Consideration of accreditation proposals

The document details the progress of the GCF accreditation process, reporting that 88 entities have been decided for accreditation, with 52 having fully completed the process via effective Accreditation Master Agreements (AMAs). It outlines the pipeline of 112 submitted applications and the support provided to direct access entities, including USD 11.68 million committed through 61 grants. The report specifically recommends the accreditation of seven new applicants (APL090 to APL096) with varying fiduciary and environmental and social (E&S) risk categories, most of whom are subject to specific conditions to close institutional gaps. Additionally, it tracks the status of existing accredited entities in addressing their accreditation conditions and proposes extending the prioritization of entities to the end of the twenty-fifth Board meeting.

• As of 30 September 2019, the GCF Board has decided to accredit 88 entities, of which 52 have fully completed the process with a signed and effective accreditation master agreement (AMA).
• The accreditation pipeline consists of 112 submitted applications, with 14 under Stage II (Step 1) review and 73 under Stage I. Another 109 entities have access to the online accreditation system but have not yet submitted applications.
• The GCF has committed USD 11.68 million across 61 grants and technical assistance to strengthen applicant and accredited direct access entities.
• The average time to accredit the 88 entities, from opening an online account to Board approval, was 19.1 months, with an average review and response timeframe of 17.5 months.
• The Board is recommended to approve the accreditation of seven new applicants: APL090 (Cambodia), APL091 (Tanzania), APL092 (Chile), APL093 (India), APL094 (India), APL095 (Italy), and APL096 (Australia).
• The new accreditation recommendations include a range of risk categories: one applicant for minimal to no risk (category C/I-3), four for medium risk (category B/I-2), and two for high risk (category A/I-1).
• The GCF is implementing a prioritization strategy to ensure diversity and coverage, focusing on national direct access entities from countries without an accredited entity, private sector entities in developing countries, and those responding to GCF requests for proposals.
• The Secretariat is utilizing a new Entity Work Programme (EWP) template to align project ideas with country priorities and climate ambitions; as of 30 September 2019, 63 EWPs have been received.
• The GCF is piloting a six-month on-boarding plan for recently accredited entities to accelerate AMA negotiations, EWP development, and the submission of funding proposals.
• The GCF's monitoring and accountability framework (MAF) requires accredited entities to perform annual self-assessments and a midterm review in their third year of accreditation.

APA

Green Climate Fund (2019). Consideration of accreditation proposals. https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b24-07-rev01.pdf

Chicago

Green Climate Fund. Consideration of accreditation proposals. 2019. https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b24-07-rev01.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Green Climate Fund |title=Consideration of accreditation proposals |date=5 November 2019 |url=https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b24-07-rev01.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{greenclimatefund2019consideration, author = {{Green Climate Fund}}, title = {{Consideration of accreditation proposals}}, institution = {Green Climate Fund}, year = {2019}, month = nov, url = {https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/document/gcf-b24-07-rev01.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }