IEO conducts accountability and learning-focused evaluations that generate lessons learned for the GEF. The evaluations focus on results, impact and performance of the GEF, and address strategic issues of the partnership.
Overall Performance Studies (OPS) are performed every four years to provide solid evaluative evidence to donors. These evaluations provide an independent assessment of performance and results of the GEF over a GEF replenishment period. The comprehensive evaluations assess the extent to which the GEF is achieving its objectives and identify potential areas of improvement.
Egypt has played a key role in the international environmental arena with strong participation and contribution to global and regional conventions. The scope of the Egypt CPE included all 19 national projects for US $87.87 million, as well as seven regional projects and one global project.
Syria has been receiving GEF support since 1994 via regional and national projects, the majority of which are in biodiversity, alongside climate change, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), and 1 multifocal project. This is in addition to the GEF corporate Small Grants programme. There are no projects combating land degradation in the country. Syria was deemed a good choice for evaluation because it is eligible for an individual climate change allocation under the Resource Allocation Framework and also for a group allocation in biodiversity, and also because it has a rela
The second Annual Country Portfolio Evaluation Report is the synthesis of three country portfolio evaluations focused on Cameroon, Egypt, and Syria produced by the GEF Evaluation Office. GEF support to these three counties began in 1992 for Cameroon and Egypt and in 1994 for Syria. This synthesis report focuses on three key areas:
Cameroon has been receiving GEF funds since 1992 via 10 national projects. About 71 per cent of funding has gone to support biodiversity projects, 25 per cent in land degradation, with the remainder split between climate change and persistent organic pollutants (POPs). Cameroon was selected for evaluation for reasons including the significant work in forest conservation and its importance as a global biodiversity hotspot. Main findings and recommendations were presented to the GEF Council as a part of the Annual Country Portfolio Evaluation Report 2009 (ACPER 2009).
Benin has received GEF funds since 1991 and was selected in particular for evaluation due to its status as one of the world’s least developed countries and its advanced work on the National Capacity Self-Assessment (NCSA). The Benin CPE focused on 13 national projects and 5 regional ones. All GEF focal areas are represented in the projects under evaluation. The main findings and recommendations of this evaluation were presented to the GEF Council in April 2008 as a part of the Annual Country Portfolio Evaluation Report (ACPER 2008).
Madagascar has been receiving GEF funds since 1994; 97 per cent of financing has supported biodiversity projects with the remainder supporting projects in the climate change and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) focal areas. Madagascar was selected because of its large portfolio size, its programmatic approach, the portfolio emphasis on biodiversity, and its importance as a global biodiversity hotspot. The main findings and recommendations were presented to the GEF Council in April 2008 as a part of the Annual Country Portfolio Evaluation Report (ACPER 2008).
South Africa began receiving GEF support in 1994. The country was chosen to receive a CPE based on its large and diverse portfolio and its large allocation under the Resource Allocation Framework, which is based on the importance of South Africa's global biodiversity and also on its dependence on fossil fuels.
The Philippines is one of the largest recipients of GEF support, with allocations in both climate change and biodiversity, and a well-established GEF Small Grants Programme. The environment sector is an essential part of the country's sustainable development agenda.
Samoa has been receiving GEF funds since the GEF’s pilot phase. It was selected for country portfolio evaluation because it represents two groups of countries that are highly relevant to the GEF; small island developing states (SIDS) of the Pacific, and least developed countries (LDCs). Also, it has a diverse portfolio and well-established environmental sector. The main findings and recommendations of this evaluation were presented to the GEF Council in June 2007.