UNITED NATIONS	EP
United Nations Environment Programme	Distr. GENERAL UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/91/60 7 November 2022 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF
THE MULTILATERAL FUND FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
Ninety-first Meeting

Montreal, 5-9 December 2022

Item 10 of the provisional agenda

Review of institutional strengthening projects, including funding levels, terminal report and extension request formats, and performance indicators that could be used consistently by all Article 5 countries (decision 89/3)

Introduction

Institutional strengthening (IS) projects have been funded by the Executive Committee since its 7th meeting to provide financial support to Article 5 countries to strengthen their capacity to facilitate expeditious and effective implementation of ozone depleting substances (ODS) phase-out projects, ensuring liaison between the country concerned, the Executive Committee, the Fund Secretariat, and the implementing agencies. Since then, Article 5 countries have been receiving assistance for IS projects, and the Executive Committee has continued to discuss matters related to the funding of IS projects in a timely manner, mainly when additional compliance commitments under the Montreal Protocol were agreed by the Parties.

At the 89th meeting, the Executive Committee considered document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/89/4, which provided a review of institutional strengthening (IS) projects including funding levels. The Executive Committee agreed to establish a contact group to continue the discussions on the matter. Subsequently, the Executive Committee requested the Secretariat, to consult with the bilateral and implementing agencies to review the existing format for terminal reports and requests for renewal of IS funding, and to select a set of performance indicators that could be used consistently by all Article 5 countries, and to report back to the Executive Committee at its 91st meeting; and deferred consideration of the review of IS projects, including funding levels, to the 91st meeting on the basis of a working text resulting from the contact group discussions (decision 89/3(b) and (c)). The present document is prepared pursuant to the aforementioned decision.

The document includes the following sections:

Proposed revised format for IS terminal reports and requests for renewal of IS funding including a new set of performance indicators

IS duration and funding

Conclusions

Recommendation

I.	Proposed revised format for IS terminal reports and requests for renewal of IS funding including a new set of performance indicators

In preparing the revised format, the Secretariat did an extensive review of the terminal reports and requests for renewal of IS projects submitted from the 82nd and 86th meetings; compiled the information on elements reported and analysed those performance indicators included in the submissions. Based on this analysis, and the emerging challenges in implementing the Montreal Protocol taking into consideration relevant decisions of the Executive Committee and the Meetings of the Parties after the adoption of the Kigali Amendment, the Secretariat developed a draft revised format for terminal reports and IS renewal requests, including a set of performance indicators that could be used to assess the effectiveness of these projects in achieving the overall objectives for IS projects. The Secretariat consulted with the bilateral and implementing agencies during the recent Inter-agency coordination meeting (IACM); discussed individually with each agency issues that were identified when reviewing requests for the renewal of IS projects submitted on behalf of Article 5 countries; and requested feedback from all agencies on the proposed changes to the format and the set of performance indicators.

The main objective for proposing a revised reporting format and set of performance indicators is to develop an instrument that was fit-for-purpose and could be used consistently across all Article 5 countries keeping in mind the need to report in an effective, transparent, and standard process to record and demonstrate the significance of IS projects. The revised format and performance indicators when approved, would facilitate future data collection for evaluation that would continue to establish the importance of IS projects as the cornerstone of the implementation of the Montreal Protocol.

I.1	Desk review of terminal reports and requests for IS renewal

The Secretariat’s review of 76 IS terminal reports and requests for renewal identified the following gaps and challenges in reporting:

Several of the terminal reports do not contain sufficient information to allow a thorough review of the submission; often requiring considerable exchange between the relevant implementing agencies and the Secretariat;

Some countries use the format for terminal reports and requests for renewal as a rigid template and followed it strictly, while others considered it more flexible thereby resulting in an inconsistent quality of reporting across countries;

A wide range of performance indicators were identified per activity which posed a challenge when assessing the overall performance of each IS project; and

Temporary additions to the format were required to ensure new decisions made by the Executive Committee were captured clearly during reporting.

Reporting on activities implemented during an approved phase of an IS project and requesting additional funding is the responsibility of the concerned Article 5 country. Oftentimes, the responsible agency provides assistance to the concerned country to ensure accuracy of its reporting. The agency is also responsible for submitting the request for consideration of the Executive Committee and responding to additional information sought by the Secretariat on the submission. Noting this, the Secretariat compared the reports received across countries, regions, and agencies to examine their quality and consistency, to understand the factors that may influence the variation in reporting information on activities and targets. This analysis was based on the comments from the Secretariat on IS terminal reports and renewal requests and the responses received.

Following the review, the Secretariat noted that some countries provided more substantive and comprehensive reports while other countries included less information. The diversity in quality of reports was also observed regardless of responsible implementing agencies. It was further noted that all Article 5 countries have consistently provided details on the role and position of the NOUs within the national administration and their reporting lines, and how the units are anchored within the country’s Government structures. There was less clarity however on the link between the NOUs and the implementation of the phase-out projects and whether they provided oversight in monitoring their timely implementation and completion. This limited the ability of the Secretariat to understand the extent to which project implementation of the phase-out projects affected the delivery of the NOUs’ mandate of overall national coordination and data reporting. This is particularly relevant to lowvolume-consuming (LVC) countries where their NOUs often provides substantive and technical support to project implementation through consultants.

Reporting on performance indicators

A wide range of performance indicators were observed from the analysis of the terminal reports, as summarized in Annex I. It was because performance indicators were described per activity, and where a country had many activities, the proliferation of indicators gave rise to unbalanced reporting when compared with countries with fewer activities.

The current reporting format required Article 5 countries to report on performance indicators for the assessment of the IS performance (which are not linked with the overall IS objectives) and to report on activities in separate tables. In several reports, countries identified performance indicators for the specific activities being implemented which were not linked to the IS objectives. As a result, the details provided for both the activities and the indicators were inconsistent, which made it difficult to assess the overall IS objectives using the reported indicators.

I.2	New responsibilities of the NOUs and recent policies adopted by the Executive Committee

In addition to their current responsibilities to facilitate the phase-out of HCFCs and the transition to alternatives that minimize environmental impact (decision 74/51(c)), NOUs will implement new responsibilities under the Kigali Amendment, as summarized below:

Facilitate the ratification of the Kigali Amendment, which will require an understanding of the Amendment itself, an analysis of their countries’ HFC consumption (and production where applicable), and an assessment of the regulatory and policy framework in place;

Assist in developing new legislation, regulations, and standards to control and monitor HFC consumption (and production where applicable), including the inclusion of HFCs into the existing import/export licensing and quota systems, and facilitating the introduction of low-GWP alternative technologies;

Data reporting responsibilities which will require that NOUs develop and implement methodologies for collecting, verifying, and reporting HFC consumption (and production where applicable) data under Article 7 of the Montreal Protocol and the country programme (CP) implementation reports, noting the complexity in understanding the formulation of different HFC blends;

Understand the global warming-potential (GWP) of different blended refrigerants, and the methodology to calculate consumption (and production where applicable) expressed in CO2-equivalent, which has become an additional responsibility for issuing quotas and monitoring HFC imports/exports, as well as for reporting Article 7 and CP data;

Consult and coordinate with all government agencies, industries, and new stakeholders (i.e., energy departments or relevant energy-efficiency authority) for the preparation of the Kigali HFC implementation plan (KIPs) to ensure that the strategy is integrated into national plans and that there is a streamlined approach to phase down HFCs; and

Public and stakeholder awareness-raising related to the Kigali Amendment, including the design, production and dissemination of information material and publications related to inter alia HFCs, low-GWP alternatives, and energy-efficiency.

In addition to the above responsibilities related to implementing the Kigali Amendment, the Executive Committee had also agreed in decision 84/92(b) on the Multilateral Fund gender policy which makes the NOUs responsible for ensuring that gender mainstreaming activities are inherent in all projects supported by the Multilateral Fund. These may include identifying specific activities and indicators related to gender, a responsibility that may require additional resources for the NOU for the policy to be implemented effectively.

I.3	Proposed elements for inclusion in the revised terminal report and IS renewal format

The current format for IS reporting and renewal requests has been in use since the 61st meeting, with minor revisions agreed at the 74th meeting to include some performance indicators, presented in Annex XIX of document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/74/56.

Based on the review of IS terminal reports and in the context of relevant decisions made by the Executive Committee that would relate to, or impact IS projects, the following new sections and additional information are proposed to be included in the revised format for IS terminal reports and requests for renewal, which is provided in Annex II.

Institutional arrangements

The Executive Committee discussed matters related to project management units (PMUs) and IS at the 83rd meeting in the context of the administrative cost regime. There was overall acknowledgement of the vital role of the NOU to facilitate the phase-out of controlled substances, and the unit’s significant contribution to the success of the Montreal Protocol at the national level. There was also a discussion on the need to clearly articulate PMU roles and responsibilities from that of the NOU, resulting in a decision by the Executive Committee to require further detailed reporting of the activities to be undertaken by the PMU and their associated costs. The NOU’s role of monitoring, coordinating, and reporting on Montreal Protocol activities was broader than that of the PMU. The legal and institutional framework facilitated by the NOU provided the foundation for the PMU to implement the HCFC phase out management plan (HPMP) with technical expertise that was not available within the NOU, thus helping the countries to meet their compliance obligations under the Protocol. Furthermore, in most LVC countries, the NOU assumes the responsibility of implementing the HPMP activities since the level of funds assigned does not allow hiring a full-time coordinator without affecting the outcomes of substantive activities.

While detailed reporting on the PMU would be a component of the HPMP tranche implementation report, it was not required in the IS project to describe the mechanism of collaboration and cooperation with the PMU; doing so would ensure a consistent understanding of their roles and responsibilities and transparency in oversight.

At the 74th meeting, the proposed IS reporting template included a section to clarify the institutional arrangements for the NOU and the PMU; the Executive Committee decided to use the template without this revision. However, in the context of the discussions at the 83rd meeting, the addition of this section merits consideration.

Integrating the gender mainstreaming policy of the Multilateral Fund as a new objective

In line with the policy on gender mainstreaming for Multilateral Fund-supported projects, the NOUs will be required to ensure that gender-related indicators are developed, integrated, and measured during the implementation of all projects supported by the Multilateral Fund. An additional objective to support the implementation of the gender mainstreaming policy is proposed to ensure that this policy is fully consolidated with those activities being implemented through the IS projects and would be consistent with decision 84/92(b).

In the report considered by the Executive Committee at its 90th meeting on the review of the implementation of the Fund’s operational policy on gender mainstreaming there was an acknowledgment of the importance of gender issues at the NOU level. As shown by the activities to develop plans of action, raise awareness, build capacity, and promote equal opportunities for women included in project submissions, bilateral and implementing agencies are already taking actions to ensure that this policy is closely linked to project implementation, including for IS projects.

The inclusion of this objective would indicate that actions in implementing the operational policy on gender mainstreaming are taken into account starting from the NOUs and would percolate to all the Multilateral-Fund supported projects, with the NOU oversight. This addition also recognizes concerns by Article 5 countries on the lack of dedicated resources for full implementation of the gender mainstreaming policy, and the additional capacity required for NOUs to identify, apply, and monitor those gender indicators that may be developed.

As the lack of dedicated funding to implement the Multilateral Fund gender mainstreaming policy in projects was a challenge identified by bilateral and implementing agencies and Article 5 countries, the Executive Committee may wish to consider this issue while discussing the possible funding arrangements for IS projects at the 91st meeting.

New performance indicators and approach for reporting

Based on the Secretariat’s analysis, one of the limitations faced when reviewing IS projects is the extensive number of performance indicators included in the reports which were not consistent across countries.

Possible options for performance indicators were discussed with bilateral and implementing agencies, and an agreement was reached with the Secretariat’s proposal to identify a set of indicators per objective rather than per activity, as listed in part III of Annex II. This approach would facilitate an easier assessment of the achievement of the objectives, as the indicators will be consistent for all countries. This would also ensure that Article 5 countries define their activities with the objectives of the IS project in mind and they can correlate these with the specific indicators identified. During implementation, bilateral and implementing agencies can develop their own criteria for meeting these indicators which would then be reported in the new table included in the terminal report format.

Additional information on government evaluation

Ensuring the sustainability of activities and projects funded by the Multilateral Fund is a priority of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee and the Secretariat should also carefully consider partner capacity in the review of project proposals, including for IS projects, as identified in the assessment of the Multilateral Fund by the Multilateral Organization Performance Network (MOPAN). As the national governments of the Article 5 countries through the ministries/institutions responsible for implementing IS projects are direct recipients of the support for capacity building provided through these projects, it is important that they take ownership of these projects.

The additional questions included in this section will, instead of simply endorsing the IS renewal request, allow the institution to provide an overview of the impact of the IS project in their country. Where there are delays in implementation, the government can then identify the reasons for this and resolve them at the national level. These additional questions will also give the government the opportunity to identify potential risks they might face to achieve the objectives of the IS, and meeting compliance obligations under the Montreal Protocol. This information will contribute to a direct understanding of the Executive Committee on how governments of Article 5 countries which are receiving IS funding view this support.

II.	IS duration and funding

II.1	Duration of the IS projects

In preparing the present document, the Secretariat also reviewed the implications for the countries, the bilateral and implementing agencies, the Secretariat, and the Executive Committee of potentially extending the duration for the renewal of IS projects, noting that a longer period of implementation would have the following impact on reporting the progress of IS projects:

Reducing the reporting requirements to every three instead of every two years, which would enable countries to better report on their activities and targets;

Article 5 countries would have a longer period of implementation for each IS phase which would give sufficient time for performance indicators to be achieved, thus resulting in more favourable overall IS assessments;

The increased stability of the NOU would result in enhanced institutional capacity to monitor the activities and performance indicators and would allow for more efficient project implementation; and

Bilateral and implementing agencies would be able to provide better guidance on the implementation of the IS activities and to support meeting the agreed performance indicators.

These observations, noted when reviewing the IS submissions, were further expressed by the implementing agencies during consultations when preparing this document. Initial discussions on the duration of IS extensions took place at the 89th meeting as further elaborated in paragraph 29 below.

II.2	Funding of the IS projects

The financial support provided through IS projects has been a major contributor to the achievement of Article 5 countries’ compliance with the Montreal Protocol’s control measures. Furthermore, IS support has allowed Article 5 countries to build their capacity and strengthen their role as full partners in the Montreal Protocol. The relatively low level of funding approved for IS has contributed significantly to the success of the Montreal Protocol as the first and only international environmental treaty to have been universally ratified (including all its amendments except for the Kigali Amendment), with a near record of all Article 5 countries being in compliance with all their obligations under the Montreal Protocol.

The Executive Committee, at its 89th meeting, discussed the review of IS projects including funding levels in a contact group. During that discussion, it was agreed that the issue of the funding levels for the IS projects would be deferred to the 91st meeting noting the need to have clear performance indicators that would support the increased level of work of the NOUs. The contact group also agreed on a working text which included an understanding in principle on the revised duration of IS from two to three years contingent on agreements to be made on other elements affecting consideration of IS funding. The working text is reproduced in Annex III to the present document and has been incorporated in the recommendation section below.

III	Conclusions

Based on the abovementioned review, and noting the new requirements of the Kigali Amendment and relevant decisions of the Executive Committee, the Secretariat considered it necessary:

To update the format for IS terminal reports and renewal requests by inter alia adding some questions related to the PMU under the section on institutional arrangements; updating the section on progress report and activities for new phases to introduce a new objective related to the gender mainstreaming policy of the Multilateral Fund; adjusting objectives to align with responsibilities for the Kigali Amendment; and updating the section on reporting on performance indicators and achievement of objectives to add new performance indicators; and

To identify the performance indicators that are the most relevant, reliable, and pertinent for each of the objectives of the IS projects which can be used by all Article 5 countries in a consistent manner.

The proposed updates to the reporting format will provide greater clarity on the implementation of IS projects and allow the Secretariat to provide the Executive Committee with a more thorough analysis of the impact of IS funding. The Secretariat will update the Guide for preparation of IS renewal requests to include the revised format, once approved, to facilitate consistency in quality of reporting by NOUs and implementing agencies.

The revised format will also support discussions of the Executive Committee on funding levels for IS projects at the 91st meeting. Sufficient funding support should continue to enable those Article 5 countries that have not ratified the Kigali Amendment to do so, while ensuring their compliance with the existing HCFC phase-out targets, and the new HFC phase-down targets agreed under the Kigali Amendment. Based on the analysis provided above, the Executive Committee may wish to consider additional funding for the IS projects for NOUs to fulfil their new responsibilities as detailed in paragraphs 11 and 12 above.

IV.	Recommendation

The Executive Committee may wish:

To note the review of institutional strengthening (IS) projects, including funding levels, terminal report and extension request formats, and performance indicators that could be used consistently by all Article 5 countries contained in document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/91/60;

To approve the revised format of terminal reports and requests for extension of IS funding and the corresponding performance indicators therein contained in Annex II of document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/91/60;

To request Article 5 countries through the bilateral and implementing agencies to use the revised format referred to in (b) above for all requests for IS renewals from the [first] [second] meeting of the Executive Committee in 2023;

[To establish the level of funding for IS support taking into account the activities that Article 5 countries would need to undertake to initiate activities to implement the Kigali Amendment and meet the first control measures for phasing down HFCs during the period 2020-2030, while at the same time continuing implementation of HCFC phase-out management plans;] [+60 per cent]

To extend the duration of IS renewal implementation phases from the current two years to three years for IS renewal proposals submitted from the [90th meeting] onwards];

To request the Secretariat:

To update the guide for preparation of IS renewal requests to take into account the revised format of terminal report and requests for extension of IS funding;

[To submit a further review of IS projects including funding levels no later than the second meeting in [2025] [2029] taking into account the remaining HCFC obligations]; and

To prepare a report on the review of the use of the revised format referred to in sub-paragraph (b) above no later than the second meeting in 2026.

Annex I

SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS USED PER OBJECTIVE OF IS

Objectives	Number of indicators used	SMART indicators (%)	Incomplete indicators (%)
1: Adoption/implementation of legislation and regulation to control and monitor controlled substances
Introduction and implementation of HCFC licensing and quota system	15	60	38
Enforcement of control measures to sustain CFCs and other ODS phased out	11	63	36
Monitoring illegal ODS trade (all ODS)	14	40	52
Ratification of Amendments to the Montreal Protocol	5	70	27
Introduction/revision of legislation to implement the Kigali Amendment	3	83	13
2: Efficient and timely data collection and reporting
Monitoring customs import/export of controlled substances	15	81	10
Article 7 data reporting	4	99	0
Country programme data reporting	4	99	0
3: Consultations and coordination with national agencies/stakeholders
Steering committees	7	78	19
Industry associations	7	70	24
4: Supervision of timely implementation of phase-out activities and reduction in ODS consumption
Implementation of HPMPs	19	86	12
Implementation of enabling activities for HFC phase-down	8	86	8
5: Awareness-raising and information exchange
Information dissemination to stakeholders	18	55	42
International Ozone Day celebrations	3	86	13
6: Regional cooperation and participation in Montreal Protocol meetings
Participation in regional network meetings	5	90	9
Participation at meetings of the Open-ended Working Group and the Parties to the Montreal Protocol	6	90	8
7: Implementation of the Multilateral Fund gender policy (*)
Ensure female participation in Montreal Protocol policy matters and decision making	11	51	47
Ensure female participation in activities supported under the Multilateral Fund	17	58	39
Encourage equal opportunities for female technicians to build a career in the refrigeration and air-conditioning sector	12	58	38

(*) Thirty-nine IS projects had been submitted and approved since the adoption of the gender policy for the Multilateral Fund.

Annex II

PROPOSED FORMAT FOR INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING TERMINAL REPORTS AND INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING RENEWAL REQUESTS

TERMINAL REPORT AND REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING FUNDING

FOR	[COUNTRY]
FOR	[REPORTING PERIOD]

Instructions:

Please note that 1 to 15 should be completed by the country concerned before submission to the implementing agency for comments in 16.

PART I: Overview of IS project and NOU

1.	Country:

2.	Name of the ministry/institution where the ozone unit is attached:

3.	Implementing agency:	Choose an item.

4.	Institutional strengthening (IS) project phases (approved) (list only the last two approvals)

Phase	Approved period (mm/yy)	Actual implementation period (dd/mm/yy)	Multilateral Fund funding (approved)	Multilateral Fund funding (disbursed)

5.	IS reporting period and requested phase:
a)	Reporting period (mm/yy to mm/yy):
b)	Requested phase (indicate number):

c)	Funding Amount (US $):

d)	Period of implementation for requested phase mm/yy to mm/yy:

6.	Data reporting:

Reporting requirement	Most recent year reported	Date submitted
Article 7
Country programme data

7.	Institutional Arrangements:

a)	Briefly describe the role and position of the National Ozone Unit (NOU) within the national government, and the integration of the Montreal Protocol implementation into the government plans

b)	What is the modality of implementation of the IS project in your country?	Choose an item.

*Items below will appear in the drop-down menu for this question:

☐ Through an agreement or project document signed with the Implementing Agency

☐ Through direct contracts between the IA and suppliers

☐ Other (please specify below)

If other, please briefly describe modality of implementation selected above:

c)	Who approves the programme of work and supervises the NOU?	Choose an item.

*Items below will appear in the drop-down menu for this question:

☐ The national government

☐ The implementing agency

☐ Other (please specify below)

If other, please specify and describe below:

d)	Is there a National Ozone Steering Committee (Steering Committee) or similar advisory committee in the country?

☐ YES ☐ NO

If YES, please describe the role and members of the National Ozone Steering Committee?

If NO, please describe who advises the NOU to implement their mandate?

8.	Indicate the total number staff in the NOU:

a)	How many are funded under the IS?	Full time	Part time
b)	How many are funded directly by the Government budget as regular staff?	Full time	Part time
c)	Please indicate the gender composition of the NOU staff	Male	Female
d)	Is the unit fully staffed?	☐ YES	☐ NO

If NO, please explain the reasons below:

9.	Indicate the NOU/Project Management Unit (PMU) modality in the country by responding to the following:

a)	Does your country have a dedicated PMU for the HPMP or other project implementation?

☐ YES ☐ NO

b)	What is the role of the NOU in the implementation of HPMP/other phase out or phase down plans implementation?	Choose an item.

*Items below will appear in the drop-down menu for this question:

☐ Supervise PMU and work plan

☐ Coordinate with the PMU, no supervision role

☐ Implement the HPMP activities (i.e., for LVC countries)

☐ Other (please specify below)

If other, please specify and describe below:

Part II.	Progress report and activities for requested phase

Please provide details on the status of the implementation of the activities approved from the current IS phase and planned activities for the requested phase. Components or elements may be indicated as n/a if it is not applicable, and if so, please include an explanation. Please add a row if necessary to include another component which reflects the national situation. Please note the specific performance indicators for each objective in Part III.

Components or elements	Activities carried out in current reporting period	Outputs achieved for reporting period (specify phase/mm/yy)	Planned activities in next phase (specify phase/mm/yy)	Expected outputs to be achieved for next phase
Objective 1: Adoption/implementation of legislation and regulation to control and monitor the imports and use of Montreal Protocol controlled substances
Amendments to national policies and regulations to include provisions required by the Kigali Amendment
Effective implementation and enforcement of the licensing and quota system for all Montreal Protocol controlled substances
Enforcement of control measures to sustain the phase out of substances already achieved
Institutional measures in place with relevant offices to effectively monitor potential illegal trade of controlled substances as applicable
Enforcement of measures to control or ban the imports of RAC equipment or preblended polyols, if applicable
Ratification of Amendments to the Montreal Protocol
Objective 2: Accurate and timely data collection and reporting of consumption of all Montreal Protocol controlled substances
Monitoring customs import/export data of controlled substances
Supporting effective and timely data collection for Article 7 and Country Programme data reporting
Supporting data reporting requirements for HFCs and blends under the Kigali Amendment and monitoring the country compliance in ODP tonnes and CO2-eq tonnes
Objective 3: Efficient coordination between national agencies/stakeholders to support the objectives of the Montreal Protocol
Establishment/enhancement of inter and intra-governmental cooperation mechanisms particularly for the implementation of the Kigali Amendment
Facilitation of agreements with stakeholders and partners (i.e., RAC associations, industry, and government) to efficiently implement the Montreal Protocol projects and other requirements
Objective 4: Supervision of timely implementation of HCFC phase out/HFC phase down activities and the resulting reduction in consumption of controlled substances
Ooverall coordination of planned projects and expected outputs for approved and ongoing national plans
Facilitation of timely review and submission of tranches/new stages/individual projects
Establishment of clearly defined roles for project supervision and implementation and implementation, where relevant
Objective 5: Promoting awareness raising and information exchange on relevant issues of the Montreal Protocol
Raising awareness based on assessment of information needs for the general public and for specific sectors to support implementation of Multilateral Fund projects
Consultation with stakeholders in development of a plan for communication and awareness
Organizing celebration of World Ozone Day
Objective 6: Regional cooperation and participation in Montreal Protocol meetings
Participation in the regional network meetings to provide continuity and institutional capacity building
Encouraging country participation at Open-ended Working Group / Meeting of the Parties.
Where possible, identify specific activities for cooperation with other countries in the network region on an issue of mutual interest
Objective 7: Integration of MLF gender policy in implementation of the Montreal Protocol
Encouraging consultations with stakeholders to mainstream gender into activities of Montreal Protocol activities
Integration of the MLF gender policy in project planning and implementation
Assessment of engagement from stakeholders and partners in mainstreaming gender into activities, where relevant

Part III.	Report on performance indicators and achievement of objectives

Please provide an assessment of the achievement of the objectives based on the performance indicators provided below and the activities reported in Part II. If all indicators are met the objective is achieved, if only some are met the objective is partially achieved, and if none are met the objective is not achieved. For partly achieved and not achieved objectives please provide an explanation and any corrective actions taken (where applicable) including any additional information which may be helpful in the assessment, under the remark’s column.

Report on performance indicators and achievement of objectives
Objective 1: Adoption/implementation of legislation and regulation to control and monitor Montreal Protocol controlled substances and equipment
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Import control measures are in place for all controlled substances (and relevant equipment/products if applicable) as per the amendments ratified by the country Zero reported consumption of phased out substances; and imports of controlled substances consistent with issued quotas and permits Cooperation framework/joint activities between NOU and customs are in place Ratification of all Montreal Protocol amendments	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 1:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 2: Accurate and timely data collection and reporting of consumption of Montreal Protocol controlled substances
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Timely submission of the CP data report by 1 May of each year Timely submission of Article 7 data report by September 30 of each year Regular coordination with customs to verify and cross-check import and export quotas and licenses issued for controlled substances (indicate frequency)	☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 2:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 3: Strengthening coordination between national agencies/stakeholders to support the objectives of the Montreal Protocol
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Inter-ministerial coordination mechanism is established to harmonize domestic policy decisions in line with national regulations/legislation on MP controlled substances Cooperation mechanisms in place between government and industry/RAC associations for coordinated efforts to implement HPMP/KIP and investment projects (where applicable)	☐ ☐	☐ ☐	☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 3:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 4: Supervision of timely implementation of HCFC phase out/HFC phase down activities and the resulting reduction in consumption of controlled substances
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Regular meetings with project staff of HPMP and NOU Tranches of HPMPs/KIPs and/or individual projects are submitted as per the approved schedule in the Agreement Project activities are implemented as planned Other funding requests or new stages developed/submitted within planned timeframe	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 4:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 5: Promoting awareness raising and information exchange on relevant issues of the Montreal Protocol
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Action plan for general awareness raising and outreach developed Information materials are prepared and disseminated as per action plan World Ozone Day activities celebrated annually Report on awareness raising activities implemented as per action plan, where feasible	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 5:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 6: Regional cooperation and participation in Montreal Protocol meetings
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
NOU/country participation in regional network meetings NOU/country participation in the OEWG or MOP The NOU supported the South-south cooperation activities in the region, when required	☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 6:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐
Objective 7: Integration of MLF gender mainstreaming policy in the implementation of the IS project
Indicator (where applicable)	Assessment of indicator	Any remarks if applicable
Yes	No	Ongoing
Report on the percentage of male and female participants on steering committee/project board meetings Terms of reference for hiring staff and consultants include gender competence as requirement and provisions that encourage underrepresented gender to apply Consultation with associations, networks, and/or stakeholders focusing specifically on mainstreaming gender throughout the project planning and implementation process Sex-aggregated data on participants/presenters is collected for all meetings/trainings/workshops	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐	☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Assessment of objective 7:	Achieved	Partly achieved	Not achieved
☐	☐	☐

Part IV.	Financial report

Please provide in the table below details on the project budget, disbursements, requested budget and government in kind contributions:

Item of expenditure	Budget for current phase (US $)	Disbursement (for current phase) (US $)	Estimated budget (for requested phase) (US $)	Government funding (in kind contribution) (US $)
Actual	Obligated	Current phase	Requested phase
Staff (including consultants)
Equipment
Operational cost (i.e., meetings, consultations, etc.)
Public awareness
Other
TOTAL

Part V.	Government evaluation and endorsement

Government evaluation of the current IS implementation phase

a)	Was the project timely implemented as approved?

☐ YES ☐ NO

b)	What was found to be particularly useful in meeting the IS objectives?

Please select all that apply:

☐ Government support at a high level was provided

☐ Support from the implementing agency was timely and efficient

☐ Agreement was signed on time

☐ Funds were disbursed on time

☐ All of the above

☐ Other (please specify below)

If other, please specify and describe below:

c)	Where problems encountered in the implementation?

☐ YES ☐ NO

If YES, please select all that apply:

☐ Political issues in the country

☐ No support from high level of government

☐ Delays in agreement signature

☐ Implementing agency not responsive to issues

☐ Other (please specify below)

If other, please specify and describe below:

d)	What experiences or actions should be implemented differently in the future IS project phases?

e)	What are the potential risks identified by the Government to achieve the objectives of the IS, and meeting compliance obligations under the Montreal Protocol?

f)	What actions have been identified to mitigate these potential risks?

Government endorsement

Action plan authorized by (name):
Signature of authorising authority:	(To be signed on hard copy)
Title:
Supervising Organization/Agency/Ministry:
Date:

Submission of action plan

Name of implementing agency:
Name of Project Officer:
Signature of Project Officer:
Date:
Implementing agency’s risk assessment for achieving the project objectives including compliance obligations, and actions for mitigating the potential risks, identify challenges faced and lessons learnt, and other comments

Part VI.	Executive summary

Please provide a summary below of the information required in no more than one paragraph each. These paragraphs will be used in documents for the Executive Committee Meeting.

Terminal report

Plan of action

Sustainability and risk assessment

Annex III

WORKING TEXT ON AGENDA ITEM 5: REVIEW OF INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING PROJECTS, INCLUDING FUNDING LEVELS

[The Executive Committee decided:

[To establish the level of funding for IS support taking into account the activities that Article 5 countries would need to undertake to initiate activities to implement the Kigali Amendment and meet the first control measures for phasing down HFCs during the period 2020-2030, while at the same time continuing implementation of HCFC phase-out management plans;] [+60 per cent]

To extend the duration of IS renewal implementation phases from the current two years to three years for IS renewal proposals submitted from the [90th meeting] onwards; and

[To request the Secretariat to submit a further review of IS projects including funding levels no later than the second meeting in [2025] [2029 taking into account the remaining HCFC obligations].]]

UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/91/1.

143 countries have received support for IS projects.

This document was prepared in responsee to decision 74/51(d)(ii), inter alia, to review IS including funding levels, at the first Executive Committee meeting in 2020.

Annex I of document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/89/16.

Held in Montreal in September 2022.

Submitted to from the 82nd to the 86th meetings, covering most phases of IS renewals for Article 5 countries.

Examples include adoption of the gender mainstreaming policy at the 84th meeting, reporting on project management units (PMUs) at the 83rd meeting in the context of administrative support cost discussions.

Paragraphs 229 to 230 of UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/83/48.

Decision 83/61(b).

At its 84th meeting, the Executive Committee inter alia approved the operational policy on gender mainstreaming for Multilateral Fund-supported projects and requested bilateral and implementing agencies to apply the operational policy on gender mainstreaming throughout the project cycle (decision 84/92(b)).

UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/90/37.

Paragraphs 165-170, Document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/90/40.

UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/88/2/Add.2 and UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/89/2/Add1.

Discussion on this issue will continue at the 91st meeting in line with decision 89/3(c): To defer consideration of the review of institutional strengthening projects, including funding levels, to the 91st meeting on the basis of the working text contained in Annex I of the report of the 89th Meeting (Part II).

Since its 7th meeting, the Executive Committee has approved US $151,925,706, plus agency support costs of US $8,151,770 for IS projects, equivalent to 4.21 per cent of the total funding approved under the Multilateral Fund for projects and activities.

“SMART” indicators stand for: Specific; Measurable; Achievable; Relevant; Timely.

Incomplete indicators contain neither measurable nor time-bound goals.

Decision 77/8(i)): That no more than two institutional strengthening projects should be ongoing at the same time.

Decision 32/17(b)

Required information from LVC countries.