Guidelines for Applying to the
United Nations Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) Part I
October 2009
Download Application Guidelines
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- Accessing the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF)
- The Immediate Response Facility (IRF)
- The Peacebuilding and Recovery Facility (PRF)
- Scope of the PRF
- Application Process
- Determining Country Eligibility for the PRF
- Diagram 3 – PRF Country Eligibility
- The Priority Plan
- Diagram 4 – PRF Priority Plan Approval
- Establishing the Joint Steering Committee (JSC)
- Local Project Review and Approval Process
- Diagram 5 – PRF Project Approval
- Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting
- Diagram 6 – PRF Implementation
Introduction
This document provides guidance and information to potential applicants and implementers of the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) and reflects the accumulated experience of the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) with the PBF to date. The guidelines are informed by comments and suggestions from key partners including the UN system, donors and the PBF Advisory Group. As PBSO gains further experience, especially with some of the new features of the application guidelines, modifications and/or updates will be incorporated periodically.
The PBF is a flexible peacebuilding tool that supports the UN’s broader peacebuilding objectives in countries at risk of relapsing into conflict. It is intended to be a catalytic fund driven by existing planning, coordination and monitoring mechanisms to support the peacebuilding strategies of incountry UN leadership. The PBF relies on the analytical, programming and implementation capacities of the UN departments, Funds, Programmes and Specialized Agencies to deliver peacebuilding results within their mandates. The PBF thus operates within a much broader UN peacebuilding effort.
The PBSO is responsible for the overall management of the PBF; the UNDP Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) Office is the Fund’s Administrative Agent. These guidelines are intended to provide users with the minimum requirements for the PBF, in line with the PBF Terms of Reference (A/63/818) and the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the UNDP/MDTF Office and Recipient Organizations. The guidelines are designed to be web-based for access through the PBF website (www.unpbf.org). In response to user request, much of the detailed information requirements for review and approval are included in ‘templates and references’ which form Part II of the Guidelines.
Gratitude is extended to all those that have helped shape these guidelines. It is hoped that the partnership that led to the production of these guidelines will continue and help ensure an increasingly focused application of the PBF – targeting prioritized interventions that truly strengthen national capacities at all levels and lay the foundations for sustainable peace and development.
Accessing the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF)
What is the PBF?
The PBF is a Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) of the Secretary-General (SG), designed as a rapid and flexible mechanism for addressing critical peacebuilding gaps in the immediate needs of countries emerging from, or at risk of relapsing into, violent conflict. The Fund focuses on interventions that demonstrate direct and immediate relevance to peacebuilding, and that have a catalyzing impact including on the sustained support and engagement of other key stakeholders.
The scope of the Fund, as set out in its Terms of Reference, covers four key areas of intervention:
- Activities designed to respond to imminent threats to the peace process, support for the implementation of peace agreements and political dialogue;
- Activities undertaken to build and/or strengthen national capacities to promote coexistence and peaceful resolution of conflict and to carry out peacebuilding activities;
- Activities undertaken in support of efforts to revitalise the economy and generate immediate peace dividends for the population at large;
- Establishment or re-establishment of essential administrative services and related human and technical capacities
For countries on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) the Fund is informed by the work undertaken by the PBC.
Who can apply?
All proposals for funding from the PBF must be submitted through the office of the Senior UN Representative in-country. All PBF funding is disbursed to Recipient UN Organizations 1 NGOs and CBOs/CSOs cannot access the Fund directly, however they may implement projects through partnership arrangements with eligible agencies and organizations.
How to apply?
The PBF has two funding windows: the Immediate Response Facility (IRF) provides rapid funding for immediate peacebuilding and recovery needs; the Peacebuilding and Recovery Facility (PRF) is driven by national ownership and stakeholder engagement in the management of PBF resources at the country level. Application for both facilities should be based on a joint prioritization of critical peacebuilding needs identified by government and the UN system in-country. The PRF embodies the fundamental concepts of peacebuilding and is the traditional entry point to PBF resources. The IRF was created for those situations that call for an immediate response. Senior UN Representatives in country are encouraged to consult with the PBSO prior to applying for the PBF.
Summary of the key elements of the PBF facilities
| IRF | PRF |
|---|---|
To address urgent peacebuilding needs due to:
|
Typically applied within five (5) years from end of conflict to engage national partners and support:
|
| Driven by response to immediate needs. To be prepared in cooperation with national authorities entities and informed by UN-system wide consultation. | Driven by UN / Government engagement and partnership with key stakeholders. Priority Plan must be submitted with government and UN system-wide consultation and consensus on prioritization. |
| Project-based funding instrument: Single project or a portfolio of predefined projects approved by PBSO, under cover of a “Submission Note”. | Programme-based funding mechanism: a set of objectives (planned outcomes) and a funding envelope approved by PBSO with a country-level Priority Plan. |
| One-step approval process. | Two-stage approval process – project approval delegated to the country-level Joint Steering Committee |
| Short duration projects (12 months). | Medium duration projects 18 months within a 24 – 36 month priority plan. |
| Quarterly project brief updates with full annual reporting at project level. | Quarterly project brief updates with full annual reporting at project and priority plan level. |
For detailed information on submission requirements and review and approval criteria at various stages of please refer to Part II of the Guidelines or web-based links ‘Templates and References’
The Immediate Response Facility (IRF)
Scope of the IRF
The IRF is the project-based financing mechanism of the PBF that was created to address critical peacebuilding needs in the immediate aftermath of conflict or as a result of a dramatic change in the country situation. IRF funding is typically part of a larger package of UN support in such situations, and is based on a strategic framework plan2 that serves as the basis for the broader UN intervention. Allocations from the fund are needs-based, relying on existing strategic frameworks, underpinned by a conflict analysis, that explicitly address peacebuilding goals. All PBF financing is disbursed through the Fund’s Administrative Agent (the MDTF Office) to a Recipient UN Organization which works with a national or locally-based implementing partner to implement approved projects3. Project implementation is guided by the rules, regulations, and policies of the Recipient UN Organization.
For countries on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), the Commission may offer strategic guidance on immediate and/or critical peacebuilding needs in the country concerned.
Proposals under the IRF may take the form of:
- Portfolio of projects – drawn from a strategic framework that explicitly addresses peacebuilding needs, typically in the immediate aftermath of conflict. Funding from the IRF for such a portfolio is limited to USD 10 million or 10% of the total funding requested in the planning framework. Individual projects should not exceed 12 months in duration.
- Stand-alone projects – responding to a critical and immediate peacebuilding need or opportunity. Funding from the IRF for such projects is limited to a maximum of USD 3 million. Projects should be completed within 12 months of the operational start-up date
Country Eligibility for the IRF
Countries eligible for funding from the IRF include those emerging from conflict or at risk of (re)lapsing into conflict, as well as those that are on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The Secretary General formally declares eligibility for the first two categories based on a recommendation from PBSO, while the PBC makes the recommendation for countries on its agenda. For single, one-off projects with a maximum value of $US 3,000,000, the ASG for Peacebuilding may determine country eligibility. Country eligibility for the IRF is assessed in the application process (see below).
Application Process for Financing under the IRF
See: IRF – Submission Note Template; PBF — Project Document Template; PBF — Results Framework
Applications must include specific projects or project proposals as PBSO review and approval under this financing mechanism is project-based, i.e. PBSO is a signatory to the project document.
Funding under the IRF presumes the existence of a fundable action plan – i.e. a plan for which project proposals have been elaborated. Following initial discussions between the Senior UN Representative and the PBSO, the process is formally activated by a request from the Senior UN Representative using the ‘portfolio submission template’, providing the context for the request (including justification for country eligibility), as well as detailed project(s) proposals. Project documents are prepared by Recipient UN Organizations together with their
implementing partners.
[Note: The application process for the portfolio of projects and the stand-alone projects is identical. However, for the stand-alone (or ‘one-off”) projects responding to sudden shocks, a pre-existing strategic framework may not be relevant. The Submission Note should briefly summarize the justification for prioritizing the proposed intervention.]
Approval Process and Review Criteria
For multiple projects submitted as a portfolio, PBSO makes a recommendation to the Secretary-General for country eligibility based on the information contained in the Portfolio Submission. In reviewing country eligibility, PBSO refers to renowned international publications and databases that assess country fragility, including those produced by the United Nations. For single projects, the ASG for peacebuilding Support determines country eligibility.
Assuming country eligibility is obtained, PBSO reviews the submission against the following criteria at both the project and portfolio level including:
- (Critical Gap) The proposal must identify the funding gap it will fill (and/or activities that others cannot fund), and describe the strategic framework from which it is derived, including the process that led to the broader framework and its current implementation status);
- (Strategic) Projects must be of direct and immediate relevance to peacebuilding and clearly link up to the PBF Priorities and Outcomes (see PBF Results Framework);
- (Catalytic Impact) The project must demonstrate its potential catalytic effect on the engagement of other stakeholders in the peacebuilding process. In addition, it must identify how its achievements will be sustained or built upon once the project is completed. The project must include a plan for securing financial commitments for the next phase of activities and/or an exit strategy;
- (Capacity) The Recipient UN Organizations and implementing partners 4 must have a demonstrated capacity to implement the projects in the timeframe proposed (eg. based on past delivery rates). Where capacity is lacking, the proposal must describe the measures that will be taken to redress this gap;
- (M&E) Each project must identify key indicators against which its achievements toward the PBF Priority Areas/Outcomes may be measured. Where such data is lacking, the proposal must describe the measures that will be taken to redress this gap.
- (Risk) The proposal must include a summary analysis of the risks affecting the implementation of the larger action plan, as well as the projects included in the submission.
- (Technical Feasibility) The project(s) must be technically sound, with project outcomes that are feasible given the project budget and duration.
The submission is reviewed by PBSO in consultation with existing technical committees / capacities (eg IMTF, ITF, etc), and external expertise, if required. Based on that analysis, PBSO may approve the project(s) in consultation with the Senior Peacebuilding Group 5 or their delegated body. Project documents are prepared and signed by the Recipient UN Organizations and national authorities, and forwarded to PBSO under cover of a “Submission Note” prepared by the Senior UN Representative in country. Once approved and signed by PBSO, the project documents are submitted to the MDTF Office (the administrative agent for the fund) who ensures compliance with PBF procedures and disburses the agreed project budget to the Recipient UN Organization. Substantive budget and project revisions must be resubmitted to PBSO for approval.
Diagram 1 – IRF Approval
Note: for single, one-off projects, the ASG for Peacebuilding Support may declare eligibility for the PBF
Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting
The responsibility for achieving project results rests with the Recipient UN Organization.
Solid results-based M&E and reporting is a key requirement of the PBF’s mandate. The responsibility for monitoring and reporting at project level rests with the Recipient UN Organizations 6 In order to ensure consistent standards across the PBF, Recipient UN Organizations should refer to the PBF Results Framework for guidance in establishing M&E plans.
Recipient UN Organizations are required to submit annual narrative and financial project progress reports for each calendar year for which there were project activities to the MDTF Office which prepares a consolidated annual progress report containing project-level narrative and financial progress reports and a financial statement on its activities as Administrative Agent of the PBF. This annual report is submitted to the ASG for Peacebuilding Support and the donors that have contributed to the fund. The MDTF Office annual report serves as the basis for the PBSO-prepared Annual Report of the Secretary-General to the General Assembly.
Each Recipient UN Organization at the country level must submit quarterly updates on project progress, including financial data (uncertified), to the Senior UN Representative, PBSO, and to the MDTF Office for posting on the PBF website. The format for these updates is attached to the Project Document Template.
The updates serve to facilitate the Senior UN Representative’s role in monitoring the implementation of the action plan from which the projects were drawn, and PBSO’s monitoring function as signatory to the project document. They also serve as the basis for PBSO’s periodic briefings for donors, the PBC and the Advisory Group that are prepared in collaboration with the MDTF Office.
Recipient UN Organizations must include adequate provision for project level M&E in the project proposal (typically 5% of the project budget). High risk or innovative projects should also ensure there is sufficient provision in the budget for external evaluations.
For multiple projects submitted as a portfolio, the Senior UN Representative or the PBSO may initiate periodic assessments of the implementation of the portfolio and/or the action plan from which it was drawn. A final independent evaluation of an IRF-funded portfolio should take place just prior to completion of the projects, and/or should be undertaken together with the regular evaluation(s) of the action plan from which the portfolio was drawn. This evaluation may be initiated by PBSO.
Diagram 2 – IRF Implementation
The Peacebuilding and Recovery Facility (PRF)
Scope of the PRF
The PRF is the programme-based financing mechanism of the PBF. While all PBF interventions are made in consultation with national authorities, the PRF is driven by the principles of national ownership and countrylevel decision-making. It is an allocation for which project-level approval is delegated to a Joint Steering Committee (JSC) that is established at country level. The Priority Plan is elaborated at the country level and draws from existing national plans 7 to identify critical and catalytic interventions in support of peacebuilding.
All PBF financing is disbursed through the Fund’s Administrative Agent (the MDTF Office) to a Recipient UN Organization 8 which is accountable for PBF funding received and works with national or locally-based implementing partner(s) to implement approved projects. Project implementation is guided by the rules, regulations and policies of the Recipient UN Organization.
The Priority Plan typically has a two year planning framework. The maximum duration of projects approved under the Priority Plan is 18 months (in addition to the time necessary to mobilize critical project inputs).
Application Process
A. Determining Country Eligibility for the PRF
See: PRF – Eligibility Request Template
1. Countries on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC)
Any country before the PBC may be considered for eligibility for funding from the PRF upon recommendation of the PBC. This recommendation is usually made soon after a country is referred to the PBC, which then requests the SG to declare the country eligible for funding from the PRF.
2. Countries not on the agenda of the PBC
Countries not on the agenda of the PBC may also access the PRF to strengthen and sustain peacebuilding efforts in countries at risk of (re)lapsing into conflict where there is a clear commitment to the peacebuilding process on the part of national authorities.
The process is typically triggered by the Senior UN Representative in-country. The Senior UN Representative advises the PBSO that the country has a need for critical funding for activities with a direct and immediate relevance to peacebuilding. This communication, the ‘Eligibility Request’, provides a summary justification for PRF financing based on the following factors:
- critical peacebuilding needs (country at risk of lapsing or relapsing into conflict, and/or within five years after the end of a major conflict; existing planning framework based on a conflict analysis and explicitly incorporating peacebuilding goals)
- critical peacebuilding opportunities (commitment of national authorities to effective partnership with the UN to address peacebuilding issues)
- potential for strategic leverage of PBF resources (potential for catalytic impact, and gap in funding available for peacebuilding activities)
The PBSO reviews the request against the eligibility factors, and presents its analysis to the Senior Peacebuilding Group 9 (SPG), or a delegated body, for review. Based on this discussion, the ASG for Peacebuilding Support submits a formal recommendation to the SG to declare the country eligible for PBF funding.
The ultimate responsibility for determining country eligibility rests with the SG, however, the SG’s declaration of eligibility for PBF support does not specify the amount of the PBF allocation (the funding envelope), nor the priority areas for which the funding envelope will be used.
Diagram 3 – PRF Country Eligibility
B. The Priority Plan
See: PRF – Priority Plan Template; PBF – Results Framework
The Priority Plan is the PBF funding instrument for the PRF, laying out the results framework for the countrylevel programme drawing from existing national plans. When there is an existing national strategy with peacebuilding objectives the development of the Priority Plan should be a quick and light process leading to a brief document to:
- Record the consensus of the immediate priorities for peacebuilding arising out of a joint analysis by the Government and the UN;
- Facilitate the determination of the country allocation (funding envelope) from the PBF (based on an indicative financial allocation among broad priority areas and outcomes); and
- Serve as the strategic framework for PBF intervention against which the review and approval of projects is delegated to the country level, and progress and impact are measured and monitored by the JSC;
The Priority Plan summarizes the underlying plan and the consultative process through which priorities for PBF funding were determined by the Government and the UN Presence. These priorities are elaborated within the PBF Results Framework, together with a brief outline of the types of interventions foreseen and the indicators that will be used to measure impact (M & E framework). The Priority Plan explicitly identifies the ‘gap’ targeted by PBF support and the foreseen catalytic impact of PBF resources.
For countries on the agenda of the PBC, the priority plan will be informed by the priority-setting exercise and/or the integrated peacebuilding strategy agreed between the Commission and the national authorities of the country concerned.
A select number of indicative project ideas should be outlined and submitted with the Priority Plan to indicate how the plan will be operationalized at the country level.
Priority Plan Approval Process
The Priority Plan is jointly prepared by the Senior UN Representative in-country and his/her national counterpart, and submitted by the Senior UN Representative to the ASG for Peacebuilding Support. The PBSO
reviews the plan on its merits (see information requirements detailed in the ‘Priority Plan Template’), and in a consultative process with the Senior Peacebuilding Group (or a delegated body). The Priority Plan may be
approved by the ASG for Peacebuilding Support who also establishes a funding envelope. This approval is communicated from the ASG to the Joint Steering Committee through the Senior UN Representative, and
includes a delegation of authority to the Joint Steering Committee for the implementation of the plan (see below), including how the delegation will be monitored. Once established, the amount of the funding envelope
is reserved for the country by the UNDP/MDTF Office according to the funding allocation among priority areas in the approved priority plan. Substantive revisions to the priority plan must be approved by PBSO.
Diagram 4 – PRF Priority Plan Approval
C. Establishing the Joint Steering Committee (JSC)
See: PRF – T OR/ROP for the JSC
Co-chaired by the Senior UN Representative and a senior governmental representative, the JSC oversees the implementation of the Priority Plan, including reviewing and approving project proposals. The JSC is a platform for engaging national and international stakeholders in the peacebuilding process and ideally includes key UN, government and donor representatives as well as representatives of civil society.
Existing mechanisms should be used as the basis for convening the JSC wherever possible to ensure a simple and light approach. This would typically be the case where there is an existing related MDTF.
Typically, JSC decision-making is informed by technical expertise in existing field-based mechanisms (thematic, sectoral and/or geographic pillars, clusters, working groups, etc).
The JSC has the delegated responsibility from the ASG for Peacebuilding for managing the PBF allocation at the country level, and ensuring that the results set out in the Priority Plan are achieved. At the project level, this includes reviewing and approving projects and project amendments, monitoring project progress and ensuring that implementation delays are addressed in a timely fashion. At the programme level, the JSC monitors and assesses programme-wide achievements using the indicators identified in the Priority Plan, and reports to the PBSO. The JSC also has a broader and more strategic responsibility to promote the peacebuilding agenda and its integration into the various in-country planning and coordination frameworks. To support and facilitate its work, the JSC will be supported by an in-country Secretariat, usually situated in a government ministry related to the JSC Co-Chair. PBF resources may be utilized to support the activities of the PBF secretariat, which typically forms the basis of one of the first projects approved by the JSC.
D. Local Project Review and Approval Process
See: PBF – Project Document Template; PBF – Results Framework
The JSC launches the PBF allocation process by making a call to Recipient UN Organizations for project proposals. Proposals may take the form of project documents (using the PBF project document template) or ‘concept notes’. A concept note is a 2 – 3 page summary of the project, its goals in relation to the priority plan, and key activities.
In its TOR and ROP, The JSC will establish specific criteria for the review and approval of proposals in its pipeline. In general, project proposals are prioritized and assessed against two sets of criteria: (i) technical feasibility; and (ii) the country-specific priorities identified in the Priority Plan.
(i) Technical Review. The JSC may create or use existing technical committees (cluster groups, thematic or sectoral pillars, etc) to review the technical feasibility of specific projects and ensure that there is maximum synergy and no duplication with other planned or on-going projects. The existing capacity of recipient organizations should be included in the technical assessment. Findings and recommendations of the technical committees form an input in the JSC decision-making process.
(ii) Strategic Review. The strategic review of projects will typically be undertaken by the PBF Secretariat, which will advise the JSC on its findings. Country-specific strategic criteria will be determined by the JSC and included in its TOR. These must take into account the following global-level requirements of PBF activities:
- (Critical Gap) The project must fill a funding gap (eg the time-critical nature of the activity and the unavailability of timely alternative funding, the lack of available funding for specific peacebuilding activities, etc.);
- (Strategic) The project must be of direct and immediate relevance to peacebuilding, and clearly link up to the PBF Priorities and Outcomes identified in the Priority Plan;
- (Catalytic Effect) The project must demonstrate its potential catalytic effect on the engagement of stakeholders in the peacebuilding process. In addition, it must identify how its achievements will be sustained or built upon once the project is completed. The project must include a plan for securing financial commitments for the next phase of activities and/or an exit strategy;
- (Capacity) The Recipient UN Organization and implementing partners 10 must have a demonstrated capacity to implement the project in the timeframe proposed (eg. based on past delivery rates). Where capacity is lacking, proposal must include a plan to scale-up capacities;
- (M&E) The project must identify key indicators against which project achievements toward the PBF Priority Areas may be measured. Where such data is lacking, the project must describe the measures that it will take to redress this gap.
Once a project has been approved by the JSC, the duly finalized project document is signed by the co-chairs of the JSC, the Recipient UN Organization, and the implementing partner(s) and submitted to the MDTF Office which ensures compliance with PBF procedures and disburses the approved budget amount to the Recipient. Recipient UN Organizations are responsible for ensuring that project expenditures are in line with the activities and budget in the approved Project Document, and that they disburse funds under their respective policies, rules and regulations. All funds should be allocated to projects within 12 months of the approval of the Priority Plan.
Diagram 5 – PRF Project Approval
E. Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Reporting
The responsibility for achieving project results rests with the Recipient UN Organization.
Solid results-based M&E and reporting is a key requirement of the PBF’s mandate. The responsibility for monitoring and reporting at project level rests with the Recipient UN Organizations 11 In order to ensure consistent standards across the fund, Recipient UN Organizations should refer to the PBF Results Framework for guidance in establishing their M&E plans.
The JSC is responsible for monitoring programme-wide achievements against the results envisaged in the Priority Plan and adjusting their implementation strategy, as necessary.
PBF Secretariats facilitate this effort. PBSO and the JSC undertake a midterm evaluation of the implementation of the priority plan.
Recipient UN Organizations are required to submit annual narrative and financial progress reports to the UNDP/MDTF Office which prepares a consolidated Annual Progress Report on the activities of the PBF and a financial statement on its activities as Administrative Agent of the Fund. This Annual Report is submitted to the ASG for Peacebuilding Support and the donors that have contributed to the fund and serves as the basis for the PBSO-prepared Annual Report of the Secretary-General to the General Assembly. The PBF Secretariat also prepares brief annual assessments of the overall performance of the PBF programme in the country against the indicators established in the Priority Plan, to inform JSC decision-making, and PBSO monitoring and reporting.
Each Recipient UN Organization at the country level must submit quarterly updates on project progress, including financial data (uncertified) to the JSC through its Secretariat for onward submission to the MDTF Office for posting on the PBF website. The format for these updates is attached to the Project Document Template. The updates serve to facilitate the JSC’s monitoring function. They also serve as the basis for PBSO’s periodic briefings for donors, the PBC and the Advisory Group that are prepared in collaboration with the MDTF Office.
Recipient UN Organizations must include adequate provision for project level M&E in the project budget (typically 5% of the project budget). High risk or innovative projects should also ensure there is sufficient provision in the budget for external evaluations. The JSC or the PBSO may also initiate periodic assessments or evaluations at the thematic or programme level as necessary.
A final independent evaluation of a PRF-funded programme, initiated by the JSC and PBSO, should take place no later than 6 months prior to the official end of the Priority Plan timeframe.
Diagram 6 – PRF Implementation
Notes
1. As of October 2009, the following have signed an MOU with the MDTF Office and are eligible to receive PBF funds: UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, UNESCO, UNOPS, UNIFEM, FAO, UNIDO, WFP, UNHCR, ILO, UNCDF, OHCHR, UNODC, HABITAT and IOM. As other organizations sign the MOU and become eligible, this information will be posted on the PBF website, www.unpbf.org.
2. Planning framework, strategic framework, action plan and immediate action plan are used interchangeably in this document to describe the planning framework that guides the UN system in the country. Examples include ISF, PCNA/TRF, PRS, UNDAF, etc. For the purposes of the PBF, any such framework is acceptable as long as it is current, based on a sound conflict analysis, and explicitly addresses peacebuilding goals.
3. The Senior UN Representative and Recipient UN Organizations are encouraged to partner with national and international NGOs/CSOs with demonstrated field presence and technical capacities to implement projects or project components, particularly for those activities where the UN does not have the necessary field presence or technical capacity
5. The Senior Peacebuilding Group is chaired by the ASG of Peacebuilding Support, and includes DPKO, DPA, DFS, DESA, DOCO, OCHA, UNDP, OHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, the World Bank, and the Secretary of the Policy Committee. It meets at the ASG or comparable level.
6. As per the standard Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the UNDP/MDTF Office and Recipient UN Organizations.
7. National plans, planning framework, strategic framework, action plan and immediate action plan are used interchangeably in this document to describe the plan or framework that guides the UN system in the country. Examples include ISF, PCNA/TRF, PRS, UNDAF, etc. For the purposes of the PBF, any such framework is acceptable as long as it is current, based on a conflict analysis, and explicitly addresses peacebuilding goals.
9 The Senior Peacebuilding Group is chaired by the ASG of Peacebuilding Support, and includes DPKO, DPA, DFS, DESA, DOCO, OCHA, UNDP, OHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, the World Bank, and the Secretary of the Policy Committee. It meets at the ASG or comparable level
10. Recipient UN Organizations and the JSC should make every effort to identify national and international NGOs/CSOs with demonstrated field presence and technical capacities to implement projects or project components, particularly for those activities where the Recipient UN Organization does not have the necessary local presence or technical capacity.
11. As per the standard Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by MDTF and Recipient UN Organizations
Peacebuilding Fund Guidelines
Part II
Templates and References
October 2009
| Required for IRF? | Required for PRF? | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Templates |
Single Project | Portfolio of Projects | Any Project | |
| 1 | IRF – Submission Note | Yes | Yes | No |
| 2 | PRF – Eligibility Request Template | No | No | Yes |
| 3 | PRF – Priority Plan | No | No | Yes |
| 4 | PRF – Project Transmittal Form | No | No | Yes |
| 5 | PBF – Project Document | Yes | Yes | Yes |
References |
||||
| 1 | PRF – Monitoring Matrix | No | No | Yes |
| 2 | PBF – Results Framework | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 3 | Terms of Reference and Rules and Procedures for the JSC | No | No | Yes |
