Independent Selection Process

To allocate funds for tsunami rehabilitation, GEF/ SGP followed its standard procedure for grant funding. Advertisements in Sinhala, Tamil and English were placed in five local newspapers, inviting NGOs and others interested in working in tsunami-affected areas to submit proposals.

At a meeting conducted at the Ceylon Continental Hotel in Colombo on September 16th 2005, GEF/ SGP formally launched the tsunami assistance programme with the participation of government agencies, embassy staff and UNDP. The audience consisted primarily of NGOs, media and other relevant agencies. Many of the NGOs submitted proposals in due course.

GEF/ SGP ensures transparency in selection of grantees. The National Steering Committee (NSC) scrutinizes all requests and its members also visit the proposed project sites. The NSC is a pivotal body in UNDP’s programmes. This twelve-member committee consists of officers from the Ministry of Environment, NGOs, academicians, scientific advisors and the private sector. Collectively, the NSC is the ultimate deciding authority.

The SSGF was different in that funding was available for small infrastructure development or livelihood development of the worst affected persons or groups. It received proposals like roofing for a small building and flooring for a classroom. That was all that certain communities needed for the moment but these were very important to them. In order to cope with the plethora of proposals that were generated, the NSC used the marking system used in approving grants for the GEF/ SGP but adapting it to the SSGF requirements.

When one considers that the funds had to be released in three tranches, the exercise threatened to become cumbersome administratively. To avoid that eventuality, GEF clustered smaller projects, designating one NGO to be responsible for fund disbursement according to schedule and reporting procedures. A mechanism was found whereby Memoranda of Understanding were signed within each cluster for this.

In Phase I, the NSC selected/ approved a list of 32 NGOs to undertake various projects on livelihood and small infrastructure. As stated earlier, NGOs were banded together based on similarity of work and geographical proximity to form thirteen clusters. In each cluster, one NGO was appointed as the Lead NGO. GEF/ SGP believed that this clustering would a result in a situation of mutual responsibility, wherein the NGOs could also monitor each other’s work.

In Phase II however, the clustering concept was put aside and funding allotted to projects implemented by seventeen individual NGOs.