Getting GCF Accreditation

Background:

Between the 8th and the 10th of October, 2018, the GCF Readines Programme convened experienced practitioners (national coordinators and/or technical experts), and Readiness delivery partners.  The purpose of the workshop was to reinforce the iterative knowledge management process of implementing GCF readiness activities in countries with different socio-economic, political, geographic, and climatic contexts. Readiness support globally is reaching maturity and it was therefore timely to take stock of results and challenges to-date and feed these into new approaches for accessing GCF funds. The workshop served to take stock of the key lessons and challenges learned during the implementation of GCF Readiness initiatives in different countries. Participants presented how the support was applied, which tools were used, and the results and lessons over the course of interactive sessions.
 
 

Accreditation of National Institutions to GCF: Jesica Andrews and Dima Reda (Accreditation case studies from Fiji and Nepal). 

Ms. Reda and Ms. Andrews presented their findings and similarities and contrasts of accreditation processes for both Fiji and Nepal.

Accreditation of national entities was envisioned as one way to empower countries to access GCF funds directly without intervention of international accredited institutions. Even though the accreditation process has been long and costly for the national entities, it has helped them improving their capacities, so that they could comply with the international standards requested. 

Some of the lessons learned from direct access accreditation support are:

  • It is more beneficial to conduct a transparent selection process, like it was done in Nepal, where national entities submitted expressions of interest to be accredited instead of being simply appointed by the government. This allows entities to engage more proactively and willingly in the process.
  • Top management from DAE candidate institutions should understand that they are accessing these funds on behalf of their countries for specific projects. These are not funds for their regular operations.  
  • Entities should work closely with NDAs and ensure that they embark in projects that are in line with country priorities
  • The accreditation process is worth it only if the accredited entity intends to implement not one project, but several projects.

 

Panel Discussion: Pragyajan Rai, Nepal National Coordinator, Vinaisi Dilikuwai, Fiji, Acting National Coordinator, Nancy Soi, Kenya UN Environment, Theresa Espino-Yap,Philippines National Coordinator

The panel discussed the question of advantages of being an accredited entity and whether these entities would be able to successfully develop projects and obtain required co-financing.

The entities selected in both countries, Fiji and Nepal, are strong entities, capable of fulfilling the standards required by GCF. However, the accreditation process takes time and the entities also require training on how to develop project proposals. In addition, they need to engage stakeholders and obtain support for co-financing. Nonetheless, these entities have increased their capacities throughout the accreditation process, and it is expected that once they are accredited and gain experience in project development, this process will prove to be transformative for the countries.