Multi-Country Programme Action Plan Between The Governments of Barbados and the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS)1 and UNDP

2012-2016

1The 2012-2016 M-CPAP provides assistance to the 10 programme countries supported by the UNDP Barbados and OECS Subregional Office (SRO)www.bb.undp.org) i.e.: Anguilla; Antigua and Barbuda; Barbados; British Virgin Islands; Commonwealth of Dominica; Grenada; Montserrat; St. Kitts and Nevis; St. Vincent and the Grenadines; and Saint Lucia. All programme countries are classified as Middle Income Countries (MICs). Anguilla; Antigua and Barbuda; Barbados; British Virgin Islands; and St. Kitts and Nevis, categorised as UNDP Net Contributor Countries (NCCs), do not receive UNDP core (TRAC) allocations. The Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines receive TRAC resources as well as Montserrat, which is classified as a special development situation country.

The Framework The Governments of Barbados and the Member States of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and the United Nations Development Programme being in mutual agreement to the content of this Multi-Country Programme Action Plan (M-CPAP) and to their responsibilities in the implementation of the MCPAP), and: Furthering their mutual agreement on cooperation for the realisation of the Millennium Development Goals and agreements of United Nations Conventions and Summits to which the Governments and UNDP committed, including: the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women; the Convention of the Elimination against All Forms of Racial Discrimination; the United Nations Conference on Environment and 3 Development; Rio+20 ; the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change; the Convention on Biological Diversity; the Millennium Declaration; the Mauritius International Meeting to Review the Implementation of the Programme of Action for Sustainable Development of SIDS; the World Summit on Social Development; the UN General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS; and the World Summit on Sustainable Development; the UN Convention to Combat Desertification; the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015.4 2

Taking note of key regional agreements, including the Treaty of Basseterre establishing the OECS Economic Union; the Treaty establishing the Caribbean Community; the Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States; the Barbados Declaration of the High Level 5 Conference of the Small Island Developing States on Achieving Sustainable Energy for All and the Caribbean 6 Comprehensive Disaster Management Strategy 2007-2012 . Building upon the experience gained and progress made during the implementation of the UNDP Subregional Programme 2006-2009, extended to 2011, in the provision of services from strategic regional interventions to support capacity development, technical, policy advisory and implementation support alignment with the corporate priorities presented in the UNDP Strategic Plan 2008-2013. Taking into account that the 2012-2016 United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) provides the foundation for UN System coordination and commitment to “Delivering as One”, in partnership with Barbados and OECS Member States. Entering into the new period of cooperation 2012-2016, with trends of declining UNDP core resources and concessionary grant resources to Middle-Income Countries (MICs), the M-CPAP framework is designed to enhance results achievement, identify and develop UNDP’s comparative advantage to access new resource diversification opportunities to support and strengthen Governments’ economic and social resilience with UNDP assistance in the following core areas: o Poverty and Inequality Reduction, and MDG Achievement o Democratic Governance o Crisis Prevention and Recovery o Environment and Sustainable Development Declare that these responsibilities will be fulfilled in a spirit of close cooperation; and have agreed as follows:

2 MDG Goal 8 “Develop a Global Partnership for Development” references the special categorisation of Small Island Developing States. 3 www.uncsd2012.org. 4 Where countries have acceded to these treaties and agreements. 5 http://www.sidsenergyforall.org/conference-details/decisions-agreements-and-declarations/ 6 Where countries have acceded to these treaties and agreements.

2

Part I. Basis of Relationship 1.1

WHEREAS the Governments of Barbados and OECS Member States (hereinafter referred to as “the Governments”) and the United Nations Development Programme (hereinafter referred to as UNDP) have entered into basic agreements to govern UNDP’s assistance to the respective countries (Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA)), which were signed by parties on: Anguilla: 7 January 1960 Antigua and Barbuda: 26 August 1983 Barbados: 21 October 1974 British Virgin Islands: 7 January 1960 Commonwealth of Dominica: 5 November 1980 Grenada: 17 May 1976 Montserrat: 7 January 1960 St. Christopher (Kitts) and Nevis: 30 January 1985 Saint Lucia: 22 July 1981 St. Vincent and the Grenadines: 29 April 1983

1.2

Based on Article I, paragraph 2 of the SBAA, UNDP’s assistance to the Governments shall be made available to the Governments and shall be furnished and received in accordance with the relevant and applicable resolutions and decisions of the competent UNDP organs, and subject to the availability of the necessary funds to the UNDP. In particular, decision 2005/1 of 28 January 2005 of UNDP’s Executive Board approved the new Financial Regulations and Rules and along with them the new definitions of 'execution' and ‘implementation' enabling UNDP to fully implement the new Common Country Programming Procedures resulting from the UNDG simplification and harmonisation initiative. In light of this decision, this M-CPAP together with Annual Work Plan (AWP) (which shall form part of this M-CPAP, and is incorporated herein by reference) concluded hereunder constitute together a project document as referred to in the SBAA. All references in the SBAA to “Executing Agency” shall be deemed to refer to “Implementing Partner”, as such term is defined and used in the M-CPAP and AWPs.

1.3

The M-CPAP is based upon and further elaborates the Sub-Regional Programme Document (SPD) for Barbados and the OECS 2012-2016 which was endorsed by the Governments and approved by the UNDP Executive Board in June 2011. The SPD was in turn, based on the relevant programmatic areas outlined in the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) 2012-2016. Both the formulation of 2012-2016 SPD and UNDAF for Barbados and the OECS were supported by extensive in-country consultative processes with the Governments of Barbados, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, British Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and with civil society and other stakeholders to identify subregional and national development priorities.

1.4

The new 2012–2016 UNDAF guides UN development cooperation in Barbados and the OECS in partnership with governments, civil society and other development partners, and coordinating the efforts of the 15 UN Agencies, Funds and Programmes that comprise the UN Subregional Team (UNST) for Barbados and the OECS, as well as three non-UNST Agencies that agreed to work with the new UNDAF framework.

Part II. Situation Analysis 2.1

Despite classifications as high and middle human development countries on the global Human Development Index (HDI), Barbados and OECS Member States have experienced similar economic recession and social impacts, as other regions. The prolonged global recession and multiple crises in

3

7

North America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America have impacted the 10 programme countries supported by the UNDP Barbados Subregional Office. 2.2

With recession impacts, starting from mid to late 2007, globally accepted vulnerabilities of SIDS defined in MDG 8 are now evidenced in high current account deficits, high levels of external debt-to-GDP ratios from 66% - 160%; contracting, weak domestic financial sectors as global financial system fall-outs and systemic shifts affect national and regional banking and insurance sectors requiring governments’ emergency interventions to reduce bank collapses, and protect assets of depositors, policyholders and pensioners, weak central government revenue resources; declines in economic performance with unpredictable, stagnated or reversed economic growth in recent years have led to sustained high levels of poverty (13%-39%) and inequality (Gini 0.31-0.56) which threaten the high levels of development achieved.

2.3

Significantly, since 2007 Barbados and the OECS recognised the need to strengthen social safety nets and participated in the UNDP Study - Social Implications of the Global Economic Crisis in Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS): 2008/2009. A Synthesis of Seven Country Studies8 which recommended that social safety nets programmes should be strengthened and maintained, despite political administration transitions. The recently concluded Rio+20 meeting highlighted the nexus between poverty, environment and livelihoods as well as the inextricable links to issues of land and natural resources ownership and/or access, to equity of access, use and benefits.

2.4

Within the context of the MDGs, Barbados and Eastern Caribbean states recorded notable progress towards the achievement of: MDG 2 (achieve universal primary education), 3 (promote gender equality and empower women), MDG 4 (reduce child mortality), MDG 5 (improve maternal health), MDG 6 (combat HIV, AIDS, malaria and other diseases), and to a lesser extent, MDG 7 (ensure environmental sustainability). While prevalence of HIV/AIDS and high infection rates however remain a challenge, MDG 6 progress is due to marked improvement in the number of persons living with HIV/AIDS accessing antiretroviral treatment and the low incidence of malaria and other diseases.

2.5

HIV/AIDS continues to be the leading cause of death for young people and a serious threat in the Caribbean. The region is second only to Sub-Saharan Africa in HIV prevalence with an estimated adult HIV prevalence rate of 2.3 per cent by 2003 figures. The Caribbean MDG Report 2010 highlights major gaps in information, but notes that in 2008 there were 20,000 more people living with HIV/AIDS than in 2001. The development dimensions of HIV/AIDS beyond the health sector continue to require strong focus and attention, including on vulnerable groups such as youth and women (for example, girls aged 15-19 are three to six times more likely to contract HIV than boys) and on the implications relating to sexual violence, access to sexual and reproductive health services and related policies, as well as stigma and discrimination.

2.6

The main MDG achievement challenges faced by Barbados and OECS states are linked to high and unsustainable public debt ratios, which reduce available funding for social sector programmes. SIDS development challenges extend to issues such as the gender equity and participation of males at secondary and tertiary education; and as indicators show the target proportion of seats held by women

7 Text of the G-20 Summit Declaration in Los Cabos, Mexico, June 18-19, 2012: “Since we last met, the global recovery has continued to face a number of challenges. Financial market tensions are high. External, fiscal and financial imbalances are still prevalent, having a major impact on growth and employment prospects and confidence. Clearly, the global economy remains vulnerable, with a negative impact on the everyday lives of people all over the world, affecting jobs, trade, development, and the environment. We will act together to strengthen recovery and address financial market tensions. We will work collectively to strengthen demand and restore confidence with a view to support growth and foster financial stability in order to create high quality jobs and opportunities for all of our citizens. We have agreed today on a coordinated Los Cabos Growth and Jobs Action Plan to achieve those goals.” 8 The full national reports can be downloaded at: http://www.undp.org/poverty/focus_poverty_assessment_publications.shtml.

4

in national parliaments will not be met. Limited access to secondary education in some states; maternal health and child survival risks posed by teenage pregnancy; HIV and AIDS; increased crime and violence compound Caribbean SIDS development challenges. To effectively address these challenges, these small, open economies, with high levels of natural hazard, economic and social vulnerabilities, require responsive, evidence-based, updated and modernised governance capacities and institutions. 2.7

This M-CPAP is in line with the UNDAF analysis of Barbados and the OECS which noted declines in gross domestic product (GDP) growth ranging from 0.5 per cent in Grenada to 3.2 per cent in Anguilla and actual GDP contraction of over -5 per cent in at least four countries. These declines have increased fiscal pressures, exacerbating debt-sustainability challenges and resulted in deteriorated foreign exchange reserve positions, declining asset quality and constraints on liquidity. These are due primarily to reduced demand and lower prices for commodity and manufactured exports, and significant declines in the key offshore finance and tourism sectors. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts an overall increase in debt-to-GDP ratios for the independent OECS members from 104 per cent in 2010 to 110 per cent in 2014. The effects of the global economic recession is impacting on already high levels of unemployment, particularly affecting 30 to 40 per cent of youth (under 35) and women; increased poverty and inequality, as transitory poverty became entrenched for some owing to a lack of social protection; and increasing crime and insecurity. The lack of fiscal space constrained social spending, making it more difficult to meet MDG and other development targets.

2.8

Development gains in the Caribbean are increasingly vulnerable to natural and anthropogenic hazards, as well as the impacts of global climate change. Recent events such as tropical storms and hurricanes; flooding and landslides have caused substantial impacts to the countries’ social, economic and environmental assets and services. The Global Assessment Report (GAR) on Disaster Risk Reduction 2011 and the Human Development Report (HDR) 2011 confirm that disaster risk is increasing faster than economic growth in Barbados and the OECS, and that the reduction in mortality with improvement in early warning is negated by high poverty and weak governance systems.

2.9

Barbados and Eastern Caribbean states maintain high levels of political advocacy and leadership in Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), in the context of SIDS vulnerability and impacts to climate change. Eastern Caribbean SIDS have pledged to improve energy efficiencies, to reduce consumption and advocate for global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, diversify fuel sources to include renewables and lower dependence on imported fossil fuels. While the potential contribution of renewable energy sources is high, monopolisation, limited research, and lack of technology, capital and skills are among the main barriers to expansion. This is underscored by the rising costs of fuel imports, in the CARICOM countries, which totaled $12 billion in 2007 and continues to increase rapidly. Caribbean SIDS have joined global movements to sustain and strengthen global development to encourage inclusive green growth, in line with sustainable development commitments and agreements reached at Rio+20 at the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). UN System and UNDP support to SIDS is critical to sustain focus on climate change adaptation, low-carbon economic growth and development in the Caribbean region.

2.10

In the UNDP Barbados and the OECS programme countries, the political landscape has maintained traditionally strong democratic governance practices, which distinguish the Caribbean region. Positive trends of free and fair elections to support political transitions are still the norm, however in several states, emerging electoral issues such as campaign financing, under-representation of women and youth in politics and a recognised need for the modernisation of parliamentary processes call for change and modernisation of Caribbean political and governance processes. While democratic governance is not at risk for the 10 Eastern Caribbean programme countries, UNDP through its 2012 Caribbean Human Development Report9 has provided data and other evidence-based input that highlight critical

9 The Caribbean Human Development Report 2012, Human Development and the Shift to Better Citizen Security, was launched in Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago can be accessed - http://hdr-caribbean.regionalcentrelac-undp.org/

5

governance threats including illegal trafficking of drugs, related escalating crime and armed violence incidences, and the increasing threats to citizens’ security and safety. 2.11

Areas of support for Caribbean SIDS include a focus on democratic governance assessments, youth and governance, enhanced voice and participation of vulnerable groups with particular emphasis on youth support to strengthen free and fair electoral processes. These priority areas of action would enhance UNDP inclusive governance programme assistance which would address governance issues such as corruption, human rights and justice reforms in line with national development priorities to maintain smooth governance transitions. In Caribbean States, the pursuit of international norms and standards are maintained and given priority action as is evidenced by the continued achievement of the high levels of development and the high and medium HDI ranking achieved over a decade. Other areas include supporting evidence-based MDG 8 defined advocacy platforms to take account of the SIDSspecific analysis, promotion of indices to measure and monitor micro-state development and support for the repositioning of Caribbean states to access new global governance entry points e.g. post Rio+20 programme support.

2.12

Historical OECS regional integration and functional cooperation programmes were strengthened with, the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) signing the Revised Treaty of Basseterre establishing the OECS Economic Union, which entered into force in January 2011. As an Economic Union, OECS Member States agreed to “undertake joint actions and pursue joint policies” on matters such as social protection mechanisms, social policies, public administration and management, statistics, education, telecommunications, international marketing of goods and services, international trade, currency and banking. Most significantly, the Revised Treaty establishes subsidiarity, makes provision 10 for the establishment of the Assembly of OECS Parliamentarians to serve as a forum for deliberation on proposed primary and secondary legislation for the nine OECS Member States, enactment of community law and, environmental policy.

2.13

UNDP programming support for 2012-2016 is guided and informed by the Revised Treaty of Basseterre, which focuses OECS development. It will also be guided by Government of Barbados and OECS Member States Annual Budget Presentations and Analysis as well as national Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSs) and Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategies. The 2012-2016 United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and the UNDP Sub-regional Programme Document (SPD) also guide this multi-country programme action plan to support programme delivery in Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Montserrat programme countries that are beneficiaries of UNDP core funding. Barbados, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, British Virgin Islands, St. Christopher (St. Kitts) and Nevis as UNDP Net Contributor Countries (NCC) will receive assistance from UNDP non-core donor funded programmes and projects. Barbados and OECS Member States are also members of Caribbean Community (CARICOM). (See www.caricom.org).

Part III. Past Cooperation and Lessons Learned 3.1

UNDP assistance and programme support via its SPD 2005-2009 (extended to 2011 to facilitate UNDP corporate strategic plan and UNDAF alignment)) prioritised four thematic areas: governance reform and institutional development; poverty reduction and social sector development in support of the MDGs and other national and international developmental goals; capacity building for environmental and natural resources management; and risk reduction and disaster management.

10 The Assembly is to comprise parliamentarians chosen from elected government and opposition members of national legislatures, reflecting as nearly as possible the proportionate representation of government and opposition members in the legislatures at the time of selection. In accordance with the Revised Treaty of Basseterre, the selection is to be made by the corresponding government or opposition side, with the Head of Government and the Leader of the Opposition of the Member State being one of the government members and opposition members respectively

6

3.2

Specific focus was placed on building strategic partnerships with governments at all levels, civil society, the private sector, academia, regional institutions and international development partners. Some results from this cooperation included the definition of SIDS policy positions in response to the challenges of the global trading environment and climate change; the definition of SIDS governance indicators and citizen security analysis, enhancement of regional capacity for environmental and natural resources management and to mitigate and respond to the impact of natural hazards; integration of poverty reduction and MDG targets into development planning processes; and facilitating the meaningful participation of SIDS in global governance processes.

3.3

Emphasis on knowledge management and South-South cooperation resulted, for example, in the Caribbean Risk Management Initiative (CRMI) and the Regional Risk Reduction Initiative (R3I), which support access to regional expertise, joint cooperation in climate change modelling and disaster risk reduction (DRR), documentation and exchange of good practices across the multi-lingual communities within the Caribbean, as well as Caribbean-South Pacific collaboration. It also supported the Caribbean Regional Technical Assistance Centre (CARTAC) project for capacity development and technical support for economic and financial management, and the Support to Poverty Assessment and Reduction in the Caribbean (SPARC) project, which increased the capacity of the OECS Member States for the collection, analysis, dissemination and use of social statistics for poverty monitoring, facilitated knowledge exchange among stakeholders on poverty and social development issues, and contributed to the gradual enhancement of policy/advocacy expertise for social development.

3.4

The Assessment of Development Results (ADR) 2009 noted some of these achievements and concluded that UNDP successfully maintained its relevance in responding to evolving partner needs. As captured in the ADR, UNDP’s presence was generally considered very important by national stakeholders in helping to highlight the considerable remaining economic disparities and vulnerabilities among and within countries in the sub-region and provide policy options and technical assistance.

3.5

Notwithstanding the achievements and successes of the programme, there were challenges. In particular, owing to lack of resources in the sub-regional office, neither gender nor HIV/AIDS has been sufficiently mainstreamed across programme areas; monitoring and evaluation can also be further strengthened across the programme, especially given the multi-country context; and much stronger attention is needed to communications for development to even better engage the national communities in the development process and to contribute to partnership building for continued development progress in the region. All these areas will receive attention in the new programme cycle.

3.6

In the interest of improving results, the UNDP sub-regional office implemented the ADR recommendations. This included repositioning and shifting its development support to focus on upstream policy/advocacy objectives in line with regional priorities, developing a clear overarching strategic vision for each thematic area, and supporting enhanced coherence across programmes to achieve better outcomes and reflect the value of UNDP’s integrated approach to development. Downstream activities have been more strategically selected to support the achievement of planned objectives.

Part IV. Proposed Programme 4.1

Taking account of UNDP’s global mandate for promoting sustainable human development and the achievement of the MDGs, UNDP’s comparative advantage as a convening partner and impartial broker facilitates access to the diversity of development partner resources, building on existing global, regional and national partnerships to support country programmes and development at national and community levels. Furthermore, UNDP is able to leverage the technical expertise of UN System agencies, funds and programmes through the UNDAF and UNDP HQ/Global Programmes and the unique existing partnerships with Governments, academia, civil society and development partners.

7

4.2

UNDP in 2012-2016 will support the achievement of national development goals and regional integration programme goals with enhanced evidenced-based platforms to promote and take account of the SIDS-specific data collection and analysis, and the promotion of indices to measure and monitor micro-state development. Assistance will be designed to support repositioning of Caribbean states to access new global governance assistance programme entry points and funding (e.g. post Rio+20 programme support) to reduce poverty, inequality, vulnerability to natural hazard and climate change impacts.

4.3

Evidence-based Citizen Security policy and programme development support for Inclusive Governance programming with private sector, civil society and community mobilisation through volunteerism and strengthened participation in governance processes, and drawing on the results of Democratic Governance Assessments and the Caribbean Human Development Report (CHDR) will be a focus.

4.4

The primary focus of 2012-2016 UNDP Subregional Programme will be programmes and projects to address the gaps identified in the 2010 Caribbean MDG Report, and to address the priorities articulated by countries during the UNDAF consultation process. The M-CPAP framework will support programmes to strengthen sustainable and equitable development of Caribbean societies through interventions that focus on capacity development to enhance SIDS resilience, reduce Caribbean SIDS vulnerabilities and support the articulation of a long-term vision of growth and development.

4.5

Within this context, interlinked with the 2012-2016 SPD and UNDAF, UNDP assistance will support outcomes that innovatively deliver capacity building assistance in the following areas: • Improved governance and regulation of environmental and energy issues taking account of the 2012 Barbados Declaration and post Rio+20 policy and programme priorities; • Evidence-based inclusive governance and citizen security policy and programme development; • Harmonisation of social, environmental and economic data collection and increased use of evidence-based policy and decision-making processes at the subregional and national level; • Improved social protection services and systems to reduce poverty and inequity, with increased economic participation and social inclusion projects that target vulnerable populations.

4.6

Capacity development with a gender equality focus that provides entry points for joint programme delivery and cross-thematic programming. This would be in line with the ADR recommendation that UNDP Barbados should…”Maintain a focus on upstream activities . . . with multi-stakeholder coordination, policy/advocacy work, and in capacity development “Improve ‘vulnerability analysis’ for the sub-region . . . as a UNDP strategic contribution to improved sub-regional and regional development planning through enhanced assessment of development status, risk factors and where to provide targeted assistance,. . . this would also contribute to the global strategic agenda on SIDS and improve overall HDI classification of SIDS.” UNDP will work with partners to develop more complete, genderdisaggregated datasets to capture the differential impacts of SIDS development challenges i.e. natural disasters in order to inform post-disaster damage and loss assessments and recovery and reconstruction strategies and plans, as well as gender-sensitive climate change adaptation strategies. In addition, the UNDP programme to strengthen data collection, analysis and its use in policy-making across all priority areas will emphasise the development of capacities of key national partner institutions.

4.7

This multi-dimensional, multi-sectoral programming framework will not only strengthen cooperation between the Governments and UNDP, but will create entry points for strengthened civil society, citizens and community voice and participation to be promoted and fostered. Expanded public-private partnerships to strengthen existing weak policy enabling environments with communications outreach and advocacy will be supported. Emphasis will be placed on mobilising new resources to support integrated programme interventions to support and advance sustainable and resilient societies that address a mix of governance, economic, social and environmental issues such as inequity, resource depletion, climate change, inclusive governance, poverty and social protection. Continued emphasis also will be placed on strengthening volunteerism and innovation in the region.

4.8

Taking account of the recommendations of joint UNDAF/SPD consultations, with national stakeholders,

8

coordinated by the UNDP designated focal point agencies in 10 programme countries, which were conducted during 2010-2011, the Programme Components for 2012-2016 are as follows:

Programme Component – Poverty Reduction and MDG Achievement11 In line with its core mandate on Poverty and Inequality Reduction, and MDG Achievement, UNDP will address economic security and poverty reduction through regional MDG Acceleration efforts in line with national and regional priorities in the following areas: support to social protection reform; private sector and microenterprise development for inclusive growth and broad-based economic participation, including in the context of rural development; education for employment and; support to sustainable land management and land tenure/access reform. UNDP will continue to work with regional and United Nations System partners to strengthen the collection and quality of data and its use within an integrated policy framework to contribute to development goals, including the MDGs. Consequently, there will be an increased focus of the SPARC (Support to Poverty Reduction and Assessment in the Caribbean) project to build national and regional capacity in data collection, dissemination and use, as well as on incorporating SIDS-specific measures of poverty and vulnerability into existing frameworks for assessing poverty reduction and human development achievements and for defining relevant policy and national and regional levels. The Poverty Reduction programme will also work towards increased economic participation and social inclusion by supporting the OECS Social Protection Reform programme and promoting decent work and inclusive markets through entrepreneurship and small and medium enterprise development. UNDP work on social protection with an emphasis on vulnerable groups will also address HIV/AIDS with a human rights-based approach, specifically through advocacy on stigma and discrimination. UNDP will also complement the support to macro-fiscal stability provided by the IMF and World Bank, DP/DSP/CAR/2 5, and support governments in analysing and addressing the poverty and social impacts of needed reforms. Programme Component Result 1: By 2016, equitable and inclusive macro and sectoral national and subregional policies are developed based on integrated collection and analysis of relevant economic, social, environmental and other data and based on measures of poverty and human development that capture the multiple deprivations of vulnerable groups. This will include: • •

An integrated data framework for effective monitoring and evaluation and the development of inclusive, pro-poor policy; and National growth and poverty reduction strategies and regional policy documents in 10 countries that reflect poverty and social impact analysis and inform the equitable, annual allocation of national resources and collection of revenues.

Programme Component Result 2: MDG Acceleration Plans developed and implemented to respond to national development gaps as prioritised by countries, and including MDG and Caribbean MDG targets related to education and human capacity development for employment; poverty reduction and natural resource management.

11 The Programme Component “Poverty Reduction and MDG Achievement” within the M-CPAP 2012-2016 combines outputs for this practice area as listed in the 2012-2016 SPD as well as integrated data priorities captioned under “Cross cutting Issues” in the SPD. The latter is linked to the UNDAF (2012-2016) Outcome – Social, environmental and economic data collection is harmonized and access increased for use in policy and decision-making processes at the subregional and national levels”. These elements of the UNDP Barbados and the OECS’ programme of support are implemented via the Poverty Reduction Programme and are so reflected in the M-CPAP 2012-2016.

9

Programme Component Result 3: As part of already underway social protection reform efforts in the region, innovative social protection measures developed that are linked to productive sectors including enterprise development, and that support inclusive growth and reduce vulnerability.

Programme Component – Governance The 2012-2016 Governance Programme will support inclusive governance12 programming that includes shared visioning policy development, programme interventions that gives focus to issues such as building trust, accountability, integrity, rights-based development, youth and governance and citizen security initiatives. The development and use of Caribbean SIDS-specific governance data from the first Caribbean Democratic Governance Assessments (DGAs), the 2012 Caribbean Human Development Report and other regional research will facilitate the strengthening of Caribbean states’ capacities with evidence-based policy formulation, programme and project design and results-based action plans. Promoting volunteerism, innovative partnerships with civil society, the private sector and new UNDAF-developed UN System joint projects will be enhanced with regional, national communications and media outreach, youth and governance programme development as well as interventions that link with the UN System support for OHCHR/UPR review processes and human rights frameworks developed to support equitable human development, gender and other development capacities. Programme Component Result 1: Enhanced governance data collection and evidenced-based capacities of state and non-state development stakeholders to: • Enhance DGA data collection and analysis support for effective governance reforms as well as state and non-state institutional capacity development; • Strengthen participatory and inclusive governance through national citizen security policy and programme development facilitated by access to new research and data from the 2012 Caribbean Human Development Report on Citizen Security and UNDP Democratic Dialogue methodologies;13 • Establish harmonised governance frameworks taking account of new global development agendas such as post Rio+20 frameworks, new business models and management systems to strengthen Caribbean policy reforms and responses; and • Develop SIDS Knowledge Management Frameworks, taking account of the new global interconnectedness that interlinks governance based on economic, social, environmental and disaster policy and programme frameworks. Programme Component Result 2: Strengthened and enhanced youth and governance capacities to: • Promote civic and leadership involvement in public responsibilities and increased capabilities of young people as decision-making change agents; • Strengthen communications, media, and youth advocacy and outreach; and • Promote and establish spaces/structures for youth skills and entrepreneurial development in new and emerging sectors including green economy, arts and creative industries, media and internet initiatives.

12 This approach is in line with recommendations of the 2009 UNDP Review Report on Middle Income Countries (MICs) which calls for “An integrated capacity development approach and response and for “UNDP to be the voice for issues such as public accountability, citizen empowerment, equality and social justice, low carbon economies, broad-based employment, social protection/insurance, land reform, education reform and democratic governance reforms. Such an approach as described above is more suited to the reality of the MICs today – the varied levels of human development within a country, its mix of capacity assets and needs, and the ‘fits and starts’ that they face in advancing human development. In this context, the risk of reversal of development gains and of sustaining successes can be better captured through the bolder categories of capacity-deficit, capacity-in-flux and capacity strong states.” 13 Since 2001, the UNDP Democratic Dialogue Regional Project has constituted an active service instrument for dialogue initiatives in the Latin America and Caribbean Region. It develops, disseminates and applies diverse social technologies to support management efforts and consensus-building initiatives according to country needs. It compiles and systematises experiences, lessons learned and good practices and establishes partnerships with other regional and global institutions committed to democratic dialogue.

10

Programme Component – Environment, energy and climate change UNDP will support the development and implementation of national policies and strategies for energy security, climate change adaptation, and better management of natural resources, taking full account of strategies to reduce natural hazard risks. To this end, UNDP will build on ongoing initiatives to remove barriers to the introduction and transfer of renewable energy technologies and facilitate the dissemination of knowledge and good practice, as well as capacity development in renewable energy, energy efficiency and climate change. The sub-regional office will continue to support the evolution of SIDSDOCK (a global SIDS energy initiative), developed under the previous programme cycle - to support diversification of the energy mix, while modelling climate change impacts, conducting damage and loss projections and supporting research on compensation mechanisms to finance the anticipated loss and damage associated with climate change. UNDP will also support the establishment of a policy framework for the development of a green economy in the Caribbean, including sustainable management of natural resources. Strong focus will be placed on the harmonisation of data for policy analysis and national accounting. Overall, the response strategy will advocate climate change as a core development concern, ensuring its mainstreaming into core development areas, including energy, agriculture, health, water resources and infrastructure. Programme Component Result 1: Enhanced capacity of national, sub-regional and regional institutions and stakeholders to: • Effectively manage natural resources. • Build resilience to the adverse impacts of climate change as well as natural and anthropogenic hazards; • Improve energy efficiency and use of renewable energy; and • Improve policy, legal, regulatory and institutional frameworks for environmental and energy governance. Programme Component Result 2: Harmonised system for collection of environmental data and for policy analysis and national accounting. Programme Component Result 3: Knowledge and good practices disseminated and capacity developed in the areas of natural resource management, disaster risk reduction, climate change, renewable energy, energy efficiency, green economy, biosafety and adherence to international standards and norms. Programme Component – Disaster Risk Reduction UNDP will continue to build on the support to the Comprehensive Disaster Management (CDM) Strategy led by the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency and the Hyogo Framework for Action to advance disaster risk reduction through regional, sub-regional and national initiatives. This will include investments in critical components of disaster risk reduction such as hazard mapping and vulnerability assessments; support to early warning systems; and continued capacity development of disaster risk reduction infrastructure. Where necessary, the development and implementation of recovery strategies will also be central to disaster risk reduction mainstreaming and will be formulated around poverty reduction and democratic governance strategies, with emphasis on sustainable livelihoods and inclusive consultative processes. Also central to activities for the period will be strengthening the links between the disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation agendas, and improving disaster response and assessment capabilities at both the national and regional levels. Strengthening of the Recovery Planning capacity will also be a priority which would incorporate the central planning and economic development agencies in the countries. The results of these activities are expected to include: more effective assessment and, consequently, response and recovery activities; improved planning with documented costs of the low impact, high frequency events, as well as the high impact infrequent events. UNDP’s involvement in the disaster risk reduction initiatives, including pioneering support to the CDM Strategy; engagement with partners at the national and regional levels, and drawing on its mandates in capacity development and recovery planning, will continue to provide a valuable space for engaging actors in the areas identified.

11

Programme Component Result 1: Multi-hazard risk identification and early warning systems. Strengthening the disaster risk reduction structures will be focused at national and regional levels and provide a basis for further investment in these areas. Specifically, UNDP will invest in strengthening risk identification, hazard mapping and vulnerability assessment (HM/VA); all-hazard early warning systems; and support to tsunami preparedness with the establishment of a Caribbean Tsunami Information Centre (CTIC). These activities are all regionally managed and allow sharing best practice and expertise, as well as building systemic redundancies. Additionally, these investments will be mainstreamed into existing structures or in the case of the CTIC this will be supervised and supported through the UNESCO IOC and the Intergovernmental Coastal Hazards Warning System for the Caribbean and Adjacent Regions (CARIBE/EWS). Improved planning and risk mitigation at the household, community and sector levels are expected to be a direct result of capacity development, public awareness and advocacy with these ultimately being demonstrated by reduced overall vulnerability and impact. Application of climate model outputs to HM/VA is expected to inform and strengthen risk mitigation and development planning to be adaptive and mitigative to the impacts of climate change. Programme Component Result 2: Improved National Disaster Risk Management (DRM) structures and mechanisms. Improving the post-disaster recovery process will continue to be advanced through capacity building in the various stages of damage assessment at all levels, including in communities, and strengthening the recovery planning capacity with increased dialogue between the central planning, disaster management and economic development agencies. Previous activities have demonstrated that rapidly communicating statistics from various government agencies is critical during the Damage and Loss Assessment (DALA) process in order to have an output on which the Government and development partners can base their recovery assistance. Further, increased engagement between the disaster management and development planning agencies is necessary to ensure the resilience of the reconstruction efforts. The results of these activities are expected to include more effective assessment and, consequently, response and recovery activities; and improved planning with documented costs of the low impact high frequency events as well as the high impact infrequent events. In the event of a disaster, UNDP will apply fast track procedures and direct implementation to support early recovery processes, including the damage and loss assessment process, and support countries in the transition to long term development. UNDP will support the enhancement of volunteer structures with the national Disaster Risk Management mechanisms as a means to improve response capacities. Programme Component Result 3: Strengthened community resilience. Strengthened community based capacity in public awareness and advocacy in disaster risk reduction; vulnerability assessment; response; and adaptation will be addressed by focusing on: •

•

Community Based Disaster Management (CBDM), including support to the vulnerability and capacity assessment (VCA) initiatives led by the IFRC; and advancing Community Based Adaptation CBA as a key strategy for integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change, including through partnership with the GEF Small Grants Programme; Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) establishment, building on regional experiences to enhance preparedness and response to natural hazards.

These initiatives will require broadening the nature of the partnerships at the regional, national and community levels and expanding on UNDP and other partner-led initiatives to realise resilience, building from the ground up.

12

Part V. Partnership Strategy 5.1

The special nature of the development context of Eastern Caribbean SIDS and the rapidly evolving development landscape as well as the complexity and high cost of addressing the development challenges of 10 Caribbean MIC/SIDS programme countries require sustained partnerships, donor coordination and strategic resource mobilisation to effectively support optimum results of the M-CAP programme outcomes. The proposed programme results require a diverse mix of Government, civil society, the private sector, UN agencies and other development partner collaboration and support. As an additionality, UNDP will also leverage its proven thought leader, and conceptual capacities in priority areas identified for assistance interventions supported by the M-CPAP. UNDP proposes integrated MCPAP assistance to strengthen links with UNDAF–UN Joint programmes.

5.2

UNDP’s known and accepted political neutrality as a locally trusted partner positions the organisation to work closely with government and other national actors to broker partnerships and mobilise resources. UNDP will also make available to its partners global knowledge accessed from its network of 166 country offices. UNDP delivery of assistance to both national and sub-regional programmes and projects addresses both non-NCC and NCC categories of programme countries.

5.3

UNDP as an advocate for development effectiveness and aid coordination and management will work with partners to develop policy/advocacy strategic positioning and donor coordination support, as well as access for the development of partnerships with the private sector, civil society and NGOs, and through south-south cooperation. UNDP, as a known global Knowledge Management advocate with access to regional and global networks, will develop SIDS Communities of Practice (CoPs) as an innovative modality for partnerships, mobilising skills, knowledge and concepts from global, regional and national stakeholders linking SIDS globally and regionally to redefine partnerships options.

5.4

Governments: UNDP’s primary partner, stakeholder and client for capacity building are Eastern Caribbean Governments – at sub-regional, national and local levels. M-CPAP programme results will focus on building capacity in government ministries and agencies in Barbados and the OECS. These institutions will, subject to capacity assessments, be the main implementing partners in the programme. This should ensure ownership and sustainability of results. The Ministry of Finance or other Ministry designated as the Government’s Focal Point and Coordinating Authority for UNDP in the programming countries will play a key role in the M-CPAP implementation, overall policy direction and the lead in monitoring progress towards expected results.

5.5

The UN System: UNDP and the other UN agencies provide coordinated assistance to strengthen and enhance the development agendas of Barbados and the OECS Member States through the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) to respond to the challenges that have been identified by the countries in national consultation processes. Six development outcome areas have been identified in the 2012-2016 UNDAF. These are: • Environment, energy, climate change and disaster risk reduction • Enabling environment of effective economic and social governance and enhanced security • Social protection and poverty reduction with an emphasis on vulnerable groups • Food and nutritional security • Public health within the context of the development agenda using rights-based approach, maintaining focus on HIV/AIDS and non-communicable diseases • Capacity development and institutional strengthening. The Resident Coordinator, in collaboration with UN system agencies and national counterparts, will work to mobilise resources towards achievement of the UNDAF outcomes. Progress towards the UNDAF outcomes will be jointly monitored and evaluated by the UN subregional team and the monitoring and evaluation of UNDP’s subregional programme will feed into and be guided by this process. Key UN partners for the UNDP programme include UNAIDS, UNICEF, UNIDO, UNISDR, UNWOMEN, UNFPA, PAHO/WHO, FAO, UNV, UNODC and UNOCHA. UNDAF Outcome Groups, which have a responsibility for ensuring the achievement of the priorities outlined therein, agree on the

13

UN input into Eastern Caribbean Development Partner Groups, made up of multilateral and bilateral partners. UNDP will actively participate in all Outcome Groups and serve as co-convening agency for three Outcome Areas. 5.6

Civil Society: Recognising the pivotal role of civil society in deepening democratic governance in the region, the programme envisages important partnerships with civil society organisations, including NGOS, Community Based Organisations, and academia. Civil society organisations can serve as valuable partners in community mobilisation and community level interventions. Accordingly, civil society organisations are expected to implement selected components of the programme.

5.7

Private Sector: UNDP will deepen its dialogue with private sector companies to leverage their technical expertise and networks, and to mobilise resources and other support for the programme. Some companies are embracing more their “corporate social responsibility” in doing business and adhere to the principles of the Global Compact.

5.8

Other Partners/Donors: UNDP would closely coordinate its interventions with significant development partners and donors, such as the European Union, CDB, USAID, CIDA, DFID, AUSAID, IADB, the Governments of Italy, and Norway, as well as new partners such as the Governments of Austria and Finland and the OPEC Fund, with a view to ensure consistency and maximise impact. Programme cofinancing may be sought with such partners.

5.9

The following table lists potential partners in each of the above categories. Implementing programmes for each output are identified in the annexed results and resources framework. Key partners in the implementation of the UNDP Multi-Country Programme Government/Parastatals

Civil Society

UN System

Office of the Premier

Selected NGOs and CBOs that have been formally registered with Governments

UNDP

Community Committees

FAO

Office of the Prime Minister Office of the Governor Office of the Deputy Governor

Development

Ministry of Communications and Works Ministry of Economic Development and Trade Disaster Management Coordination Agency

Regional Institutions Caribbean Community (CARICOM) CDB Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC)

Ministry of the Environment

Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA)

Ministry of Finance

CIMH

Ministry of Education

ITU ILO

Ministry of Agriculture Office of the Auditor General

ECLAC

PAHO/WHO (Caribbean Programme Coordination) PAHO/WHO (Eastern Caribbean Countries) UNAIDS UNESCO UNIC UNFPA UNICEF

14

Ministry of Health Ministry of Agriculture, Trade, Land Housing and the Environment Ministry of Youth Affairs Culture Tourism and Sports Ministry of National Security Office of the Attorney General

Caribbean Environmental Health Institute (CEHI)

UN WOMEN UPU

Caribbean Centre for Development Administration (CARICAD) Caribbean Regional Technical Assistance Centre (CARTAC) Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS)

UNEP UNIDO UNODC

International Partners IFRC

University of the West Indies (UWI)

Private Sector

Other Donors United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) Department for International Development (DfID) German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ) Austrian Development Agency (AUSAID) International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) Commission of the European Communities Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) World Bank Government of Finland Government of Norway Government of Austria

15

Part VI. Programme Management 6.1

The programme will be nationally executed under the overall coordination of the UNDP Focal Point Ministry as the Government Coordinating Agency, in collaboration with Government ministries, NGOs, IGOs, UN agencies, providing implementation support and formulation of programme activities. The Government Coordinating Agency will nominate the Government Co-operating Agency directly responsible for the Government’s participation in each UNDP-assisted AWP. The AWPs describe the specific results to be achieved and will form the basic agreement between UNDP and each Implementing Partner on the use of resources. The reference to “Implementing Partner(s)” shall mean “Executing Agency (ies)” as used in the SBAA.

6.2

In programme design and implementation, UNDP works closely with key partners. The multi-country programme builds on the United Nations reform principles, especially simplification and harmonisation, by operating in line with the harmonised common country programming instruments such as the UNDAF results matrix, Delivering as One (DaO) efforts, joint monitoring and evaluation, and programme resources frameworks in the M-CPAP and the AWPs.

6.3

To the extent possible UNDP and partners will use the minimum documents necessary, namely the signed M-CPAP and signed AWPs to implement programmatic initiatives.14 However, as necessary and appropriate, project documents would be prepared using, inter alia, the relevant text from the MCPAP, and AWPs. UNDP will sign project documents with partners in accordance with corporate practices and local requirements. In line with the UNDG Joint Programming Guidance Note, the scope of inter-agency cooperation is strengthened through joint programmes and geographical convergence.

6.4

All cash transfers to an Implementing Partner are based on the Annual Work Plans agreed between the Implementing Partner and UNDP.

6.5

Cash transfers for activities detailed in AWPs can be made by UNDP using the following modalities: 1. Cash transferred directly to the Implementing Partner: a. Prior to the start of activities (direct cash transfer), or b. After activities have been completed (reimbursement); 2. Direct payment to vendors or third parties for obligations incurred by the Implementing Partners on the basis of requests signed by the designated official of the Implementing Partner; 3. Direct payments to vendors or third parties for obligations incurred by UN agencies in support of activities agreed with Implementing Partners.

6.6

Direct cash transfers shall be requested and released for programme implementation periods not exceeding three months. Reimbursements of previously authorised expenditures shall be requested and released quarterly or after the completion of activities. The UNDP shall not be obligated to reimburse expenditure made by the Implementing Partner over and above the authorised amounts.

6.7

Following the completion of any activity, any balance of funds shall be reprogrammed by mutual agreement between the Implementing Partner and UNDP, or refunded.

6.8

Cash transfer modalities, the size of disbursements, and the scope and frequency of assurance activities may depend on the findings of a review of the public financial management capacity in the case of a Government Implementing Partner, and of an assessment of the financial management

14 In some exceptional cases, it may be necessary to prepare a project document outside the M-CPAP. While the use of project documents outside the M-CPAP should be avoided, if necessary, such project documents could be prepared (for example, in crisis situations not envisaged before). In such cases, the AWP format will be used as project document ensuring that it reflects the mandatory clauses such as the legal context, management arrangements and for cash transfer.

16

capacity of the non-UN Implementing Partner. A qualified consultant, such as a public accounting firm, selected by UNDP may conduct such an assessment, in which the Implementing Partner shall participate. 6.9

Cash transfer modalities, the size of disbursements, and the scope and frequency of assurance activities may be revised in the course of programme implementation based on the findings of programme monitoring, expenditure monitoring and reporting, and audits.

6.10

Resource mobilisation efforts will be intensified to support the Results and Resources Framework (RRF) and ensure sustainability of the programme. Mobilisation of other resources in the form of cost sharing, trust funds, or government cash counterpart contributions will be undertaken to secure funding for the programme.

Part VII. Monitoring and Evaluation 7.1

Monitoring and evaluation of the M-CPAP will be undertaken in line with the UNDAF results matrix and UNDAF monitoring and evaluation plan. A Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Framework/Plan more specifically focused on monitoring and overseeing the results that are being supported directly by UNDP will be prepared and implemented within the UNDAF/National M&E processes. The Government and UNDP will be responsible for setting up the necessary M&E mechanisms, (including those needed to monitor outcomes), tools and conducting reviews in order to ensure continuous monitoring and evaluation of the M-CPAP, and with the view to ensuring efficient utilisation of programme resources as well as accountability, transparency and integrity.15 The Implementing Partners will provide periodic reports on the progress, achievements and results of their projects, outlining the challenges faced in project implementation as well as resource utilisation as articulated in the AWP. The reporting will be in accordance with the procedures and harmonised with UN agencies to the extent possible.

7.2

Implementing partners agree to cooperate with UNDP for monitoring all activities supported by cash transfers and will facilitate access to relevant financial records and personnel responsible for the administration of cash provided by the UNDP. To that effect, Implementing partners agree to the following: 1. Periodic on-site reviews and spot checks of their financial records by UNDP or its representatives, 2. Programmatic monitoring of activities following UNDP’s standards and guidance for site visits and field monitoring, 3. Special or scheduled audits. UNDP, in collaboration with other UN agencies will establish an annual audit plan, giving priority to audits of Implementing Partners with large amounts of cash assistance provided by UNDP, and those whose financial management capacity needs strengthening.

7.3

To facilitate assurance activities, Implementing Partners and UNDP may agree to use a programme monitoring and financial control tool allowing data sharing and analysis.

7.4

The

7.5

Assessments and audits of non-government Implementing Partners will be conducted in accordance with the policies and procedures of UNDP.

audits

will

be

commissioned

by UNDP

and

15 For more details: Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfers (HACT)

17

undertaken

by private

audit

services.

Part VIII. Commitments of UNDP 8.1

UNDP will ensure coherence between the M-CPAP/AWP, UNDAF results matrix and MDGs, including M & E reporting. Through annual reviews and periodic progress reporting, responsibilities between UNDP, the Government and the Implementing Partners will be emphasised.

8.2

In case of direct cash transfer or reimbursement, UNDP shall notify the Implementing Partner of the amount approved by UNDP and shall disburse funds to the Implementing Partner in 10 days.

8.3

In case of direct payment to vendors or third parties for obligations incurred by the Implementing Partners on the basis of requests signed by the designated official of the Implementing Partner; or to vendors or third parties for obligations incurred by UNDP in support of activities agreed with Implementing Partners, UNDP shall proceed with the payment within 10 days.

8.4

UNDP shall not have any direct liability under the contractual arrangements concluded between the Implementing Partner and a third party vendor.

8.5

Where more than one UN agency provides cash to the same Implementing Partner, programme monitoring, financial monitoring and auditing will be undertaken jointly or coordinated with those UN agencies.

8.6

For OECS Member States, UNDP will make available approximately US$600,000 in TRAC 1 from regular core resources to support programme implementation, subject to availability of funds. UNDP will cooperate with the Government to mobilise additional resources of approximately US$42,000,000.00, subject to donor interest. Regular resources and other additional resources mobilised are exclusive of funds which would be mobilised for emergency disaster response. These funds would be based on the needs and priorities identified in post-disaster damage and loss assessments.

Part IX. Commitments of the Government 9.1

The Governments will honor their commitments in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreements (SBAA) of: Anguilla: 7 January 1960 Antigua and Barbuda: 26 August 1983 Barbados: 21 October 1974 British Virgin Islands: 7 January 1960 Commonwealth of Dominica: 5 November 1980 Grenada: 17 May 1976 Montserrat: 7 January 1960 St Kitts: 30 January 1985 St Lucia: 22 July 1981 St Vincent and the Grenadines: 29 April 1983

9.2

The Governments shall apply the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations agencies to UNDP’s property, funds, and assets and to its officials and consultants. In

18

addition the Governments will accord to UNDP and its officials and to other persons performing services on behalf of UNDP, the privileges, immunities and facilities as set out in the SBAA. 9.3

9.4

9.5

In case of government cost-sharing through the M-CPAP, the following clauses will apply: i. The schedule of payments and UNDP bank account details. ii. The value of the payment, if made in a currency other than United States dollars, shall be determined by applying the United Nations operational rate of exchange in effect on the date of payment. Should there be a change in the United Nations operational rate of exchange prior to the full utilisation by the UNDP of the payment, the value of the balance of funds still held at that time will be adjusted accordingly. If, in such a case, a loss in the value of the balance of funds is recorded, UNDP shall inform the Governments with a view to determining whether any further financing could be provided by the Governments. Should such further financing not be available, the assistance to be provided to the M-CPAP may be reduced, suspended or terminated by UNDP. iii. The above schedule of payments takes into account the requirement that the payments shall be made in advance of the implementation of planned activities. It may be amended to be consistent with the progress of M-CPAP delivery. iv. UNDP shall receive and administer the payment in accordance with the regulations, rules and directives of UNDP. v. All financial accounts and statements shall be expressed in United States dollars. vi. If unforeseen increases in expenditures or commitments are expected or realised (whether owing to inflationary factors, fluctuation in exchange rates or unforeseen contingencies), UNDP shall submit to the government on a timely basis a supplementary estimate showing the further financing that will be necessary. The Governments shall use their best endeavors to obtain the additional funds required. vii. If the payments referred above are not received in accordance with the payment schedule, or if the additional financing required in accordance with paragraph [vi] above is not forthcoming from the Government or other sources, the assistance to be provided to the M-CPAP under this Agreement may be reduced, suspended or terminated by UNDP. viii. Any interest income attributable to the contribution shall be credited to UNDP Account and shall be utilised in accordance with established UNDP procedures. ix. In accordance with the decisions and directives of UNDP's Executive Board reflected in its Policy on Cost Recovery from Other Resources, the Contribution shall be subject to cost recovery for indirect costs incurred by UNDP headquarters and country office structures in providing General Management Support (GMS) services. To cover these GMS costs, the contribution shall be charged a fee equal to 7%. Furthermore, as long as they are unequivocally linked to the specific project(s), all direct costs of implementation, including the costs of executing entity or implementing partner, will be identified in the project budget against a relevant budget line and borne by the project accordingly. x. Ownership of equipment, supplies and other properties financed from the contribution shall vest in UNDP. Matters relating to the transfer of ownership by UNDP shall be determined in accordance with the relevant policies and procedures of UNDP. xi. The contribution shall be subject exclusively to the internal and external auditing procedures provided for in the financial regulations, rules and directives of UNDP. Mechanisms for participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation on the progress of the country programme involving civil society and other development partners will be implemented. The Governments are also committed to organise periodic programme review, planning and joint strategy meetings and where appropriate, coordination of sectoral and thematic development partners groups to facilitate the participation of donors, civil society, private sector and UN agencies. In addition, the Governments will facilitate periodic monitoring visits by UNDP staff and/or designated officials for the purpose of monitoring, meeting beneficiaries, assessing the progress and evaluating the impact of the use of programme resources. The Governments will make available to UNDP in a timely manner any information about policy and legislative changes occurring during the implementation of the M-CPAP that might have an impact in co-operation. A standard Fund Authorisation and Certificate of Expenditures (FACE) report, reflecting the activity lines of the Annual Work Plan (AWP), will be used by Implementing Partners to request the release of funds, or to secure the agreement that UNDP will reimburse or directly pay for planned expenditure. The

19

Implementing Partners will use the FACE to report on the utilisation of cash received. The Implementing Partner shall identify the designated official(s) authorised to provide the account details, request and certify the use of cash. The FACE will be certified by the designated official(s) of the Implementing Partner. 9.6

Cash transferred to Implementing Partners should be spent for the purpose of activities as agreed in the AWPs only.

9.7

Cash received by the Governments and national NGO Implementing Partners shall be used in accordance with established national regulations, policies and procedures consistent with international standards, in particular ensuring that cash is expended for activities as agreed in the AWPs, and ensuring that reports on the full utilisation of all received cash are submitted to UNDP within six months after receipt of the funds. Where any of the national regulations, policies and procedures is not consistent with international standards, the UN agency regulations, policies and procedures will apply.

9.8

In the case of international NGO and IGO Implementing Partners cash received shall be used in accordance with international standards in particular ensuring that cash is expended for activities as agreed in the AWPs, and ensuring that reports on the full utilisation of all received cash are submitted to UNDP within six months after receipt of the funds.

9.9

To facilitate scheduled and special audits, each Implementing Partner receiving cash from UNDP will provide UNDP or its representative with timely access to:
All financial records which establish the transactional record of the cash transfers provided by UNDP;


9.10

All relevant documentation and personnel associated with the functioning of the Implementing Partner’s internal control structure through which the cash transfers have passed.

The findings of each audit will be reported to the Implementing Partner and UNDP. Each Implementing Partner will furthermore


Receive and review the audit report issued by the auditors.




Provide timely statements of the acceptance or rejection of any audit recommendation to the auditors and UNDP so that the auditors can include those statements in their audit report and submit it to UNDP.




Undertake timely actions to address the accepted audit recommendations.




Report on the actions taken to implement accepted recommendations to the UNDP on a quarterly basis (or as locally agreed).

Part X. Other Provisions 10.1

Where a Government agency is the Implementing Partner of a particular project under this M-CPAP, consistent with the Article III of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA), the responsibility for the safety and security of the Implementing Partner and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property in the Implementing Partner’s custody, rests with the Implementing Partner. To this end, each Implementing Partner shall:

a)

put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account the security situation in the country where the project is being carried;

20

b)

assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full implementation of the security plan.

10.2

UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of the Implementing Partner’s obligations under this M-CPAP, and its constituent AWPs.

10.3

Each Implementing Partner agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document (M-CPAP and AWP) are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under/further to each Project Document”.

10.4

The foregoing shall also apply to Projects under this M-CPAP where the Implementing Partner is an Inter-governmental organisation that has signed a standard basic executing agency agreement with UNDP.

10.5

Where UNDP or other UN Agencies serve as Implementing Partners, they shall (a) comply with the policies, procedures and practices of the United Nations safety and security management system, and (b) undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the project funds/UNDP funds received pursuant to a Project Document, are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). This list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered unto under each Project Document.

10.6

This M-CPAP enters into force on the date signed by the Parties and in the case the M-CPAP is signed on different dates, then it shall enter into force on the date of the later signature. The M-CPAP shall continue in force for five years.

10.7

This M-CPAP supersedes any previously signed M-CPAP between the Governments and UNDP and may be modified by mutual consent of both parties on the recommendations of the joint strategy meeting.

IN WITNESS THEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorised, have signed this Country Programme Action Plan on this day [day, month, and year] in [name of city, name of country]. For the Government of Anguilla

For the United Nations Development Programme

Signature: _________________

Signature: _________________

Name:

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

_________________

Title:

_________________

21

For the Government of Antigua and Barbuda Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the Government of Barbados Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the British Virgin Islands Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

22

For the Government of the Commonwealth of Dominica Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the Government of Grenada Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the Government of Montserrat Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the Government of St Christopher and Nevis Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

23

For the Government of Saint Lucia Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

For the Government of St Vincent and the Grenadines Signature: _________________

Name:

Title:

_________________

_________________

24

Annex I: M-CPAP RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK UNDAF Priority: Environment, Energy, Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction UNDAF Outcome #1: Enhanced capacity of national, sub-regional and regional institutions and stakeholders to: effectively manage natural resources; build resilience to the adverse impacts of climate change and natural and anthropogenic hazards; improved energy efficiency and use of renewable energy; improved policy, legal, regulatory and institutional frameworks for environmental and energy governance. Relevant UNDP Strategic Plan result: Disaster risk reduction better integrated into development planning and disaster response and recovery improved 16 Implementation Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) Country programme outputs modality(ies) and for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Implementing partner(s) Indicator: Number of updated, tested and publicly Output 1: Improved risk NIM REGULAR RESOURCES identification and multi-hazard available contingency plans per country. Baseline: All countries have contingency plans for early warning systems CIMH 86,500 19,306 19,306 19,306 19,306 CDEMA hurricanes and, in some cases, for multiple hazards. OTHER RESOURCES Annual Targets Governments Ad hoc and infrequent testing of plans and limited updating of plans. By 2012 7,195,000 6,072,571 6,890,000 7,200,000 6, 103,929 Target: Annual updates and testing of multi-hazard • NEMO and Met Office utilising plans, which are made publicly available in 6 to 10 DEWETRA DSS for EWS countries. • Emergency telecommunications upgraded and integrated into EWS Indicator: No. of countries with climate change for at least 3 countries adaptation strategies updated and approved. • GIS capacity and hazard maps Baseline: 6 countries have draft strategies. developed for at least 3 countries Target: 6-10 countries have updated and approved climate change adaptation strategies. By 2016 • Flood hazard EWS functioning and DIM Indicators: capable of quantifying expected Percent of budget allocated to environmental precipitation and associated impacts WMO protection; hectares of forest cover; greenhouse gas for major watersheds UNESCO emissions per capita; number of updated and tested •Tsunami EWS fully functioning UN Agencies contingency plans; volume of savings from reduced fossil fuel imports; multilateral environmental Gender Marker Rating and agreements incorporated into national legislation; Motivation17 - 2: energy efficiency and renewable energy policies. Flooding and its impact on Baseline: National reports currently capture GHG communication, transport and emissions. MEAs are not currently incorporated into livelihoods have been shown to legislation but are reported on. Draft RE policy in disproportionately affect women due place in all countries. to their high levels of participation in Target: Annual GHG report prepared by all the agriculture sector in the countries. Energy policy approved in all countries. agriculture sector, the informal sector Indicator: Data capture system available. Energy policy approved and being applied. Baseline: Data for some sectors available is mixed format. Target: Uniformed data structure and collection system in place.

Total

163,724

33,461,500

and as caregivers.

16Indicative estimates are subject to the availability of funds. Budget includes technical assistance. 17Gender Rating and Motivation: 3- Gender equality is a principal objective of the output; 2- Gender equality is a significant objective of the output; 1- Outputs that will contribute in some way to gender equality but not significantly; 0- Outputs that are not expected to contribute noticeably to gender equality. Include a one sentence motivation as to the reason for the chosen rating.

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 2: Improved national Disaster Risk Management structures and mechanisms Annual Targets By 2012 • The system for damage assessment from initial to detailed economic impact clearly defined in an approved plan with roles and responsibilities. By 2014 • Expertise for conducting Damage and Needs Assessments (DANA) and Damage and Loss Assessments (DALA) established incountry to manage level 1 and 2 events By 2016 • Process for damage assessment and disaster risk reduction monitoring integrated into national information infrastructure • Recovery planning capacity built and incorporated into the Central Planning structure • Hazard mapping (HM) and vulnerability assessments (VA) for critical areas complete for flooding, landslides and storm surge, incorporating expected changes of climate change • Risk mitigation based on HM/VA and incorporating climate change – adaptation (for hydrometeorological events) to be incorporated into national strategies in 6 countries

Implementation modality(ies) and Implementing partner(s) NIM NEMO UNECLAC OECS Secretariat CDEMA Government

DIM UNESCO WMO UN Agencies

Gender Marker Rating and Motivation Rating - 2: Definition of vulnerable groups will be central to effective disaster risk management. Gender analysis in this context will therefore be a necessity.

26

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 3: Strengthened community resilience

Implementation modality(ies) and Implementing partner(s) NIM CDEMA

Annual Targets: By 2016 • CERTs established and equipped to facilitate response and advocacy as indicated by plans and responses to natural hazards – 3 vulnerable communities in at least 4 countries • Community-Based Disaster Management (CBDM) initiatives, including adaptation to CC designed, implemented and documented in 2 pilot communities Gender Marker Rating and Motivation Rating - 2: Strengthened communities to incorporate gender analysis in assessment processes.

27

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 4 : Knowledge and good practices disseminated and capacity development in the areas of natural resource management, disaster risk reduction, climate change, renewable energy, energy efficiency, low carbon emissions, biosafety and adherence to international standards and norms

Implementation modality(ies) and Implementing partner(s) NIM Government and/or UN Implementing Partner University of the West indies Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (CCCCC) NGO UNEP

Annual Targets: By 2012 • Number of capacity development activities for policymakers in climate change, renewable energy, energy efficiency By 2014 • Biosafety Protocol adopted By 2016 • Number of projects generated through knowledge fairs/networking opportunities Gender Marker Rating and Motivation – 1: Documentation of good practice should include gender analysis across thematic areas – energy and the environment and disaster risk reduction - in efforts to respond to areas of gender Inequity in policy development.

28

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 5: Institutional capacity to respond to climate change strengthened at the national level

Implementation modality(ies) and Implementing partner(s) NIM Government Civil Society

Annual Targets: By 2013 • Policy, legislative and regulatory framework for EE and RE in place. By 2014 • National adaptation plans in place Ecosystems and valuation of related ecosystem services in place. By 2016 • Protected areas using valuation systems as income earners and cofinancing for further development Gender Marker – 1: Rural communities have a significant number of female-headed households this factor must be addressed in the income stream. Output 6: Improved energy efficiency and the removal of barriers to the introduction and transfer of renewable energy technology facilitated

NIM UNEP UNDP UNIDO CARICOM

Annual Targets: By 2012 • Cost-effective opportunities identified; By 2014 • Low carbon emission development strategy for at least one country • Increased renewable energy resource potential. 2% more renewable energy systems in place; By 2016 • Reduced fossil energy consumption identified.

Gender Marker – 1: Regional studies have identified the limited transfer of RE and other technologies to women’s businesses as one of the factors constraining their productivity and income generation.

29

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 7: Harmonisation system for environmental data and for policy analysis and national accounting Annual Target: By 2013 • National Framework for Systematic Collection of Environmental Statistics established in at least one OECS Member State By 2014 • Protocols for harmonisation system developed and available for use. By 2016 • Data reporting incorporated into regional reporting system and picked up by national statistical entity. Gender Marker - 1: Improved harmonization and collection of data will enhance the policy-making environment for gender-sensitive policy formulation Output 8: Strengthened capacity to draft and implement national land use policies and land administration systems

Implementation modality(ies) and Implementing partner(s) NIM National Government CARICOM Secretariat/OECS Secretariat

NIM Government UN System

Annual Targets (to be further defined with the Government): • National land use/ development plans and community-based land management projects that integrate a risk reduction approach developed and implemented. Gender Marker Rating and Motivation – 1: Women in the region tend to have more insecure forms of land tenure. National land use policies and land administration systems should address this gender differential.

30

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

UNDAF Priority: Enabling environment for economic and social governance and enhanced security. UNDAF OUTCOME 2: Strengthened enabling environment for effective and inclusive governance and citizen security at the national levels. Related Strategic Plan focus areas: Enabling environment for economic and social governance and enhanced security. Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes Indicator: % of population: feels safe; considers government security response effective; is confident in systems of governance; believes it can contribute to policy-making (disaggregated by age, gender); Baseline: currently not known at regional level (to be informed by Caribbean HDR and Democratic Governance Assessments research and analysis) Targets (to be finalised as a result of the above research): 50% of population: feels safe; considers government security response effective; is confident in systems of governance; believes it can contribute to policy-making (disaggregated by age, gender); Indicator: Representation of women in governance structures; % of Commission on Youth Development (CCYD) recommendations and national youth plan recommendations implemented; %of population is confident in systems of governance; believes it can contribute to policy-making (disaggregated by age, gender); Baseline: currently not known at regional level (to be informed by Caribbean HDR and Democratic Governance Assessments research and analysis) Targets (to be finalised as a result of above research): Representation of women in governance structures;50% of Commission on Youth Development recommendations and national youth plan recommendations implemented. 50% of population is confident in systems of governance; believes it can contribute to policy-making (disaggregated by age, gender);

Country programme outputs Output 1: Enhanced evidence for governance and judicial reforms Annual Targets (to be further discussed with Governments): • Biennial Democratic Governance Assessments in at least 4 countries - Barbados and the OECS Member States

Implementation modality(ies) and implementing partner(s)

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

DIM/NIM Government – Focal Ministry CARICOM Secretariat OECS Secretariat UN System NGO and IGOs to be decided on consultation

• Caribbean HDR action plans implemented in at least 6 Barbados and the OECS Member States. The 4 priority countries - Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, St. Kitts and Nevis and Saint Lucia. • Youth-specific Democratic Dialogues and multi-stakeholder public consultations processes established to facilitate sharing of evidenced based data and research Gender Marker Rating – 2: Populations in the subregion are comprised of high proportions of female-headed households (some as high as 40%) who are within the poor and vulnerable population groups. Assessments account for these factors and can inform responses to enhance governance.

18Indicative estimates are subject to the availability of funds. Budget includes technical assistance.

31

2014

2015

2016

18

Total

REGULAR RESOURCES 79,500

17,743

17,743 17,743 OTHER RESOURCES

17,743

150,472

1,226,000

1,975,000

470,000

550,000

4,801,000

580,000

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs

Implementation modality(ies) and implementing partner(s)

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$)

2012 Output 2: Crime Prevention capacity strengthened through national citizen security policy and programme development.

NIM Government Focal Ministries – Ministries of Youth and National Security

Annual Targets: • Adoption and use of gender-responsive, human rights based crime prevention programmes targeting youth and adolescents Gender Marker Rating – 2: Gender-based violence is addressed in the CHDR as a priority issue. Output 3: Greater participation by citizens, especially women, youth and vulnerable groups, in functions of government. Annual Target: 2012-2016 • 50% increase youth and gender responsive policies with youth-specific project funded by the DG - TTF Gender Marker Rating – 2: This project aims to enhance participation of youth - women and men - in governance activities to enhance inclusive governance through empowerment, reduced marginalization and to enhance gender equity.

DIM/NIM Ministry of Youth, Community Development Focal Point Ministry

32

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

UNDAF Priority: Social protection and poverty reduction with a focus on vulnerable groups. UNDAF OUTCOME: (3) Enhanced social protection services and systems that improve equity, universal accessibility and quality; (2) Strengthened enabling environment to reduce poverty, increase economic participation and social inclusion with emphasis on vulnerable groups; and (6) Social, environmental and economic data collection is harmonised and access increased for use in policy and decision-making processes at the sub-regional and national level. Related Strategic Plan focus areas: Social protection and poverty reduction with a focus on vulnerable groups. Related Strategic Plan focus areas: Social protection and poverty reduction with a focus on vulnerable groups. 19 Implementation Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) Country programme outputs modality(ies) and for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total implementing partner(s) Output 1: Articulated, Indicator: Number of countries to have enacted NIM REGULAR RESOURCES coordinated social protection protection strategies as policy; number of Social systems that address Safety Net Assessments carried out. OECS Secretariat 151,000 33,701 33,701 33,701 33,701 285,804 resilience in productive Baseline: Five countries have social protection UNDP OTHER RESOURCES sectors including strategies. National Governments microenterprises, and that Target: At least five additional countries have 415,500 365,000 1,500,000 550,000 850,000 3,380,500 support inclusive growth and articulated, coordinated social protection systems reduce vulnerability. that address resilience in productive sectors including microenterprises, and that support Annual Targets: (to be finalised inclusive growth and reduce vulnerability. in consultations with Governments) Indicator: Number of countries with articulated, Gender Marker Rating and coordinated and well-defined social protection Motivation – 2: strategy; the proportion of people categorised as Female-headed households poor/vulnerable disaggregated by sex and age; have high levels of income percentage of poorest quintile in national poverty and dependency. This consumption by sex and age; Number of countries output directly addresses policy with defined MDG Acceleration plans aligned with and systems aimed at reducing national/regional growth and social vulnerability - among key protection/poverty reduction strategy targets; vulnerable groups including Number of countries implementing MDG women and PLHIV - and Acceleration Plans Baseline: No countries in the sub-region have MDG strengthening resilience. Acceleration Plans Target: At least three countries define and implement MDG Acceleration Plans

19Indicative estimates are subject to the availability of funds. Budget includes technical assistance.

33

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs

Indicator: Number of countries that have multi-sectoral and integrated data collection and dissemination systems in place that contribute to policy development including MDG achievement and monitoring

Output 2: Implementation of MDG Acceleration Plans

Indicator: Number of national statistical offices with increased capacities in data collection, analysis and reporting/publishing/dissemination

Gender Marker Rating and Motivation – 2: As part of the MAF, the assessment of implementation effectiveness/impact includes the extent to which existing projects/programmes have been able to achieve stated gender equality objectives. Output 3: Framework developed for multi-sectoral and integrated data collection and dissemination across Line Ministries and NSOs in 5 countries and implemented in at least 3.

Indicator: Number of countries publishing regular reports on MDG progress (including data on education, HIV/AIDS and maternal health) and other social, poverty and economic data Baseline: Little integration of social/ environmental data in planning; weak frameworks for data sharing across sectors for integrated planning; Two countries currently have irregularly functioning mechanisms for monitoring MDG progress that are not institutionalised. No protocols for data sharing in place at the subregional level Target: Data audits and capacity development undertaken and data management frameworks developed

Annual Targets: (to be finalised in consultations with Governments

Gender marker rating – 2: The framework allows for access to reliable, sex-disaggregated data which is critical to address the needs of vulnerable groups including women, and which also facilitates reporting on the MDGs including MDG 3 (gender equality), CEDAW and other international reporting requirements related to gender equity.

Implementation modality(ies) and implementing partner(s) NIM OECS Secretariat UNDP National governments

NIM SPARC multi-donor framework agencies including CARICOM Secretariat; OECS Secretariat, National governments; CDB, UWI and UN System.

34

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

Outcome-level indicators, baselines and targets for UNDP contribution to UNDAF/CPD outcomes

Country programme outputs Output 4: SPARC Work Programme – for statistical capacity development implemented Annual Targets: (to be finalised in consultations with Governments) Statistical system and data audits and capacity development undertaken and data management frameworks developed in pilot country in first year and at least one country in each subsequent M-CPAP programme year

Implementation modality(ies) and implementing partner(s) NIM

Indicative Resources by outcome (per year, US$) 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Total

SPARC multi-donor framework agencies including CARICOM Secretariat; OECS Secretariat, National governments; CDB, UWI and UN System.

Gender marker rating – 2 This output is designed to ensure capacity development for data collection, analysis and use for evidence-based, genderresponsive decision-making. Capacity development work in this area will target sexdisaggregated data and gender analysis of data TOTAL

9,153,500

35

8,483,321

8,930,750

8,400,750

7,574,679

42,543,000

Annex 2: Projects within the UNDP Barbados and the OECS Subregional Office (SRO)

UNDP Area Disaster Reduction

Thematic

Project ID

Project Name

Implementing Partner/Country

Budget - USD

Period

Risk

00064135

OCT Regional Risk Reduction Initiative

UNDP

6, 959, 320.00

2009 - 2012

00064107

Enhancing Resilience to Reduce Vulnerability in the Caribbean (ERC)

Caribbean Institute for Meteorology and Hydrology (CIMH)

4, 527, 813.00

2009 - 2013

00053584

St. Vincent and the Grenadines Disaster Risk Reduction

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

385, 967.17

2006 - 2012

00060483

Saint Lucia Disaster Risk Reduction CPAP

Government Lucia

40, 636.10

2008 - 2012

00060484

Dominica Disaster Risk Reduction CPAP

Government of Dominica

60, 764.48

2008 - 2012

00076310

Grenada Disaster Risk Reduction CPAP

Government of Grenada

28, 169.82

2010 - 2012

00076612

Montserrat Disaster Risk Reduction CPAP

Government of Montserrat

16, 400.00

2010 - 2012

00076749

St. Vincent Recovery Project

UNDP

30, 000.00

2010 - 2012

00076750

Saint Lucia Recovery Project

UNDP

30, 000.00

2010 - 2012

36

of

St. the

Saint

Energy and Environment

the

00053747

Island Resource Management

Government of Antigua and Barbuda

3, 015, 930.00

2006 - 2012

00043445

Climate Change Enabling Activity; Second National Communication

Government of Barbados

420, 000.00

2006 - 2012

00046566

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in Barbados

Government of Barbados

500, 000.00

2005 - 2010

00043256

Montreal Protocol. Terminal Phase out Management Plan

Government of Barbados

172, 000.00

2006 - 2012

00040776

Climate Change Enabling Activity; Second National Communication

Government of Dominica

420, 000.00

2005 - 2012

00045747

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in Dominica

Government of Dominica

500, 000.00

2005 -2012

00052324

Montreal Protocol. Terminal Phaseout Management Plan

Government of Dominica

97, 000. 00

2006 - 2012

00045243

Climate Enabling Second

Government of Grenada

420, 000.00

2005 - 2013

Change Activity; National

37

Communication 00046568

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in Grenada

Government of Grenada

500, 000.00

2005 - 2012

00053386

Montreal Protocol. Terminal Phase out Management Plan

Government of Grenada

120, 000.00

2010 - 2012

00045305

Climate Change Enabling Activity; Second National Communication

Government of St. Kitts and Nevis

420, 000.00

2005 - 2012

00046155

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in St. Kitts and Nevis

Government of St. Kitts and Nevis

500, 000.00

2005 - 2012

00060275

Assessment Capacity Needs and Specific Biodiversity Add-ON

of Building Country Priority. Enabling

Government of St. Kitts and Nevis

175, 000.00

2009 - 2012

00052323

Montreal Protocol. Terminal Phase out Management Plan

Government of St. Kitts and Nevis

105, 000.00

2009 - 2012

00040777

Climate Change Enabling Activity; Second National Communication

Government Lucia

420, 000.00

2007 - 2012

38

of

Saint

Governance

00046154

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in Saint Lucia

Government Lucia

00045266

Climate Change Enabling Activity; Second National Communication

00046250

of

Saint

500, 000.00

2005 - 2012

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

St. the

420, 000.00

2005 - 2012

Capacity Building for Sustainable Land Management in St. Vincent

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

St. the

500, 000.00

2005 - 2012

00052271

Montreal Protocol. Terminal Phaseout Management Plan

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

St. the

128, 000.00

2010 - 2012

00076381

Climate Change Negotiations

UNDP

220, 900. 01

2010 - 2012

00064116

Youth Innovation Caribbean Network for Youth (Youth IN)

CARICOM Secretariat

3, 576, 982.89

2008 - 2013

UWI Civil Society Organisation

00072038

Democratic Governance Assessments

UWI/OSLO Centre

226, 146.66

2009 - 2012

00082501

Engaging Caribbean Youth on Citizen Security

UNDP

175, 000.00

2012 - 2013

39

Poverty Reduction

00075559

Caribbean Human Development Report Citizen Security

UNDP

247, 662. 17

2010 - 2012

00052517

Dominica Governance

Government of Dominica

166, 262. 43

2006 - 2012

00052570

Grenada Governance

Government of Grenada

148, 575. 59

2006 - 2012

00041058

St. Vincent and the Grenadines Governance

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

St. the

165, 823. 45

2004 - 2012

00052549

Saint Governance

Government Lucia

Saint

231, 998. 38

2006 - 2012

00075393

SPARC

CARICOM Secretariat

291, 215. 61

2010 - 2012

00045241

CARUTA

UNDP

817, 789. 31

2005 - 2012

00053014

Dominica Reduction

Poverty

Government of Dominica

268, 384. 61

2006 - 2012

00055005

Grenada Reduction

Poverty

Government of Grenada

262, 844. 42

2007 - 2012

00052747

Saint Lucia Poverty Reduction

Government Lucia

Saint

313, 698. 84

2006 - 2012

00052348

St. Vincent & Grenadines Poverty Reduction

Government of Vincent and Grenadines

St. the

258, 643. 43

2006 - 2012

Lucia

40

of

of

00076922

Improved Framework

Data

00045318

Strengthening Poverty Reduction and Social Sector Development in the OECS

UNDP

395, 691 .53

2010 - 2012

OECS Secretariat

1, 306, 184. 68

2005 - 2012

41

Annex 3: Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

Subregional Development Plan 2012-2016

UNDAF/ SPD Outcome SPD Outcome 1

Strategic Plan Results Area Energy & Environment

Evaluation Title

Partners (joint evaluation)

Evaluation commissioned by (if not UNDP)

Energy & Environment Portfolio

N/A

N/A

Type of evaluation

Planned Evaluation Completion Date

Outcome Evaluation

December, 2014

Estimated Cost

$30,000

Disaster Risk Reduction

Provisional Source of Funding Energy & Environment Disaster Risk Reduction Related projects

SPD Outcome 2

Democratic Governance

Evaluation of UNDP’s contribution to improved Democratic Governance and Citizen Security

UWI, UNDP and Eastern Caribbean Development Partners

N/A

Outcome Evaluation

2013

$25,000

Governance Related projects

SPD Outcome 3

Poverty Reduction & MDG

Poverty Reduction Portfolio

N/A

N/A

Outcome Evaluation

December, 2014

$30,000

Poverty Related Projects

SPD Outcome 4

Poverty Reduction &

Poverty Reduction

N/A

N/A

Outcome Evaluation

December, 2014

$30,000

Poverty Related

42

MDG

Portfolio

SPD Outcome 5

Poverty Reduction & MDG

Poverty Reduction Portfolio

N/A

N/A

Outcome Evaluation

December, 2014

$30,000

Poverty Related projects

SPD Outcome 1

Environment & Sustainable Development

GEF

N/A

GEF

Mid-term

December, 2014

$88,000

Project budget

SPD

Environment & Sustainable Development

GEF

N/A

GEF

Final

July 2016

$88,000

Project budget

SPD Outcome 2

Democratic Governance

Youth IN Project Evaluation Youth and Governance Development in the Caribbean

CARICOM, OECS Secretariat, UN System Agencies

N/A

Mid-term

2012

$20,000

Enhancing

National Met Services; National Disaster Organisations; CIMH; CIMA (Italian Research Foundation

SPD Outcome 1

Crisis Prevention & Recovery

Resilience to Reduce Vulnerability in the Caribbean

projects

Project budget

Government of Italy

Government of Italy

43

Final

December, 2012

$110,000

Project budget

SPD Outcome 1

Crisis Prevention & Recovery

Regional Risk Reduction Initiative (R3I)

Ministry of Disaster Management, European Commission (donor), UNDP; other Project board members (CMO; DFID; regional authorizing office

EU

Final

December, 2012

$150,000

Project budget

UNDP M-CPAP 2012-201620 Review Type

Period

Estimated Cost - USD

Annual Review (Virtual Consultation)

End 2012

2, 500

Annual Review (Virtual Consultation)

End 2013

2, 500

Mid-Term Face)

Third quarter 2014

20, 000

End 2015

2, 500

Multi-country

review

Annual Review (Virtual Consultation)

(Face-to-

Review of 2012-2016 Programme cycle and Third quarter 2016

25, 000

20 In addition to the evaluations, listed in the SPD M and E Plan, which will inform the M-CPAP review process monitoring and evaluation of the M-CPAP implementation will be supported by at least one M-CPAP review per annum - with face-to face reviews held mid-year and toward the end of the programme cycle - given the multi-country coverage. Additionally, the M-CPAP M and E process will be interlinked with the UNDAF (2012-2016) M and E Framework. The UNDAF Framework comprises Outcome Groups responsible for agency-specific monitoring and reporting on progress towards the agreed output and outcome targets. The Outcome Groups are to comprise representation from UN System (inclusive of UNDP); representatives of national governments and other key partners.

44

2017-2021 M-CPAP Development Meeting – (Face-to-Face)

45