(Sida) Mid-term Review of the MRV Project in Burkina Faso (January 2020-August 2021)

At a Glance

Publication Date October 2021
Format pdf
Country Burkina Faso

The strategic partnership with the Embassy of Sweden has made funds available to GGGI to implement the project entitled “Development of a measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) system in Burkina Faso”. The project is designed to build institutional capacity at the national and regional levels to help the country meet the requirements of the Paris Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework and monitor progress towards achieving the NDCs. The mid-term review aims to assess the progress of the MRV project implementation towards the achievement of the objectives set from January 2020 to August 2021 and to identify lessons and opportunities to further improve the delivery and impact of GGGI interventions.

Key evaluation questions

  • Relevance
    • Did the project address key government needs and priorities as originally identified in the project document?
    • How have Sida’s five perspectives ((i) the perspectives of the poor, (ii) the rights perspective, (iii) an environmental and climate perspective, (iv) a gender perspective and (v) a conflict perspective) been taken into account?
    • How does the project align with the new strategy 2018-2022 developed by Sweden, and developments in the bilateral relationship with Burkina Faso?
    • Have there been any significant changes in these priorities that the program should adapt to, now or in the future?
    • To what extent will the MRV system under construction be useful for climate adaptation projects and for obtaining climate/carbon financing?
  • Coherence
    • How well are the arrangements to support coordination and decision making between GGGI, Sweden/SIDA and the Government of Burkina Faso working?
    • How effectively does GGGI coordinate project activities with other development partners supporting climate action in Burkina Faso?
  • Effectiveness
    • Have the project results been delivered as planned? Or, if not yet due, are they on track to be delivered as planned?
    • What difference has the project made (or is likely to make) in achieving these outcomes? How could the outcomes be strengthened in the future?
    • Are the results likely to lead to subsequent impacts, whether intended (according to the project’s logical framework) or unintended, positive or negative?
    • Was the original theory of change (including vertical logic) and logical framework (including indicators, core values and targets) well defined? Does the theory of change need to be updated?
    • Were participatory processes used as intended in the project document?
  • Efficiency
    • Has GGGI undertaken program planning, risk management, delivery, monitoring and reporting in a manner that adequately contributes to the achievement of the proposed outcomes?
    • Has GGGI planned and managed human and financial resources to ensure that the program is delivered on time and within budget in accordance with the original grant agreement?
    • Have the measures to address the cross-cutting safeguard, anticorruption, fraud and audit issues described in the original proposal been implemented appropriately?
    • Has the capacity of relevant government entities been appropriately strengthened to a sufficient degree?
    • How did the COVID19 pandemic affect the project?
  • Sustainability
    • Have the measures to ensure sustainability of results and transformational impact, as described in the original design, been implemented appropriately?
    • Are the measures to ensure sustainability of results and transformational impact effective?
    • How could measures to ensure the sustainability of results and transformational impact be improved?


  • For GGGI
    • Develop an explicit exit strategy that addresses the institutional anchoring of the project and the delegation of tasks.
    • Update the project risk management plan on an annual basis or at least once after the mid-term evaluation.
    • To have a consultation with the key partners concerning the selection of the consultants in order to agree on the method of work and especially the respect of the deadlines.
    • Establish a mechanism for monitoring the training of actors within the various partner institutions responsible for providing activity data. For a good monitoring of the result of the project, it is important to know periodically how the actors adapt the training received.
    • Hold a refreshment workshop at least one year before the end of the project.
  • For Partners
    • Integrate MRV information into future work plans and budgets.
    • Contribute to strengthening the institutional framework of the MRV system to facilitate the collection and analysis of data from the various sectors concerned.
    • Establish a permanent consultation framework to be coordinated by the SP/CNDD.
  • Cross-cutting
    • Continue the gender mainstreaming effort that is already underway with more initiatives for an enabling environment for women’s participation.
    • Take stock of its current funding portfolio (GGGI) for synergy between donors, Sida, and its partners.

Management response

The evaluation report may also be downloaded in French here