Midterm Review of WWF GEF Project in Eastern Indonesia Assessment Report

The midterm review finds that while the project's design remains relevant, its overall effectiveness is low, with few measurable outcomes achieved relative to the ~70 million USD investment. Key impediments include significant delays in initiation, inadequate organizational capacity within the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF), and a lack of alignment between the project's Theory of Change and implemented activities. The report highlights a critical need to shift resources toward community-level interventions (Component B), improve monitoring and evaluation systems to track behavior change, and strengthen the Project Steering Committee to better mobilize co-financing and ensure long-term sustainability.

• The project's overall effectiveness is rated as low, with achievements primarily at the output level and failing to demonstrate measurable impact on environmental targets or socio-economic benefits for beneficiaries.
• The project's financial efficiency is poor, characterized by a very low spending rate where a disproportionate amount of the budget was spent on travel and meetings rather than staff salaries and technical expertise.
• The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system is inadequate for adaptive management, as it lacks indicators for the project's highest-level targets and focuses on activity completion rather than behavior change.
• The project suffered from significant early delays, including a three-year gap between CEO endorsement in 2017 and the signing of the Grant Agreement in late 2019.
• The project's sustainability is considered low due to financial risks, lack of a clear scaling model, and a failure to follow up on beneficiary feedback.
• Gender mainstreaming efforts have been limited to ensuring balanced participation in activities, failing to link women's inclusion to the project's core objective of reducing fishing pressure.
• The Blue Abadi Fund (BAF) under Component C has achieved full capitalization of its original USD 30 million estimate, but its impact on livelihoods remains limited due to the low capacity of local grantees.
• There are significant concerns regarding the organizational capacity of the Project Management Unit (PMU), with many staff lacking the necessary background or competencies for their roles.
• The project's internal coherence is low, as several activities and outputs are inconsistent with the overall goal and intended scale of impact.
• The project's risk classification remains 'medium,' as no new high-risk socio-political contexts have emerged since the design phase.

APA

Soede, L. P. (2024). Midterm Review of WWF GEF Project in Eastern Indonesia Assessment Report. WWF International. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/1081/1ghrmeygrs_PNCI_MTR_Final_Report_V6.pdf

Chicago

Soede, Lida Pet. Midterm Review of WWF GEF Project in Eastern Indonesia Assessment Report. WWF International, 2024. https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/1081/1ghrmeygrs_PNCI_MTR_Final_Report_V6.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Soede |first1=Lida Pet |title=Midterm Review of WWF GEF Project in Eastern Indonesia Assessment Report |publisher=WWF International |date=31 January 2024 |url=https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/1081/1ghrmeygrs_PNCI_MTR_Final_Report_V6.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{soede2024midterm, author = {Soede, Lida Pet}, title = {{Midterm Review of WWF GEF Project in Eastern Indonesia Assessment Report}}, institution = {WWF International}, year = {2024}, month = jan, url = {https://www.worldwildlife.org/documents/1081/1ghrmeygrs_PNCI_MTR_Final_Report_V6.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }