Further development of indicators in the performance measurement frameworks

Transcription

1 Meeting of the Board 8 10 March 2016 Songdo, Incheon, Republic of Korea Proviional agenda item 20 GCF/B.12/13 1March 2016 Further development of indicator in the performance meaurement framework Summary Thi document preent the reviion of ome indicator of the GCF mitigation and adaptation performance meaurement framework a requeted by deciion B.08/07. It alo preent an initial evaluation policy and an initial reult management framework for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme.

2 Page b Table of Content I. Introduction 1 II. Refinement of indicator in the mitigation and adaptation performance management framework 1 III. Initial evaluation policy Type of evaluation Learning and knowledge management 4 IV. Operationalization of the initial monitoring and evaluation ytem 5 V. Initial reult management framework for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme of the GCF 5 Annex I: Draft deciion of the Board 6 Annex II: Mitigation and Adaptation Performance Meaurement Framework 7 Annex III: Propoed Refinement to the Mitigation and Adaptation Performance Meaurement Framework 17 Annex IV: Initial evaluation policy 29 Annex V: Initial Reult Management Framework for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme of the GCF 32 Annex VI: Lit of conulted intitution 33

3 Page 1 I. Introduction 1. Thi document provide information and update in repone to the requet from the Board of the GCF, in deciion B.08/07 (para. (b)), that the Secretariat further develop the indicator marked a noted, but further refinement needed in the performance meaurement framework (PMF). The PMF meaure the performance of GCF funded climate mitigation and adaptation project and programme and are integral part of the initial reult management framework (RMF) of the GCF (deciion B.07/04 and B.08/07). In particular, the PMF include the indicator againt which the reult enviaged in the RMF are meaured. 2. In the ame deciion (B.08/07), the Board affirmed two key feature of the monitoring and evaluation framework of the GCF: (i) national, economic and ector wide indicator will be ued only at the dicretion of the recipient countrie (deciion B.08/07, para. (e)); and (ii) the GCF i a continuou learning intitution that hould remain flexible, and refine it PMF and indicator over time (deciion B.08/07, para. (g)). 3. In addition, the Secretariat ha taken into account the report of the Adaptation Committee to the twentieth eion of the Conference of the Partie to the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the related UNFCCC deciion, 1 which pecifically recommended the GCF to: (a) (b) (c) (d) Keep the indicator imple; Deign indicator that are qualitative a well a quantitative; Deign indicator in uch a way a to capture the progre that countrie are able to make in integrating adaptation into their development and ectoral planning, policie and action; and Give countrie ufficient flexibility to define their indicator in line with their national and local planning, trategie and prioritie. 4. In complement, the Secretariat conulted expert from other climate fund under the UNFCCC, international organization including climate finance intitution, academia, think tank, and ubject matter expert in both developed and developing countrie to obtain feedback in relevant area of expertie. The lit of the conulted intitution i provided in annex VI to thi document. 5. Thi document take into account the monitoring and accountability framework (MAF) adopted by the Board at it eleventh meeting. 2 Furthermore, it provide an initial evaluation policy for the GCF and propoe an initial RMF for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme. II. Refinement of indicator in the mitigation and adaptation performance management framework Indicator 6. The mitigation and adaptation PMF contain the core indicator and performance indicator for the reult of the GCF adopted by the Board at it eventh meeting. 3 The PMF 1 UNFCCC deciion 4/CP.20, annex, paragraph 4. 2 Deciion B.11/10, paragraph (a). 3 Deciion B.07/04, paragraph (b).

4 Page 2 outline reporting reponibilitie of the accredited entitie (AE) and include explanation of the indicator, and other relevant background and methodological information, a needed. 7. Annex II to thi document provide a propoed revied verion of the mitigation and adaptation PMF. Annex III provide information on the propoed refinement to the PMF compared with the verion reported to the eighth meeting of the Board The Secretariat will develop PMF guideline to upport the AE in the monitoring, reporting and evaluation proce. The guideline hould include the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) methodologie for baeline information collection and analyi; methodologie for project related data collection and analyi; role, reponibilitie and timeline; and other key guidance, uch a aeing pertinent improvement of individual indicator, among other. 9. Since the indicator are diaggregated by gender, where poible, the monitoring and evaluation guideline will reflect the guidance of the gender policy and gender action plan of the GCF. 5 Gender diaggregation i alo required for any additional pecific project/programme indicator that can be gender diaggregated proce 10. Baed on deciion B.08/07, the core indicator of the GCF will be meaured for all project/programme for each type of intervention (adaptation, mitigation, cro cutting). The other indicator adopted by the Board hall be reported on accordingly to the relevant reult() of the GCF to which the pecific project/programme contribute. 11. At the project and programme level, participatory approache for the monitoring and reporting of the project/programme indicator are encouraged, epecially for thoe project/programme focued on community baed mitigation and adaptation intervention. 12. Baed on deciion B.11/10, the AE of the GCF will ubmit annual performance report (APR) to report on the progre made toward the target of the PMF indicator and any additionally identified project /programme level indicator. The APR will alo contain a narrative with update on the progre of each output and outcome enviaged at the project/programme level. The APR will include an update on the tatu of the achievement of the invetment criteria. The Secretariat will develop guideline to upport the preparation of the APR. 13. A requeted by the MAF, 6 the Secretariat will produce an annual portfolio performance report (PPR) on the tatu of GCF funded project and programme that were under implementation at the end of the previou calendar year. The PPR will analye qualitative and quantitative information received from the AE through the APR and other ource of information (e.g. interim evaluation). 14. The PPR will alo include GCF level indicator that can be aggregated through dahboard/corecard which will be regularly updated and reviewed. Standard report will be produced baed on the APR, PPR and GCF level dahboard, and publihed on the GCF webite. 4 Annex VIII to deciion B.08/07 (annex VIII to document GCF/B.08/45). 5 Annexe XIII and XIV to deciion B.09/11 (annexe XIII and XIV to document GCF/B.09/23). 6 Deciion B.11/10, annex I, paragraph 14.

5 Page Following the adoption of the PMF by the Board, the Secretariat will develop methodologie to meaure the indicator a detailed in ection IV below. 16. The Readine and Preparatory Support Programme will provide upport for relevant monitoring and evaluation training to direct acce AE and national deignated authoritie (NDA)/focal point. III. Initial evaluation policy 17. Paragraph 23(j) of the Governing Intrument for the GCF entrut the Secretariat with the reponibility of carrying out monitoring and evaluation The objective of evaluation i to provide evidence and leon learned from the implementation of project and programme, make recommendation, and improve the deign and impact of climate project. 19. The MAF define the overall role of the Secretariat, the accountability unit, AE, NDA/focal point and local partner in evaluation. 8 Notably, the MAF require AE to undertake interim and final evaluation of all project/programme, 9 including an aement of progre made toward the GCF invetment criteria, intended reult, and target. 20. All evaluation will be guided by the following principle: (a) (b) (c) (d) independence and impartiality; tranparency; participation of all the relevant takeholder (firt and foremot, communitie and women); repect for the belief, culture and cutom of the beneficiarie; and (e) credibility. 21. The tandard, criteria, and pecific role and reponibilitie for the different type of evaluation will be defined in the evaluation guideline to be developed by the Secretariat. 3.1 Type of evaluation Project /programme level evaluation 22. Interim evaluation will take tock of whether and how the project/programme implementation ha performed againt the agreed outcome and invetment criteria. At leat one mid term evaluation will be undertaken for each project and programme. Interim/mid term evaluation will highlight any concern or rik that require the attention of the AE and the GCF. In addition, the evaluation hould recommend corrective action to enure that the climate reult are delivered a expected. 23. The objective of the final evaluation i to learn leon and apply thoe leon in order to upcale and replicate ucceful project/programme. The final evaluation will examine the overall performance of the project/programme againt the invetment criteria and other evaluation criteria that will be defined in the evaluation guideline. 7 Governing Intrument, paragraph 3, 23(j) and Deciion B.11/10. 9 Deciion B.11/10, annex I, paragraph 11(b).

6 Page The Secretariat may provide technical upport to AE, in particular direct acce AE, for the deign and implementation of their project /programme level evaluation. 25. Project /programme level evaluation report will be ubmitted by AE to the Secretariat, which will analye thee report to inform the annual PPR. The evaluation finding could alo be ued to identify the project/programme that will be ubject to ad hoc check The Secretariat may carry out ex pot evaluation on a ample of project/programme to ae the achievement of the intended climate impact, their utainability and the potential for calability and replication. The ex pot evaluation ample could be determined baed on the type of intervention, the level of environmental and ocial rik, and the reult/recommendation that emerge from the project/programme final evaluation report Country portfolio, thematic and GCF level evaluation 27. Higher level evaluation, uch a GCF level, thematic level, and country portfolio level evaluation, and impact evaluation, will play a key role in aeing the effectivene of the GCF in achieving long term climate reult and paradigm hift toward low carbon and climatereilient development. 28. Country portfolio level evaluation will be conducted to improve the impact of GCF financing in relation to country pecific climate goal, and to enhance national climate policie and public and private climate invetment. They will target the climate reult and related utainability achieved by a et of completed and ongoing project/programme at the country level. The election of countrie for thi type of evaluation will be determined taking into conideration the number of GCF invetment in a given country, the ditribution of ector, and other relevant factor. 29. Thematic level evaluation will be conducted to improve the deign of future climate project/programme in key climate ector. Thematic level evaluation will concern a ample of project/programme upported by the GCF in a particular ector or GCF reult area. The election of the ample will conider thoe project/programme where there i a high probability of learning relevant inight for the development of future project. 30. GCF level evaluation will be managed by the independent Evaluation Unit. The purpoe of thi type of evaluation i to learn leon that can help to improve the financing efficiency and effectivene of the GCF for future replenihment. They will ae the overall performance of the GCF in achieving climate reult, including progre made toward paradigm hift in mitigation and adaptation, and the climate related intitutional trengthening of GCF partner countrie. The releae of GCF level evaluation report will be ynchronized with the replenihment cycle of the GCF. 3.2 Learning and knowledge management 31. The Secretariat will enure that finding and leon learned through the monitoring and evaluation exercie decribed above are captured by a GCF wide knowledge management ytem, including it portfolio management ytem, 11 and hared with relevant takeholder to upport continuou learning and improve performance. 10 The ample could alo be determined baed on the type of intervention, the level of environmental and ocial rik, and the reult/recommendation that emerge from the project/programme final evaluation report a detailed in deciion B.11/10, annex I, ection III. 11 The portfolio management ytem i one of the key deliverable of tool enviaged to be developed through the operationalization of the MAF (deciion B.11/10, annex I, para. 36(a)).

7 Page A enviaged by the MAF, an online platform will be developed on the GCF webite. The platform will contain a dynamic databae/content management ytem where targeted uer (both expert and non expert) will be able to find evaluation report, a well a both pecialized and non technical knowledge product and relevant GCF material. IV. Operationalization of the initial monitoring and evaluation ytem 33. The following tool hould be developed for operationalizing the initial monitoring and evaluation ytem of the GCF: (b) (c) (d) Guideline on monitoring and reporting, including methodologie for data collection and guideline for reporting on PMF indicator; additional detail on other reporting requirement (e.g. APR); and a monitoring and reporting toolkit; A monitoring and evaluation training package to build the reult management capacity of direct acce entitie, NDA/focal point and local takeholder (communitie, civil ociety organization, women group, etc.) through national/regional workhop and e learning tool; and Evaluation guideline that define the tandard, criteria, role and reponibilitie for project/programme evaluation, ex pot evaluation and higher level evaluation (e.g. country, regional, thematic and GCF level). 34. The Secretariat will alo review it RMF, poibly by the end of 2018, and eek the Board view on poible improvement, a needed. V. Initial reult management framework for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme of the GCF 35. The Governing Intrument 12 mandate that the GCF hall upport countrie through readine activitie in order to build the capacity of their intitution and direct acce entitie in order to acce GCF reource baed on trategie and country pipeline of project and programme. 36. Deciion B.08/11, paragraph (i), pecifie four indicative activitie and their enviaged outcome for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme. 37. To appropriately ae the impact and meaure the overall reult that the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme intend to achieve, an initial RMF for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme i preented in annex V to thi document. 38. The initial RMF for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme i conitent with the overall initial RMF of the GCF and it PMF. In particular, it i aligned with reult 5 13 of the GCF mitigation and adaptation RMF. 12 Governing Intrument, paragraph Reult 5 for mitigation i Strengthened intitutional and regulatory ytem for low emiion planning and development, and for adaptation it i Strengthened intitutional and regulatory ytem for climate reponive planning and development (annex VIII to document GCF/B.08/45).

8 Page 6 Annex I: Draft deciion of the Board The Board, having conidered document GCF/B.12/20 titled Further development of indicator in the performance meaurement framework : (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Adopt the mitigation and adaptation performance meaurement framework a et out in annex II; Requet the Secretariat to develop the methodologie related to the indicator of the mitigation and adaptation performance meaurement framework; Alo requet the Secretariat to develop the neceary monitoring, reporting and evaluation training module and product o a to build the capacity of accredited entitie and national deignated authoritie/focal point; Adopt the initial evaluation policy a et out in annex IV; and Alo adopt the initial reult management framework and it logic model for the Readine and Preparatory Support Programme of the GCF a et out in annex V.

9 Page 7 Annex II: Mitigation and Adaptation Performance Meaurement Framework 1. The mitigation and adaptation PMF contain the core indicator and performance indicator for the Fund reult adopted by the Board at it eventh meeting. 1 The PMF outline reporting reponibilitie and include explanation on the indicator, and other relevant background and methodological information a needed. 2. Since the indicator are diaggregated by gender, where poible, the monitoring and evaluation guideline will reflect the guidance of the Gender policy and Gender action plan of the GCF. 2 Gender diaggregation i alo required for any additional pecific project/programme indicator that can be gender diaggregated. 3. Baed on deciion B.08/07, the core indicator of the GCF will be meaured for all project/programme for each type of intervention (adaptation, mitigation, cro cutting). The other indicator adopted by the Board hall be reported on accordingly to the relevant Fund reult() the pecific project/programme contribute to. 4. At project and programme level, participatory approache to the monitoring and reporting of the project/programme indicator are encouraged, epecially for project/programme focued on community baed mitigation and adaptation intervention. 5. Baed on deciion B.11/10, the accredited entitie (AE) of the Fund will ubmit annual performance report (APR) to report on progre toward target on the PMF indicator and any additionally identified project/programme level indicator. 6. On the bai of the APR and project/programme level evaluation report, the Secretariat will produce once a year, a Portfolio Performance Report (PPR) of the tatu of the project and programme that were under implementation a of the end of previou calendar year. 7. The following acronym are ued for rapidly claifying the indicator: PSM /PSA (Paradigm Shift indicator for Mitigation or Adaptation), * (core indicator), MCrC/ACrC (crocutting indicator for Mitigation or Adaptation) and M/A (to indicate if the indicator concern Mitigation or Adaptation). 1.1 Mitigation performance meaurement framework = Decided = Noted, but further refinement needed Expected reult Paradigm hift Objective Shift to lowemiion utainable Indicator * = Core PSM Degree to which the Fund i contributing to lowemiion utainable reponibility (annual reporting) Secretariat/Ac credited Entitie (AE) Note Baed on analyi from the aggregation of the PMF indicator, APR information, and project/programme evaluation. To be meaured at the end of each GCF 1 Deciion B.07/04 paragraph (b). 2 Annexe XIII and XIV to deciion B.09/11 (annexe XIII and XIV to document GCF/B.09/23).

10 Page 8 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibility (annual reporting) Note development pathway development replenihment cycle. Fund level Impact * Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced AE Aggregate ummation of ector pecific t CO 2eq reduction indicator. Intended to be etimated ex ante and calculated expot; reported annually. *Cot per t CO 2eq decreaed for all Fund funded mitigation project/ programme AE Intended to help undertand anticipated cot (ex ante) a well a trend in reducing cot of mitigation over time. Cot per t CO 2eq reduced are expected to vary baed on ector, technology, programme/project context, time cale, rik and other material conideration. *Volume of finance leveraged by Fund funding AE Leveraged conidered ynonymou with the term mobilized (ued by other fund). Informed by CIF, International Finance Corporation (IFC), and other. Calculation to be diaggregated by public and private ource; prorated by amount of co financing. MCrC1 Co benefit of mitigation action Co benefit related to ocial, economic, and environmental co benefit aociated with GHG reduction/low emiion development pathway and utainable development. 1.0 Reduced emiion through increaed lowemiion energy acce and power generation M1.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided from gender enitive energy acce and power generation AE Methodologie likely to determine three ub indicator: (i) on energy efficiency (ii) low emiion power (iii) energy acce. Sex diaggregation data and qualitative narrative related to gender to be collected where feaible: 2.0 Reduced emiion through increaed acce to lowemiion tranport M2.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided from low emiion, gender enitive tranport AE Diaggregated by gender where feaible.

11 Page 9 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibility (annual reporting) Note 3.0 Reduced emiion from building, citie, indutrie and appliance 4.0 Reduced emiion from land ue, deforetation, foret degradation, and through utainable management of foret and conervation and enhancement of foret carbon tock M3.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided building, citie, indutrie, and appliance M4.1 Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided and/or GHG removal by ink (including increaed removal) from REDD+ and other land ue activitie AE AE Sub indictor can be identified (in the methodologie) for each ector (i) building/energy efficiency (ii) citie, (iii) indutrie and (iv) appliance. Gender diaggregation and other poible gender relevant reporting to be included for each ector where feaible. Etimation hall eek conitency with information on the reult of REDD+ activitie publihed in the Lima REDD+ Information Hub on the REDD+ Web Platform (UNFCCC deciion 9/CP.19 3 ) Methodologie to be developed in relation to by Fund work on the performance framework for REDD+, the Foret Carbon Partnerhip Facility Methodological Framework (Dec. 2013), UN REDD, and emerging United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) guidance on REDD+. Gender diaggregation i to be reearched and included if poible. Outcome Cro cutting MCrC2 Number of technologie and innovative olution (including gender friendly technologie and olution) tranferred or licened to upport low emiion development AE Thi indicator may include number of technology tranfer licene, number of facilitie created to produce local technologie, and/or project/programme that include tranfer of technology and innovative olution that upport low emiion pathway. 5.0 Strengthened intitutional and regulatory ytem for low emiion planning and development M5.1 Number of policie, intitution, coordination mechanim and regulatory framework that improve incentive for low emiion planning and AE The indicator language ha been updated to allow a quantification of the reult achieved and upport AE. The Readine and Preparatory Support Programme may employ the indicator to meaure it country level reult. 3 Thi deciion form part of the Waraw Framework for REDD plu.

12 Page 10 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibility (annual reporting) Note development and their effective implementation 6.0 Increaed number of mall, medium and large lowemiion power upplier 7.0 Lower energy intenity of building, citie, indutrie, and appliance M6.1 Proportion of low emiion power upply in a juridiction or market. M6.2 Number of houehold, and individual (male and female) with improved acce to low emiion energy ource M6.3 MW of lowemiion energy capacity intalled, generated and/or rehabilitated M7.1(a) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided due to improvement in building deign and energy efficiency M7.1(b) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in climate mart citie M7.1(c) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in loweremiion indutry M7.1(d) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in energy efficient appliance AE AE AE AE Diaggregated by ize of upplier. Proportion of low emiion energy ource a percent of total energy conumption in a juridiction or market can be a clearer explanation that can be provided in the methodologie. Diaggregated by male and female. Diaggregated by urban and rural. Aume that it will typically not be poible to meaure improved acce from large grid ytem; therefore the data will be linked to off grid acce (e.g., olar panel) and mini grid ytem. Intenity to be meaured a a ratio of energy conumption to ector pecific production compared to baeline. Can be identified for each ector: (i) energy efficiency in building, (ii) citie (iii) indutrie and (iv) appliance. Diaggregated by ex/gender (e.g. female headed houehold, women led SME) 8.0 Increaed ue of low carbon tranport M8.1 Increaed female and male paenger trip and AE Diaggregated by gender. Freight i included becaue it comprie

13 Page 11 Expected reult Indicator * = Core freight uing lowcarbon tranport reponibility (annual reporting) Note nearly half of all tranport related GHG emiion. Increae reflect mode hift for paenger (rather than total number of paenger), covering hift from baeline ue of everal other mode of higher emiion tranport (e.g., bue, car, train, 2 3 wheeler) to loweremiion tranport (e.g. bue, train, bike, pedetrian). M8.2 Increaed fuel economy and decreaed carbon intenity for paenger and freight vehicle AE Thi indicator reflect change in the overall fuel economy and carbon intenity of vehicle fleet by vehicle cla and fuel ource (e.g., ethanol, electric) for paenger vehicle (public/private) and freight. 9.0 Improved management of land or foret area contributing to emiion reduction M9.1 Hectare of land or foret area under utainable management or improved protection and management leading to reduced GHG emiion and/or enhancement of carbon tock AE Informed by work on Fund REDD+ performance meaurement framework, Foret Carbon Partnerhip Facility Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, UN REDD, and UNFCCC guidance. Project/Programme Outcome/Output Activitie Input [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.]

14 Page 12 Propoed refined adaptation performance meaurement framework = Decided = Noted, but further refinement needed Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note Paradigm hift Objective Increaed climatereilient utainable development Fund level Impact PSA Degree to which the Fund contribute to climate reilient utainable development *Total Number of direct and indirect beneficiarie; Number of beneficiarie relative to total population Secretariat /Accredited Entitie (AE) AE Enviioned a a corecard indicator that reflect an analyi from the aggregation of the PMF indicator, information from APR, and project/programme evaluation. The corecard would likely be meaured at the end of each GCF replenihment cycle. Element conidered in the corecard and method for it aement to be further developed. The indicator meaure the number of people who have received upport, where two dimenion of upport are conidered: targeted and intenity level. Baed on thee two dimenion, direct and indirect beneficiarie are identified. Diaggregated by gender. To improve clarity and conitency, it hould be pecified that the econd part of the indicator Number of beneficiarie relative to total population can be pecified a percentage conider a reformulation along thee line: Percentage of beneficiarie relative to total population 1.0 Increaed reilience and enhanced livelihood of the mot vulnerable people, communitie, and region A1.1(a) Etimated change in loe of live (for male and female) due to the impact of climate related diater A1.1(b) Etimated change in loe of economic aet (USD equivalent) due to the impact of extreme event and climaterelated diater. AE Diaggregated by vulnerable group, and gender, and hare of total population. Methodologie to be developed. The indicator i diaggregated in two. One indicator conider the etimated reduction in loe of live and the other meaure the etimated change in economic loe caued by the impact of climate related diater. Economic loe will be analyzed in relation to the ize of economie. Sub indicator can be identified (i) for

15 Page 13 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note number of live and US$) implifie the analyi and provide more pecific information on the impact. A1.2 Number of individual and percentage of population (and relative diaggregation of women and men) adopting climatereilient livelihood option (including fiherie, agriculture, tourim, etc.) AE Diaggregated by gender; to conider equitable haring of benefit. Methodology to conider relevant ector (e.g., climate reilient agriculture, utainable climate reilient tourim, fiherie, green job, etc.) Indicator include the poibility of expreing it meaurement a percentage of thoe that are benefiting from diverified livelihood option over the total number of project beneficiarie (which i already captured by AE a core indicator). 2.0 Increaed reilience of health and well being, and food and water ecurity A2.1 Number of male and female benefiting from introduced health meaure to repond to climate enitive dieae AE Diaggregated by health meaure, dieae Diaggregated by gender A2.2 Number of food ecure houehold (in area/period at rik of climate change impact) AE Diaggregated by male and female headed houehold A2.3 Number of male and female with year round acce to reliable and afe water upply depite climate hock and tree AE Diaggregated by gender in relation to dometic, agricultural and indutrial ource. Diaggregated by male and female headed houehold for dometic ource. 3.0 Increaed reilience of infratructure and the built environment to climate change threat *A3.a Number of phyical aet contructed and/or made more reilient to climate variability and change *3.b Value of phyical aet contructed and/or AE Number will be diaggregated by ector, type of aet, action (contructed or trengthened), etc. To cover aet aociated with climatevulnerable ector, uch a tourim. Thi indicator i propoed a core indicator for adaptation project that will deliver reilient infratructure.

16 Page 14 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note made more reilient to climate variability and change Compared to the previou verion, the indicator ha been re formulated a two ub indictor (both to be reported). Thi change improve clarity and reporting. Human benefit are not included in thi verion. Human benefit are complex to value and are mainly aeed in qualitative term. Human benefit will be captured by evaluation of project/programme. 4.0 Improved reilience of ecoytem and ecoytem ervice A4.1Extent of ecoytem trengthened, retored and protected from climate variability and change AE Diaggregated by ecoytem type. Thi indicator ha been lightly re worded to improve clarity. Outcome Cro cutting ACrC1 Number of technologie (including gender friendly technologie) and innovative olution tranferred or licened to promote climate reilience AE May include number of technology tranfer licene, number of facilitie created to produce local technologie, and/or project/programme that include tranfer of technology and innovative olution that upport climate adaptation and reilience. Diaggregated by type of technologie and innovative olution 5.0 Strengthened intitutional and regulatory ytem for climatereponive planning and development A5.1 Number of gender friendly policie, intitution, coordination mechanim and regulatory framework that improve incentive for climate reilience and their effective implementation. AE The indicator meaure the intitutional, policy, and regulatory ytem that improve incentive for climate reilience and are accompanied by evidence of their effective implementation. The evidence may be a qualitative aement (e.g. through a tandardized corecard) of the variou trategic plan and document i needed at regular interval to oberve change in term of climate change treamlining and quality. It ha been reformulated to improve it quantification capacity and incluivity. The Readine and Preparatory Support Programme may employ the indicator to meaure it country level reult.

17 Page 15 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note 6.0 Increaed generation and ue of climate information in deciionmaking 7.0 Strengthened adaptive capacity and reduced expoure to climate rik A6.1 Number of climate information product/ervice in deciion making in climate enitive ector developed, delivered, and ued A7.1 Ue by vulnerable houehold (including number of female beneficiarie), communitie, buinee and publicector ervice of Fundupported/developed tool, intrument, trategie, and activitie to repond to climate change and variability A7.2: Number of male and female reached by climaterelated early warning ytem and other rik reduction meaure etablihed/ trengthened AE AE AE Diaggregated by takeholder (government, private ector, and general population). Thi formulation allow a clearer quantification and interpretation of the information required. Project/programme evaluation hould complement thi indicator and inform (for example through houehold and/or climate ervice provider urvey) on the impact on the deciion making capacity of intitution and beneficiarie. The indicator will alo capture gender friendly information climate information product/ervice. Thi indicator i qualitative and/or quantitative in nature and countrypecific. The qualitative apect will require an in depth analyi or a corecard approach to determine the extent of progre. Houehold: diaggregated by maleheaded and female headed An early warning ytem i perceived a a compoite of four dimenion: (1) knowledge on rik, (2) monitoring and warning ervice, (3) diemination and communication, (4) repone capability. Diaggregated by hazard and geographical coverage. Diaggregated by gender. The reformulation of thi indicator intended to reflect the recommendation of the Adaptation Committee to GCF for what concern implifying the indicator o that they are pecific and manageable in term of meaurement by different typology of AE. A the geographic coverage of EWS i uually a characteritic of the ytem (therefore already defined by the propoal) the

18 Page 16 Expected reult Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note number of people reached i the mot important element that hould be captured. 8.0 Strengthened awarene of climate threat and rikreduction procee Project/Programm e Outcome/Output Activitie Input A8.1: Number of male and female made aware of climate threat and related appropriate repone AE Diaggregated by gender. [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.]

19 Page 17 Annex III: Propoed Refinement to the Mitigation and Adaptation Performance Meaurement Framework 1. The below table indicate the refinement to the indicator in the mitigation and adaption PMF where the previou verion identified thee indicator a noted, but further refinement needed To allow comparion to the adopted verion 2, added language i undercored. Deleted text i trikethrough. 3. Few minor editorial correction have been propoed for the decided indicator baed on the feedback received from expert and AE. Thi i only meant for improved language clarity. Among the edit propoed, there are the following: (a) (b) (c) The numbering of the indicator ha been updated. The wording "a a reult of project/programme ha been removed from ome indicator. Thi i for a more concie definition and in conideration that technical guidance for attribution will be addreed in the indicator methodologie. Concerning the mitigation indicator that adopt the ame unit of meaure of the core indicator Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO2eq) reduced it i propoed to eliminate the word ubindicator, ince thee indicator are conidered individual indicator rather than ub indicator. 4. The reporting reponibility and note column have been updated a neceary. 1.1 Propoed refined mitigation performance meaurement framework Table 2.1: Mitigation performance meaurement framework = Decided = Noted, but further refinement needed Expected reult Paradigm hift Objective Shift to lowemiion utainable development pathway Indicator * = Core PSM 4 Degree to which the Fund i contributing to i achieving lowemiion utainable development impact reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Secretariat/A ccredited Entitie (AE) Propoed aement baed on a combination of quantitative and qualitative information that goe beyond imple aggregation of the reult indicator. Element to be conidered include the overall contribution to low carbon development pathway, conitent with a temperature increae of le than 2 degree, the degree to which knowledge and learning 1 The previouly adopted verion of the mitigation and adaptation performance meaurement framework i reported at page 71, in Annex VIII, of the Board document GCF/B.08/45 (Deciion of the Board Eighth Meeting of the Board). 2 Deciion B.08/07 (b) at the October 2014 meeting of the Board, 3 Note are provided by the Secretariat for information only. 4 For practical categorization purpoe, a new re numbering of the indicator i propoed.

20 Page 18 Expected reult Fund level Impact Indicator * = Core * Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced a a reult of Fundfunded project/ programme *Cot per t CO 2eq decreaed for all Fund funded mitigation project/ programme *Volume of finance leveraged by Fund funding reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Implementing entitie (IE)/ AE/intermed iarie are achieved, extent to which the enabling environment i created or enhanced, and extent to which the regulatory framework and policie are trengthened. Baed on analyi from the aggregation of the PMF indicator, APR information, and project/programme evaluation. To be meaured at the end of each GCF replenihment cycle. Aggregate ummation of ector pecific t CO 2eq reduction indicator. Intended to be etimated ex ante and calculated ex pot; reported annually. Methodologie tailored to each ector ee pecific below. Intended to help undertand anticipated cot (ex ante) a well a trend in reducing cot of mitigation over time. Cot per t CO 2eq reduced are expected to vary baed on ector, technology, programme/project context, time cale, rik, etc and other material conideration. Leveraged conidered ynonymou with the term mobilized (ued by other fund). Informed by CIF, International Finance Corporation (IFC), and other. Calculation to be diaggregated by public and private ource; prorated by amount of co financing. 1.0 Reduced emiion through increaed lowemiion energy acce and power generation MCrC1 Social, environmental, economic co benefit index/indicator at impact level Co benefit of mitigation action 1.1M1.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided a a reult of Fundfunded project/programme + from genderenitive energy acce and power generation (ub indicator)^ Co benefit indicator related to GHG reduction/low emiion development pathway and utainable development. Specific to be determined Co benefit related to ocial, economic, and environmental co benefit aociated with GHG reduction/low emiion development pathway and utainable development. Energy acce: Baed on gender enitive methodologie ued by CIF Program for Scaling Up Renewable Energy in Low Income Countrie (SREP) core indicator 2. Diaggregated by gender. Power generation: Method to be informed by the international financial intitution (IFI) GHG accounting harmonization work on energy efficiency and renewable energy; where feaible, gender diaggregated data to be collected. Can alo conider the Fund 2013 energy efficiency guideline.

21 Page 19 Expected reult 2.0 Reduced emiion through increaed acce to lowemiion tranport 3.0 Reduced emiion from building, citie, indutrie and appliance Indicator * = Core 2.1M2.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided a a reult of Fundfunded project/programme + from low emiion, gender enitive tranport (ubindicator) ^ 3.1M3.1 *Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided a a reult of Fundfunded project/programme + building, citie, indutrie, and appliance ubindicator^ reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Methodologie likely to determine three ub indicator: (i) on energy efficiency (ii) low emiion power (iii) energy acce. Sex diaggregation data and qualitative narrative related to gender to be collected where feaible: Public tranport: Specific to be informed by IFI GHG accounting harmonization; GEF 2013 tranportation project GHG calculation methodology developed by the Intitute for Tranportation Development Policy (ITDP) Vehicle fuel (fuel economy tandard): [If applicable to Fund invetment] method may be informed by the work of International Council on Clean Tranportation (ICCT); and by the work of the Women Iue in Tranportation Committee of the US Tranport Reearch Board. Diaggregated by gender where feaible. Building: Informed by IFI GHG accounting harmonization work on energy efficiency. Citie: Informed by the Global Protocol for Community Scale Greenhoue Ga Emiion and by the Citie Alliance. Indutrie: Informed by MDB/IFI GHG accounting harmonization work on energy efficiency. Appliance: Informed MDB/IFI GHG accounting harmonization work on energy efficiency where applicable. Can alo draw upon the GEF GHG accounting for tandard and labelling; CLASP /Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) Policy Analyi Modelling Sytem. Sub indictor can be identified (in the methodologie) for each ector (i) building/energy efficiency (ii) citie, (iii) indutrie and (iv) appliance. Gender diaggregation and other poible gender relevant reporting to be included for each ector where feaible. 4.0 Reduced emiion from land ue, deforetation, foret degradation, and through utainable management of foret and conervation and enhancement 4.1M4.1 Tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO 2eq) reduced or avoided and/or GHG removal by ink (including increaed removal) a a reult of Fund funded project/programme + foret and landue ub indicator^ from REDD+ and Etimation hall eek conitency with information on the reult of REDD+ activitie publihed in the Lima REDD+ Information Hub on the REDD+ Web Platform (UNFCCC deciion 9/CP.19 5 ) Methodologie to be developed in relation to by CIF FIP Indicator 1, pending Fund work on the performance framework for REDD+, the Foret Carbon Partnerhip Facility Methodological Framework (Dec. 2013), UN REDD, and emerging United Nation 5 Thi deciion form part of the Waraw Framework for REDD plu.

22 Page 20 Expected reult of foret carbon tock Indicator * = Core other land ue activitie reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) guidance on REDD+. Gender diaggregation i to be reearched and included if poible. Project/Programme Outcome 6 Cro cutting MCrC2 Number of technologie and innovative olution (including gender friendly technologie and olution) tranferred or licened to upport low emiion development a a reult of Fund upport. + Thi indicator may Might include number of technology tranfer licene, number of facilitie created to produce local technologie, and/or project/programme that include tranfer of technology and innovative olution that upport lowemiion pathway. 5.0 Strengthened intitutional and regulatory ytem for low emiion planning and development 5.1M5.1 Number of effective policie, intitution, coordination mechanim Intitutional and regulatory ytem framework that improve incentive for low emiion planning and development and their effective implementation Detail on thi indicator are to be determined in the methodologie. Although thi can be informed by GEF Indicator 5, the World Bank RISE (Readine for Invetment in Sutainable Energy) work, and Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) Climateope work, conideration will be made to avoid country and ector level requirement for thi indicator. Conideration hould be given to what can be meaured at different level (city, regional, etc.) and what change can be tied to the work of the Fund, either in an attribution or contribution ene. The indicator language ha been updated to allow a quantification of the reult achieved and upport AE. The Readine and Preparatory Support Programme may employ the indicator to meaure it country level reult. 5.2 Number and level of effective coordination mechanim Intermediarie Seek to meaure evidence of meaure taken for promoting coordination and ynergy at the regional and international level, including between and among relevant agencie and with regard to other multilateral environmental agreement. The revied verion of the previou indicator (M11) include coordination mechanim. Therefore thi indicator i now redundant. 6.0 Increaed number of mall, medium 6.1M6.1 Proportion of lowemiion power To be determined by recipient countrie. Diaggregated by ize of upplier. 6 Baed on the feedback received by ome AE and reult management expert conulted during the refinement of the indicator in the PMF, we propoe thi light language change to improve clarity on the fact thee are the outcome related to GCF reult management framework.

23 Page 21 Expected reult and large lowemiion power upplier Indicator * = Core upply in a juridiction or market. 6M6.2 Number of houehold, and individual (male and female) with improved acce to low emiion energy ource M6.3 MW of lowemiion energy capacity intalled, generated and/or rehabilitated a a reult of GCF upport + reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Proportion of low emiion energy ource a percent of total energy conumption in a juridiction or market can be a clearer explanation that can be provided in the methodologie. Informed by CIF SREP 2. Diaggregated by male and female. Diaggregated by urban and rural. To be informed by SE4All. Aume that it will typically not be poible to meaure improved acce from large grid ytem; therefore the data will be linked to off grid acce (e.g., olar panel) and minigrid ytem. Informed by CIF CTF and SREP indicator. 7.0 Lower energy intenity of building, citie, indutrie, and appliance 7.1M7.1 Energy intenity improved efficiency of building, citie, indutrie, and appliance a a reult of Fund upport + 7.1M7.1(a) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided due to improvement in building deign and energy efficiency 7.1M7.1(b) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in climate mart citie 7.1M7.1(c) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in lower emiion indutry 7.1M7.1(d) tco2eq emiion reduced or avoided a a reult of invetment in energy efficient appliance Informed by MDB/IFI GHG accounting harmonization work on energy efficiency; can alo be informed by IEA and SE4ALL Global Tracking Framework where relevant. Will need to be calculated ector by ector; different methodologie apply to building, citie, indutrie and appliance. Intenity to be meaured a a ratio of energy conumption to ector pecific production compared to baeline. Can be identified for each ector: (i) energy efficiency in building, (ii) citie (iii) indutrie and (iv) appliance. Diaggregated by ex/gender (e.g. female headed houehold, women led SME) 8.1M8.1 Number Informed by CIF CTF indicator 4, pending

24 Page 22 Expected reult 8.0 Increaed ue of low carbon tranport Indicator * = Core of additional Increaed female and male paenger trip and freight uing low carbon tranport a a reult of Fund upport. + reponibilit reporting) Note 3 work by MDB and IFI on tranport GHG accounting harmonization. Additional paenger = mode hift To conider underlying reaon for mode hift, uch a tranit oriented development. Diaggregated by gender. Freight i included becaue it comprie nearly half of all tranport related GHG emiion. Increae reflect mode hift for paenger (rather than total number of paenger), covering hift from baeline ue of everal other mode of higheremiion tranport (e.g., bue, car, train, 2 3 wheeler) to lower emiion tranport (e.g. bue, train, bike, pedetrian). 8.2M8.2 Increaed fuel economy and decreaed carbon intenity for paenger and freight vehicle Vehicle fuel economy and energy ource a a reult of Fund upport. + Trend in fuel economy by vehicle cla (commercial and paenger plu ubclae by heavy/light duty, weight, etc.) and energy ource (e.g. hybrid and all electric vehicle) Focue on vehicle in the private, commercial and government fleet (not public tranport or non motorized tranport option). Detail of methodology to be determined: may be by average fuel economy by vehicle cla. 9.0 Improved management of land or foret area contributing to emiion reduction Project/Programm e 9.1M9.1 Hectare of land or foret area under verified utainable management or improved protection and effective management that contribute to CO 2 emiion reduction leading to reduced GHG emiion and/or enhancement of carbon tock Informed by work of the International Energy Agency, the International Council on Clean Tranportation, and other Thi indicator reflect change in the overall fuel economy and carbon intenity of vehicle fleet by vehicle cla and fuel ource (e.g., ethanol, electric) for paenger vehicle (public/private) and freight. Informed by work on Fund REDD+ performance meaurement framework, (currently being developed). Can draw on CIF Foret Invetment Program (FIP) indicator guidance, Foret Carbon Partnerhip Facility Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, UN REDD, and UNFCCC guidance. [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.]

25 Page 23 Expected reult Outcome/Output 7 Indicator * = Core reponibilit reporting) Note 3 Activitie Input [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] [Defined for each project/programme on a cae by cae bai.] 2.2 Propoed refined adaptation performance meaurement framework Table 2.2: Adaptation performance meaurement framework = Decided = Noted, but further refinement needed Expected reult Paradigm hift Objective Increaed climatereilient utainable development Fund level Impact Indicator * = Core PSA Degree to which the Fund i achieving a contribute to climatereilient utainable development impact *A2 Total Number of direct and indirect beneficiarie; Number of beneficiarie relative to total population reponibilit reporting) Secretariat /Accredited Entitie (AE) Note 1 Propoed aement baed on a combination of quantitative and qualitative information that goe beyond imple aggregation of the reult indicator. Element to be conidered include the overall contribution to utainable climate reilient development pathway, the degree to which knowledge and learning are achieved, extent to which the enabling environment i created or enhanced, and extent to which the regulatory framework and policie are trengthened. Enviioned a a corecard indicator that reflect an analyi from the aggregation of the PMF indicator, information from APR, and project/programme evaluation. The corecard would likely be meaured at the end of each GCF replenihment cycle. Element conidered in the corecard and method for it aement to be further developed. The indicator meaure the number of people who have received upport, where two dimenion of upport are conidered: targeted and intenity level. Baed on thee two dimenion, category of direct and indirect beneficiarie are identified. 7 A per footnote 14 1 Note are provided by the Secretariat for information only.