Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the GCF's accreditation process, which is divided into three stages: no-objection and readiness, accreditation review and decision, and final arrangements. It defines the fiduciary standards (basic and specific) and environmental and social safeguards (ESS) that applicants must meet. The framework distinguishes between 'direct access' for national/regional entities and 'international access' for global organizations. It also details the roles of the GCF Board, Secretariat, Accreditation Committee, and Accreditation Panel in managing the process.

The document is a compilation of inputs regarding the GCF's accreditation process. Key themes include the need to prioritize National Implementing Entities (NIEs) over international ones to ensure country ownership, the demand for a more 'fit-for-purpose' approach for smaller or private sector entities, and proposals to monitor the overall carbon footprints of accredited entities to ensure they align with the Paris Agreement. Stakeholders highlight systemic delays in the accreditation pipeline and suggest streamlining processes through third-party verification and multi-language support.

The Accreditation Panel (AP) recommends the accreditation of Applicant 015 (APL015) for 'Large' project sizes and 'High risk' (Category A/I-1) environmental and social risk categories. The applicant, a public international financial institution operating in over 90 developing countries, was assessed via a fast-track process as an EU DEVCO entity. The AP found that APL015 fully meets the Fund's basic and specialized fiduciary standards, including project management, grant award mechanisms, and on-lending/blending. It also complies with interim environmental and social safeguards (ESS) and gender policies, although it was advised to finalize its formal stakeholder complaints mechanism.

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.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel (AP) recommends the accreditation of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (APL038) for international access under a fast-track process. GIZ is recommended for a 'medium' project size limit (up to USD 250 million), medium environmental and social risk (Category B/I-2), and specific fiduciary functions including project management and grant award mechanisms. The recommendation is conditional upon GIZ submitting an operational manual detailing its fiduciary due diligence process, specifically regarding 'know your customer' and anti-money laundering (AML) standards. The assessment highlights GIZ's global presence in over 130 countries and its track record of managing approximately 1,300 projects as of December 2014, with 40% being climate-related.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) for accreditation as a national direct access entity. SANBI is approved for 'small' project sizes, medium environmental and social risk (Category B/I-2), and specific fiduciary functions, including project management and grant award mechanisms. While the panel found SANBI's grant award mechanisms to be 'mature and well-established', it noted a lack of monitoring reports under a newly established process manual. Consequently, accreditation is conditional upon SANBI submitting periodic monitoring reports for two Adaptation Fund (AF) projects: 'Building resilience in the Greater uMngeni Catchment' and 'Taking adaptation to the ground: a small grants facility for enabling local level responses to climate change in South Africa'.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of the World Wildlife Fund, Inc. (WWF) under a fast-track process. The assessment confirms that WWF meets the GCF's basic and specialized fiduciary standards, environmental and social safeguards for medium-risk projects, and gender policy requirements. WWF is recommended for international access to manage projects of 'medium' size (up to USD 250 million) with a maximum environmental and social risk category of 'medium risk' (Category B/I-2).

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is reviewing its accreditation framework to address imbalances in its portfolio of accredited entities (AEs) and the time-consuming nature of the current process. A consultant's review found that while standards are appropriate, the portfolio is under-representative of direct access and private sector entities. Proposed improvements include streamlining the technical review process by using external consultants and a roster of firms, with an estimated 2019 budget of USD 700,000 for Stage II reviews. Additionally, the GCF proposes a Project-Specific Assessment Approach (PSAA) as a complementary modality to allow entities to be assessed for a single project rather than undergoing full institutional accreditation. The PSAA targets direct access entities and projects in the Micro to Small categories, with a proposed 2019 budget of USD 600,000 for its implementation.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of IL&FS Environmental Infrastructure and Services Limited (IEISL), a private sector entity in India, for 'small' projects with a 'medium risk' environmental and social category. While IEISL demonstrated strong capabilities in project management, environmental and social safeguards, and gender policy, the assessment identified gaps in its basic fiduciary standards, specifically regarding procurement dispute resolution, conflict of interest guidance, and reliance on related-party funding. Accreditation is recommended subject to several conditions, including the recruitment of a gender expert and the update of its prohibited practices policies.

The Green Climate Fund's Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of Yes Bank Limited, a private sector financial institution in India, for medium-sized projects with a maximum environmental and social risk category of B/I-2. While the bank fully meets basic fiduciary and E&S standards, it partially meets specialized fiduciary standards for project management, grant awards, and on-lending due to a lack of demonstrated implementation of its Information Disclosure Policy. It also partially meets gender policy requirements due to limited in-house capacity for gender risk assessment. Accreditation is recommended subject to conditions regarding gender capacity building and the public disclosure of GCF project progress and results.

The Green Climate Fund's Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of La Banque Agricole (LBA) in Senegal for small-scale projects with a medium environmental and social risk category (I-2). While LBA demonstrates strong basic fiduciary standards and a robust environmental and social management system, the recommendation is subject to six conditions to be met before the first funding proposal. These conditions include establishing procedures to oversee the procurement and loan portfolios of executing entities, demonstrating the application of updated environmental and social tools, and strengthening gender mainstreaming capacity through the appointment of a focal point and the creation of a gender committee.

The Accreditation Panel (AP) recommends upgrading Pegasus Capital Advisors, L.P. (PCA) to the 'large' project size category. The assessment confirms that PCA's governance, fiduciary standards, and track record in managing private equity funds and portfolio investments meet GCF requirements for projects with total projected costs exceeding US$ 250 million.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of the National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC) in Nepal for 'micro' sized projects with 'minimal to no risk' (Category C) environmental and social risk. While the NTNC's policies and capacities generally meet GCF standards, the assessment identified gaps in its track record regarding the implementation of recently approved fiduciary and environmental and social management systems. Consequently, accreditation is recommended subject to several conditions, including the establishment of an independent Complaints Committee and the provision of evidence demonstrating the application of its financial, risk management, and monitoring frameworks over subsequent years.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of the Infrastructure Development Bank of Zimbabwe (IDBZ) as a national direct access entity for 'small' projects (above US$ 10 million up to US$ 50 million) with a medium environmental and social risk category (B/I-2). While the IDBZ demonstrated strong alignment with GCF's gender policy and environmental and social standards, the assessment identified several fiduciary gaps. These include a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of its internal audit function, the operational status of its Investigations, Integrity & Loss Control Division, and the public disclosure of procurement and project evaluation data. Accreditation is recommended subject to specific conditions to be met before and after the first funding proposal and disbursement.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Accreditation Panel recommends the accreditation of the Vietnam Development Bank (VDB) as a national direct access entity. VDB is approved for 'small' projects (up to US$ 50 million), medium environmental and social risk (Category B/I-2), and various fiduciary functions including on-lending and grant awards. While VDB's institutional policies and capacities generally meet GCF standards, the assessment identified gaps in its track record regarding the public disclosure of monitoring reports, grant results, and environmental and social (E&S) complaints. Consequently, accreditation is subject to specific conditions, including the formal adoption of a disclosure policy and the provision of gender assessments and E&S communication systems with its first funding proposal.

The Accreditation Panel recommends that the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) be upgraded to 'large' project size and 'high risk' (Category A/I-1) environmental and social risk categories. The assessment found that IFAD's fiduciary standards, project management capacities, and environmental and social safeguards fully meet GCF requirements for these expanded parameters.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) has recommended the re-accreditation of Namibia's Environmental Investment Fund (EIF) for a second term, maintaining its status as a national direct access entity for 'micro' projects (up to USD 10 million). While the EIF demonstrates strong alignment with GCF's climate mandates and robust environmental and social safeguards, the assessment identified significant gaps in financial reporting, project monitoring, and internal audit track records. The recommendation for re-accreditation is subject to several conditions, including updating the Gender Equality Charter and improving the monitoring of grant awards to executing entities.

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) assessed the Centre de Suivi Ecologique (CSE) for re-accreditation. While the GCF recommends re-accreditation for a second term, it did not grant the requested upgrade to 'small' project size or 'medium risk' (category B) status, maintaining the entity's 'micro' size and 'minimal to no risk' (category C) status. The assessment found that CSE aligns with GCF's strategic goals, particularly in climate change adaptation in Senegal, but identified gaps in its internal audit functions, risk management, and grievance redress mechanisms. Re-accreditation is subject to several conditions, including the operationalization of an independent internal audit function and the appointment of an independent observer for its grievance mechanism.

The GCF's Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Policy implements a risk-based approach to protect the fund's resources and reputation. It mandates counterparty due diligence, prohibits relationships with non-cooperative or sanctioned entities, and assigns oversight to the Independent Integrity Unit. The policy aligns with Financial Action Task Force (FATF) recommendations and requires the retention of due diligence records for at least five years.

The GCF's initial accreditation framework integrates fiduciary standards and environmental and social safeguards (SAS) into a three-stage process: no-objection and readiness, accreditation review and decision, and final arrangements. It distinguishes between basic fiduciary criteria (administrative and financial) and specialized criteria (project management, grant-making, and lending). Until its own SAS are developed, the GCF adopts the International Finance Corporation's (IFC) Performance Standards, applying a risk-based approach to categorize projects (Categories A, B, and C) and intermediaries (Levels I1, I2, and I3). The process is overseen by the GCF Board, supported by an Accreditation Committee, an independent Accreditation Panel, and the Secretariat.