the League of Municipalities; both of which can contribute In-Kind co-financing.

6. As I can not think of additional sources of co-financing I added the remaining amount to UNDP (in red)..not sure about this.

Thank you for reviewing the information.

George

[Mary Jean Caleda]

Thanks George. I am doing final edits and will do a CSW (complete staff work-background on what this PIF went through)  to support submission.

Re co-financing- Time is critical and it is obviously  too late in the day to knock on doors for additional co-financing. The process is long and tedious (presentation, emails - you don't know if they will respond on short notice..). If we were advised as early as February or March when the PIF was endorsed by the OFP and UNDP started discussions with the team, this would have been a breeze. If someone from the team will volunteer to do this, great. Otherwise I suggest we take the  more practical approach below.

 

a) make a representation with the GEF OFP (who endorsed the PIF) and state our case

 

b) we submit Version 3 of the PIF with the co-financing as  is (we just replace newCaPP and BPP) and let GEF determine the final co-financing ratio upon inclusion in work program . UNDP mentioned it is the GEF that makes the final determination of co-financing based on a project to project analysis (and UNDP is advising this based on previous experience). Ang alam ko, MKBA (with a 9M budget) submitted a 1:3 co-financing  but was told to submit  full proposal on 1:5. So, kung ganun, puede di ba?  

 

May I get the team's advice on this please, including Gara's?

 

Maraming salamat po at pasensiya sa abala on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

 

Cheers pa rin,

 

 

 

 

Sent from my Ipad

<112813 BDMainstreaming.docx>

<Co-Financing BD mainstreaming.xlsx>

[Grace Tena]

Hi Jean,

Let us submit whatever we have right now and let us wait for further comments from GEF.

Thanks,

Grace

[George Banez]

Hi Jean,

Just got the chance to read the email.  It is your call to submit a 1:2 ratio in the PIF instead of 1:3 per Grace's.   If we are submitting the PIF with a 1:2 ratio of co-financing, then the thing to do would be to replace the $2M contribution from GEF related projects (BPP and NewCapp) listed as DENR-PAWB co-financing with other non-GEF projects with $2M worth of co-financing available from DENR, PAWB.  Also, take Eco-fish out of the USAID contribution and replace by PTFCF, PhilamFund and FPE (per Anabel) but with the total being the same at $4.3 M.

Still, these amounts and commitment from these organizations need to be confirmed.  for example, I'm not sure if GIZ is completely aware that we have listed $950,000 con-financing from PAME?  Also, if GEF decides, it is a 1:3 ratio, then $13050000 co-financing still needs to be raised.

George

[Mary Jean Caleda]

 pagod na ako dito. no energy to rebut your ..1:2 is MY call..

sige na..call ko na..

 

[Grace Tena]

Hi George,

We do not need to firm up confirmations on the co-financing,  we can do this during the PPG.  All we need to identify is the indicative co-financing which we can more or less confirm during the PPG.

Thanks,

Grace

From: Mary Caleda <mj.c...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: "undp-gef...@googlegroups.com" <undp-gef...@googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 21:28:01 +0800
To: George Banez <george...@gmail.com>
Cc: "undp-gef...@googlegroups.com" <undp-gef...@googlegroups.com>, BPP <grace...@undp.org>, Cristy Regunay <reg...@yahoo.com>, Elma Eleria <elma_...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: PIF co-financing

--