esd.sidsdock.org · Web viewThe Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD-Caribes) project is a broad initiative that spans five states: Antigua & Barbuda; Belize;

Annex 1: Project Document BELIZE

IL

NATIONAL PROJECT DOCUMENT

SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

Project title: Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean Buildings, Belize

Strategic objectives: GEF strategic long-term objective: Climate Change

Strategic programme for GEF IV: CC-SP1-Building EE and CC-SP3-RE

Geographical scope: National Belize

Project executing organization: Ministry of Energy, Science & Technology, and Public Utilities

Duration of project: 48 monthsCommencing: April 2014Completion: April 2018

1.11 Cost of project US$ Cost to the GEF Trust Fund 998,740

Co-financing

Cash

Development Finance Corporation 800,000.00

Sub-total 800,000

In-kind

MPSEPU 92,000

Central Building Authority 45,000

JICA

IDB/Castalia

BEL

OAS

OLADE

500,000

410,000

10,000

90,000

188,000

Sub-total 1,335,000

Total 3,123,740

1


1.12 Project summary

The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD-Caribes) project is a broad initiative that spans five states: Antigua & Barbuda; Belize; Grenada; St. Lucia; and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The main objective of this project is sustainable energy use through energy efficiency and renewable energy intervention technologies within the project territories. The ESD-Caribes activities – a mix of policy and demonstrations – are intended to reduce energy intensity from electricity use within the respective project countries by 20 % from the business as usual (BAU) scenario. It is intended that the project activities will serve as harbingers toward an “energy efficient economy” within the Caribbean and commercial uptake of successful models will be encouraged.

Belize has an unrealized sustainable energy potential worth BZ$503 in net present value (NPV) over the period 2014 to 2033. Belize uses some EE measures already, but their penetration is far below the potential. The Private Sector has advanced its use of Renewable Energy Resources, especially its Hydro-Electric Potential, through the construction of a few Hydro-power plants (Mollejon, Chalillo, Hydro Maya, and Vaca). These have allowed Belize’s electricity generating capacity from Hydro to be over fifty percent (50%) of generating capacity. Nonetheless, more can be generated by expanding the use of the RE technologies already being used, as well as by using new sources including wind, solar PV, anaerobic digestion, landfill gas, and small hydro. In Belize, the cost of electricity is high. The residential rate is 19cents US per kWh. With most of the country dependent on electric power, the need for each home, business or industry to become more EE is pivotal to reducing the cost of living and maximize economic growth. The rising cost of fuel is directly impacting the business, transportation and public sector.

The ESD-Caribes activities in Belize will target sustainable Energy Efficient (EE) retrofitting of public sector buildings as demonstration projects and the private sector through the establishment of a blended-grant mechanism via the development bank for the promotion of Energy Service Companies. The project will also allow for the adoption of enforceable EE codes for the improved design and construction of buildings. Alternate measures will be considered for buildings using little or no cooling equipment, which will include the regulating and labelling of widely, used appliances via legislation and public awareness campaign. These activities will be strengthened and collaborated through the 5Cs with the other four countries each taking the lead in a particular area. These interventions are aimed to realise the reduction of the energy intensity from electricity use in Belize buildings by 20% within the targeted time period.

2


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION.................................................................................................1ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.........................................................................................................4SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION)..................5

2.1. Background and context......................................................................................................52.2. Global significance...............................................................................................................72.3. Threats, root causes and barrier analysis..........................................................................72.4. Institutional, sectoral and policy context...........................................................................92.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis...................................................................................102.6. Baseline analysis and gaps.................................................................................................142.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions..................................................19

SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE)...................................................................203.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits......203.2. Project goal and objective.................................................................................................203.3. Project components and expected results........................................................................213.4. Intervention logic and key assumptions...........................................................................283.5. Risk analysis and risk management measures................................................................293.6. Consistency with national priorities or plans..................................................................293.7. Incremental cost reasoning...............................................................................................303.8. Sustainability......................................................................................................................303.9. Replication..........................................................................................................................303.10. Public awareness, communications and mainstreaming strategy.................................313.11. Environmental and social safeguards..............................................................................32

SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS....................33SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION.......................................................................................34SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN...........................................................................35SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET.................................................................................37

7.1. Overall project budget.......................................................................................................377.2. Project co-financing...........................................................................................................377.3. Project cost-effectiveness...................................................................................................38

APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................3Appendix 1: Budget by project components and UNEP budget lines......................................3Appendix 2: Co-financing by source and UNEP budget lines..................................................3Appendix 3: Incremental cost analysis.......................................................................................3Appendix 4: Results Framework.................................................................................................3Appendix 5: Workplan and timetable.........................................................................................3Appendix 6: Key deliverables and benchmarks.........................................................................3Appendix 7: Budgeted M&E plan................................................................................................3Appendix 8: Summary of reporting requirements and responsibilities..................................3Appendix 9: Standard Terminal Evaluation TOR....................................................................3Appendix 10: Decision-making flowchart and organogram...................................................3Appendix 11: Terms of Reference.............................................................................................3Appendix 12: Co-financing commitment letters from project partners...............................3Appendix 13: Endorsement letters of GEF National Focal Points........................................3Appendix 14: Draft procurement plan.....................................................................................3Appendix 15: Tracking Tools....................................................................................................3

3


ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

5Cs Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre AC Air ConditionAPAB Association of Professional Architects of Belize APEB Association of Professional Engineers of Belize BECOL Belize Electric Company BEL Belize Electric Limited BELCOGEN Belize Co-Generation Energy Limited CARICOM Caribbean CommunityCariCom Caribbean Community CC Climate ChangeCCCCC Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre CDB Caribbean Development BankCDM Clean Development MechanismCFE Mexico’s Comisión Federal de Electricidad

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CREDP Caribbean Renewable Energy Development Programme CLASP

CSEP Caribbean Sustainable Energy Program CSME CARICOM Single Market and Economy DFC Development Finance Cooperation EE Energy efficiencyESCO Energy Service CompanyESD Caraibes Energy for Sustainable Development in the CaribbeanGDP Gross Domestic ProductGEF Global Environment FacilityIDB Inter-American Development Bank KHMH Karl Husner Memorial HospitalkWh kilo Watt Hourm2 Square Meter

MPSEPUMinistry of Public Service, Energy and Public UtilitiesMAFFESD

MW Mega WattNREPS National Registry of Environmental Professionals

OAS Organization of American States OLADE Latin American Energy OrganizationPV PhotovoltaicRE renewable energy (RE) SGU St. George's UniversitySIDS Small Island Developing StatesT Tonne(s)TOR Terms of ReferencesUN United NationsUNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social AffairsUNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment ProgramUSD United States Dollar

4


5


SECTION 2: BACKGROUND AND SITUATION ANALYSIS (BASELINE COURSE OF ACTION)

2.1. Background and context

1. The Caribbean Community consists of many small island developing states (SIDS) and low lying coastal states, all of which exhibit unique characteristics, including, varying topographies, limited natural resources, small populations and fragmented markets with different energy product specifications.

2. Caribbean SIDSs are heavily dependent on fossil fuel for energy services. Most, except Trinidad & Tobago import all their oil products for transport, electricity and heating. Belize exports crude oil and imports refined products and electricity. Although energy accords with Trinidad & Tobago and with Venezuela have been struck (PetroCaribe), the fuel price spike in 2008 had consumed a major portion of SIDS’s foreign exchange reserves.

3. Project activities include: Additional data collection, review and evaluation with the expected output of establishment of baseline data. Energy efficiency (EE) and renewable energy (RE) in buildings need assessments in the five countries. Expected output includes detailed targets for increasing EE and RE in buildings. Consultations with governments, housing stakeholders and other relevant parties to gain buy-in, detailed implementation arrangements, and design of project workplan and terms of reference for consultants, regional center and executing agencies.

4. Renewable energy is estimated to contribute only about 3 percent of the regional energy supply mix. For CARICOM States, renewable energy potential (Biomass, Solar, Wind, Ocean, Hydro, Geothermal, etc.) is great but unevenly distributed; development of the resources may be stymied by the small size of the markets at the national level. For example, hydroelectric power potential in Guyana alone exceeds the existing electricity demand of all CARICOM countries. Renewable energy resource is the only natural energy resource endowment for many CARICOM Member States.

5. A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while sitting in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies.

6. Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 percent of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85 percent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel. Overall, across the region, approximately 85 percent of the population has access to electricity. On the supply side, recent data showed that in 2004, fuel consumption by electric utilities was more than 29.2 million barrels of petroleum. Total petroleum imports inclusive of electricity and gasoline was more than 163 million barrels during the same period – electricity consumption accounted for 18 percent of total consumption. Overall, across the region, approximately 85 percent of the population has access to electricity.

6


7. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 percent and 21 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), respectively. Electricity prices are high in the region and among the highest in the world, primarily a result of the very high cost of transportation associated with the relatively small quantities of fuel delivered to the various countries, as well as the high level of liquid petroleum fuel use in the power matrix, and low efficiency of the relatively small power grids.

8. The major determinant of energy access in the majority of the CARICOM countries is ability to pay for service. Only three countries have less than 90 percent of the population that has access to electricity. However, there are several instances during 2008/2009, where as a result of high fuel prices, governments across the region had to subsidize electricity to many consumers who were not able to pay the fuel surcharges and would have otherwise been disconnected. In the countries with less than 90 percent access, two countries - Surinam and Guyana - face challenges of geography, resulting from the remote interior location of significant portions of their populations.

9. The provision of electricity service through the establishment of traditional power grid is very costly for small populations and decentralized systems powered primarily by diesel generator sets are the principal means. Under such conditions, the fuel for the electricity generated is expensive and requires government support. Renewable systems based on wind, solar, hydro, and biofuels are proving to be more efficient in providing electricity to such households in isolated locations.

STATUS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES IN BELIZE

10. The Government of Belize now has as one of its priorities the development of its Energy Sector. In a partnership between the Ministries of Public Utilities, of Natural Resources and the Environment, and the Office of the Prime Minister, developed the first ever National Energy Policy Framework.

11. In the meantime, the Belize Private Sector has advanced its use of Renewable Energy Resources, especially its Hydro-Electric Potential, through the construction of a few Hydro-power plants (Mollejon, Chalillo, Hydro Maya, and Vaca). These have allowed Belize’s electricity generating capacity from Hydro to be over fifty percent (50%) of generating capacity.

12. Belize has also seriously invested scarce resources into exploring and successfully developing its energy generating potential from Biomass. This is exemplified by BELCOGEN facility, generating electricity from the sugar waste (baggasse).

13. Both these private sector initiatives (hydro and biomass potentials) have had in some way, even as small as possible, the involvement of the Energy and Environment Partnership Finland/Central America.

14. Electricity generation in Belize included installed generation capacity is 89 MW with peak demand around 74 MW. Electricity demand mainly comes from residential sector (56%), industry and commerce (37%) and public lighting (7%).

15. Around 50% of electricity is imported from Mexico’s CFE through an agreement to supply 15 MW of firm capacity and up to 40 MW on economic basis.

16. BEL generates from diesel (18 MW) and gasoline (20MW) burning plants, mostly peak energy, accounting for 7% of the energy supply, 43% is produced using hydro plants. In

7


1994, BEL consumed 94% of all fuel used for energy production. This consumption decreased to 86% and 82% for 1997 and 2000 respectively.

17. Belize Electric Company (BECOL) owns the largest commercial hydroelectric plants (Mollejon 25 MW and Chalillo 7 MW), producing approximately 43% of the country’s electricity. The hydro generation is at a high cost than CFE.

18. Belcogen has an agreement to sell 13.5 MW to BEL using bagasse from the production of sugar by Belize Sugar Industry.

2.2. Global significance

19. A country wide study in 2007 of carbon emissions in Belize showed a general increase in carbon dioxide emissions of 7% from 1994 to 1997 and an increase of 4% from 1997 to 2000. This gives a total increase of 64.53 Gg of carbon dioxide emissions or an 11.1% increase over this six-year period. GhG emissions of the buildings sector reduction target of 4 $ per ton CO2 is achievable according to the case studies elaborated. Studies conducted under the Ministry of Energy showed that renewables could represent 89 percent of electricity supply, electricity consumption could decrease by 24 percent, and stationary fuel consumption could decrease by 19 percent— combining to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 2.4 million tons over the 2014-2033 period.

20. Hence a goal of, 20% improvement in EE reduction during project period is set to be achieved by

a. By establishing and implementing mandatory efficiency minimums for refrigeration, fans and motors, lighting and air conditioners,

b. Increasing in country capacity to adopt and improve EE and RE distribution

c. Energy efficiency retrofitting and/or renewable energy installations,

d. Adoption of the Energy Efficient Building Code for Energy Conservation for new buildings,

e. Rating system and demonstrations of deeper savings coupled with preferential finance.

21. Options will be explored for graduating toward 50% reduction by 2033

2.3. Threats, root causes and barrier analysis

22. The global recession has impact on Belize’s economy, and has weakened the capacity to transition to a low carbon economy.

23. A lack of institutional capacity and perhaps political will has caused reliance on a private, monopolistic electric utility to set and implement policy in the electricity sector. The co-ownership of the generating company Belize Electric Company (BECOL) and the power distributing company Belize Electricity Limited (BEL) in Belize has not caused them to aggressively seek alternative fuels or sources of primary energy. Coupled with the utility company’s unique contract agreement to buy power from their sister company first.

24. BEL’s tariff structure, as it is, is not an incentive for it to support EE for its customers or itself, which could limit Belize’s ability to achieve its full EE potential. Improved decoupling of BEL revenues from sales of energy only could allow it to better recover costs and earn a

8


return on helping its customers implement EE

25. BEL’s does not have a strong incentive to control the costs it passes on to consumers. Therefore, regulation with strong efficiency incentives for BEL needs to be implanted.

26. Private sector: developers and landlords have no incentive to invest in EE and prefer lower-cost, less-efficient equipment; those buying or renting are stuck with using that equipment, and also may have no incentive to invest in EE. Therefore, Building Codes need to be introduced to mandate EE.

27. Owners of distributed RE systems cannot sell their excess generation and the tariff structure as is would make distributed generation hurt BEL’s financial viability.

28. BEL is unable to meet the demand of power in Belize, hence it purchase around 50% of electricity from Mexico’s Comision Federal de Electricidad (CFE) through an agreement to supply 15 MW of firm capacity and up to 40 MW on economic basis. However, CFE has the reserve the right to cut off power to Belize within a very small notice period usually causes outages and load shedding. Additionally, the CFE’s peak rate and BECOL’s rates are both supporting a high unit rate to customers.

29. Public sector: procurement officials are not incentivized to invest in EE; Government ends up paying more than it should for energy. Private sector firms need to be contracted to retrofit public building under contracts that align their success with energy savings and make Government departments directly responsible for energy bills.

30. The small size of the market has not led to the development of any energy service companies and the market-of-scale and the relatively long distribution chain has not conducive to the rapid deployment of new EE and RE technology.

31. Energy consumers don’t know about cost and performance of EE measures. This project will aim to Implement public awareness initiatives; adopt a labeling system for EE products in coordination with other countries in the region; or develop national energy performance standards; consider requiring buildings to have energy management systems

32. Lack of training opportunities and knowledge transfer has stunted the growth of local entrepreneurship in the energy sector and in the design and operation of energy efficient buildings.

33. Service providers, financiers, and public entities do not have the skills to take advantage of EE.

34. Upfront cost of EE measures is high for consumers; financing institutions do not provide lending on appropriate terms for EE; non-creditworthy customers cannot finance EE, leading to sub-optimal outcome from a social welfare perspective

35. The consumer is generally unaware of potential alternatives. Previous energy saving programs (e.g. Cuba’s fluorescent lights donation) has not reached its intended market or goal. There is continually increasing demand for electricity services as individuals, families and communities strive to improve their quality of life in a developing country. As a result, per capita electricity consumption is increasing.

9


2.4. Institutional, sectorial and policy context

36. The CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) is intended to benefit the people of the Region by providing more and better opportunities to produce and sell our goods and services and to attract investment. It will create one large market among the participating member states. A key element of the Single Market and Economy is the free movement of goods and services through measures such as eliminating all barriers to intra-regional movement and harmonizing standards to ensure acceptability of goods and services traded. Building materials and equipment are important traded goods falling under this agreement. Energy efficiency and renewable energy performance standards can be promulgated under the CSME.

37. Recognizing the need to develop a coordinated regional approach to expedite the increased use of renewable energy and energy efficiency and chart a new, climate-compatible development path that harnesses indigenous renewable energy resources, maximizes energy use, minimizes environmental damage, and spurs economic growth and innovation, CARICOM adopted its regional Energy Policy in 2013 after a decade in development. To facilitate the process of translating intentions into action, the CARICOM Secretariat commissioned the first phase of the Caribbean Sustainable Energy Roadmap and Strategy (C-SERMS), designed to build on existing regional efforts and to provide CARICOM member states with a coherent strategy for transitioning to sustainable energy.

38. The Ministry of Public Service, Energy and Public Utilities (formerly Ministry of Energy, Science & Technology and Public Utilities) in Belize undertook the baseline studies for the drafting of Belize’s National Energy Policy Framework. The National Renewable Energy Policy Framework to be included in National Energy Policy intends transition the energy sector and economy toward low carbon development, as well as development of a plan that provides for the coordination and implementation of a comprehensive, integrated and transparent approach that develops a longer-range culture of investment and support for Science, Technology and Innovation (STI). This will position Belize to be globally competitive in key markets, to overcome barriers to accessing global markets, and to understand and respond to unpredictable markets, external shocks, and hazardous events. The document provides an outline for the Sustainable Energy Strategy in the development of a low carbon economy by 2033.

NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY SUPPORT

39. The CARICOM Secretariat has offered Belize technical support for the conception of the Draft Energy Policy, which will be amalgamated into the Regional Energy Policy for the Caribbean.

40. The Organization of American States (OAS) will be providing technical experts to undertake baseline studies.

41. Training has also been proposed to enhance Belize’s capacity in sectors that will assist in the development of the baseline studies for the Draft Policy Paper.

42. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has formally agreed to a grant to assist in the formulation of the country’s Sustainable Energy Action Plan. Technical support for baseline studies will be provided which will results in a draft report of Belize’s status.

43. In November 2010, Belize became the 27th Signatory country to the Lima Convention and formally joined with OLADE to secure the necessary technical assistance and database access to complete its Energy Balance and Capacity Building.

10


44. Formulation of a National Energy Plan for Belize Report, December 2003 recommended:

Energy data should be collected and analysed on a regular basis, and a national energy balance produced annually. A demand-side management (DSM) study should be conducted as part of the generation planning exercise, to assess whether generation can be avoided.

Implement a comprehensive energy-efficiency training program for relevant stakeholders.

The Belize Building Codes should be reviewed to include potential energy saving design features.

Appliance importers should be educated about energy efficiency and encouraged to import energy efficient appliances.

Design and initiate a national energy-efficiency education and awareness program. A study of energy end use practices in all sectors (public, commercial, residential,

etc.) of the economy should be conducted in collaboration with BEL and an organisation experienced in conducting surveys.

Incentives should be provided such as reduction in import duties for energy efficient equipment (e.g. compact fluorescent bulbs) to encourage their importation and use.

Support the creation of ESCOs in Belize through workshops, information provision and linkages to countries with ESCO experience.

Create a National Solar Water Heating Initiative.

2.5. Stakeholder mapping and analysis

Stakeholders

Mandate Level of

Power

Potential Role in Project

Methods to engage

stakeholder

Any Other Relevant Aspects

Ministry of Finance

To advise on, coordinate and implement the government’s economic and fiscal policies and programs including the generation and allocation of financial resources to provide appropriate public services and to contribute to the overall development of Belize

High Power

High Potential to collaborate with the Ministry of Energy on overall policy guidance for Fiscal Measures to Achieving 20% Reduction of Energy Consumption to achieve Energy

Dialogue and data gathering

Can provide cash co-financing. This Ministry pays the electric bills for all government buildings. Will be key to get this consumption information to carry out demonstration projects/analysis on energy efficiency in the public sector.

11


Efficiency (EE)

Ministry Public Service, Energy and Public Utilities

To plan, promote and effectively manage the production, delivery and use of energy through Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy, and Cleaner Production interventions for the sustainable development of Belize

High Power

High Potential To collaborate on Energy, Electricity and Energy Efficiency policies.

Dialogue and Partnership in project implementation

Can provide in-kind co-financing through capacity building as they hold the technical expertise in term of Energy and Energy Efficiency

The Public Utilities Commission

to regulate the electricity, water, and telecommunications sectors in Belize in order to efficiently provide the highest quality services at affordable rates, ensuring the viability and sustainability of each sector

Low Power

High Potential to involve and secure interest of the electric utility company


Can provide in-kind co-financing through capacity building as they hold the technical expertise in term of Energy and Energy Efficiency

Ministry of Environment, Sustainable Development and Climate

To foster the prudent use and proper management of the natural resources of Belize, the

Low Power

Though low potential, they can monitor and enforce environmental matters.


Contain the technical expertise to monitor GhGs emissions

12


Change preservation, protection and improvement of the environment, and the control of pollution, thus guaranteeing a better quality of life for present and future generations

Ministry of Housing

Mandate for the facilitation, development and implementation of access to legal, adequate and affordable housing solutions

High Power

High potential to collaborate with the development of Energy Efficient Building Codes


Central Building Authority

legal entity responsible for the approval and policing of construction practices in Belize

High Power

High Potential to collaborate on energy efficiency Building Codes enforcement

Dialogue and Data Gathering

Belize Bureau of Standard

To facilitate, promote and encourage the use of quality services in metrology, standardization and conformity assessment thereby contributing to competitiveness of

High Power

High Potential to enforce the tariff of general merchandise of restricted non-energy efficient product.

Dialogue and Data Gathering

Their present mechanism of operation will work hand in hand with the Appliance Standards and Labelling activity

13


goods and services, facilitation of trade and the protection of consumers

Major Equipment Importers and Retailors

Supply and distribution of EE appliances

Low Power

High potential as they are the key target for the supply and distribution of Energy Efficiency appliances and we need to secure their interests so they can secure the interest of consumers

Consultation and information gathering

Association of Professional Engineers of Belize

Certify and regulate engineers and engineering in Belize

Low Power

High Potential. They will participate with in the adopting of the Building Codes and implementing energy performance standards

Can participate in Public Awareness

Association of Professional

Certify and regulate architects in Belize

Low Power

High Potential. They will

Consultation and information

Can participate in Public Awareness

14


Architects of Belize

participate with in the adopting of the Building Codes and implementing EE design in new building

gathering

Public Energy End-users Low Power

High Potential. Beneficiary of energy efficiency project activities and participants in public awareness

Consultation and information Gathering and giving

Development Finance Corporation

Belize’s only Development Bank to support the strengthening and expansion of Belize’s economy by providing developmental financing on an economically sustainable and environmentally acceptable basis to individuals, businesses and organizations Bank

High Power

High Potential to collaborate on designing an appropriate Financial Proposal for an Energy Fund mechanism for supporting bankable RE production and EE applications.

Dialogue

Ministry of Education

To ensure that all Belizeans are

Low Powe

High Potential to

Dialogue

15


given an opportunity to acquire those knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for their own personal development and for full and active participation in the development of the nation

r involve and secure the interests of tertiary institutions to carry out capacity building in Sustainable energy.

Belize Electricity Limited

To provide reliable electricity at the lowest sustainable

cost, stimulate national development and improve the

quality of life in Belize

High Power

High Potential to collaborate on facilitating Energy Efficiency Technology and information to consumers as they have direct contact with the public.

Dialogue Can assist with capacity building

2.6. Baseline analysis and gaps

45. Belize consumed 12,888 TJ (or 307,823 TOE) of total primary energy supply from all fuel sources in 2010, costing approximately $206 million US dollars19 or about 14.4% of GDP20. This means that, on the basis of fuel energy content, Belize produced more energy than consumed: 13,538 TJ versus 12,888 TJ. The corresponding calculated aggregate energy intensity – that is, the economy-wide primary energy consumed per dollar of GDP – was 8,536 BTU per US dollar of GDP in 2010 dollars. For comparison, the estimated energy intensities of the USA, El Salvador, Jamaica and Barbados for 2008 were 7,523, 3,370, 8,555 and 3,360 BTU per US dollar of GDP in 2005 dollars respectively. Of the total primary energy supply, 10,946 TJ (or 261,437 TOE) was actually delivered to consumption points as secondary energy. The difference reflects the losses incurred in generating, transmitting and distributing electricity

16


46. The industrial sector consumed 27.43% of total secondary energy in 2010: 61.3% of this sector’s consumption was due to the use of diesel, HFO and crude oil to run industrial motors and for steam generation; 21.3% was for the use of steam produced from bagasse within the sugar industry; and the remaining 17.4% was due to the direct consumption of electricity.

47. The remaining 25.77% of total secondary energy consumption in 2010 was due to the residential and commercial & services sectors. Wood, used for cooking mainly in rural areas, accounted for 39.3% of residential energy consumption; while electricity and LPG accounted for 34% and 24.6% of residential energy consumption respectively. The main secondary fuel consumed by the commercial and services sector was electricity (about 87.3%).

48. Belize’s energy sector as a whole produced 702,461 tCO2e of GHG emissions in 2010, at a rate of 56 tCO2e per TJ of primary energy supply. The electricity supply sub-sector produced GHG emissions at the lower rate of 52.74 tCO2e per TJ, mainly because of the higher proportion of low carbon energy sources in the supply mix; although this is partly offset by the high emissions rate of imported electricity

49. Belize has an unrealized sustainable energy potential worth BZ$524 million (BZ$503 million not considering electricity exports) in net present value (NPV) over the period reaching year 2033. Renewables could represent 89 percent of supply, electricity consumption could decrease by 24 percent, and stationary fuel consumption could decrease by 19 percent—combining to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 2.4 million tons over the period. This potential is estimated by comparing the net cost of electricity and stationary fuels in a business-as-usual scenario (BAU) scenario, with the net cost of electricity and stationary fuels in a national sustainable energy strategy (NSES) scenario.

Error: Reference source not found summarizes the results of a NSES scenario against BAU, and shows the NSES’ costs and benefits.

NSES BAU NSES vs. BAUElectricity consumption (2033)

1,121GWh 1,472GWh -24%

Stationary fuel consumption (2033)

6,027TJ 7,412TJ -19%

Electricity from RE (2033) 999.5GWh/1,121GWh

(89%)

628GWh/1,472GWh

(43%)

89% vs. 43%

Cumulative greenhouse gas emissions (2013–2033)

6.9 M tCO2e 9.3 M tCO2e -2.4 M tCO2e

CapEx for EE, electricity +stationary fuel use (NPV, 2013–2033)1

BZ$217M BZ$0 -BZ$217 M

All-in cost of electricity supply (NPV, 2013–2033)

BZ$1,727 M BZ$2,186 M BZ$459 M

1 This indicates capital expenditure beyond historic levels. In the BAU case it is assumed to be zero—this does not mean that no investment takes place, but rather that it continues to take place in line with historical trends.

17


Value of stationary Fuel Use (NPV, 2013–2033)*

BZ$1,919 M BZ$2,180 M BZ$261 M

Electricity exports (NPV, 2013–2033)

BZ$21 M BZ$0 BZ$21 M

Net Present Value(Reduced cost of elec. supply + reduced cost of stat. fuel use – EE

CapEx)

BZ$503 M

NPV (including value of electricity exports) BZ$524 M

*Includes the value of crude oil, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), diesel, heavy fuel oil (HFO), and biomass

Note: All net present value calculations are discounted at a 10 percent annual rate; assumes current Mexico/Belize exchange rates for cost of power purchased from Mexico, which is subject to change

50. Households use electricity primarily for refrigeration; lighting; and appliances such as televisions, computers, and laundry machines; some air-conditioning, usually for the bedroom; and miscellaneous equipment that is not used for a prolonged time. The development of residential equipment standards should therefore prioritize refrigerators, lighting products, appliances with standby plug loads, and air-conditioning units. In large buildings including government offices, hotels, and commercial buildings priority should be given to improve the energy efficiency of their air-conditioning systems while some of the large chiller-type air-conditioning systems are not operating and have been replaced with split-level individual air-conditioning units or are operating inefficiently. They also use fluorescent lamps (with magnetic ballast), incandescent bulbs, and occasionally CFLs. Also in Belize, the traditional Mayan/Caribbean traditional open concept for cooling of buildings with outside air is no longer being used due to the demand for in-door low comfortable temperatures and the increase in indoor heating that is generated by office equipment. Also lighting products in use are in general inefficient and include fluorescent lights (with magnetic ballast): incandescent bulbs; and some CFLs. However, technical standards for the CFLs are yet to be developed.

51. The tourism sector and many offices also rent refrigeration equipment (refrigerators, freezers, and coolers) from suppliers of ice, water, and other bottled drinks. In the majority of cases such rented equipment have proven to be inefficient users of electricity and unable to provide cooling at the desired temperature. Another example of inefficient equipment is extractor fans, which are used in commercial kitchens; most owners would purchase the cheaper model which is usually inefficient.

52. The Government of Belize lacks adequate funds for investing in energy efficiency upgrades of buildings and could therefore benefit from the involvement of ESCOs, which would determine the required energy efficiency upgrades and make the corresponding investments while the ESCOs would be repaid from (part of) the energy savings. Standard contracts need to be prepared together with the Development Finance Corporation of Belize to provide specific financial support and guarantees to ESCOs for this purpose. ESCO staff would need to be adequately trained and ESCOs would need to meet certain capacity criteria to qualify for such support. Projects in which ESCOs could become involved include lighting retrofits, upgrades of air-conditioning systems, overall energy efficiency upgrades of buildings, and development of renewable energy installations.

53. Belize is too reliant on outside resources for energy efficiency implementation. Sales people, service providers (electricians, engineers, building managers, and so on), financiers, and public entities do not have the skills to sell and deliver energy efficiency. Public entities lack the labor

18


force to implement and monitor regulations related to efficiency. Initial demand for products and services can for satisfied with outside support. The proposed framework includes capacity building efforts sponsored by the Ministry in coordination with academia, to create a skilled workforce through Belize Energy Network members with certification schemes appropriate to Belize, such as Energy Assessments, Energy Management, and ISO 50001.

54. Energy efficiency labeling of appliances does not yet exist in Belize. This has resulted in the importation and distribution of inefficient appliances, which are mostly purchased by the medium and lower income households and actually over their lifetime cost more than more energy efficient ones due the their higher energy consumption.

55. Energy efficient building codes have not yet been adopted in Belize, but the process has commenced and the Project will assist in the completion of this process. It is estimated that any of the above actions, including energy efficiency improvements, labeling of appliances, engagement of ESCOs, and the development and implementation of building codes will increase the efficiency of energy use by more than 20%. Table 2 presents the estimated impact of the implementation of an energy standards and labeling program in the country.

Table 2.2: Estimated Impact of Standards and Labeling Program in Belize

TV sets Photo-Voltaic (PV)

Other plug loads

Refrigerators

Dwellings (number) 67,000 67,000 67,000Penetration (%) 10 1 7 10Consumption (kWh/year)

600 600 600 600

Savings (kWh) 150 2,000 120 150kwh/y 100,5000 0 562,800 100,5000lifetime Years 7 20 10 10years of program impact

4 4 4 4

kWh lifetime 28,140,000 0 22,512,000 10,050,000Emission factor (kg CO2/kWh

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Tons of CO2 14,070 0 11,256 5,025Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Residential 30,351

Computers PV Other Refrigerators Units installed 67,000 67,000 67,000 67,000Penetration (%) 10 0 7 10Consumption 600 600 600 600Savings ( kWh) 150 2000 120 150kWh/y 100,5000 134,000 562,800 1,005,000Lifetime (years) 7 20 10 10years of program impact

4 4 4 4

kWh lifetime 28140000 10720000 22512000 10,050,000Emission factor (kg CO2/kWh

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Tons of CO2 14070 5360 11256 5,025

19


Sub-total emissions reduction (tons of CO2)

Commercial 35,711

Total direct tons of CO2 emissions reduction

Commercial and Residential (including initial ESCO projects as demonstrations)

66,062

Total direct tons of CO2 (post project)

ESCOs 200,000

Emission reductions as a result of the activities of ESCOs during the project period are included in the market assessment above so as not to double count the impact. Through the revolving fund additional GHG emission reductions of 200,000 tons of CO2 are expected (direct post impact), which can be attributed to the activities of ESCOs.

20


2.7. Linkages with other GEF and non-GEF interventions

56. The UNDP GEF CariCom Renewable Energy Development Project has ended and this project will attempt to benefit from activities and studies performed thus far. The project is designed to avoid problems experienced in the CREDP project by utilizing 85% of the funding in-country and thus achieving strong buy-in. This level of decentralization calls for strong coordination since in the end common equipment standards and rating systems will be necessary. 5Cs has the mandate to coordinate and implement region-wide trade related agreements. In addition, UNEP will ensure linkage to the Global Solar Water Heating Market Strengthening Initiative especially outreach intended for SIDS. The UNEP Sustainable Buildings and Construction Initiative will continue to offer information globally much of which may benefit this project. The UN DESA Division for Sustainable Development and SIDS Unit will also provide access to information and national sustainable development strategies development support from its regular program for Technical Cooperation and the SIDS Unit’s ongoing projects. UNDESA stresses the comprehensive integrated approach which is especially important in SIDS where resources are constrained. The Caribbean Sustainable Energy Program (CSEP) with EU and OAS support is providing valuable assistance in the development of national energy plans and policies, which are seen as key to more systematic longer term progress.

21


SECTION 3: INTERVENTION STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE)

3.1. Project rationale, policy conformity and expected global environmental benefits

57. CC-1 Energy Efficiency in Buildings is a high priority in the current GEF CC strategy. While the most cost effective measures to be investigated will be improvements in efficiency of standby transformer loads, Energy Efficiency Ratings in refrigeration equipment, high performance split air-conditioning equipment, efficient fans, replacement of slatted glass windows, roof insulation, solar water heating, consideration will also be given to renewable energy. CC-3 is also conformed with building-integrated grid-connected renewable energy options.

58. Greenhouse Gas emissions from the Belize power production sector was 108 ktCO2 in 2005. Electricity demand comes mainly from the commercial, residential and government consumers, with some light industry all of which will benefit from buildings and equipment measures anticipated in this project.

59. Therefore a 20% cut in electricity use from the reported 2005 level, over a 10 year life of equipment would achieve 220kT of CO2. If the appliances last 10 and a replacement rate of 10% per year then the stock turnover in 10 years. Therefore, if we introduce appliances which last over 10 year we would achieve our goal. After year three of the project a sample data will be taken to verify if the penetration rate is being reached, after which adjustments would be made if necessary. If the economy grows, a 20% intensity reduction would result in more emissions reductions than this target. By project end the emission reductions should have reached about 65 ktCO2 in order for the mechanism to reach 220 ktCO2 by 2020 when the standard would likely require major review. The efficiency levels can have gradual increase in requirements over time stipulated in the standard as well.

60. Similarly for a buildings code, monitoring will ensure the code is working and thereafter project the impact. Lifetime of the buildings is about 30 years and so a small building starts per year will have a growing impact over time.

61. The 10 year impact period would be reinforced by codes and standards with mandatory minimum efficiency requirements as well as a revolving fund for ESCOs which together with Development Finance Corporation finance can be expected to sustain or scale up.

62. ESCOs are remunerated from energy savings and will remain motivated so the level of activity at the end of the project can provide ex-ante impact of the ESCO finance mechanism continuing to operate up to 10 years. The emission reductions are estimated at less than 4$/tonne therefore achieving over 1 tCO2/$ allocated to the instrument including the revolution of funds at least 3 times.

3.2. Project goal and objective

63. The Goal is sustainable development in the buildings sector through the following objectives:

Setup the capacity for EE improvement of the building stock.

Demonstrate the technology to achieve 20% reduction in GhG emissions.

Put mechanisms in place to roll it out into the market.

Plan for 50% reduction longer term.

3.1 Project components and expected results

22


Project Components Expected Outcomes Expected Outputs

1. Establish an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

Opportunities and target potentials for energy savings are identified.

Buildings Performance Assessment Protocols and Manual Developed

Baseline projection and monitoring system able to track and feedback on progress.

Monitoring and quality assurance addressed – rebound effect managed and indoor air quality improved.

Assessment of EE and RE Capacity in relevant institutions

Demonstration Building Audit reports, statistics on potential savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors.

Belize GHG emission report. Identification of measures at the

design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and renewable.

Identify equipment and lighting potentials to reduce fossil fuel use.

Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified and developed.

Methodology for Buildings Indicators and Building Indicators Infrastructure.

2. Strengthening of National capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

Technical training programs on energy efficiency for Building Design and Retrofitting.

Building materials and component efficiency guidelines for procurement and adopted into practice.

Technical training on Standards and Labelling and Energy Efficiency Building Codes

Capacity Building for Energy Service Companies

Development of a building rating system and label.

Stakeholders (Standards officers, manufacturers, distributors and merchants) trained on EE Appliances & Equipment)

Stakeholders (building designers, contractors, engineers, architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel) trained in Energy Efficiency Building Codes.

Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector.

Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions. (ESCOs materials will be shared across the region)

3. Identification and development of country-appropriate finance mechanisms

Higher borrowing ratio, lower rate, and extended term finance (ESCO finance) linked to EE rating or RE production rate.

Promotion and training for expansion to commercial banking sector

CDM registered projects Fiscal incentives program to

increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures (such as income tax, environmental levy duty

Financial loan scheme to support the purchase of RE and EE products and services by the residential and commercial sectors developed.

Develop blended loan/ grant mechanism for initial operationalization and revolving mechanisms (ESCO)

Financial Mechanism identified as Utility Service Model

Baseline, approved methodologies for GhG monitoring and verification

Propose ESCO prequalification requirements, ToRs and levels of efficiency improvement qualifying for program support

4. Demonstration programme for sustainable energy piloted in

Monitored and verified demonstrations of measures and

Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in

23


selected buildings. benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level.

Initial market volume boosted for tradesmen, materials and equipment.

Development of an MOA between 5C, MPSEPU and national development bank for blended/grant loan mechanism

buildings at the national level Government adopts a buildings and

equipment energy efficiency standard. Potential market size for materials and

equipment has been quantified using MEPS

“Blended Financing” fund established for on-lending to eligible sub projects and Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) to provide financing for energy efficiency retrofits and installation of distributed renewable energy in private-sector buildings in Belize

5. Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings, equipment and appliances

Adoption of energy performance standard for buildings design, construction, and appliances introduced with ratings and minima for performance.

Support of the national consultation process for the development of guidelines and draft standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

Voluntary Energy Standards & Labels for appliances

Mandatory Minimum Energy Performance Standards and Labels (MEPS) for refrigeration, air-conditioning, room circulation, exhaust fans, and lights have been developed/adopted

6. Regional public awareness, knowledge management & sharing, replication strategy and reporting

Joint reporting for dissemination and cross-learning

Regional harmonized energy efficiency and renewable energy equipment and materials trade agreement

Task reports produced on subtopics – Belize: ESCO training programme

Each country leads or joins a task group on subtopics of energy efficiency such as equipment codes formulation, design tools, materials, etc. with 5Cs providing the critical oversight and guidance mandated to them by the member governments

Grenada PV interconnection and Monitoring buildings

A&B awareness and education program materials, schools, general public,

St Lucia Lighting Belize ESCO training and program

24


7. National Project management Outputs and reports as per UNEP GEF requirements suitable for consolidation by CCCCC

8. Monitoring and Evaluation by UNEP

Independent Terminal Evaluation

25


Table 3.2 List of potential projects in Belize

Project Numbe

r

Project Name Description Implementation

1Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Forestry, Environment and Sustainable Development (formerly MESTPU)

Detail assessment and comparison to be done with existing equipment and proposed green technologies.

Using this breakdown, high consuming and malfunctioning equipment devices will be targeted and replaced.

The building envelope will be assessed and recommendations made to improve this area. Life time, savings and capital cost to be analyzed to determine the return on investment.

Re-wiring it and where necessary Install EE lighting (LEDs) Upgrade ACs to split units. Staff sensitization on audit reports and

energy management measures Install insulation measures to roof/ceiling,

walls, doors and windows where necessary

2 Karl Huesner Memorial Hospital


Using this breakdown, high consuming and malfunctioning equipment will be targeted and replaced.

The building envelope will be assessed and recommendations made to improve this area. Life time, savings and capital cost to be analysed to determine the return on investment.

Expansion of the current water chill system to incorporate the wings of the Hospital that are currently utilizing small split units. Using the heat from the current chiller system to pre-heat the water for the sterilization units.

Install UV reduction measures on windows and doors on the east, west and south side for a more efficient use of the AC.

Re-wiring it and where necessary Install EE lighting (LEDs) Upgrade ACs to split units. Staff sensitization on audit reports and

energy management measures Install insulation measures to roof/ceiling,

walls, doors and windows where necessary

26


3 University of Belize


Using this breakdown, high consuming and malfunctioning equipment devices will be targeted and replaced.

The building envelope will be assessed and recommendations made to improve this area. Life time, savings and capital cost to be analysed to determine the return on investment.

Propose normal green measures, e.g. insulation, EE light, the latest energy control measures and use this building as a startup measuring stick for educational institutions.

Change from T12 to LED, take advantage of natural light, change high pressure sodium exterior lights install Led Security lights

Change air conditioners that are always being repaired and replace air conditioners that are not inverter types that work for more hours than 9 hours, discourage use of auditorium for classes

Do energy awareness talk with staff, students and faculty. Do energy audit presentation with engineering faculty students.

Paint roof with reflective paint, The university has a solar farm but the

power produce is sent straight to the grid. The university will start to benefit financially from the farm after 20 years of production

4 Energy Service Companies.

Pilot a “blended financing” fund of at least for on-lending to eligible sub projects and Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) to provide financing for energy efficiency retrofits and installation of distributed renewable energy in private-sector buildings in Belize

Capacity building for Belizean ESCOs Finalization of ESCO mechanism Disburse UNEP grant to DFC DFC to commit co-financing Pilot with demonstration projects where

possible

5 Energy Efficient Standards and Labelling of Appliances

Energy Standards & Labels (ESL) and compliance are necessary to guarantee sustained improvements in energy at the point of use.

Assessment of current legislative framework and coordinate with various agencies, GOB Departments and Suppliers

Impact and Market Assessment Translations and harmonization of Minimum

Energy Performance Standards. The first phase will target Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) and labelling for lighting, air conditioners, refrigerators, and motors. Adoption

Development of Mutual Recognition Agreements

27


Development of MV&E framework for S&L Programme

Public Awareness

6 Energy Efficient Building Codes

Intervention to require improved performance of buildings and equipment is important market stimulation.

Facilitate the Central Building Authority with the local adaptation of the ICC building codes, which includes the EE Standard.

Consultation visits to Six Districts, Belmopan and Ambergris Caye. –Review of I-Codes and Preparation of Application Documents by Consultant. –Training and Familiarizing Professionals with I-Codes and Application Document. –The first phase will target Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) and labeling for lighting, air conditioners, refrigerators, and motors. Adoption, implementation, and enforcement of Regional Building Energy Efficiency Code will tie together equipment and architecture.

7 Monitor & Evaluation

The monitoring the building performance of the EE measures and documentation of CO2 savings will be done by the national PMU with support from St. George’s University as part of their regional project.

SGU shall setup, train and monitor the entire EE mechanism document the performance of the building and report on meeting the projected target. –COMPONENTS 7,8

8 Public Awareness

The public awareness campaign prepared and lead by Antigua & Barbuda as part of the regional project.

Antigua & Barbuda will prepare and disseminate publications which seek to promote EE of buildings through the interventions in each country.

64. ESCO Mechanism

By lending the grant funds at cost of operations excluding risk factor, inflation and profit as would normally be included in the interest rate charged; blended with a majority of the institutions own finance, the cost of finance for the new technology is reduced. The national development bank in Belize is the Development Finance Cooperation (DFC) which has confirmed that the business of the bank includes finance of suitably qualified loan applications for business operations, equipment vendors, building construction and renovation. The bank is prepared to enter discussions on a finance mechanism with leveraging of approximately 4:1; the proposed grant being 200,000 USD and approximately 800,000 USD would be required over the project period. The ratio of 4 to 1 could be increased to say 6 to 1 for installations that are highly cost effective and low risk like lighting while for others the ratio could be increased for such installations as photovoltaics. The portfolio should average 4 to 1. Reducing the exposure to energy price fluctuations through energy efficiency is in keeping with the development mandate of the DFC.

28


Capacity building will be implemented through training of the ESCO stakeholders. A Consistent mechanism will need to be established to facilitate continuous EE of buildings through ESCO. An analytic tool is necessary to generate the base lines and the extent of savings which would be realized for each project.

Standard contracts will be developed and comprehensive optional payment from savings will be established. The contract shall also address the legal aspect of ‘change of ownership’ of a building during the payback period. Similar contractual arrangement will be included if there arises a change in the use of the building since the new usage may not generate the level of energy saving that were previously agreed upon. Additionally, the ownership and routine maintenance of the equipment during and after the payback should be clearly stated and agreed upon, with specific liability for accidental or intentional damages to the equipment.

Model contracts will include for private buildings, equity from the building owner, sweat equity from the ESCO installation effort and liens on equipment could form suitable security in keeping with DFC policy. Another model or use of the loans could be for stocking high efficiency lights and equipment for residential buyers – if this would lead to price reductions and volume marketing.

65. Case studies and examples of potential energy savings - Energy efficient measures in the building of Karl Heusner Memorial Hospital (KHMH)

To reduce the energy consumption of a building the potential for energy losses during its operation needs to be reduced. The case study found that KHMH would need to address insulation of its roofs, walls, windows, and door, which would save electricity consumption by air-conditioning systems and other cooling equipment. Under the project there would need to be a coordinated and integrated approach with the support of KHMH, MFPSEPU BEL, and other partners to develop a phased strategy to implement an energy management system, sensitize staff, gather building energy consumption data and record field measurements, finance and implement energy conservation measures. Also there needs to be the creation of a financing plan that meets the financial parameters set by KHMH for simple payback, or return on investment, to include design, implementation, commissioning, measurement & verification, and maintenance.

The work will focus on the following systems: air conditioning (chiller system and split air conditioners), water heating (boilers), ventilation (fans), refrigeration, lighting, and building envelope, and pumps. The team will evaluate potential savings anticipated, retrofit feasibility and sustainability of systems, and a long term operations and maintenance system for the hospital.

One of the main energy cost at the hospital is the continuous usage of security lights (some induction lights have recently been installed) as well as inefficient incandescent bulbs and other light fixtures whereas installation of photo cell light controls would reduce the usage of the lights to when they are required. The replacement of all inefficient incandescent light bulbs and light fixtures would reduce electricity consumption by saving of up to 8 kWh a day.

The hospital has 143 air conditioners of which only 2 are inverter types (energy efficient type). There are 3 (115 tonne York chiller systems). A site visit was undertaken on the 12th of January 2016 and it was noted that 1 of the chillers was not working. The other 2 chillers had 3 of their 6 compressors that were not functioning as well. It was also observed that there was a compressor that had condensate outside it. The breakdown of air conditioned vs.

29


unconditioned spaces is Chiller systems provide cooling for 30%, Central/splits provide for 25% and the rest is unconditioned spaces.

On site there is a 30 HP Diesel generated hot water system but this is out of service. Currently hot water is supplied by individual electrical heaters. Conventional water heating using electricity or diesel has been proven to be expensive while the capacity and intermittent high demand for hot water has raised some questions about continuous availability of water from a SWH. Two options for saving energy cost associated with water heating have been identified. The first option, the installation of a SWH, which will feed the hot water into an existing gas fired water heater thus requiring less energy. The second option, would to recover the heat from chiller-based air-conditioning system using a heat recovery water coil condenser and piping the heated water to the hospital’s boilers.

3.3. Intervention logic and key assumptions

CLASP

“The recommended new standards will reduce new refrigerator and freezer energy use by up to 30 percent by January 2014. For top loading clothes washers, 26 percent energy savings and 16 percent water savings would kick in for 2015 relative to current standards, increasing to 37 percent energy and water savings in 2018. For front loading clothes washers, the savings will be 43 percent for energy and 52 percent for water in 2015 compared to today’s standards. Clothes dryers will increase in efficiency by 5 percent in 2015. In addition, changes to the dryer test procedure will reduce over-drying, saving additional energy and extending the life of clothes. Room air conditioners will see a 10 to 15 percent increase in efficiency effective June 2014 and dishwashers will see 14 percent energy savings and 23 percent water savings beginning in January 2013. Many of the new standards are based on levels of efficiency that previously earned federal tax credits, illustrating how these tax credits can contribute towards transforming markets towards higher efficiency products. For a typical household, products just meeting the new standards would cut their total electric bill by about 6 percent relative to products just meeting the current standards”. (USEPA appliance standards announcement) Mexico is currently in the process of harmonizing minimum standards with the USA.

30


with support from CLASP. Caribbean countries, especially Belize will need to block dumping of obsolete equipment.

Energy Star labeled appliances are more efficient yet, refrigerators being at least 10% more efficient. 20% more efficient refrigerators receive a tax incentive. The EU, USA and Canadian labelling programs cover a range of appliance performance and are maintained by their standards organisations to remain current with technical advances and energy costs. By selecting a level such as the Energy Star and selecting an equivalent level in the EU system (G through to A++) countries will be availing themselves of products in mass production made in many countries including China and Mexico.

31


3.5 Risk analysis and risk management measures

66. The project is designed to avoid problems experienced in the CREDP project by utilizing 85% of the funding in-country. This level of decentralization calls for strong coordination since in the end common equipment standards and rating systems will be necessary. 5Cs has the mandate to coordinate and implement region activities related to clement change including mitigation.

67. Adoption and support of energy efficiency program and in this case, buildings and appliances programs, requires political will and resources. The tendency in building industry is to sell on first cost basis, aesthetics and by location which is counterproductive for energy efficiency. By getting energy ratings and information into market, energy efficiency qualities be made readily apparent. Development of ratings systems that work in the developing countries with appropriate benchmarks for comfort and other aspects will address this risk. Due to the diffused responsibility for investment in energy efficiency, and the tendency for mandatory minimums to stagnate, progressive options as incentives to pursue the socioeconomic and environmental benefits of energy efficiency will be explored.

68. Availability of efficient products on the local markets is as important as sound suasion mechanisms and for the most common features of buildings in the region i.e. lighting and air conditioning, the project will strive to demonstrate that addressing the whole chain from buying, to installment and use, carries benefits in terms of energy use and in terms of comfort of use as well as aesthetic design.

69. The take-back effect may degrade benefits of improved performance. These will be assessed through testing and surveys and mitigated either by specific measures or accommodated in the impact projections. Indoor air quality, combustion safety and durability of structures can be affected by energy efficiency measures resulting in a rejection of EE techniques. Quality control measures and testing of a sample of improved as well as control buildings will identify the need for adoption of measures to ensure adequate or better building integrity.

70. Climate change can place higher demand on heating and cooling depending on the location however, the measures taken will reduce the impact of such changes. Should water availability be impacted by climate change, the sustainable building guidelines will reduce this risk since water saving is considered in sustainable building design.

3.4. Consistency with the planned priorities changes

71. National Energy Plan for Belize of December 2003 recommends Collection and analysis of energy data on a regular basis, the preparation of annual national

energy balances, and the implementation of a demand-side management (DSM) study to assess whether additional power generation can be avoided;

Implementation of a comprehensive energy-efficiency training program for relevant stakeholders.

Review of the building codes in Belize to include potential energy saving design features. Training of appliance importers about the benefits of energy efficiency and encouraged to

import energy efficient appliances. Design and commencement of a national energy efficiency education and awareness program. A study on energy end-use practices in all sectors (public, commercial, residential, etc.) of the

economy in collaboration with Belize Electricity and Lighting and an organization that is experienced in conducting such surveys.

Development and adoption of incentives such as reduction of import duties for energy efficient equipment (e.g., compact fluorescent lamps) to encourage their import and use.

32


Support for the creation of ESCOs in Belize through workshops, dissemination of information, and the establishment of linkages to countries with ESCO experience.

Creation of a National Solar Water Heating Initiative.

72. The Central Buildings Authority is working on the CrossQ Building Codes has found that additional climate zones will be needed for Belize but otherwise is on a path to adopt such a code. National Energy Policy will tie in with the project’s demonstrations and projected improvements.

3.5. Incremental cost reasoning

73. Incremental cost is barrier removal, upfront cost of building capacity, awareness. EE interventions could be considered commercially viable and in theory should already benefit form high market penetration. However, the lack of high market penetration is as a result of barriers. The proposed intervention is to remove these barriers.

74. Building on the current situation described in section B above, the current business as usual approach would see continuing under-investment and poor levels of awareness of opportunities for improvement among consumers, industry professionals and government. The added value of the project will be to build the capacity for continual improvement of the building stock in a way that stakeholders agree is effective use mechanisms that integrate with the market and will achieve sustainable improvements. Specifically, there are no existing national coordinating efforts to address building and municipal lighting efficiency. As a result this project would provide the policy and technical framework for a coordinated effort to increase energy efficiency in these sectors, which would otherwise have not been addressed by current national efforts. Important barriers to these processes include fragmentation of stakeholders, lack of awareness, lack of means for key decision makers to participate in the global process to design a common benchmarking system, lack of capacity to adequately analyse the needs for policy intervention at local levels, and inadequate capacity to build capacity to collect local level data required for baselines and policy tools, such as information about availability of materials, products, services and the local level of technological development. GEF projects have and continue to address lower cost measures that while justified by lack of progress without the projects, are minimal in nature and need a comprehensive and longer term approach in order that developing countries can meet their obligations under the UNFCCC.

75. Overcoming the barriers will trigger a shift toward energy efficiency that can be expected to continue given the national economic benefits.

3.6. Sustainability

76. The involvement of the private sector through the training and establishment of ESCOs along with funds being injected into DFC will continue to sustain itself.

77. Oil prices are likely to remain high, which can only lead to more savings potential through EE building and other mechanisms.

78. Institutional strengthening via the adoption of the building codes, training of ESCOs and the implementation of the appliance labelling.

79. The soft financing through the DFC could be sustained with carbon credits via the National Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA).

3.7. Replication

33


80. Jamaica has already recognized a Code for Energy Conservation in Buildings, and it is hoped that the rest of CariCom may follow this project’s lead on appliances.

81. All will disseminate the success of the project through the 5Cs to other Caribbean regional countries and to all SIDS through UNDESA SIDSnet.

3.8. Public awareness, communications and mainstreaming strategy

82. There is a common misconception about energy efficiency and energy conservation. Energy efficiency involves reducing the amount of energy required to provide products and services. It may require measures such as using energy efficient bulbs, or installing fluorescent bulbs or larger window panes to accommodate more light. These measures reduce the amount of energy used and can positively impact upon the financial implications of energy usage. Energy conservation, on the other hand, refers to the attempts to reduce energy consumption such as turning off lights, and unplugging appliances. Both energy efficiency and energy conservation can significantly reduce the cost of energy usage; and both are designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

83. The following proposal seeks to present public education strategies that explain energy efficiency and conservation, while encouraging tangible changes in the lives of homeowners, businesses, hotels and the like. Firstly, the proposal looks at the example of the Barbados Light and Power Company Limited, who has been in operation since 1911. The case study brings to light the aspects that must be considered in developing a public awareness strategy of this form.

84. The proposal then highlights strategies that can be employed to convey the message of energy efficiency and conservation. Hence, the strategy focuses on several audiences and a means of reaching each of them. The strategies to be employed include:

Public Service Announcements

Cartoons

Comic Strips and

Brochures

85. It is imperative to note that on-going surveys must be conducted to determine what is known (prior to the implementation of the strategy), what persons are beginning to understand (during the implementation), and then what persons have understood and have done to make life changes (at the completion of the intense public awareness campaign). The initial survey will assist the implementing team in deciding on the information that needs to be included in the varying media.

However, each media should stress the following:

A definition of energy efficiency and energy conservation

The impact of either on:

Their utility bills The environment

86. What are the steps to be taken towards the implementation of these strategies

87. The following therefore discusses these areas in greater detail.

3.9. Environmental and social safeguards

34


88. St. George’s University of Grenada will provide a system to evaluate and monitor the environmental and public health aspects of renewable energy use and energy efficiency interventions in Belize. They will collect public health and environmental health indicators, exposure measurement data, as well as Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) survey data for energy consumption behaviour before and after certain interventions. In particular the “take back” or “rebound” effect related to behaviour will be quantified and the information disseminated through the public awareness programme and will become one of the parameters to be fed into the preparation of the building code. The epidemiological data will help us to understand the effect of interventions in public health and behaviour of occupants. Five percent of the national budget is reserved for this under Activity Component 1.

35

UNEP GEF

CCCCC Regional Coordinating Committee

National Steering Committees (5)

5 Project Management Units National Coordinators

Regional Partners, CDB

GEF Operational Focal Point

Development Finance Corporation, Co-financiersActivities

Regional Coordinator

UNDESA


SECTION 4: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS

A. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT:

89. UNEP will be the implementing agency complemented in the UN system by the UNDESA Regular Program for Technical Cooperation as well as the SIDS Unit of the Division for Sustainable Development. UNDESA has executed a variety of GEF projects however the implementing arrangement proposed is that UNDESA will only provide advisory services.

B. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENT:

90. Funding will be channeled to national executing project management units by UNEP through the 5Cs as a technical coordinating body. Each country will take the lead on development of technical specifications or materials on a topic. 5Cs will have responsibility for collating data and technical material. This distributed execution mechanism for a regional project is anticipated to have the largest national policy.

91. Organizational Chart

92. The blended grant loan facility will have due diligence performed by UNEP, UNDESA and 5Cs.

93. 5Cs is EA for UNEP and will channel funding to the Belize PMU and the Project Coordinator will provide secretary support to the steering committee including DFC, DOE, CBA, etc.

36


94. The National steering Committee will dialog with the GEF Focal Point and DFC; facilitating and monitoring the various activities of the project.

SECTION 5: STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION

95. Some stakeholders were interviewed during the project preparation. This will be formalized during project initiation with a national inception meeting. Refer to list of stakeholders. Regional stakeholders are referred to in the 5Cs document.

Table 5.5 Key Stakeholders

Ministry of Finance (MOF) The MOF is responsible for the overall policy guidance and initial sign-off on project Documents.

Ministry of Public Service, Energy & Public Utilities

The MPSEPU for implementing government policies to identify and provide programs services to and communities with the various entities in Belize. This will be achieved through the setting up of a Executing Unit within the Ministry.

Department of Environment (DOE) Under the guidance of the MPSEPU, the DOE will lead with the implementation of the appliance labelling and set up guide lines for enforcement. They will engage the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in the appliance industry for the development of the Efficiency labelling policies.

The Belize Bureau of Standard (BBS)

The BBS will support the DOE to development of the Efficiency labelling policies.

Chamber of Commerce The Chamber of Commerce will be the link between this project and the appliance/equipment suppliers and rest of commercial sector.

Development Finance Cooperation (DFC)

The DFC will be the key banking agency to facilitate the rolling out of the ESCO projects. They will match, manage and report on the finances for the ESCO.

Belize Hotel Association(BHA) The BHA will support the public awareness of EE intervention in the tourism sector via ESCOs.

Central Building Authority (CBA) The CBA will lead the public awareness of the Building Codes with the support of the APEB, APAB and Local Building Authorities.

Public Utilities Commission The PUC will support the public

37


(PUC) awareness of EE interventions in the residential and commercial sectors

Customs and Excise The Customs and Excise department will play a key roll in the regulation/ of equipment standards.

National Climate Change Office This office will support the awareness of the climate change components of the project.

Ministry of Housing (MOH) The MOH shall participate in the ratification of the Building Codes

SECTION 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN

96. The project will follow UNEP standard monitoring, reporting and evaluation processes and procedures. Substantive and financial project reporting requirements are summarized in Appendix 8. Reporting requirements and templates are an integral part of the UNEP legal instrument to be signed by the executing agency and UNEP.

97. The project M&E plan is consistent with the GEF Monitoring and Evaluation policy. The Project Results Framework presented in Appendix 4 includes SMART indicators for each expected outcome as well as mid-term and end-of-project targets. These indicators along with the key deliverables and benchmarks included in Appendix 6 will be the main tools for assessing project implementation progress and whether project results are being achieved. The means of verification and the costs associated with obtaining the information to track the indicators are summarized in Appendix 7. Other M&E related costs are also presented in the Costed M&E Plan and are fully integrated in the overall project budget.

98. The M&E plan will be reviewed and revised as necessary during the project inception workshop to ensure project stakeholders understand their roles and responsibilities vis-à-vis project monitoring and evaluation. Indicators and their means of verification may also be fine-tuned at the inception workshop. Day-to-day project monitoring is the responsibility of the project management team but other project partners will have responsibilities to collect specific information to track the indicators. It is the responsibility of the Project Manager to inform UNEP of any delays or difficulties faced during implementation so that the appropriate support or corrective measures can be adopted in a timely fashion.

The project Steering Committee will receive periodic reports on progress and will make recommendations to UNEP concerning the need to revise any aspects of the Results Framework or the M&E plan. Project oversight to ensure that the project meets UNEP and GEF policies and procedures is the responsibility to the Task Manager in UNEP-GEF. The Task Manager will also review the quality of draft project outputs, provide feedback to the project partners, and establish peer review procedures to ensure adequate quality of scientific and technical outputs and publications.

99. At the time of project approval 90% percent of baseline data is available. Baseline data gaps will be addressed during the first year of project implementation. A plan for collecting the necessary baseline data will be prepared under component 1. The main aspects for which

38


additional information are needed are energy consumption and physical characteristics of buildings.

100. Project supervision will take an adaptive management approach. The Task Manager will develop a project supervision plan at the inception of the project which will be communicated to the project partners during the inception workshop. The emphasis of the Task Manager supervision will be on outcome monitoring but without neglecting project financial management and implementation monitoring. Progress vis-à-vis delivering the agreed project global environmental benefits will be assessed with the Steering Committee at agreed intervals. Project risks and assumptions will be regularly monitored both by project partners and UNEP. Risk assessment and rating is an integral part of the Project Implementation Review (PIR). The quality of project monitoring and evaluation will also be reviewed and rated as part of the PIR. Key financial parameters will be monitored quarterly to ensure cost-effective use of financial resources.

101. A mid-term management review or evaluation will take place as indicated in the project milestones. The review will include all parameters recommended by the GEF Evaluation Office for terminal evaluations and will verify information gathered through the GEF tracking tools, as relevant. The review will be carried out using a participatory approach whereby parties that may benefit or be affected by the project will be consulted. Such parties were identified during the stakeholder analysis (see section 5 of the project document). The project Steering Committee will participate in the mid-term review and develop a management response to the evaluation recommendations along with an implementation plan. It is the responsibility of the UNEP Task Manager to monitor whether the agreed recommendations are being implemented.

102. An independent terminal evaluation will take place at the end of project implementation. The Evaluation and Oversight Unit (EOU) of UNEP will manage the terminal evaluation process. A review of the quality of the evaluation report will be done by EOU and submitted along with the report to the GEF Evaluation Office not later than 6 months after the completion of the evaluation. The standard terms of reference for the terminal evaluation are included in Appendix 9. These will be adjusted to the special needs of the project.

103. The GEF tracking tools are attached as Appendix 10. These will be updated at mid-term and at the end of the project and will be made available to the GEF Secretariat along with the project PIR report. As mentioned above the mid-term and terminal evaluation will verify the information of the tracking tool.

39


SECTION 7: PROJECT FINANCING AND BUDGET

7.1. Overall project budget

Project Components Belize

GEF Co-fin

1.Establish Assessment and Monitoring System including studies of long term potentials

134,990

2.Strengthening of National capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy

320,000

3.Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

45,000

4.Demonstration program 400,000

5.Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings

30,000

7. National Project management 58,750 -

Total 988740

7.2. Project co-financing

Name of Co-financier (source)

Classification

Type Project

JICA2 in Belize Bilateral Cash 500,000

Development Finance Corporation Belize

Nat. Dev. Bank

Cash 800,000

Central Buildings Authority Belize

Nat'l Gov't In-kind 45,000

Ministry of Finance, Public Service, Energy

and Public Utilities

Nat’l Gov’t In-kind 92,000

Inter-American Development Bank/Castalia

Technical Cooperation

In-kind 410,000

BEL Technical Cooperation

In-Kind 10,000

OAS Bilateral In-Kind 90,000

OLADE Technical Cooperation

In-Kind 188,000

Total Co-financing 02,135,000

2 Japan International Cooperation Agency

40

Khara, 12/31/16,

Will be added when co-finance report is completed to UNEP standard


7.3. Project cost-effectiveness

Cost effectiveness in the project approach is improved through avoidance of repetition in the development of tools and surveys in single country projects. On the order of 20% can be saved if a GEF country has a toolbox available and surveys already done. In some cases deployment may take place without major GEF interventions in the individual countries. This will be the case where the highly cost effective building energy efficiency measures themselves are so attractive to developing economies and that they can be implemented without investment instruments. For Countries in the lowest allocation Group for the Resource Allocation Framework a small or medium size project may facilitate transfer of the tools and mechanisms through regional activities. Given the specificity of the region and the ambition of this project, a regional platform is designed to secure sustainability of the efforts. The project will support identification and development of policy packages combining public-private sector adoption and market suasion as well as support to mandatory codes. The project will also explore deployment cost effectiveness over time by laying out potentials, targets and roadmaps for longer term transformation. Energy efficiency when promulgated through energy efficiency standards has cost effective benefits in the creation of larger markets for materials and equipment as well as full market penetration. Rating and labeling systems along with mandatory codes will ensure an evolving and improvement seeking perspective on sustainable energy use. Particularly in SIDS deep energy efficiency gains and renewable energy are needed. Mandatory codes ensure full market penetration of minimum standards of energy efficiency in these SIDS especially if oil price risk is factored into the code. The region has a typical average energy consumption growth rate of about 4%. If the construction growth rate is similar, within a 5 year period of application of an energy efficiency code is considered, the growth in energy consumption due to the new buildings could be cut in half. The establishment of a rating system would encourage innovation and progressive competition. The rating system would also apply to existing buildings and could be tied to incentives. Thus the scope of direct impact would be more than double the energy growth rate. If the market penetration of 4 % new construction and 4 % existing facilities is compounded over 5 years the project will cut emissions by 20%. With a 10 year life of equipment, the project’s direct impact would be about 16 Mt CO2, representing less than 0.35 $ GEF funding per ton of CO2.

41

Annex 1: Project Document

Appendix 1: Budget by project components and UNEP budget lines

42


EXPENDITURE BY PROJECT COMPONENT/ACTIVITY ($)

43


Component 1: Establish

an Assessment

and Monitoring System for

Energy Effi-ciency

and Renewable Energy in Buildings

Component 2: Streng-thening of National Ca-pacity for Energy Efficiency and Rene-wable Energy

Component 3: Appropriate Financial and Market-based Mechanisms that Support Energy Efficiency

Component 4: Demonstra-tion Pro-gram for Sustainable Energy

Component 5: Regulatory Framework to Promote Energy Efficient Buildings, Equipment, and Appliances

Component 6: Regional Public Aware-ness, Know-ledge Mana-gement and Sharing, Re-plication Stra-tegy, and Regional Re-porting

Component 7:Project Manage-ment

Total 2012 2013 2014 20155 Total

10 PERSONNEL COMPONENT 110

0Project personnel

110

1Project Coordinator (5Cs)

163,050 163,050 40,000 42,100 39,950 41,000 163,050

110

2Project Manager (AB) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

110

3Project Manager (Bz) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

1104

Project Manager (Gn) 58,750 58,750 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,750 58,750

1105

Project Manager (SL) 22,500 22,500 5,000 5,000 5,000 7,500 22,500

1106

Project Manager (SVG) 44,200 44,200 10,000 10,000 10,000 14,200 44,200

1199

Sub-total 406,000 406,000 85,000 87,100 84,950 148,950 406,000

1200

Consultants

1201

5Cs 274,000 274,000 73,500 73,500 73,500 53,500 274,000

1202

AB 66,290 100,000 15,000 50,000 45,000 276,290 85,540 70,000 60,000 60.750 276,290

1203

Bz 66,240 130,000 15,000 10,000 35,000 226,240 25,540 70,000 25,000 105,700 226,240

1204

Gn 148,240 6,500 3,450 69,500 227,690 50,000 67,000 50,700 59,990 227,690

1205

Gn SWAC 50,000 50,000 40,000 10,000 50,000

1206

SL 17,000 9,000 5,000 5,000 8,000 44,000 14,000

10,000 10,000 10,000 44,000

1207

SL SWAC 17,040 17,040 17,040 17,040

44


1208

SVG 14,740 10,000 1,000 45,750 40,750 112,240 30,000 30,000 25,000 27,240 112,240

1209

Int’l Technical Adviser 75,000 75,000 20,000 20,000 15,000 20,000 75,000

1299

Sub-total 381,850 285,500 39,450 110,750 198,250 349,000 1,302,500

355,620 323,500 258,500 364,880 1,302,500

1300

Administrative Support

1301

Assistant (5Cs) 74,000 74,000 28,000 14,000 15,000 17,000 74,000

1399

Sub-total 74,000 74,000 28,000 14,000 15,000 17,000 74,000

1600

Travel on official business

1601

Project staff travel 5Cs 35,200 35,200 7,000 10.000 9,000 9,200 35,200

1602

Project staff travel AB 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1603

Project staff travel Bz 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1604

Project staff travel Gn 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1605

Project staff travel SL 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1606

Project staff travel TT 10,000 10,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 10,000

1606

In’tl Technical Adviser 29,000 29,000 6,000 9,000 9,000 5,000 29,000

1699

Sub-total 50,000 64,200 114,200 23,000 34,000 33,000 24,200 114,200

1999 Component total 429,550 285,500 39,450 110,750 198,250 440,900 480,000

1,896,700 491,620 458,600 391,450 555,030 1,896,700

20 SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT

2100

Sub-contracts for Developing and Operation of Financial Support Mechanisms

210

3Bz: Development Finance Corp.

390,000 390,000 200,000 190,000 390,000

2104

Grenada Development Bank

400,000 100,000 500,000 200,000 300,000 500,000

2105

St. Lucia Development Bank

90,000 105,000 195,000 100,000 95,000 195,000

219 Sub-total 490,000 595,000 1,085,000

500,000 585,000 1,085,000

45


9220

0Sub-contracts for Monitoring Procure-ment and Demon-stration Contracts

2201

AB (procurement) 58,750 58,750 20,000 20,000 18,750 58,750

210

2AB (demo contracts) 350,000 350,000 150,000 200,000 350,000

2203

BZ (procurement) 58,750 58,750 20,000 20,000 18,750 58,750

2204

Gn (procurement) 100,000 100,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000

2205

SL (procurement) 22,000 22,000 10,000 2,000 10,000 22,000

2206

TT (procurement) 44,200 44,200 10,000 10,000 24,200 44,200

2207

TT (demo contracts) 420,000 420,000 200,000 220,000 420,000

2299

Sub-total 283,700 770,000 1,053,700 435,000 497,000 96,700 25,000 1,053,700

2999 Component total 283,700 490,000

1,365,000 2,138,700 935,000

1,082,000 96,700 25,000 2,138,700

30 TRAINING COMPONENT

3200

Group Training

3201

5Cs 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000

3202

AB 99,950 30,000 105,000 234,950 70,000 50,000 50,000 64,950 234,950

3203

Bz 90,000 30,000 125,000 245,000 70,000 50,000 50,000 75,000 245,000

3204

Gn 50,000 20,000 70,000 25,000 20,000 10,000 15,000 70,000

3205

SL 45,000 5,000 12,000 62,000 25,000 20,000 6,000 11,000 62,000

3206

TT 30,750 10,000 70,000 110,750 50,000 30,000 10,000 20,750 110,750

3299

Sub-total 315,700 75,000 332,000 20,000 742,700 240,000 190,000 126,000 186,700 742,700

3999 Component total 315,700 75,000 102,000 332,000 742,700 240,000 190,000 126,000 186,700 742,700

40 EQUIPMENT AND

PREMISES COMPONENT

46


4100

Expendable equipment

4101

Office supplies 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

4199

Sub-total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

4999 Component total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000

50 MISCELLANEOUS COMPONENT 520

0Reporting costs

520

1Public Awareness- Raising Reports

2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000

529

9Sub-total 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000

5300

Sundry

5301

Communications 900 900 100 300 300 200 900

5399

Sub-total 900 900 100 300 300 200 900

550

0Evaluation

550

1External Audit

14000 14000 3500 3500 3500 3500 14000

5581

Monitoring & Evaluation (mid-term and final)

22300 38700 61000 30,000 31000 61000

5599

Sub-total 22,300

52,700 75,000 3500 30,000 45,000 75,000

5999

Component total 22,300 52,700 2,900 77,900 100 31,300 300 46,200 77,900

99 GRAND TOTAL

735,550 541,200 604,450 1,475,750

530,250 485,900 485,900 4,859,000 1,669,720

1,761,900

614,450 812,930 4,859.000

47


Appendix 2: Co-financing by source and UNEP budget lines 5Cs UNDESA AB

Ministry of Land,

Housing and, En-

vironment

A AB Ministry of Land, Housing and, En- vironment

BzJICA

BzDevelop-ment Fi- nance Cor- poration

BzCentral

BuildingsAuthori- thy

BzMinistry of

Natural Resourcesand En-

vironment

GnGrenada Develop- ment Bank

GnWINDREFF

SLSt. Lucia Develop-ment Bank

SLMinistry of Physical Develop-ment and the Envi- ronmrnSVG

SVGMinistry of Housing and the Environ-ment

SVGMinistry of Housing and the Environ-ment

TOTAL

Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash Cash In-kind In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind Cash In-kind

UNEP Budget Line

10 PERSONNEL COMPONENT

1100 Project personnel

1101 5Cs Project Coordinator

242,950 75,000 242,950 75,000

1102 AB 58,750 0 58,750

1103 Bz 58,750 0 58,750

1104 Gn 58.750 0 58,750

1105 SL 22,500 0 22,500

1106 SVG 44,200 0 44,200

1199 Sub-total 242,950 75,000 0 58,750 0 0 0 58,750 0 58,750 0 22,500 0 44,200 242,900 317,950

1200 Consultants

1201 5Cs 242,950 242,950 0

1202 AB 5,000 50,000 5,000 50,000

1203 Bz 300,000 18,000 300,000 18,000

1204 Gn 5,000 116,250 5,000 116,250

1205 Gn SWAC 10,000 0 10,000

1206 SL 4,100 30,000 4,100 30,000

1207 SL SWAC 10,000 0 10,000

1208 SVG 5,000 33,500 5,000

33,500

1209 Int’l Technical Adviser (UNDESA)

45,000

1299 Sub-total 262,050 45,000 0 50,000 300,000 0 0 18,000 0 126,250 0 40,000 0 33,500 562,500 267,750

1301 Administrative Support 5Cs

0 0

1399 Sub-total 0 0

1600 Travel on official business

1601 Project staff 5Cs 0 0

1602 Project staff AB 0 0

1603 Project staff Bz 0 0

1604 Project staff Gn 0 0

48


1605 Project staff SL 0 0

1606 Project staff SVG 0 0

1607 Int’l Technical Adviser (UNDESA)

30,000 0 30,000

1699 Sub-total 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000

1999 Component total

550,000 150,000 0 108,750 300,000 0 0 76,750 0 185,000 0 62,500 0 77,700 805,400 615,700

20 SUB-CONTRACT COMPONENT

2100 Sub-contracts for Developing and Operation of Financial Support Mechanisms

2101 Bz: Development Finance Corporation

800,000 800,000 0

2102 Grenada Development Bank

1,200,000 1,200,000 0

2103 St. Lucia Development Bank

800,000 800,000 0

2199 Sub-total 0 0 0 0 0 800,000 0 0 1,200,000 0 800,000 0 0 0 2,800,000 0

2200 Sub-contracts for Monitoring Procure-ment and Demon-stration Contracts

2201 AB (procurement) 30,000 0 30,000

2202 AB (demo contracts) 550,000 373,750 550,000 373,750

2203 Bz (procurement) 100,000 5,250 100,000 5,250

2204 Gn (procurement) 0 0 0

2205 SL (procurement) 20.000 0 20,000

2206 SVG (procurement) 5,800 0 5,800

2207 SVG (demo contracts) 1,716,500 1,716,500 0

2399 Sub-total 0 0 550,000 403,750 100,000 0 0 5,250 0 0 0 20,000 1,716,500 5,800 2,366,500 434,800


0 0 550,000 403,750 100,000 800,000 0 5,250 1,200,000 0 800,000 20,000 1,716,500 5,800 6,086,500 434,800

30 TRAINING COMPONENT

3200 Group training

3201 5Cs 0 0

3202 AB 220,000 0 220,000

3203 Bz 100,000 45,000 10,000 0 155,000

3204 Gn 0 0

3205 SL 0 0

3206 SVG 138,500 0 138,500

3299 Sub-total 0 0 0 220,000 100,000 0 45,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 138,500 0 510,500


0 0 0 220,000 100,000 0 45,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 138,500 0 510,500

49


-

99 GRAND TOTAL

550,000 150,000 550,000 732,500 500,000 800,000 45,000 92,000 1,200,000 185,000 82,500 185,000 1,716,500 222,000 6,116,500 1,509,000

50


Appendix 3: Incremental reasoning

Building on the baseline situation, the current business as usual approach would see continuing under-investment and poor levels of awareness of opportunities for improvement among consumers, industry professionals and government. The added value of the project will be to build the capacity for continual improvement of the building stock in a way that stakeholders agree is effective that integrate with the market and will achieve sustainable improvements. In the eastern Caribbean and Belize the markets are very small and are at the end of a long supply chain for equipment presenting a situation where lock-in to certain equipment, especially low cost equipment is much firmer and specialized or high efficiency equipment is special order. Organising the suppliers to respond to an initial demand, demonstrating the energy efficiency, promoting the market for energy efficiency are all incremental to the business as usual case even though energy savings will justify the product upgrades. Energy standards and labelling in Europe and North America can be adapted to local climate conditions, energy prices and local currency in order to become effective marketing tools. Without their adaptation, they are not useful. Building designers are uncertain about what improvements to make, some over-insulating the envelope (beyond cost effectiveness) while others are succumbing to glass wall office building designs that are inappropriate in tropical climates and cause excessive air-conditioning loads.

This project would provide the policy and technical framework for a coordinated effort to increase energy efficiency in these sectors, which would otherwise have not been addressed by current national efforts. Overcoming the barriers will trigger a shift toward energy efficiency that can be expected to continue given the national economic benefits.

Project Strategy Baseline Alternative Increment

Project ObjectiveTo reduce the GHG emissions intensity in buildings by 20%

Baseline older refrigerators and air-conditioners average 1,281 kwh/yr, newer 513 kwh/yr, with high variability.Good penetration of compact fluorescent lamps (rate unknown) but incandescent lamps still available. Magnetic ballast fluorescents still widely used in commercial buildingsVery few (<0.1%) high performance buildings, most buildings use technologies common during periods of low energy prices 1990’s.No mechanisms to encourage beSVGer performance

A reduction in GHG emissions intensity of 20% as a result of more efficient energy consumption and renewable energy use in buildings

The increment is moving from inaction and low level discussion to an organized push for EE and RE in buildings.

Outcome 1Institutional capacity for management of

General Statistics, weak knowledge of technical potentials, weak policy documents

Capacity to predict trends and assess impact of EE policies and

EE and RE potentials and ability to track progress are

51


sector, monitoring and assessment programs,

Long range planning for deep GhG emission cuts of 50%

institutionalized

Output 1.1 Building audit reports, statistics on potential savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors

Studies available for buildings were mostly walk-thought audits with no building envelope characterization.

Samples of commercial buildings, government buildings and hotels are established each at about 20 for statistical analysis.

Adequate information to allow alternative measures to be considered

Output 1.2 Identification of measures at the design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and renewables

There are a few reports looking at buildings in a rather general way

20 upgrade option reports on 1.1 studied buildings

Upgrades and cost effectiveness considered

Output 1.3 Identify equipment and lighting potentials to reduce fossil fuel use

Equipment ratings are available for some equipment and others not, Available ratings are for northern country conditions, electricity prices and foreign currencies

> 20% energy performance improvement

Improvements considered in a systematic way

Output 1.4 Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified and developed

No boSVGom-up policy support documents for buildings sector

20% and 50% improvement options put forward for long term policy

Alternative is the increment, no significant action without the project

Outcome 2Technical capacity and awareness for EE

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance available to many small builders, public consumers

Majority of vendors, practitioners and trades-persons are aware of EE techniques

Awareness and capacity to effect change improved

Output 2.1 Development of training workshops, seminars on energy efficiency for building designers, contractors architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel

No particular qualification available for ESCOs

30 trained ESCOs with at least 3 in each country

Qualified industry established

Output 2.2 Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector

Manuals available are for other climates and cultures

Manual covering building science in the tropical island context

Alternative is the increment

52


Output 2.3 Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions

University of West Indies has some relevant capacity for training but the local poli-techniques need expansion of curricula

Improved material for training Improvement in training material

Outcome 3Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

Normal finance is available for buildings, building renovation and to support business (including buildings materials and equipment suppliers) capitalization but no portfolio is established for energy service companies or renewable energy suppliers in particular

National development banks (NDB) accept grant capitalization to be used in a blended finance product for the demonstration investments and listed eligible loans subsequently.National housing authority agrees to adopt an EE guideline or draft national EE buildings code in their housing finance program.

EE in buildings finance becomes a finanace portfolio with added value over the traditional property value

Output 3.1 Reduced operating costs and risk hedging against fuel price spikes are integrated into lending

There are a few programs such as the Solar Water Heater loan Program by the Grenada Credit Union otherwise finance is generic and EE/RE not recognized

5 financing agencies engaged, others made aware of the options

Recognition of EE in the finance

Output 3.2 Fiscal incentives program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures

Tax and customs duty is exempted in several countries for items like Photovoltaic panels

Any expansion of tax relief possible will be pursued – likely are specialized components not manufactured in the CariCom region

New fiscal incentives

Outcome 4Demonstration program for sustainable energy

Awareness and understanding of EE/RE benefits

Increased awareness

Output 4 .1 Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level.

Very few low energy buildings and none documented

Number of buildings Energy intensity kwh/m2, number of new buildings kwh/m2

20% improvement

Awareness and transparency of EE improved

Output 4.2 Challenge competition for private sector builders for construction and retrofiSVGing of buildings to make a very low purchased energy target of some few kWh/m2 – Private sector competition for ESCOs.


~20 projects – at least 3 per country

Outcome 5Regulatory instruments – Code compliance advice, mandatory

Refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment customs control is effective but no efficiency considered, low efficiency low cost

Building guidelines or mandatory codes are provided or enforced along with building permiSVGing

Possibility of Regulation exists

53


equipment efficiency levels how-to establish

equipment entering the market Equipment standards and/or mandatory minimums are enforced

Output 5.1 Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

No energy code or equipment requirements or labeling exists

All countries adopt voluntary programs

Standards and labeling inform the market

Outcome 6Regional Dissemination

Ongoing mandate and activity advocating EE and RE

Enhance info and service offerings to member countries

Improved information availability

Output 6.1 Task reports produced on subtopics:

Weak regional coordination/ information exchange

Nationally lead task area reports produced with regional coordinator assistance

CAricCOm and SIDS community beSVGer informed

54


Appendix 4: Results Framework

Project Strategy

Objectively verifiable indicators Indicator Baseline Target Sources of

verificationRisks and

Assumptions

Project ObjectiveTo reduce the GHG emissions intensity in buildings by 20%

Demonstration results and mechanisms to propagate savings at this level for 5 to 7 years

Baseline older refrigerators and air-conditioners average 1,281 kwh/yr, newer 513 kwh/yr, with high variability.Good penetration of compact fluorescent lamps (rate unknown) but incandescent lamps still available. Magnetic ballast fluorescents still widely used in commercial buildingsVery few (<0.1%) high performance buildings, most buildings use technologies common during periods of low energy prices 1990’s.No mechanisms to encourage beSVGer performance

A reduction in GHG emissions intensity of 20% as a result of more efficient energy consumption and renewable energy use in buildingsCountry by Country targets are detailed in Section 2.6 on Baseline Analysis and Impact Targets.

Utility records for particular buildings and general demand vs GDP/capita published figures and project monitoring reports

Customs control of EE products may be difficult.

Outcome 1Institutional capacity for management of sector, monitoring and assessment

a. Baseline projection and monitoring system to be able to track and feedback on progressb. Opportunities andtarget potentials for energy savings are identified

General Statistics, weak knowledge of technical potentials

Capacity to predict trends and assess impact of EE policies and programs,

Long range planning for deep GhG emission cuts of 50%

Project reports Small administrations may restrict ability to carry specialized staff. Regional capacity can be maintained more easily.

Output 1.1 Building audit reports, statistics on potential

Grenada produces and transfers a monitoring protocol and capacity

Studies available for buildings were mostly walk-thought audits with no

Samples of commercial buildings, government buildings

National and Regional Project reports

55


savings in domestic, commercial and public sectors

building in appropriate national agencies

building envelope characterization.

and hotels are established each at about 20 for statistical analysis.

Output 1.2 Identification of measures at the design, construction and maintenance stages of the building life cycle for improved energy efficiency and renewables

Report on potentials and cost effectiveness

There are a few reports looking at buildings in a rather general way

20 upgrade option reports on 1.1 studied buildings


Output 1.3 Identify equipment and lighting potentials to reduce fossil fuel use

Report on actual performance and potentials to be achieved

Equipment ratings are available for some equipment and others not, Available ratings are for northern country conditions, electricity prices and foreign currencies

> 20% energy performance improvement


Output 1.4 Specific energy saving measures and policy options for various classes of buildings are identified and developed

Report on 1.2, 1.3 plus longer term potentials5Cs/UNDESA provide preliminary feasibility study on Sea Water Cooling and long range buildings energy technologies

No boSVGom-up policy support documents for buildings sector

20% and 50% improvement options put forward for long term policy


Outcome 2Technical capacity and awareness for EEGrenada – PVSt. Lucia – LightingBelize – ESCOs

Building service community is trained and awareConsuming public as informed and understands advantages of EE and REBuilding and hotel managers are aware and able to monitor energy

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance available to many small

Majority of vendors, practitioners and trades-persons are aware of EE techniques

Market surveys, industry association reports

Bypassing customs

56


indicators (kwh/ m2, kwh/ guest-nite, kwh/ m3

refrigeration etc.)

builders, public consumers

Output 2.1 Development of training workshops, seminars on energy efficiency for building designers, contractors architects, renewable energy installers and maintenance personnel

Trained personnel No particular qualification available for ESCOs

30 trained ESCOs with at least 3 in each country

Course records and listed trained personnel

Output 2.2 Publication of manual on best practices on energy efficiency for use in building sector

Manual produced, feedback from Output 2.1 courses encorporated

Manuals available are for other climates and cultures

Manual covering building science in the tropical island context

Manual

Output 2.3 Development of energy efficiency courses for national tertiary institutions

Course material augmented and mainstreamed

University of West Indies has some relevant capacity for training but the local poli-techniques need expansion of curricula

School course material

Outcome 3Appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support energy efficiency

Establishment of a fund, or a revolving mechanism to aSVGract finance to demonstrations and subsequent investmentsor adoption in a housing finance program of an EE code

Normal finance is available for buildings, building renovation and to support business (including buildings materials and equipment suppliers) capitalization but no portfolio is established for energy service companies or renewable energy suppliers in particular

National development banks (NDB) accept grant capitalization to be used in a blended finance product for the demonstration investments and listed eligible loans subsequently.National housing authority agrees to adopt an EE guideline or draft national EE buildings code in their housing finance program.

National Development Bank Board decision, product offeringHousing Authority program documents

Economic instability in general is a risk especially for tourism

Output 3.1 Reduced Availability of specialize There are a few programs 5 financing agencies Financial partner

57


operating costs and risk hedging against fuel price spikes are integrated into lending

finance or portfolio of banks lending that includes EE and RE features.

such as the Solar Water Heater loan Program by the Grenada Credit Union otherwise finance is generic and EE/RE not recognized

engaged, others made aware of the options

reporting to steering comiSVGees

Output 3.2 Fiscal incentives

program to increase market uptake and penetration of sustainable energy measures

Expansion of Tax and Customs duty relief for EE and RE equipment

Tax and customs duty is exempted in several countries for items like Photovoltaic panels

Any expansion of tax relief possible will be pursued – likely are specialized components not manufactured in the CariCom region

Government customs regulations

Outcome 4Demonstration program for sustainable energy

# and type of demonstration projects

Awareness and understanding of EE/RE benefits are recognised

Media reporting,surveys

Failing demonstrations need to be avoided as they are very powerful and can set back any progress.

Output 4 .1 Demonstrations of measures and benefits of energy efficiency in buildings at the national level. Voluntary projects

Utility records(households, government and Commercial establishments)


Number of buildings Energy intensity kwh/m2, number of new buildings kwh/m2

20% improvement

Monitoring bills and occupants survey by national PMU

Take back effect, consumer preferences,risk of low oil price

Output 4.2 Challenge competition for private sector builders for construction and retrofiSVGing of buildings to make a very low purchased energy target of some few kWh/m2 – Private sector competition for ESCOs.

# ESCO or new building projects proposed


~20 projects – at least 3 per country

Monitoring bills and occupants survey by national PMU

Outcome 5Regulatory instruments Code compliance advice, mandatory equipment efficiency levels how-to

Mandatory refrigeration, air-con, and lighting standards and labeling

Phased in minimum

Refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment customs control is effective but no efficiency considered, low efficiency

Building guidelines or mandatory codes are provided or enforced along with building permiSVGing

Customs reporting Political risk

Compact fluorescent lights are not surviving anticipated

58


establish performance levels

Mandatory EE code for new buildings and phased inmandatory building ratings at time of sale (Mj purchased energy/m2)

low cost equipment entering the market

Equipment standards and/or mandatory minimums are enforced

life times, reducing reliability and payback as well as mercury contamination.

Output 5.1 Development of guidelines and standards for energy efficient construction practices including renewable energy and products based on investigation of global and regional standards.

Status of development and adoption of labeling programs, efficiency standards and mandatory Energy Performance levels.

No energy code or equipment requirements or labeling exists

All countries adopt voluntary programs, all then adopt mandatory labeling, some use suasion only while

Project report and draft regulations produced.

Outcome 6Regional public awareness, knowledge management & sharing, replication strategy and regional reporting

Dissemination to region and SIDS

Ongoing mandate and activity advocating EE and RE

Enhance info and service offerings to member countries

Publications, Small Island Developing States net posted information,Presentations at regional for a

Output 6.1 Task reports produced on subtopics: Grenada: PV interconnection and monitoring buildings Antigua & Barbuda awareness and education program materials, schools, general public, St. Lucia: Lighting Belize: ESCO training and program Trinidad & Tobago: Energy Efficiency

Regional coordination of the nationally lead task areas results in reports that are agreed to by the national PMUs/governments

No regional coordination/ information exchange

Nationally lead task area reports produced with regional coordinator assistance

Project reporting

59


Regulations

60


Appendix 5: Workplan and timetable

Regional Workplan

All the activities listed below are regional and link to the national budgets in Section 7.

Activities 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Outputs/DeliverablesQ2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3Q4

1.

Establish, and Operationalize Collaboration with Steering CommiSVGees x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

National Steering CommiSVGee members

2. Selection of National Coordinators

x

Five National coordinators/consultants

3. Planning and Convening Inception Meeting

x x

Agreement of project administration, workplan, responsibilities and timetable for deliverables and the M and E

4.Design and Implement the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

x x x x

Monitoring and Evaluation plan developed and Implemented

5.

Design an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Interventions in Buildings x x x

Assessment systems designed and tested

6.Development of the Methodology and Instruments for Conducting the Assessment to Evaluate

x x Methodology and instrument for conducting the capacity assessment

61



the Capacity that Exist In country (government, and private sector) to implement energy efficiency to promote ESD

7. Conducting of national capacity assessment

x x x

Report on the Capacity needs of the five countries

8. Design and delivery of training programme3

x x x x x x

Public and private sector professionals trained to be efficient managers of ESD implementers

Training workshop 1

x

Antigua focused on bank financing of efficient buildings CDM baseline Grenada

Training workshop 2x

Training workshop 3

x

Building design and retrofit ting best practices training Belize, St. Lucia, SVG, Grenada

9. Establishment of MEP standards for energy efficiency in refrigeration and cooling devices (fans, AC units) and

x x x x Standard, labeling and monitoring protocols for appliances, including AC units, fans and refrigerators

3 The focus of the training will be on the public sector to efficiently manage ESD and for the private sector to effectively implement ESD projects. Nature of the traning will be identified based on the assessment and national ESD priorities

62



other common household appliances

10.

Standards developed for adaptation for ESD design, retrofiSVGing and Monitoring Training workshop 1 x x

National standards for planning and implementing ESD

11. Conducting of national capacity assessment

x x x

Report on the ESD capacity in the participating countries and training needs

12.Developing guidelines for bioclimatic architectural designs

x x x

Guidelines for bioclimatic architectural designs

13.Development of Energy efficiency code for the design of buildings

x x x

EE code for design of buildings

14. Begin demonstration activities

x x x x x x x x x x

A number of projects that demonstrate successful practice in financing, regulation, capacity building, and market

15.

Design and Conduct assessment and gap analysis of existing financial and market mechanisms to support RE, EE and Energy conservation implementation x x x x

Guidelines on Financial and Marketing Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

16. Inform public/private x x x x x x x Public and private

63



decision-makers about clean energy benefits

decision-makers informed about project results and clean energy benefits (public meeting and publications)

17.

Preparing Terms of References for Blended Grant-Loan Mechanism to promote ESCo development and operations

x x x

Terms of Reference on Blended Grant-Loan Mechanism for Supporting ESCo Activities Toward Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

18.

Development of specifications and Terms of Reference on Financial Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

x x x

Specifications and Terms of Reference on Financial Mechanisms for Sustainable Energy Use in Buildings

19.Planning and Convening of Mid-term Evaluation Review

x x x x

Mid-term Report

20.

Establishment of a functional Inter-Ministry Agency on Sustainable Energy x x

Formal agreement at the national level for the agency to be established

21.Dissemination of tools developed as part of this project

x x x

Publications and workshops, based on details provided by the Antigua & Barbuda project

64



22. Final Reporting

x

Final Evaluation Report

65


Appendix 6: Key Deliverables and Benchmarks

Goal: To utilize a mix of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies to reduce the electricity use in the project buildings by 20 % by 20-15 in five Caribbean Countries

Item Project Component Key Deliverables Dates Benchmarks

1.

Start-up, Regional Coordination, Evaluation and Reporting

1.Project Inception Report October 2012 Names, terms of reference and decisions of meetings

2.National Steering CommiSVGees December 2012 Names and terms of reference

3.National Consultants November 2012 Names and terms of reference

4.Regional Steering CommiSVGees January 2013 Names and terms of reference and decisions of meeting

5.Mid Term Evaluation Report July 2014 Evaluation report and report of the Evaluation meeting

Report on Consultation with Stakeholders

6.Final Evaluation October 2016 Final Report

2 Establish an Assessment and Monitoring System for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Buildings

1. National building performance tracking system

June 2012 Published document available on 5CS web site

2.Social safeguards monitoring plans published

June 2012 Published document available on 5CS web site

3.Training of of technical personnel November 2012 Report with name of participants and leSVGers of nominations from National Steering CommiSVGee and leSVGers certifying completion of training

3. Strengthening of national capacity for energy efficiency and renewable energy to support long term development of ESD

Training of the following:

1.Construction sector professionals -trained and aware of sustainable energy practices for buildings

2. Technocrats with responsibility for approving and implementing

December 2012

Report from training activities and leSVGers from National Steering CommiSVGee re completion of training.

66


building projects are trained to be aware and recognize the benefits of sustainable energy practices in buildings

3. End-users understand advantages of green buildings –targeting hoteliers, owners of commercial buildings, public sector managers

4. Demonstration programme for sustainable energy use in buildings

Project technical requirements and ToRs

Utility records and trends

January 2015 Case study reports on the various demonstration projects.

5. Development of appropriate financial and market based mechanisms that support sustainable energy use in buildings

Establishment of revolving finance mechanism to aSVGract private activities to incorporate RE and EE in buildings

January 2014 Signed agreements between governments and financial institutions to establish revolving funds and other dedicated financing mechanism to support Energy efficiency and conservation technologies and renewable energy application in buildings.

Published Guidelines for establishment of Energy Service Companies

6. Regulatory framework to promote energy efficient buildings (Building Codes), and Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) for appliancesand equipment

1. Mandatory refrigeration, air-conditioning and lighting standards, with voluntary standards for other appliances and equipment

June 2015 Draft national legislation on agreed set of standard for energy equipment in the participating countries

2. Mandatory Energy Efficiency code for new buildings

June 2014 Draft national legislation on new code for new building construction

7 Regional public Dissemination of information June 2015 Publications of training material, building code

67


awareness, knowledge management, and sharing, replication strategy and reporting

generated by the project and design guide , Equipment and appliance standards and labelling, results of the demonstrations, and news paper and media coverage

68


Appendix 7: Budgeted M&E plan

The monitoring and evaluation funding is mostly allocated within the national and regional activities Components 1 and 7. Assessment of the buildings and equipment stock is considered an important ongoing task. The protocol established by WINDREF and proposed for execution in all countries will measure the energy performance as well as the ability of the buildings to deliver indoor environment and the response of occupants. In order to estimate the “take-back” effect , a small number of reference buildings will be tested to establish baseline data in each country. After implementation of the efficiency improvement measures these building will be monitored. The sample size across all 5 countries will be of more valid statistical size providing beSVGer characterization of trends in energy use, indoor environment, occupant satisfaction and health. About 5% of the project ($250,000) is allocated to the measurement and analysis within Project Component 1. Additional funding and co-financing in the Grenada budget Component 1 is for measurement protocol development. The results will be used in the public awareness campaign and therefore will be accompanied by surveys of occupant perceptions and satisfaction. They will also provide feedback to the buildings assessment protocol and building codes and standards. Greenhouse gas emissions reductions will be tracked here by tracking energy bills before and after. See the Annex Building Performance Assessment Protocol.

Under the demonstrations and financing mechanisms Components 3 and 4, the volume of investment for low energy consuming buildings will be tracked by the co-financing partners themselves and reported through the national steering commiSVGees. There is no cost to the project.

The project management functions will ensure that at the national level the project progress reports and funds management is accomplished. This work is spread across 5 administration units $242,950 (5%) all coordinated through the CariCom Climate Change Centre (5Cs) $242,950 (5%).

Midterm evaluation will be primarily from a desk review $30,000 and participating in a regional meeting in one of the project countries.

The Terminal Evaluation will be independent and cover all countries $45,000.

69


Monitoring Framework and Budget

Objective / Outcome

Outcome / objective level indicator

Baseline Conditions

Mid point Target(as relevant)

End of Project Target

Means of Verification

Monitoring / sampling (frequency / size)

Location / Group

Responsibility

Time frame

Budget(Object of expenditure & cost)

1.To reduce the GHG emissions intensity in

buildings by 20%

GhG emissions intensity and market penetration

Equipment and buildings surveys building on the preliminary sample

By mid-term demonstrations and initial impact at 20 to 30% of end target = 0.24 million tCO2

1.2 million tCO2 and revolving mechanisms in place with prospect for 1 million tCO2 during foreseeable revolutionsIndirect impact 6 million tCO2 projected

Component 1 provides and institutionalized assessment capacity

Frequency for energy monitoring is the billing period, size will be all demonstrations and 5% of project buildings plus cohorts

All countries and types of buildings will be covered, statistical samples achieved on a regional basis

National PMUs and counterpart governments, using 5Cs and WINDREF protocol

Annual reporting from 1st PIR date

5% of projects allocated under Component 1

2.Institutional capacity for management of sector, monitoring and assessment

Capacity to generate policy and assess impact

Weak Initial reports on assessment, policy options

1.Reports and policy options under consideration 2.- Two governments that have enacted policies to promote the use of higher efficient appliances and equipment – policies included reduced tariff on importation of EE and RE equipment and appliances and increased tariffs on low energy efficient equipment and appliances 3. Three governments that have introduced legislation to support market

Project reports and any policy progress at national level

Mid point and end

Project Management Units and national counterpart agencies

5Cs, WINDREF

Annual reporting from 1st PIR date

National project budget contracted services budgets allocated, ~ 50 buildingsd at 5,000 each plus market survey

70


transformation – 4. Two utilities companies that are promoting EE and RE in buildings

3.Technical capacity and awareness for EE

Building service community is trained and awareConsuming public as informed and understands advantages of EE and REBuilding and hotel managers are aware and able to monitor energy indicators

Refrigeration and Air-conditioning equipment associations exist, Mechanical engineering, Civil Engineering associations exist but practice in the market is highly variable, low awareness and guidance available to many small builders, public consumers

First training session completed and initial progress engagement by industry

1.Ongoing engagement of industry associations 2. More than 50 % of professional that have received training are utilizing same .3.One new ESCOS established and doing significant volume of business

Project reports, association publications

Mid-point and end of Project

National and or regional

National PMUs and 5Cs

ongoing Project management20 person weeks

Financial Instruments

Availability of finance recognizing EE

No special finance instruments for EE buildings

Demonstration finance involves co-finance with revolving or ongoing nature

1.Three revolving funds and general willingness by banks to engage in EE incremental cost lending2. A twenty percent increase in the number of financial institutions that are

Bank reports, loan agreements and banking surveys or association reports

Mid-point and end of project

All countriesEmphasis on Grenada, Belize and St. Lucia

PMUs and 5Cs

Midterm review and final review

No additional cost to project

71


now providing financing to customers for procuring EE and RE equipment and appliances –versus at 3. Two of these institutions actively promoting the use of more EE appliances and equipment 4.One Commercial bank in two countries are offering beSVGer loan packages for the construction of more energy efficient buildings

4. Demonstrations

Awareness and acceptance of EE technologies

Isolated early adopters of EE technology exist

General support with some skeptics during demonstrations

1.Broad acceptance of EE in buildings 2. Two demonstration buildings in each country which have achieved greater than 20 percent reduction in energy use and beSVGer than 15 percent return on the investment

Press reports, government communications

Mid Point and end

All countries and regionalEmphasis on A&B public awareness

PMUs and Cs

Mid Term review and Final reports

No additional cost

5. Regulatory instruments

Publication, use and mandatory implementation of equipment and buildings standards

No standards and labeling appropriate to Caribbean exist

Initial market penetration figures from component 1

1. Two governments have introduced legislation for standards, labeling , and introduced new building codes2. Three

Government an association reports

Mid Point and end

All countries PMUS and 5Cs

Mid term and final reports

No additional cost over project management

72


and labeling governments that have Standards and labeling programs in place, 3.One government with mandatory Energy Performance levels under consideration

. 6. Regional Dissemination

Publications and references to project reports

Some isolated activities

Coordination results in reports shared across countries

Regional and global reference ot project outcomes

SIDSnet access figures, 5Cs

Mid point an end

All countries, regional

PMUs, 5Cs, UNDESA

Mid term and end reports

No Additional cost

2. Cost of acquisition of essential baseline data during first year of project4:Including the WinREF development and national deployment costs, about 150,000 is anticipated. Sample sizes will be adjusted as appropriate to stay within 5% budget over the full project period.

3. Cost of project inception workshop (please include proposed location, number of participants):Five inceptions workshops are anticipated with at least 30 participants in each country.

4 Refer to detailed M&E work plan for additional information on what data will be collected and what activities will be undertaken. The data to be collected needs to be consistent with the indicators included in the table above.

73


4. Cost of Mid-Term Review/Evaluation:$30,000

5. Cost of Terminal Evaluation:$45,000

6. Any additional M&E costs 5:The national development banks and housing finance corporations will be monitoring their investments and reporting to their respective boards, all provide annual reports which will cover these loans.

Total costs: $75,000 specifically budgeted with $250,000 allocated to an assessment system that the project results monitoring will be based on and some portion of project management costs as well as $75,000 co-financing for the M&E effort.

M&E Activities (budgeted under UNEP budget line 5581, Monitoring & Evaluation)

Responsible Parties Timeframe Budget (US$)

Progress and Financial Reports

- Execution: CariCom CC Centre

- Support: National PMUs- Approval: UNEP

- Two reports for any given year (July 31 and January 31)- Last Progress & Financial Reports (Final Reports) within 60 days of project closure

None

Inception Reports - Execution: CCCCC, PMUs

- Immediately following project start-up and national steering commiSVGee meetings

None

Progress Reports - Execution: CCCCC - Support: PMUs

- Quarterly None

Annual Project Reports (APR) - Execution: PMU- Support: National

Steering CommiSVGees and PMUs

- Yearly 25,000(GEF-financing)

20,000 (Co-financing)

5 Please describe the activity and included the expected cost. Additional M&E costs could be related to the following: (i) Additional reviews and evaluation processes for phased and tranched projects; (ii) application & validation of tracking tools.

74


Project Implementation Review (PIR)

- Execution: CCCCC- Support: UNDESA

- Yearly 5,000(Co-financing)

Regional Advisory Review (TPR)

- Execution: CCCCC- Input: National Steering

CommiSVGees, National Project Managers, UNDESA

- At least once every year upon receipt of the APR

50,000(Co-financing)

Terminal Regional Advisory Review (SVGR)

- Execution: CCCCC- Input: National Steering

CommiSVGees- Support: UNDESA- Approval: PSC

- Last month of project closure None

Project Terminal Report- Execution: CCCCC- Support: PMUs

- Last three months of project implementation

None

Mid-term Independent Evaluation

- Execution: Independent Consultants

- Input: PMUs, Chair, National Steering CommiSVGees

- At the midpoint of project implementation

25,000(GEF-financing)

Final External Evaluation

- Execution: Independent Consultants

- Input: PMUs, Chair, National Steering CommiSVGees

- Three months prior to the terminal TPR meeting

25,000(GEF-financing)

Total M&E Budget 75,000(GEF financing)

75,000 (Co-financing)

75


Appendix 8: Summary of Reporting Requirements and Responsibilities

Appendix 8 –

Reporting requirements

Due date Format appended to legal instrument as

Responsibility of

Procurement plan

(goods and services)

2 weeks before project inception meeting

No particular format

Regional Technical Coordinator

Inception Report 1 month after project inception meeting

No particular format

Regional Technical Coordinator

Expenditure report accompanied by explanatory notes

Quarterly on or before 30 April, 31 July, 31 October, 31 January Annex 11

CariComCCC (5Cs) administration unit with input from National PMUs

Cash Advance request and details of anticipated disbursements

Quarterly or when required

Annex 7B 5Cs’ administration unit with input from National PMUs

Progress report (non financial) Half-yearly on or before 31 January

Annex 8 Regional Technical Coordinator with input from National Coordinators

Audited report for expenditures for year ending 31 December

Yearly on or before 30 June

Stationary of firm 5Cs to contract accountant

Inventory of non-expendable equipment (applicable to office equipment or building monitoring equipment over 1500$ per item purchased with project funds)

Yearly on or before 31 January

Annex 6 5Cs with input from PMUs

Co-financing report Yearly on or before 31 July

Annex 12 National Technical coordinator with input from steering commiSVGee

76


Project implementation review (PIR) report Yearly on or before 31 August

Annex 9 5Cs technical coordinator, with input from national coordinators, UNEP Task Manager, UNEP Fund Management Officer

Minutes of steering commiSVGee meetings Yearly (or as relevant) LeSVGerhead of Chairperson’s agency

Project Managers

Mission reports and “aide memoire” for executing agency

Within 2 weeks of return

UNEP format UNEP (TM, DGEF FMO)

Final report 2 months of project completion date

Annex 10 5Cs with input from PMUs

Final inventory of non-expendable equipment Annex 9 5Cs administrative unit

Equipment transfer leSVGer Annex 10 Regional Technical Coordinator

Final expenditure statement 3 months of project completion date

Annex 11 5Cs administrative unit

Mid-term review or Mid-term evaluation Midway though project No particular format

UNEP TM or EOU

(as relevant)

Final audited report for expenditures of project

6 months of project completion date

LeSVGerhead of firm

5Cs to contract firm

Independent terminal evaluation report 6 months of project completion date

Appendix 9 to Annex 1

EOU

77


Appendix 9 - Standard Terminal Evaluation Terms of Reference

Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP GEF project {Title}

1. Project Background and Overview

Project rationale

The objective was stated as:

The indicators given in the project document for this stated objective were:

Relevance to GEF ProgrammesThe project is in line with:.

Executing ArrangementsThe implementing agency(ies) for this project was (were) UNEP and { }; and the executing agencies were:

The lead national agencies in the focal countries were:

Project ActivitiesThe project comprised activities grouped in {number} components.

Budget

At project inception the following budget prepared:GEF Co-funding

Project preparation funds:GEF {Medium/Full} Size Grant

TOTAL (including project preparation funds)

Co-funding sources:

78


Anticipated:

Terms of Reference for the Evaluation

1. Objective and Scope of the Evaluation The objective of this terminal evaluation is to examine the extent and magnitude of any project impacts to date and determine the likelihood of future impacts. The evaluation will also assess project performance and the implementation of planned project activities and planned outputs against actual results. The evaluation will focus on the following main questions:

1. Did the project help to { } among key target audiences (international conventions and initiatives, national level policy-makers, regional and local policy-makers, resource managers and practitioners).

2. Did the outputs of the project articulate options and recommendations for { }? Were these options and recommendations used? If so by whom?

3. To what extent did the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority and credibility necessary to influence policy makers and other key audiences?

Methods

This terminal evaluation will be conducted as an in-depth evaluation using a participatory approach whereby the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and other relevant staff are kept informed and consulted throughout the evaluation. The consultant will liaise with the UNEP/EOU and the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager on any logistic and/or methodological issues to properly conduct the review in as independent a way as possible, given the circumstances and resources offered. The draft report will be circulated to UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, key representatives of the executing agencies and the UNEP/EOU. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP / EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary or suggested revisions.

The findings of the evaluation will be based on the following:

1. A desk review of project documents including, but not limited to:(a) The project documents, outputs, monitoring reports (such as progress and

financial reports to UNEP and GEF annual Project Implementation Review reports) and relevant correspondence.

(b) Notes from the Steering Group meetings. (c) Other project-related material produced by the project staff or partners.(d) Relevant material published on the project web-site:{www.SIDSnet.org }.

2. Interviews with project management and technical support including

3. Interviews and Telephone interviews with intended users for the project outputs and other stakeholders involved with this project, including in the participating countries and international bodies. The Consultant shall determine whether to seek additional

79


information and opinions from representatives of donor agencies and other organizations. As appropriate, these interviews could be combined with an email questionnaire.

4. Interviews with the UNEP/DGEF project task manager and Fund Management Officer, and other relevant staff in UNEP dealing with {relevant GEF focal area(s)}-related activities as necessary. The Consultant shall also gain broader perspectives from discussions with relevant GEF Secretariat staff.

5. Field visits6 to project staff

Key Evaluation principles.In aSVGempting to evaluate any outcomes and impacts that the project may have achieved, evaluators should remember that the project’s performance should be assessed by considering the difference between the answers to two simple questions “what happened?” and “what would have happened anyway?”. These questions imply that there should be consideration of the baseline conditions and trends in relation to the intended project outcomes and impacts. In addition it implies that there should be plausible evidence to aSVGribute such outcomes and impacts to the actions of the project.

Sometimes, adequate information on baseline conditions and trends is lacking. In such cases this should be clearly highlighted by the evaluator, along with any simplifying assumptions that were taken to enable the evaluator to make informed judgements about project performance.

2. Project Ratings The success of project implementation will be rated on a scale from ‘highly unsatisfactory’ to ‘highly satisfactory’. In particular the evaluation shall assess and rate the project with respect to the eleven categories defined below: 7

A. ASVGainment of objectives and planned results:The evaluation should assess the extent to which the project's major relevant objectives were effectively and efficiently achieved or are expected to be achieved and their relevance. Effectiveness: Evaluate how, and to what extent, the stated project objectives have been

met, taking into account the “achievement indicators”. The analysis of outcomes achieved should include, inter alia, an assessment of the extent to which the project has directly or indirectly assisted policy and decision-makers to apply information supplied by biodiversity indicators in their national planning and decision-making. In particular:

Evaluate the immediate impact of the project on {relevant focal area} monitoring and in national planning and decision-making and international understanding and use of biodiversity indicators.

As far as possible, also assess the potential longer-term impacts considering that the evaluation is taking place upon completion of the project and that longer term impact is expected to be seen in a few years time. Frame recommendations

6 Evaluators should make a brief courtesy call to GEF Country Focal points during field visits if at all possible.7 However, the views and comments expressed by the evaluator need not be restricted to these items.

80


to enhance future project impact in this context. Which will be the major ‘channels’ for longer term impact from the project at the national and international scales? Relevance: In retrospect, were the project’s outcomes consistent with the

focal areas/operational program strategies? Ascertain the nature and significance of the contribution of the project outcomes to the {relevant Convention(s)} and the wider portfolio of the GEF.

Efficiency: Was the project cost effective? Was the project the least cost option? Was the project implementation delayed and if it was, then did that affect cost-effectiveness? Assess the contribution of cash and in-kind co-financing to project implementation and to what extent the project leveraged additional resources. Did the project build on earlier initiatives, did it make effective use of available scientific and / or technical information. Wherever possible, the evaluator should also compare the cost-time vs. outcomes relationship of the project with that of other similar projects.

B. Sustainability:Sustainability is understood as the probability of continued long-term project-derived outcomes and impacts after the GEF project funding ends. The evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, e.g. stronger institutional capacities or beSVGer informed decision-making. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of outcomes. The evaluation should ascertain to what extent follow-up work has been initiated and how project outcomes will be sustained and enhanced over time.

Five aspects of sustainability should be addressed: financial, socio-political, institutional frameworks and governance, environmental (if applicable). The following questions provide guidance on the assessment of these aspects:

Financial resources. Are there any financial risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the likelihood that financial and economic resources will not be available once the GEF assistance ends (resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and trends that may indicate that it is likely that in future there will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)? To what extent are the outcomes of the project dependent on continued financial support?

Socio-political: Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project?

Institutional framework and governance. To what extent is the sustenance of the outcomes of the project dependent on issues relating to institutional frameworks and governance? What is the likelihood that institutional and technical achievements,

81


legal frameworks, policies and governance structures and processes will allow for, the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? While responding to these questions consider if the required systems for accountability and transparency and the required technical know-how are in place.

Environmental. Are there any environmental risks that can undermine the future flow of project environmental benefits? The TE should assess whether certain activities in the project area will pose a threat to the sustainability of the project outcomes. For example; construction of dam in a protected area could inundate a sizable area and thereby neutralize the biodiversity-related gains made by the project; or, a newly established pulp mill might jeopardise the viability of nearby protected forest areas by increasing logging pressures; or a vector control intervention may be made less effective by changes in climate and consequent alterations to the incidence and distribution of malarial mosquitoes.

C. Achievement of outputs and activities: Delivered outputs: Assessment of the project’s success in producing each of the

programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality as well as usefulness and timeliness.

Assess the soundness and effectiveness of the methodologies used for developing the technical documents and related management options in the participating countries

Assess to what extent the project outputs produced have the weight of scientific authority / credibility, necessary to influence policy and decision-makers, particularly at the national level.

D. Catalytic RoleReplication and catalysis. What examples are there of replication and catalytic outcomes? Replication approach, in the context of GEF projects, is defined as lessons and experiences coming out of the project that are replicated or scaled up in the design and implementation of other projects. Replication can have two aspects, replication proper (lessons and experiences are replicated in different geographic area) or scaling up (lessons and experiences are replicated within the same geographic area but funded by other sources). Specifically:

Do the recommendations for management of {project} coming from the country studies have the potential for application in other countries and locations?

If no effects are identified, the evaluation will describe the catalytic or replication actions that the project carried out.

E. Assessment monitoring and evaluation systems. The evaluation shall include an assessment of the quality, application and effectiveness of project monitoring and evaluation plans and tools, including an assessment of risk management based on the assumptions and risks identified in the project document. The Terminal Evaluation will assess whether the project met the minimum requirements for ‘project design of M&E’ and ‘the application of the Project M&E plan’ (see minimum requirements 1&2 in Annex 4 to this Appendix). GEF projects must budget adequately for execution of the M&E plan, and provide adequate resources during implementation of the

82


M&E plan. Project managers are also expected to use the information generated by the M&E system during project implementation to adapt and improve the project.

M&E during project implementation

M&E design. Projects should have sound M&E plans to monitor results and track progress towards achieving project objectives. An M&E plan should include a baseline (including data, methodology, etc.), SMART indicators (see Annex 4) and data analysis systems, and evaluation studies at specific times to assess results. The time frame for various M&E activities and standards for outputs should have been specified.

M&E plan implementation. A Terminal Evaluation should verify that: an M&E system was in place and facilitated timely tracking of results and progress towards projects objectives throughout the project implementation period (perhaps through use of a logframe or similar); annual project reports and Progress Implementation Review (PIR) reports were complete, accurate and with well justified ratings; that the information provided by the M&E system was used during the project to improve project performance and to adapt to changing needs; and that projects had an M&E system in place with proper training for parties responsible for M&E activities.

Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities. The terminal evaluation should determine whether support for M&E was budgeted adequately and was funded in a timely fashion during implementation.

F. Preparation and ReadinessWere the project’s objectives and components clear, practicable and feasible within its timeframe? Were the capacities of executing institution and counterparts properly considered when the project was designed? Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated in the project design? Were the partnership arrangements properly identified and the roles and responsibilities negotiated prior to project implementation? Were counterpart resources (funding, staff, and facilities), enabling legislation, and adequate project management arrangements in place?

G. Country ownership / driveness:This is the relevance of the project to national development and environmental agendas, recipient country commitment, and regional and international agreements. The evaluation will:

Assess the level of country ownership. Specifically, the evaluator should assess whether the project was effective in providing and communicating biodiversity information that catalyzed action in participating countries to improve decisions relating to the conservation and management of the focal ecosystem in each country.

Assess the level of country commitment to the generation and use of biodiversity indicators for decision-making during and after the project, including in regional and international fora.

83


H. Stakeholder participation / public awareness:This consists of three related and often overlapping processes: information dissemination, consultation, and “stakeholder” participation. Stakeholders are the individuals, groups, institutions, or other bodies that have an interest or stake in the outcome of the GEF- financed project. The term also applies to those potentially adversely affected by a project. The evaluation will specifically:

Assess the mechanisms put in place by the project for identification and engagement of stakeholders in each participating country and establish, in consultation with the stakeholders, whether this mechanism was successful, and identify its strengths and weaknesses.

Assess the degree and effectiveness of collaboration/interactions between the various project partners and institutions during the course of implementation of the project.

Assess the degree and effectiveness of any various public awareness activities that were undertaken during the course of implementation of the project.

I. Financial Planning Evaluation of financial planning requires assessment of the quality and effectiveness of financial planning and control of financial resources throughout the project’s lifetime. Evaluation includes actual project costs by activities compared to budget (variances), financial management (including disbursement issues), and co- financing. The evaluation should:

Assess the strength and utility of financial controls, including reporting, and planning to allow the project management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for a proper and timely flow of funds for the payment of satisfactory project deliverables.

Present the major findings from the financial audit if one has been conducted. Identify and verify the sources of co- financing as well as leveraged and associated

financing (in co-operation with the IA and EA). Assess whether the project has applied appropriate standards of due diligence in the

management of funds and financial audits. The evaluation should also include a breakdown of final actual costs and co-

financing for the project prepared in consultation with the relevant UNEP/DGEF Fund Management Officer of the project (table aSVGached in Annex 1 to this Appendix Co-financing and leveraged resources).

J. Implementation approach:This includes an analysis of the project’s management framework, adaptation to changing conditions (adaptive management), partnerships in implementation arrangements, changes in project design, and overall project management. The evaluation will:

Ascertain to what extent the project implementation mechanisms outlined in the project document have been closely followed. In particular, assess the role of the various commiSVGees established and whether the project document was clear and realistic to enable effective and efficient implementation, whether the project was executed according to the plan and how well the management was able to adapt to changes during the life of the project to enable the implementation of the project.

84


Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency and adaptability of project management and the supervision of project activities / project execution arrangements at all levels (1) policy decisions: Steering Group; (2) day to day project management in each of the country executing agencies and {lead executing agency}.

K. UNEP Supervision and Backstopping Assess the effectiveness of supervision and administrative and financial support

provided by UNEP/DGEF. Identify administrative, operational and/or technical problems and constraints that

influenced the effective implementation of the project.

The ratings will be presented in the form of a table. Each of the eleven categories should be rated separately with brief justifications based on the findings of the main analysis. An overall rating for the project should also be given. The following rating system is to be applied:

HS = Highly SatisfactoryS = SatisfactoryMS = Moderately SatisfactoryMU = Moderately UnsatisfactoryU = UnsatisfactoryHU = Highly Unsatisfactory

3. Evaluation report format and review procedures The report should be brief, to the point and easy to understand. It must explain; the purpose of the evaluation, exactly what was evaluated and the methods used. The report must highlight any methodological limitations, identify key concerns and present evidence-based findings, consequent conclusions, recommendations and lessons. The report should be presented in a way that makes the information accessible and comprehensible and include an executive summary that encapsulates the essence of the information contained in the report to facilitate dissemination and distillation of lessons.

The evaluation will rate the overall implementation success of the project and provide

individual ratings of the eleven implementation aspects as described in Section 1 of this

TOR. The ratings will be presented in the format of a table with brief justifications based on

the findings of the main analysis.

Evidence, findings, conclusions and recommendations should be presented in a complete and balanced manner. Any dissident views in response to evaluation findings will be appended in an annex. The evaluation report shall be wriSVGen in English, be of no more than 50 pages (excluding annexes), use numbered paragraphs and include:

i) An executive summary (no more than 3 pages) providing a brief overview of the main conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation;

85


ii) Introduction and background giving a brief overview of the evaluated project, for example, the objective and status of activities; The GEF Monitoring and Evaluation Policy, 2006, requires that a TE report will provide summary information on when the evaluation took place; places visited; who was involved; the key questions; and, the methodology.

iii) Scope, objective and methods presenting the evaluation’s purpose, the evaluation criteria used and questions to be addressed;

iv) Project Performance and Impact providing factual evidence relevant to the questions asked by the evaluator and interpretations of such evidence. This is the main substantive section of the report. The evaluator should provide a commentary and analysis on all eleven evaluation aspects (A − K above).

v) Conclusions and rating of project implementation success giving the evaluator’s concluding assessments and ratings of the project against given evaluation criteria and standards of performance. The conclusions should provide answers to questions about whether the project is considered good or bad, and whether the results are considered positive or negative. The ratings should be provided with a brief narrative comment in a table (see Annex 1 to this Appendix);

vi) Lessons (to be) learned presenting general conclusions from the standpoint of the design and implementation of the project, based on good practices and successes or problems and mistakes. Lessons should have the potential for wider application and use. All lessons should ‘stand alone’ and should:

Briefly describe the context from which they are derived State or imply some prescriptive action; Specify the contexts in which they may be applied (if possible, who

when and where)vii) Recommendations suggesting actionable proposals for improvement of the

current project. In general, Terminal Evaluations are likely to have very few (perhaps two or three) actionable recommendations.

Prior to each recommendation, the issue(s) or problem(s) to be addressed by the recommendation should be clearly stated.

A high quality recommendation is an actionable proposal that is:1. Feasible to implement within the timeframe and resources available2. Commensurate with the available capacities of project team and partners3. Specific in terms of who would do what and when4. Contains results-based language (i.e. a measurable performance target)5. Includes a trade-off analysis, when its implementation may require utilizing significant resources that would otherwise be used for other project purposes.

viii) Annexes may include additional material deemed relevant by the evaluator but must include:

86


1. The Evaluation Terms of Reference, 2. A list of interviewees, and evaluation timeline3. A list of documents reviewed / consulted4. Summary co-finance information and a statement of project expenditure by activity5. The expertise of the evaluation team. (brief CV).

TE reports will also include any response / comments from the project management team and/or the country focal point regarding the evaluation findings or conclusions as an annex to the report, however, such will be appended to the report by UNEP EOU.

Examples of UNEP GEF Terminal Evaluation Reports are available at www.unep.org/eou

Review of the Draft Evaluation ReportDraft reports submiSVGed to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff are allowed to comment on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks feedback on the proposed recommendations. UNEP EOU collates all review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report.

4. Submission of Final Terminal Evaluation Reports. The final report shall be submiSVGed in electronic form in MS Word format and should be sent to the following persons:

Segbedzi Norgbey, Chief, UNEP Evaluation and Oversight Unit P.O. Box 30552-00100Nairobi, KenyaTel.: +(254-20)762-4181Fax: +(254-20)762-3158Email: [email protected]

With a copy to:Maryam Niamir-Fuller, DirectorUNEP/Division of GEF CoordinationP.O. Box 30552-00100Nairobi, KenyaTel: +(254-20)762-4166Fax: +(254-20)762-4041/2Email: [email protected]

{Name}Task Manager

87

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.unep.org/eou


{Contact details}

The Final evaluation will also be copied to the following GEF National Focal Points.{Insert contact details here}

The final evaluation report will be published on the Evaluation and Oversight Unit’s web-site www.unep.org/eou and may be printed in hard copy. Subsequently, the report will be sent to the GEF Office of Evaluation for their review, appraisal and inclusion on the GEF website.

5. Resources and schedule of the evaluation This final evaluation will be undertaken by an international evaluator contracted by the Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The contract for the evaluator will begin on ddmmyyy and end on ddmmyyyy (# days) spread over # weeks (# days of travel, to {country(ies)}, and # days desk study). The evaluator will submit a draft report on ddmmyyyy to UNEP/EOU, the UNEP/DGEF Task Manager, and key representatives of the executing agencies. Any comments or responses to the draft report will be sent to UNEP / EOU for collation and the consultant will be advised of any necessary revisions. Comments to the final draft report will be sent to the consultant by ddmmyyyy after which, the consultant will submit the final report no later than ddmmyyyy.

The evaluator will after an initial telephone briefing with EOU and UNEP/GEF conduct initial desk review work and later travel to (country(ies)} and meet with project staff at the beginning of the evaluation. Furthermore, the evaluator is expected to travel to {country(ies)} and meet with representatives of the project executing agencies and the intended users of project’s outputs.

In accordance with UNEP/GEF policy, all GEF projects are evaluated by independent evaluators contracted as consultants by the EOU. The evaluator should have the following qualifications:

The evaluator should not have been associated with the design and implementation of the project in a paid capacity. The evaluator will work under the overall supervision of the Chief, Evaluation and Oversight Unit, UNEP. The evaluator should be an international expert in { } with a sound understanding of { } issues. The consultant should have the following minimum qualifications: (i) experience in {} issues; (ii) experience with management and implementation of { } projects and in particular with { } targeted at policy-influence and decision-making; (iii) experience with project evaluation. Knowledge of UNEP programmes and GEF activities is desirable. Knowledge of {specify language(s)} is an advantage. Fluency in oral and wriSVGen English is a must.

6. Schedule Of Payment The consultant shall select one of the following two contract options:

Lump-Sum OptionThe evaluator will receive an initial payment of 30% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. A further 30% will be paid upon submission of the draft report. A final payment

88

http://www.unep.org/eou


of 40% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual Special Service Agreement (SSA) of the evaluator and is inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses.

Fee-only OptionThe evaluator will receive an initial payment of 40% of the total amount due upon signature of the contract. Final payment of 60% will be made upon satisfactory completion of work. The fee is payable under the individual SSAs of the evaluator and is NOT inclusive of all expenses such as travel, accommodation and incidental expenses. Ticket and DSA will be paid separately.

In case, the evaluator cannot provide the products in accordance with the TORs, the timeframe agreed, or his products are substandard, the payment to the evaluator could be withheld, until such a time the products are modified to meet UNEP's standard. In case the evaluator fails to submit a satisfactory final product to UNEP, the product prepared by the evaluator may not constitute the evaluation report.

89


Annex 1 to Appendix 9: OVERALL RATINGS TABLE

Criterion Evaluator’s Summary CommentsEvaluator’

s Rating

A. ASVGainment of project objectives and results (overall rating)Sub criteria (below)

A. 1. Effectiveness A. 2. RelevanceA. 3. Efficiency

B. Sustainability of Project outcomes(overall rating)Sub criteria (below)

B. 1. FinancialB. 2. Socio PoliticalB. 3. Institutional framework and governanceB. 4. Ecological

C. Achievement of outputs and activitiesD. Monitoring and Evaluation (overall rating)Sub criteria (below)

D. 1. M&E DesignD. 2. M&E Plan Implementation (use for adaptive management) D. 3. Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities

E. Catalytic RoleF. Preparation and readinessG. Country ownership / drivennessH. Stakeholders involvementI. Financial planningJ. Implementation approachK. UNEP Supervision and backstopping

RATING OF PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND RESULTS

Highly Satisfactory (HS): The project had no shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Satisfactory (S): The project had minor shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Satisfactory (MS): The project had moderate shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): The project had significant shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

90


Unsatisfactory (U) The project had major shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The project had severe shortcomings in the achievement of its objectives, in terms of relevance, effectiveness or efficiency.

Please note: Relevance and effectiveness will be considered as critical criteria. The overall rating of the project for achievement of objectives and results may not be higher than the lowest rating on either of these two criteria. Thus, to have an overall satisfactory rating for outcomes a project must have at least satisfactory ratings on both relevance and effectiveness.

RATINGS ON SUSTAINABILITYA. Sustainability will be understood as the probability of continued long-term outcomes and

impacts after the GEF project funding ends. The Terminal evaluation will identify and assess the key conditions or factors that are likely to contribute or undermine the persistence of benefits after the project ends. Some of these factors might be outcomes of the project, i.e. stronger institutional capacities, legal frameworks, socio-economic incentives /or public awareness. Other factors will include contextual circumstances or developments that are not outcomes of the project but that are relevant to the sustainability of outcomes.

Rating system for sustainability sub-criteriaOn each of the dimensions of sustainability of the project outcomes will be rated as follows.

Likely (L): There are no risks affecting this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Likely (ML). There are moderate risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

Moderately Unlikely (MU): There are significant risks that affect this dimension of sustainability

Unlikely (U): There are severe risks that affect this dimension of sustainability.

According to the GEF Office of Evaluation, all the risk dimensions of sustainability are deemed critical. Therefore, overall rating for sustainability will not be higher than the rating of the dimension with lowest ratings. For example, if a project has an Unlikely rating in any of the dimensions then its overall rating cannot be higher than Unlikely, regardless of whether higher ratings in other dimensions of sustainability produce a higher average.

RATINGS OF PROJECT M&EMonitoring is a continuing function that uses systematic collection of data on specified indicators to provide management and the main stakeholders of an ongoing project with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of objectives and progress in the use of allocated funds. Evaluation is the systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, its design, implementation and results. Project evaluation may involve the definition of appropriate standards, the examination of performance against those standards, and an assessment of actual and expected results.

The Project monitoring and evaluation system will be rated on ‘M&E Design’, ‘M&E Plan Implementation’ and ‘Budgeting and Funding for M&E activities’ as follows:

91


Highly Satisfactory (HS): There were no shortcomings in the project M&E system. Satisfactory(S): There were minor shortcomings in the project M&E system. Moderately Satisfactory (MS): There were moderate shortcomings in the project M&E system.Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU): There were significant shortcomings in the project M&E system.Unsatisfactory (U): There were major shortcomings in the project M&E system.Highly Unsatisfactory (HU): The Project had no M&E system.

“M&E plan implementation” will be considered a critical parameter for the overall assessment of the M&E system. The overall rating for the M&E systems will not be higher than the rating on “M&E plan implementation.”

All other ratings will be on the GEF six point scale.

GEF Performance Description Alternative description on the same scale

HS = Highly Satisfactory Excellent

S = Satisfactory Well above average

MS = Moderately Satisfactory Average

MU = Moderately Unsatisfactory Below Average

U = Unsatisfactory Poor

HU = Highly Unsatisfactory Very poor (Appalling)

92

Annex 2 to Appendix 9: Co-financing and Leveraged Resources

Co-financing (basic data to be supplied to the consultant for verification)

Co financing(Type/Source)

IA own Financing(mill US$)

Government

(mill US$)

Other*

(mill US$)

Total

(mill US$)

TotalDisbursement

(mill US$)Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual

Grants Loans/Concessional

(compared to market rate)

Credits Equity investments In-kind support Other (*)-----

Totals* Other is referred to contributions mobilized for the project from other multilateral agencies, bilateral development cooperation agencies, NGOs, the private sector and beneficiaries.

93


Leveraged ResourcesLeveraged resources are additional resources—beyond those commiSVGed to the project itself at the time of approval—that are mobilized later as a direct result of the project. Leveraged resources can be financial or in-kind and they may be from other donors, NGO’s, foundations, governments, communities or the private sector. Please briefly describe the resources the project has leveraged since inception and indicate how these resources are contributing to the project’s ultimate objective.

Table showing final actual project expenditure by activity to be supplied by the UNEP Fund management Officer. (insert here)

94


Annex 3 to Appendix 9

Review of the Draft ReportDraft reports submiSVGed to UNEP EOU are shared with the corresponding Programme or Project Officer and his or her supervisor for initial review and consultation. The DGEF staff and senior Executing Agency staff provide comments on the draft evaluation report. They may provide feedback on any errors of fact and may highlight the significance of such errors in any conclusions. The consultation also seeks agreement on the findings and recommendations. UNEP EOU collates the review comments and provides them to the evaluators for their consideration in preparing the final version of the report. General comments on the draft report with respect to compliance with these TOR are shared with the reviewer.

Quality Assessment of the Evaluation ReportAll UNEP GEF Mid Term Reports are subject to quality assessments by UNEP EOU. These apply GEF Office of Evaluation quality assessment and are used as a tool for providing structured feedback to the evaluator.

The quality of the draft evaluation report is assessed and rated against the following criteria: GEF Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU

Assessment Rating

A. Did the report present an assessment of relevant outcomes and achievement of project objectives in the context of the focal area program indicators if applicable? B. Was the report consistent and the evidence complete and convincing and were the ratings substantiated when used? C. Did the report present a sound assessment of sustainability of outcomes? D. Were the lessons and recommendations supported by the evidence presented?

95


E. Did the report include the actual project costs (total and per activity) and actual co-financing used? F. Did the report include an assessment of the quality of the project M&E system and its use for project management?UNEP EOU additional Report Quality Criteria UNEP EOU

Assessment Rating

G. Quality of the lessons: Were lessons readily applicable in other contexts? Did they suggest prescriptive action?H. Quality of the recommendations: Did recommendations specify the actions necessary to correct existing conditions or improve operations (‘who?’ ‘what?’ ‘where?’ ‘when?)’. Can they be implemented? Did the recommendations specify a goal and an associated performance indicator?I. Was the report well wriSVGen?(clear English language and grammar) J. Did the report structure follow EOU guidelines, were all requested Annexes included?K. Were all evaluation aspects specified in the TORs adequately addressed?L. Was the report delivered in a timely manner

GEF Quality of the MTE report = 0.3*(A + B) + 0.1*(C+D+E+F)EOU assessment of MTE report = 0.3*(G + H) + 0.1*(I+J+K+L)Combined quality Rating = (2* ‘GEF EO’ rating + EOU rating)/3The Totals are rounded and converted to the scale of HS to HU

Rating system for quality of terminal evaluation reportsA number rating 1-6 is used for each criterion: Highly Satisfactory = 6, Satisfactory = 5, Moderately Satisfactory = 4, Moderately Unsatisfactory = 3,

Unsatisfactory = 2, Highly Unsatisfactory = 1, and unable to assess = 0.

96



GEF Minimum requirements for M&E

Minimum Requirement 1: Project Design of M&E8

All projects must include a concrete and fully budgeted monitoring and evaluation plan by the time of Work Program entry (full-sized projects) or CEO approval (medium-sized projects). This plan must contain at a minimum: SMART (see below) indicators for project implementation, or, if no indicators are identified, an

alternative plan for monitoring that will deliver reliable and valid information to management SMART indicators for results (outcomes and, if applicable, impacts), and, where appropriate,

corporate-level indicators A project baseline, with:

a description of the problem to address indicator data or, if major baseline indicators are not identified, an alternative plan for addressing this within one

year of implementation An M&E Plan with identification of reviews and evaluations which will be undertaken, such as mid-

term reviews or evaluations of activities An organizational setup and budgets for monitoring and evaluation.

8 hSVGp://gefweb.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEPoliciesProcedures/MEPTools/meptstandards.html

97


Minimum Requirement 2: Application of Project M&E

Project monitoring and supervision will include implementation of the M&E plan, comprising: Use of SMART indicators for implementation (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used) Use of SMART indicators for results (or provision of a reasonable explanation if not used) Fully established baseline for the project and data compiled to review progress Evaluations are undertaken as planned Operational organizational setup for M&E and budgets spent as planned.SMART INDICATORS GEF projects and programs should monitor using relevant performance indicators. The monitoring system should be “SMART”:

1. Specific: The system captures the essence of the desired result by clearly and directly relating to achieving an objective, and only that objective.

2. Measurable: The monitoring system and its indicators are unambiguously specified so that all parties agree on what the system covers and there are practical ways to measure the indicators and results.

3. Achievable and ASVGributable: The system identifies what changes are anticipated as a result of the intervention and whether the result(s) are realistic. ASVGribution requires that changes in the targeted developmental issue can be linked to the intervention.

4. Relevant and Realistic: The system establishes levels of performance that are likely to be achieved in a practical manner, and that reflect the expectations of stakeholders.

5. Time-bound, Timely, Trackable, and Targeted: The system allows progress to be tracked in a cost-effective manner at desired frequency for a set period, with clear identification of the particular stakeholder group to be impacted by the project or program.

98



List of intended additional recipients for the Terminal Evaluation (to be completed by the IA Task Manager)

Name Affiliation EmailAaron ZazueSVGa GEF Evaluation Office [email protected]

Government Officials

GEF Focal Point(s)

Executing Agency

Implementing AgencyUNEP DGEF Quality Assurance Officer

99


100


Appendix 10: Decision-making flowchart and organizational chart

1. UNEP/GEF UNEP, as the GEF Executing Agency and with direct technical assistance from UN-DESA, will be associated with the project supervision to ensure consistency with GEF and UNEP policies and procedures and will provide guidance on linkages with related UNEP and GEF -funded activities. The UNEP/UN-DESA Coordination will monitor implementation of the activities undertaken during the execution of the project and will be responsible for clearance and transmission of financial and progress reports to the Global Environment Facility. UNEP will retain the responsibility of reviewing and approving the substantive and technical reports produced in accordance with the schedule of work.

Regional Stakeholders SIDS Dock CDB

National Stakeholders Local Partners Green Fund Co-financiers

National Coordinators

Project Technical Coordinator

Project Management Unit (MP U)

NATIONAL Steering CommiSVGee GEF Focal Point Govt and NGO Representatives

REGIONAL Steering CommiSVGeeRegional Coordinator

UNDESA Technical Cooperation

UNEP/GEF

CARICOM Climate Change Centre

101


2. CARICOM CLIMATE CHANGE CENTREThe project has regional and national scope and consequently, the reporting features will facilitate integration among the project countries such that UNEP will receive reports via the CARICOM Climate Change Centre (5Cs) from the various national Project Management Units – 5Cs have Regional coordinating responsibility for the ESD-Caraibes Project.

3. REGIONAL COORDINATING COMMISVGEEProject Management at the regional level will be provided by the CARICOM Climate Change Centre (5Cs) via a Project Technical Coordinator, assisted by the Regional Coordinating CommiSVGee, that includes the UN-DESA Technical Representative and National Coordinators.

4. NATIONAL STEERING COMMISVGEEThe National Steering CommiSVGees include the GEF Focal Points, and will have direct oversight over the Project Management Unit (PMU), the executing organ for the ESD-Caraibes, the National Steering CommiSVGee shall approve all reports prepared by the PMU prior to submission to the UNEP-GEF. The Steering CommiSVGees shall comprise technical advisors/representatives from the ministries responsible for energy; housing, environment; utilities; and public works, as well as relevant bureaus of standards; green building councils; and business associations as appropriate.

5. PROJECT MANAGEMENT UNIT:The Project Management Unit (PMU) includes the Project Managers for the pilot demonstration projects of the ESD-Caraibes project, as well as the designated representative from the agencies with responsibility for the regulatory development issues – Energy Efficiency Building Code and Appliance Standards and Labelling. The National Coordinator will manage the PMU and will be directly responsible to the chairperson of the National Steering CommiSVGee and 5Cs.

102


Appendix 11

Key Project Staff and Main Sub-contracts

TERMS OF REFERENCE

PROJECT TECHNICAL COORDINATOR (MP)

Introduction

The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is aimed at reducing the growth of energy demand in five Caribbean countries through increasing the efficiency of energy use in buildings, increased use of energy conservation and promoting the increased use of renewable energy resources.

The overall regional project consists of five (5) national components whose outputs are expected to make a significant contribution to improved use of electrical energy in these countries and provide examples of best practices across the region. It consists of various interventions whose outputs will contribute to increasing the markets, addressing financing barriers, and increasing awareness and building capacity.

103


The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS).

The Energy for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean (ESD) is the first aSVGempt to develop a regional project to address the inefficient use of energy in buildings in Caribbean Island Countries (CICs).

Background

Every year, the Caribbean region spends a significant portion of scarce foreign exchange to import liquid petroleum fuels to provide energy services. Except for Trinidad and Tobago, all Caribbean countries import petroleum products for more than 90 per cent of commercial energy consumption. All transportation fuels and an estimated 85 per cent of all electric power in the Caribbean are generated with liquid petroleum fuel9. The national energy situations across the region are characterized by national electric utilities that are either privately owned, publicly owned or at times, a mixture of both. Typically, these companies use either bunker or diesel fuel to produce power. As a consequence, the cost of electricity is, on average, among the highest in the world. Increasing demand for reliable and cost effective electricity supplies is a major challenge for the future economic development of the region. So too is the rising cost of regional fuel imports, which jumped from USD 6.5 billion in 2004, to USD 12 billion in 2007, representing 16 per cent and 21 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), respectively10.

A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while siSVGing in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To

9 CARILEC. hSVGp://www.carilec.com/publications/Carilec%20Position%20Paper%20on%20Energy%20Policy%20-%20Final%20Document%20-%2011%20Jan%202008.pdf10 UNDP Energy Paper

104


comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders.

Duties & Responsibilities

The PTC will report to the 5Cs Director or the designated representative. The PTC will liaise with the National Steering CommiSVGee and National Project Coordinators, Regional Steering CommiSVGee (RSC), as well as the UNEP Principal Project Representative (UNEP Paris) and Energy Advisor in UN-DESA, in coordinating the implementation of the annual work plan for the project.

The workplan will provide guidance on the day-to-day implementation of the project activities and on the integration of parallel co-financing initiatives. The PTC will be responsible for the day-to-day project implementation, which will be fully in line with UNEP execution procedures. The PTC will also be responsible for providing, to UNEP, all required reports, including the submission of work plans and financial reports. The 5Cs on the advice of the PTC shall recruit, as appropriate, experts to undertake activities at regional and national levels in cooperation with the participating CICs and the RSC. The PTC will work with an Administrative and Financial Officer (AFO) who will assist with the delivery of project activities. The PTC shall be responsible for all substantive, managerial and financial reports from the project.

In particular the PTC will:

Serve as the Head of the Project Management Office (MP O), housed in 5CS; Assume overall responsibility for the day-to-day management and implementation of all project activities and ensure the realiz-

ation of project objectives in accordance with the UNEP Project Document and UNEP’s Guide. Assume responsibility for all the reporting obligations of the project to UNEP, including inception phase report, annual work

plans and budgets, quarterly progress and financial reports, Annual Project Report(APR)/Project Implementation Review (PIR) reports, multi-partite review meeting papers and annual project audit reports, and all other reporting requirements as per stand-ard UNEP/GEF procedures.

Ensure effective coordination of all ESD activities, both incremental and baseline (particularly co-financed) activities. Coordinate and monitor the implementation of the activities described in the work plan.

105


Assume responsibility for all project consultation meetings, including meetings with the National Coordinators, National Steer-ing CommiSVGee, donor meetings, multi-partite review meetings, an Inception Phase workshop and annual meetings of the RSC.

Coordinate in-country studies and activities with the ESD National Coordinators. Coordinate and manage all procurement requirements for GEF-funded services and supplies (e.g., contracts and consultancies

in the project, including reviewing consultancy reports). Provide guidance to contractors and consultants engaged by the project. Facilitate liaison and networking between and among the 5 country steering commiSVGees, regional organizations, key stake-

holders, and other individuals involved in project implementation. Foster and establish strong links with all project partners, particularly those who are implementing and/or funding co-financed

activities and other related programmes and projects in the CICs, including the CARICOM Energy Unit. Ensure regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project. Assume overall responsibility for the widespread dissemination of ESD best practices and experiences as well as highlighting

GEF’s and UNEP’s roles in the project. Ensure the ESD is consistent with the Regional Strategy for Building a Climate Resilient Economy in the Caribbean, approved

by the Caribbean Heads of Government, in July 2009. Act as Secretary to the Regional Steering CommiSVGee.

Deliverables

The MP /Regional Coordinator is responsible for the submission of the following deliverables, among others: (a) Project Inception Report; (b) Project Progress and Financial Reports; (c) Steering CommiSVGee Report (d) Meeting and Training Workshop Reports; (e) Resource Assessment Reports; (f) Feasibility Study Reports; (g) Performance Reports on the hardware demonstration projects; (h) Mid-Term Evaluation Report; (i) Final Evaluation Report, and; (j) Reports on the Implementation of all project activities (incremental and baseline).

Duration

The duration of the project is over a 48-month period, with renewal at mid-term subject to successful evaluation.

Qualifications & Experience

106


The PTC shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise: Advanced university degree (at least M.Sc. or equivalent) in engineering, energy, environmental management or other field rel-

evant to the project; Extensive knowledge and experience with the climate change and energy issues of the CICs; Proven track record of project management experience with GEF- and UNEP-funded projects or similar regional/multi-country

projects in small island developing countries; Demonstrated very good and adequate capacity for project leadership and management; Ability to manage the work of consultants/sub-contractors; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary and/or multi-cultural team; Ability to meet project deadlines, and; an ability to live, travel and work within Caribbean island communities; Practical experience with renewable energy projects/programmes, and; Excellent working knowledge of English.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

ADMINISTRATIVE / FINANCIAL OFFICER (AFO)

Introduction



The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy

107


(RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS).


Background


A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while siSVGing in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders.


108



The AFO, working under the direct supervision of the Project Technical Coordinator (MP ), will be responsible for all the administrative, secretarial and financial maSVGers of the ESD. The AFO will be responsible for the project’s record keeping systems, meetings and travel arrangements and the processing and reporting of all project incomes and expenditures. The AFO will work closely with the PTC , UNEP and the ESD National Coordinators.

In particular the AFO will: Conduct the secretarial activities of the project including correspondence, filing and drafting minutes of meetings. Assist the PTC as the Secretary to the Regional Steering CommiSVGee. Responsible for arranging the travel and accommodation logistics for the annual regional Steering CommiSVGee meetings and

all other project-related meetings and associated travels. Work together with the 5CS Project Accountant on the requests for the advance of project funds from UNEP to 5CS and any re-

quired payments from 5CS to project-implementing partners. Work together with the ESD National Coordinators and project-implementing partners on the reporting of how funds advanced

were spent and ensure timely financial reporting to the UNEP. Assist the PTC in ensuring regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project. Liaise closely with the ESD National Coordinators on their work programmes and budgets and assist to make funds available

on time. Assist with the annual audit of the project. Provide technical assistance to CICs on how to effectively and efficiently meet their ESD financial reporting requirements.

Deliverables

The AFO will assist the PTC in the facilitation, preparation, and submission of all the project deliverables.

Duration

The duration of the project is over a 48-month period; however, the AFO will be recruited on a two-year contract in the first instance, to be renewed for the remainder of the project based a mid-term review.

Qualifications

109


The AFO shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise:

University degree in accounting, business management or economics, and some working experience in office and/or project management or secretarial responsibilities.

Previous experience in a management team for GEF- and UN-funded projects or similar regional/multi-country projects in small island developing countries;

Excellent working knowledge of English; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary and/or multi-cultural team; Ability to meet project deadlines; Ability to live, travel and work within the Caribbean Community; Some knowledge and experience with the climate change and energy issues of the Region is an advantage.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

ESD NATIONAL CORDINATOR/CONSULTANT (NC)

Introduction



The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project

110


financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS).


Background


A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while siSVGing in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties and Responsibilities


111


The ESD National Coordinator/Consultant (NC) will be contracted by the 5CS and hosted in a designated agency as agreed to by National Steering CommiSVGee (NSC). This position will be funded by the ESD under the various activity lines that are to be implemented by the country. Under the direction of the National Steering CommiSVGee (NSC) and the Project Technical Coordinator (PTC), the NC shall carry out the following tasks that would be assigned:

Serve as the technical focal point for the national level activities of the ESD within the designated government agency; Responsible for the day-to-day management and implementation of all national project activities; Responsible for the formulation and preparation of annual and quarterly work plans and budgets; Ensure the achievement of project objectives in accordance with the UNEP Project Document and the country-specific annual

and quarterly work plans; Assume overall responsibility for all the reporting obligations of the project to the designated host government agency, the NSC

and PTC/5CS, including annual work plans and budgets, quarterly progress and financial reports. Ensure an effective coordination of all ESD activities with all national project partners, particularly those who are implement-

ing and/or funding co-financed activities in the country. Coordinate and monitor the national activities described in the work plans. Responsible for all project consultation meetings including a national Inception Phase Meeting and meetings of the country

team. Serve as the national representative to the annual meetings of the ESD Regional Coordination. Manage all necessary nationally-managed contracts and consultancies in the project, including reviewing consultancy reports. Ensure regular and timely receipt of progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project at the national level. Coordinate in-country studies and activities. Provide guidance to contractors and consultants. Facilitate liaison and networking between and among the National Steering CommiSVGee. Foster and establish strong links with all national co-financing activities. Assume responsibility for the widespread dissemination of ESD best practices and experiences as well as highlighting GEF’s

and UNEP’s roles in the project. Ensure that the national level ESD activities are consistent with national policies and strategies.

Deliverables

112


The NC is responsible for the submission of the following deliverables, among others: (a) Project Progress and where required, financial reports; (b) national meeting and training workshop reports; (c) reports on all nationally-managed project studies and consultancies, and; (d) progress reports on the various parallel funded activities of the project at the national level.

Qualifications & Experience

The NC shall have the following basic required qualifications and expertise:

An university degree or equivalent in energy, environment or a related field; At least 5 years of project management/coordination experience; Proven track record of project management/coordination experience with GEF- and UNEP-funded projects or similar national

projects; Ability to coordinate the work of consultants/sub-contractors; Proven ability to work as part of an interdisciplinary team; Ability to meet project deadlines; Practical experience with renewable energy projects/programmes; Excellent interpersonal skills, and; Excellent working knowledge of English.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

NATIONAL PROJECT STEERING COMMISVGEES (NSCs)

Introduction



113


The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5CS).


Background


A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while siSVGing in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To


114


comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures, the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders.

Purpose of the National Steering CommiSVGee (NSC)

The National Steering CommiSVGee (NSC) will have overall responsibility for the management, coordination and implementation of the ESD in-country activities. The National Steering CommiSVGee shall be comprised of five persons, in addition to the national coordinator/consultant who will have the responsibility of providing coordination support to the NSC.


Prepare a preliminary meeting schedule based on the implementation plan/schedule of activities specified in the UNEP Project Document (ProDoc).

Based on the implementation plan/schedule of activities specified in the UNEP Project Document (ProDoc), and in consultation with the PTC /5CS, determine exactly which of the in-country activities that will be implemented by national professionals and other relevant national stakeholders from the private sector and civil society in the country.

Determine the responsibility of the exact work between the identified national stakeholders. Prepare and transmit during the inception period, Memorandum of Agreements (MoA) containing comprehensive and con-

firmed implementation arrangements for the in-country activities to the PTC/5CS. Be responsible for the ESD in-country activities that are to be implemented by national stakeholders (from government, private

sector and civil society). Implementation of specific national activities as agreed in the work plans. Through the PTC/5CS, request external expertise/technical assistance for those specific in-country activities that are deemed

not possible to implement by national stakeholders represented in the country team (e.g., due to lack of capacity, knowledge, availability, etc), if needed, and indicate the preferred source of expertise (regional organisations, national consultants, regional consultants and international consultants).

Cooperate and coordinate with external experts (regional organisations, national consultants, regional consultants and/or inter-national consultants) and provide them with necessary input and assistance.

Review draft reports by consultants engaged by the NSC. Submit quarterly progress reports to the PTC/5CS.

115


Inform, and justify to, the PTC/5CS about any possible delays during the project. Inform ministries and other agencies of gov-ernment (professionals and politicians), NGOs and the private sector about the ESD project and its outcomes.

Membership

The ESD National Steering CommiSVGee, at a minimum, will consist of senior representatives: National Executing Agency –who will chair the NSC GEF National Focal point From the Country’s Energy Unit/Office; From the power utility and/or private power generator; An environment / climate change officer; An executive from a financial organization or from the government; of the business

community / chamber of commerce. Project Manager/Regional Coordinator

The ESD National Coordinator/Consultant will provide the secretariat to the Country Team, and will chair the first meeting of the Country Team. The first meeting of the team will select the chairperson. The Steering CommiSVGee, when duly constituted, shall decide its schedule of meetings in keeping with the work plan.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

REGIONAL COORDINATION COMMISVGEE (RCC)

Introduction



116


The project is expected to bring about in the five Caribbean countries: (1) Increased number of successful commercial applications of energy efficiency and conservation in buildings; (2) Expanded market for renewable energy technology (RET) applications for power generation and productive uses; (3) Enhanced institutional capacity to design, implement and monitor energy projects for sustainable development; (4) Availability and accessibility of financing energy efficiency and conservation and renewable energy (RE) projects, and; (5) Increased awareness and knowledge on sustainable energy among key stakeholders. ESD is a 4-year project financed by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the implementing agency, and executed by the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs).


Background


A defining characteristic of the national energy situation across the region is the high inefficiency in the use of energy resources; it is estimated that the region wastes more than half the available energy in the imported fuels, which results in a very high energy per unit of GDP. A major contributor to the poor energy efficiency is the relatively high percentage of private automobiles that consume significant amounts of fuel while siSVGing in traffic jams and the poor maintenance practices on vehicles. With the exception of the Jamaica, Guyana, and Barbados (where there is a national oil company that is primarily responsible for imports of petroleum fuels), in the rest of the countries petroleum fuels imports are controlled by the international companies. To comprehensively address the different obstacles to greater widespread acceptance of energy efficiency and conservation measures,


117


the project has adapted a collective approach to address the technical, financial, market, institutional, policy and awareness barriers simultaneously through initiatives in different countries that will provide overall lessons and examples. The ESD will therefore involve a high degree of coordination with related activities of national, regional and international stakeholders. Duties & Responsibilities

The Regional Coordination CommiSVGee (RCC) shall be responsible for the following functions:

Providing policy guidance to the Implementing Partner in the implementation of the project; Facilitating the coordination and implementation of project activities across institutions both at the regional and national levels; Reviewing the project activities, and their adherence to the work plan set forth in the project document and approve any modi -

fications/revisions as may be necessary; Reviewing and approving the annual work plan and budget; Approving major project deliverables; Making decisions on the issues brought to its notice by UNEP and other collaborating institutions, and advice regarding effi -

cient and timely execution of the project; Reviewing issues raised and agreeing to action plans for their resolutions; Appointing sub-commiSVGees, if necessary, to carry out specific tasks; Initiating remedial action to remove impediments in the progress of the project activities that were not earlier envisaged; Approving requests for changes (e.g. scope changes, schedule alterations, personnel); Ensure that the ESD project activities are fully in line with existing policies and climate change negotiation position of the

region; and, On request of the PTC/5CS, provide guidance on the execution of national level activities under the ESD framework.

Members

The following will be the members of the RCC:• The National ESD Coordinator/Consultant of each participating country;• UNEP-GEF;• UNDESA;• 5CS Executive Director or representative; • PTC /5CS;• Representatives of collaborating organisations and co-financing partners.

118


The PTC will serve as the Chair of the CommiSVGee, and the Administrative and Financial Officer will assist the PTC . The secretariat services will be provided by the Implementing Partner (5CS).

Meeting Frequency

The RCC will meet annually, during the project period. Where appropriate, this will be done back-to-back with relevant regional meetings. The meeting will be the Project Inception workshop at the beginning of the project. The RCC will use e-mail distribution lists, phone, video and audio Conferencing, fax, etc., for communication in-between the meetings.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Project Inception

Introduction

The Inception Phase of the ESD provides an opportunity for the Project Management Office (MPO) to become acquainted with the Project, its agreed strategy, expected outputs and outcomes, the stakeholders, the risks etc.

It is also an opportunity for the stakeholders and partners to provide input on the work plan and to confirm implementation arrangements both at the regional and national levels. It provides an opportunity to finalize any outstanding implementation details and present them to UNEP and 5CS for clearance.

Inception Deliverables.The expected output of the Inception Phase is an Inception Report. The Report should address the following issues:

1. Review, agree on, and finalize project institutional arrangements, including to: Finalize level of representation and individual membership of the RCC and NSC; receive confirmation of willingness to

participate. Develop rules of procedure for the RCC. Clarify relationship between the RCC and NSC and National Coordinators/Consultants. Revise existing Terms of References in the Project Document if necessary

119


2. Review, agree on, and finalize the role and responsibility of various participants for achieving project outcomes: Identify links and coordination between participants and activities. Link each participant to the work plan and delivery of project outcomes. Strengthen links to and between project stakeholders.

3. Review, agree on, and finalize the project management arrangements (organizational chart) of the project, including reporting lines. This should include: Location of the National Coordinators/Consultants (i.e., designated host government agency). Relationship of key project stakeholders (including name, title and contact details of all government counterparts).

4. Review, agree on, and finalize the Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) framework for the implementation of the project, including: Annual work plan/budget processes covering regional and in-country activities, linked to the overall rolling work

plans/budget. This will include the seSVGing of yearly targets/milestones that are understood and agreed/endorsed by all stakeholders.

Ongoing work plan/budget of monitoring and evaluation plans. Links to project outcome indicators (impact indicators), progress indicators. Practical, activity-level links to national energy plans, where available. Monitoring of progress of parallel activities of co-financing institutions, including the delivery of their commiSVGed co-

financing. Evaluation of the achievement of the target milestones/benchmarks, which will be used as bases for the succeeding phase

of the ESD.

5. Coordinate all co-financing sources with the project work plan. This should include arrangements of government and private co-financing, and ways of monitoring, evaluation, and reporting for the co-financing.

6. With assistance from UNEP, review the capacity of the NCs and NSC in providing and/or obtaining project execution services and day-to-day project management. Provide training on required UNEP reporting and project management requirements, as well as general GEF expectations.

7. Prepare, deliberate and agree with the participating countries on the operational criteria for assistance, including allocation of funds to individual countries as part of the project.

120


8. Review, and where necessary identify additional Project Risks (possible barriers to successful project implementation and identified externalities that may reduce project effectiveness). Prepare a detailed risk management strategy for project implementation.

9. Prepare an overall work plan for the first year of implementation. Prepare a project budget revision if necessary.

Inception Process

The PTC is expected to meet with all stakeholders during the Inception Phase. This will be a mix of individual appointments and also including the regional Inception Meeting to deliberate and agree to the modifications suggested by the PTC, as reflected in the final draft Inception Report (IR). Subsequent suggested modifications will have to be reflected in the Project Document agreed to by the 5Cs and UNEP.

In the spirit of cooperation underpinning this project, all parties shall be invited to participate in and contribute to the Inception Phase.

The Inception Phase shall include formal and informal training for the participants by 5CS and UNEP. This will cover an induction into the organization, its procedures and arrangements, as well as a sharing of project-specific knowledge from existing 5Cs and UNEP initiatives. The PMO will also receive training from UNEP. This will include an overview of UNEP rules and procedures from the UNEP-GEF, introduction to the office, as well as a briefing on GEF maSVGers from the UNEP-GEF Technical Advisor.

The TPC during the Inception Phase, shall bring to the aSVGention of the meeting all previous project comments, including those of the STAP Roster Expert, GEF Secretariat, UNEP-GEF, and GEF Council members. 5CS and UNEP will provide copies of all relevant correspondence.

The Inception Phase is expected to take approximately 12 weeks. However, flexibility exists to take account of the local situation and seasonal conditions. Monthly updates of the progress shall be provided to the UNEP-GEF. The preliminary draft Inception Report will be shared with the UNEP-GEF as soon as available and before a final draft Inception Report is to be prepared. This final draft version is to be circulated to all stakeholders for consideration during the regional Inception Meeting.

The agreed final draft Inception Report will be sent to stakeholders no later than 2 weeks in advance of the regional Inception Meeting.

121


Appendix 12: Co-financing Commitment LeSVGers Summary and Explanation notes (US$)

Name of Co-financier (source)

Project Preparation Cofinance (received)

Project TotalEligible

Commitment

accepted

Notes

Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre (5Cs)

550,000 550,000

UNDESA 25,000 150,000 175,000

Ministry of Land Housing and Environment A&B

550,000 550,000 Cash estimate based on project activities and establishment of a revolving fund

Ministry of Land Housing and Environment A&B

10,000 722,500 732,500 In Kind includes Government financing of upgraded public buildings

JICA19 in Belize 500,000 500,000 Although up to 10M$ is identified, the buildings integrated portion addressing project objectives during the project period is estimate conservatively at 0.5M$

Development Finance Corporation Belize

800,000 800,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers

Central Buildings Authority Belize

45,000 45,000

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Belize

12,000 80,000 92,000

Grenada Development Bank 1,200,000 1,200,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers

WINDREF 10,000 175,000 185,000

19 Japan International Cooperation Agency

122


St. Lucia Development Bank 800,000 800,000 Excludes normal management costs if their own finance and the equity required of borrowers

Sustainable Development & Environment Unit St. Lucia

110,000 82,500 192,500 EU funded activity related to buildings was instrumental in the project design

Ministry of Housing and the Environment T&T

1,716,500 1,716,500 Cash

Ministry of Housing and the Environment T&T

10,000 212,000 222,000

Total 177,000 7,625,500

Associated Co-finance:SIDS Dock grant to Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States: US$ 2,000,000

SIDS Dock grant to UNDP including a concessional loan instrument, eligible countries including Trinidad & Tobago, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines, Dominica, Grenada, Belize, Antigua & Barbuda, St. KiSVGs and Nevis: US$ 2,000,000 plus Caribbean Development Bank own finance and equity of borrowers: more than US$ 6,000,000

World Bank support to Eastern Caribbean Energy Regulatory Authority: US$ 5,600,000

The Energy Efficiency Promotion Project is jointly funded by the European Union (EU)/ACP Energy Facility, German International Cooperation (GIZ) and OECS Secretariat, addresses the introduction of norms, standards and energy efficiency ratings and labels in the 6 independent OECS member countries, to improve Energy Efficiency (EE) at the consumer level, with priority aSVGention to low income households. The proposal, covering Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia, St. KiSVGs and Nevis and St. Vincent and Grenadines, was approved by the EU for co-financing and a financing agreement negotiated and concluded between GIZ and the European Union. 5,2000,000 Euro

123


124


125


126


127


128


129


130


131


132


133


134


135


136


137


138


139


140


141


142


143


144


145


146


147


148


149


150


Appendix 13: Endorsement leSVGers of GEF National Focal Points

151


152


153


154


155


156


157


158


159


160


161


162


163


164


165


166


Appendix 14: Draft procurement plan

The procurement plan includes both goods (non-expendable equipment) and services (consultants and sub-contracts) that will be procured under the project. Items to be procured should be in accordance with the GEF-approved budget. Procurement will be undertaken only during the project implementation period.

Externally executed project. Procurement of goods and services financed by GEF funds will be in accordance with the project executing agency’s applicable operational polices and procedures, but should meet internationally acceptable standards.

The items of equipment and services required for executing the project should be detailed in the procurement plan, to be reviewed at the inception meeting and cleared by UNEP/GEF. The TM should ensure that the project workplan and timetable allow sufficient time to procure equipment and services, e.g. recruitment of project personnel and/or consultants, finalization of legal instruments for sub-contractors, and office set-up time. Procurement of additional items not included in the above-mentioned plan and costing above US$ 1,500 per item will be cleared by UNEP/GEF. The same principle of clearance will apply to any service contracts or agreements to be procured that are not in the original procurement plan and cost above US$ 5,000 per contract. Within two weeks, UNEP/GEF will review, provide guidance and/or give clearance.

Terms of reference for consultants or sub-contractors should be finalized by the time the inception meeting is held. A forecast should be prepared of when consultancy agreements or sub-contracts are to be signed and the anticipated disbursement schedules, as this will affect the amount of the initial cash advance to be requested.

Definitions of non-expendable and expendable equipment [ST/AI/2003/5]

Non-expendable equipment. There are three categories of non-expendable equipment:

Property or equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or more per unit at the time of purchase and having a shelf life of at least five years (e.g. generators, kitchen equipment, major equipment and vehicles);

Special items, which are property items considered to be of an aSVGractive nature and easily removable from the premises because of their size, costing US$ 500 or more per unit at the time of purchase and with a serviceable life of three years or more (e.g. computers, cameras, televisions, facsimile machines and tape recorders);

Group inventory items (e.g. furniture and modular workstations) with a serviceable life of five years or more, irrespective of value.

167


Expendable equipment. Information on expendable equipment is not required to be maintained in the executing agency’s records. However, if equipment records are deemed necessary for the efficient management of the project activities (e.g. equipment spare parts, technical equipment and replacement items such as tires and maintenance tools), equipment records may be maintained at the discretion of the executing agency. There are two types of expendable equipment:

Equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or less per unit at the time of purchase (e.g. toner cartridges and consumables); Equipment valued at US$ 1,500 or more but with a serviceable life of less than five years.

Consultants will be selected from a short list of at least three by 5Cs in consultation with a national government representative to the project and a UN adviser (UNEP or UNDESA). Non-profit Agencies will not be subject to competition. This includes the national development banks, housing development corporations, WINDREF, and non-government organizations. Successfully completed assignments can be extended without competition.

Equipment purchased with total value greater than $1,500 US will be selected by competitive quotation. Tenders over $50,000 will be advertised. Value for money may be used to select the winning bid. Comparators can be from other countries than the one in which the tender is being let. The Caribbean Single Market Economy rules will be followed.

General ethical standards will be upheld in the process.

Purchasing and consultancies tendering plans will be reviewed by the national steering commiSVGee.Goods less than 1,500 $ may be purchased at any time from a peSVGy cash account for replenishment

Major procurements schedule:Sept – Nov 2011 1 regional adviser, 5 national project managersJan – June 2012 3 national development banks, 2 project deployment contractors for the demos (first tranche Sept 2012 Sea water cooling prefeasibility studyOct 2012 – Jun 2013 3 national development banks, 2 project deployment contractors for the remainder of demos and general

EE/RE buildings finance

Appendix 15: Tracking Tools

See also separate file in MS Excel format At GEF CEO Endorsement

168


General Data Target Notes at CEO Endorsement

Project Title Energy for Sustainable Development in Caribbean BuildingsGEF ID

Agency Project ID

CountryAntigua+Barbuda,Belize,Grenada,St.Lucia,Trinidad+Tobago

Region LCR GEF Agency UNEP

Date of Council/CEO Approval Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)GEF Grant (US$)

Date of submission of the tracking tool Month DD, YYYY (e.g., May 12, 2010)

Is the project consistent with the

priorities identified in National Communications, Technology

Needs Assessment, or other Enabling Activities under the

UNFCCC?

1

Yes = 1, No = 0 Is the project linked to carbon

finance? 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cofinancing expected (US$)

Objective 1: Transfer of Innovative Technologies Please specify the type of enabling environment created for technology transfer through this project

National innovation and technology transfer policy Yes = 1, No = 0 Innovation and technology

centre and network Yes = 1, No = 0 Applied R&D support Yes = 1, No = 0

South-South technology cooperation 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

169


North-South technology cooperation Yes = 1, No = 0

Intellectual property rights (IPR) Yes = 1, No = 0 Information dissemination 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Institutional and technical

capacity building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)

Number of innovative

technologies demonstrated or deployed

2

Please specify three key technologies for demonstration or deployment

Area of technology 1 Energy_Efficiency Type of technology 1 specify type of technologyArea of technology 2 Renewable_Energy Type of technology 2 specify type of technologyArea of technology 3 Type of technology 3 specify type of technology

Status of technology demonstration/deployment 1

0: no suitable technologies are in place1: technologies have been identified and assessed2: technologies have been demonstrated on a pilot basis3: technologies have been deployed4: technologies have been diffused widely with investments5: technologies have reached market potential

Lifetime direct GHG emissions

avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime direct post-project GHG

emissions avoided tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (boSVGom-up) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (top-down) tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

170


Objective 2: Energy Efficiency Please specify if the project targets any of the following areas

Lighting 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Appliances (white goods) 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Equipment 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Cook stoves 0 Yes = 1, No = 0

Existing building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 New building 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

Industrial processes 0 Yes = 1, No = 0 Synergy with phase-out of ozone

depleting substances 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Other (please specify)

Policy and regulatory framework 4

0: not an objective/component1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced

Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk

guarantees, revolving funds)4

0: not an objective/component1: no facility in place2: facilities discussed and proposed3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand

Capacity building 4

0: not an objective/component1: no capacity built2: information disseminated/awareness raised3: training delivered4: institutional/human capacity strengthened5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained

171


Lifetime energy saved

MJ (Million Joule, IEA unit converter: hSVGp://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp)Fuel savings should be converted to energy savings by using the net calorific value of the specific fuel. End-use electricity savings should be converted to energy savings by using the conversion factor for the specific supply and distribution system. These energy savings are then totaled over the respective lifetime of the investments.

Lifetime direct GHG emissions avoided 1,214,693 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime direct post-project GHG emissions avoided 1,080,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (boSVGom-up) 7,670,250 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Lifetime indirect GHG emissions avoided (top-down) 7,577,500 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

Objective 3: Renewable Energy Please specify if the project includes any of the following areas Heat/thermal energy production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0

On-grid electricity production 1 Yes = 1, No = 0 Off-grid electricity production Yes = 1, No = 0

Policy and regulatory framework 1

0: not an objective/component1: no policy/regulation/strategy in place2: policy/regulation/strategy discussed and proposed3: policy/regulation/strategy proposed but not adopted4: policy/regulation/strategy adopted but not enforced5: policy/regulation/strategy enforced

Establishment of financial facilities (e.g., credit lines, risk

guarantees, revolving funds)1 0: not an objective/component

1: no facility in place2: facilities discussed and proposed

172


3: facilities proposed but not operationalized/funded4: facilities operationalized/funded but have no demand5: facilities operationalized/funded and have sufficient demand

Capacity building 1

0: not an objective/component1: no capacity built2: information disseminated/awareness raised3: training delivered4: institutional/human capacity strengthened5: institutional/human capacity utilized and sustained

Installed capacity per technology directly resulting from the project

Wind Biomass MW el (for electricity production)Biomass MW th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MW el (for electricity production)Geothermal MW th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MW Photovoltaic (solar lighting

included) 0.200 MW Solar thermal heat (heating,

water, cooling, process) 52,500.00 MW th (for thermal energy production, 1m² = 0.7kW)Solar thermal power MW el (for electricity production)

Marine power (wave, tidal, marine current, osmotic, ocean

thermal) MW

Lifetime energy production per technology directly resulting from the project (IEA unit converter: hSVGp://www.iea.org/stats/unit.asp)Wind MWh

Biomass MWh el (for electricity production)Biomass MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Geothermal MWh el (for electricity production)Geothermal MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Hydro MWh Photovoltaic (solar lighting 7,008.000 MWh

173


included)Solar thermal heat (heating,

water, cooling, process) 18,900.00 MWh th (for thermal energy production)

Solar thermal power MWh el (for electricity production)Marine energy (wave, tidal,

marine current, osmotic, ocean thermal) MWh

Lifetime direct GHG emissions

avoided 20,307 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime direct post-project GHG

emissions avoided 120,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (boSVGom-up) 420,000 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)Lifetime indirect GHG emissions

avoided (top-down) 841,944 tonnes CO2eq (see Special Notes above)

174


175