Annex VI: Accreditation assessment of Applicant 036 (APL036)

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) for accreditation as a regional entity for 'small' projects (up to USD 50 million) with a high environmental and social risk category (Category A/I-1). The CDB demonstrated strong fiduciary standards, a track record of mobilizing approximately USD 200 million for climate action, and a robust gender equality policy. However, accreditation is conditional upon the CDB establishing a public system for reporting the progress of grant-funded projects and finalizing a permanent external communications mechanism for environmental and social complaints.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) is recommended for accreditation as a regional entity with a 'small' project size limit, defined as costs above USD 10 million and up to USD 50 million per individual project or activity.
  • The CDB has a demonstrated history of climate action, having mobilized an estimated USD 200 million in concessional resources and technical assistance for adaptation and mitigation.
  • The CDB is approved for a high-risk environmental and social (E&S) category (Category A/Intermediation 1), meaning it can handle activities with potential significant adverse impacts that are diverse, irreversible, or unprecedented.
  • The Accreditation Panel identified a gap in the CDB's grant award mechanisms: it lacks a public system to provide information on the periodic progress of individual projects and programmes to ensure transparency in fund use.
  • The CDB's E&S safeguards are considered partially met because it currently relies on an interim online mechanism for project-specific complaints and must establish a permanent external communications mechanism.
  • The CDB's gender policy, approved in 2008, and its capacity for gender mainstreaming—including the use of gender checklists and marker tools—were found to be consistent with GCF requirements.

Cite the original document

APA
Green Climate Fund (n.d.). Annex VI: Accreditation assessment of Applicant 036 (APL036). https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/decision/b14/decision-b14-10-b14-a6.pdf
Chicago
Green Climate Fund. Annex VI: Accreditation assessment of Applicant 036 (APL036). n.d. https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/decision/b14/decision-b14-10-b14-a6.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Green Climate Fund |title=Annex VI: Accreditation assessment of Applicant 036 (APL036) |url=https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/decision/b14/decision-b14-10-b14-a6.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{greenclimatefundndannex, author = {{Green Climate Fund}}, title = {{Annex VI: Accreditation assessment of Applicant 036 (APL036)}}, institution = {Green Climate Fund}, url = {https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/decision/b14/decision-b14-10-b14-a6.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated