The approved results frameworks for the Clean Technology Fund (CTF), Forest Investment Program (FIP), Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR), and Scaling-Up Renewable Energy Program (SREP) each contain core indicators that pilot countries are required to report on annually, with support from the Multilateral Development Banks. These core indicators are consistently measured by all CIF countries and then aggregated across country and program. Over time, this enables the CIF to meaningfully report on achievements at the country and fund level. The CIF Administrative Unit administers and supports this reporting process.

This revised, simplified CTF logic model and results framework was prepared pursuant to the approved Measures to Improve the Operations of the Climate Investment Funds. The revised results framework is based on the first-hand experiences of the pilot countries and the MDBs in implementing the original CTF results framework. The revised results framework takes into account key CTF objectives and an improved understanding of what is possible as part of the development and implementation of a CTF investment plan.

The results framework establishes a basis for future monitoring and evaluation of the impact, outcomes and outputs of CTF-funded activities. In addition, the results framework is designed to guide countries and MDBs in further developing their own results frameworks to ensure that CTF-relevant results and indicators are integrated in their own monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems at the country or the project/program level.

Related documents:

CTF Core Indicators:

B1. Tons of GHG emissions reduced or avoided
B2. Volume of direct finance leveraged through CTF funding – disaggregated by public and private finance
B3. Installed capacity (MW) as a result of CTF interventions
B4. Number of additional passengers (disaggregated by men and women, if feasible) using low carbon public transport as a result of CIF intervention
B5. Annual energy savings as a result of CTF interventions (GWh)

CTF Logic Model

CTF logic model

The FIP Sub-Committee recognized the current FIP results framework, and its adoption in the endorsed investment plans, as a valid basis for mid-term and ex-post evaluation in the FIP pilot countries. The Sub-Committee has approved the document, Results Monitoring and Reporting in the FIP, which clarifies the themes for annual reporting by the pilot countries. 

 Annual reporting will be around certain common themes on which all countries will report. Additionally, countries will also report on relevant co-benefits themes as applicable to their investment plans and provide a narrative on a range of important themes as outlined in the document.

Related documents:

Annual Reporting at the Level of the FIP Investment Plans

FIP Common Themes 

1. GHG emission reductions / enhancement of carbon stocks
 
2. Livelihoods co-benefits
 
Other Relevant co-benefit Themes
 
1. Biodiversity and other environmental services
 
2. Governance
 
3. Tenure, rights and access
 
4. Capacity development
 
Narrative 
 
1. Five common topics to be annually reported on by all FIP pilot countries (theory of change;contribution to national REDD+ strategies and equivalents; bilateral and other support; government's perspective on link with DGM; and highlights and showcases)
 
2. Other potential themes not on an annual basis (role of program coordination and synergies between different projects; ongoing stakeholder participation; implementation in the context of broader national policies; knowlegde exchange and management; and analytical work or public communications)

FIP Logic Model

FIP logic model

This revised, simplified PPCR logic model and results framework was prepared pursuant to the approved Measures to Improve the Operations of the Climate Investment Funds. The revised results framework is based on the first-hand experiences of the pilot countries and the MDBs in implementing the original PPCR results framework.The revised results framework takes into account key PPCR objectives and an improved understanding of what is possible as part of the development and implementation of a SPCR.

The results framework establishes a basis for future monitoring and evaluation of the impact, outcomes and outputs of PPCR-funded activities. In addition, the results framework is designed to guide countries and MDBs in further developing their own results frameworks to ensure that PPCR-relevant results and indicators are integrated in their own monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems at the country or the project/program level.

Related documents:

PPCR M&R in 7 Steps - national level:

PPCR M&R in 7 Steps - project level:

PPCR Core Indicators:

1. Degree of Integration of climate change in national, including sector, planning
2. Evidence of strengthened government capacity and coordination mechanism to mainstream climate resilience
3. Quality and extent to which climate responsive instruments/investment models are developed and tested
4. Extent to which vulnerable households, communities, businesses and public sector services use improved PPCR supported tools, instruments, strategies and activities to respond to climate variability or climate change
5. Number of people supported by the PPCR to cope with the effects of climate change

Gender Considerations in Reporting on PPCR Core Indicators

All five of the established core indicators address, directly or indirectly gender issues. Three of the five core indicators specifically address gender issues. Core Indicator 2 specifically requires a score to determine whether females and males are participating equally in the “coordination mechanism”.
Core Indicator 3 requires a score to determine as to whether “the instrument/investment model appropriately incorporates the needs of both females and males into design andimplementation.”
Core indicator 5 disaggregates the data by female and male.

Core indicator 4 indirectly addresses gender by measuring the extent to which vulnerable households use improve PPCR-supported tools, instruments, strategies and activities to respond to climate variability or climate change. In this case for example, female headed households could be one of the definitions of “vulnerable”. The definition has intentionally been left open for countries to describe their own unique situations.

The methodology of gathering data also addresses genderequality. The guidance for all three score cards (Core Indicators 1, 2 and 3) recommends that the scoring team include both men and women. 

PPCR Logic Model


PPCR logic model

This revised, simplified Scaling Up Renewable Energy in Low Income Countries Program logic model and results framework was prepared pursuant to the approved Measures to Improve the Operations of the Climate Investment Funds. The revised results framework is based on the first-hand experiences of the pilot countries and the MDBs in implementing the original SREP results framework.The revised results framework takes into account key SREP objectives and an improved understanding of what is possible as part of the development and implementation of a SREP.

The results framework establishes a basis for future monitoring and evaluation of the impact, outcomes and outputs of SREP-funded activities. In addition, the results framework is designed to guide countries and MDBs in further developing their own results frameworks to ensure that SREP-relevant results and indicators are integrated in their own monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems at the country or the project/program level.

Related documents:

SREP Core Indicators

1. Annual electricity output from RE as a result of SREP interventions (GWh)
2. Number of women and men, businesses and community services benefiting from improved access to electricity and fuels as a result of SREP interventions

SREP Logic Model


SREP logic model