IFCD | Results of the last cycle

ARTERIAL NETWORK MOZAMBIQUE PROJECT PROPOSAL 2018

Project ID: 2018-1101

Name of applicant:

Arterial Network Moçambique

Country of applicant:

Mozambique

Type of applicant:

NGO

Amount requested:

91.713,00

Beneficiary country(ies):

Mozambique

Status:

Non Recommended

Total Score: 16.5

IFCD Submissions details

Preselection | National Commissions Review

IFCD Preselection form - - 05/22/2018 - 14:44

Submitted by on 22 May 2018

1. Name and contact details of officer from the National Commission for UNESCO

Title:

Family name:

RICARDO

Given name:

Paulino

Position:

Head of Department of Culture and Information

Address:

Rua Dr. Egas Miniz Nº 45 Bairro de Sommershield - Maputo - Moçambique

Postcode:

C.P. 3674

Town:

Maputo

E-mail:

pricardo.natcom@tvcabo.co.mz

2. Justification of pre-selection

What are the main reasons for having pre-selected this project proposal, as compared to other proposals received by the National Commission for UNESCO?:

The project is aligned with the national priorities in the policies matters/legislation where the actual situation it´s critical. We hope that with the support from UNESCO, many stakeholders could be involved in the national efforts to design actual and operational instruments in terms of regulation and strategic policies.

3. The applicant institution/organization

What elements demonstrate that the applicant institution/organization is a significant stakeholder in the culture sector (locally / nationally / internationally)?:

The applicant Organization join the main Stakeholders in the Culture Sector (SOMAS, INLD, and other) and have worked closely with UNESCO Office in Maputo, National Commission and Ministre of Culture in the implementation of many activities particularly in the fields of Cultural Diversity and Cultural Industries.

4. Relevance of the pre-selected project proposal

4.1. What are the main current needs and priorities in your country in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

Revision of the legislation and regulation. Adequate of the strategic platforms particularly policies with the new challenges and priorities.

4.2. How do the objectives of this pre-selected project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The project join many stakeholders and institutions from ONGs including partnership with the governmental institutions.

4.3. To what extent do you expect this pre-selected project proposal to have an impact on the country’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

Creation and consolidation of a national and legal platform to straghtining a development of cultural policies, legislation and Cultural Industries.

5. Feasibility of the pre-selected project proposal

5.1. What elements demonstrate the applicant’s organizational capacity and competence to manage the project and implement the work plan?:

The project proposal join some of the best and qualified personal in the fields of culture.

5.2. What types of procedures have been foreseen by the applicant institution/organization to ensure financial accountability?:

External audit, including the monitory from the National Commission and the UNESCO Office.

7. The pre-selection process at the national level

ELIA DOS ANJOS VAZ BILA

Full name:

ELIA DOS ANJOS VAZ BILA

Organization:

National Commission for UNESCO

Type of organization/Institution:

Party

Position:

Secretary General

Date:

2018

Full Name of the representative of the National Commission as Signature:

ELIA DOS ANJOS VAZ BILA

IFCD Submissions details

Eligibility | Technical Assessment

IFCD Eligibility form - p-cambier - 07/12/2018 - 16:41

Submitted by p-cambier on 12 Jul 2018

Eligibility Status:

Eligible

Technical Examination

Submitted by the deadline:

Yes

Application Form submitted either in English or French:

Yes

Maximum amount requested is US$ 100,000 or below:

Yes

Project implementation period is between 12 and 24 months:

Yes

All sections of the Form are completed:

Yes

Signature of applicant:

Yes

The applicant does not have an ongoing IFCD funded project:

Yes

Falls within the areas of intervention of IFCD:

Yes

IF PARTY OR NGO

Party to the 2005 Convention from developing countries:

Yes

National Commission Review Form:

Yes

Signature of National Commission:

Yes

Official document/ statutes (with English or French translation if necessary):

Yes

IFCD Submissions details

Experts Evaluations

EVALUATION GRID
8 points	The project proposal addresses perfectly all relevant aspect of the criterion under consideration. The answer provides all the information needed and there are no concerns or areas of weakness
6-7 points	The proposal addressed the criterion well, although some improvements could be made. The answer gives clear information on all or nearly all of the evidence needed.
5-4 points	The project proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are still some weaknesses. The answer gives some relevant information, but there are several areas where detail is lacking or the information is unclear.
3-2 points	The project proposal does not entirely address the criterion or cannot be judged properly due to missing or incomplete information. The answer does not necessarily address the question asked, or gives very little relevant information.
1 point	The project proposal barely addresses the criterion. There is a clear lack of relevant information that makes it extremely difficult to judge whether the question asked is addressed.
0 points	The project proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to the lack of pertinent information. The answer does not address the question asked, or does not provide relevant information.

Expert 1

Sub-Total Expert 1 : 7.5

IFCD Expert Evaluation form - - 08/10/2018 - 13:14

Submitted by on 10 Aug 2018

Brief summary of the project:

Recently established NGO wants to set up website to support its advocacy, capacity building and mapping acts, plans discussions over copyright legislation, intends to map the creative sector in the Maputo area and wishes to organize training on fundraising for members of its network.

1. RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROJECT TO THE OBJECTIVES AND AREAS OF INTERVENTION OF THE IFCD

1.1 Please describe how the project objectives and proposed impact/long-term benefits are aligned with at least one of the IFCD’s outcomes and associated expected results.:

All the selected activities and outputs are related to IFCD objectives.

1.2 How do the objectives of this project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country/ region in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The objectives and activities defined in general terms correspond to the needs identified also in general terms.

1.3 To what extent are the project’s objectives specific and measurable?:

The objectives are too general to consider them specific and measurable.

1.4 To what extent does the project contribute to the promotion of gender equality, the empowerment of youth, South-South and North-South-South cooperation and/or the participation of various groups in the areas of intervention of the IFCD?:

These aspects are not touched upon in the proposal.

Score:

2. FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE RELEVANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS MODALITIES OF EXECUTION

2.1 What elements demonstrate the applicant’s organizational capacity (main activities of the institution/organization) and competence (skills and background of staff) to implement the work plan and manage the budget?:

In the absence of a website the brief recommendation of the National Commission is a pledge of competence.

2.2 To what extent do the activities address relevant issues? Please explain how the methodology is appropriate to achieving the objectives?:

The proposed activities all belong to the toolkits of actions aiming to promote the case of the creative sector. Setting up a website is an obvious early hurdle. Discussing relevant legislation (about copyright in this case) involving stakeholders from across the country is a laudable exercise which may catalyze the related job of the administration and the legislation (the Parliament). A one shot mapping offers some clues to advocacy and policy priorities but usually remains a static portrayal.

2.3 To what extent is the time frame realistic and coherent with the activities?:

Every phase of the project is scheduled leisurely.

2.4 Have the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the project been clearly identified? To what extent are the outputs/deliverables and main activities relevant to the target beneficiaries and address their needs?:

The key actors are identified and so is the membership of the organization’s network. The way the participants to the three regional consultations would be recruited is not specified.

Score:

3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

3.1 Does the budget provide for adequate resources (salaries, fees, equipment, travel, communication, etc.) necessary for success of the project? If the budget has been overestimated or underestimated, please explain how.:

The budget is too generous with regard to the planned activities.

3.2 What proportion of the budget is allocated to project activities versus overhead costs? Does the budget seem adequate and overhead costs estimated in compliance with the limit to a maximum of 30% of the total project budget?:

Within the total frame the share of overhead is not outstanding.

3.3 Does the project proposal indicate any additional financial contributions to the project, such as co-funding and/or self- funding?:

No self-funding is indicated.

3.4 What actions have been foreseen to ensure financial accountability (e.g. Involvement of a financial officer)?:

No details are given about this matter.

Score :

4. IMPACT AND EXPECTED RESULTS, INCLUDING POTENTIAL FOR STRUCTURAL CHANGE

4.1 Are the project’s expected outputs and/or deliverables concrete, measurable and realistic? To what extent are they likely to achieve the objectives of the project?:

Each planned activity Is concrete, measurable and can be realistically executed and can contribute to the positioning of the creative industries in Mozambique.

4.2 To what extent are the main activities and the budget relevant and appropriate to achieving the intended outputs and/or deliverables?:

The budget allows for carrying out the activities.

4.3 To what extent is it expected that this project will have an impact/long-term benefits on the country/region’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

The project would probably have modest longer term impact on policies and on the general performance of the cultural industries.

4.4 To what extent does the project demonstrate potential for structural change (for example: changes in the policy environment; far-reaching changes in public and professional organizational structures; and changes in the way government and regulatory authorities do business)?:

No structural changes are likely to be produced – unless the website proves to be an exceptionally lively virtual community hub, the consultative meeting churn out draft proposals that quickly turn into a Parliamentary Act, the findings of the mapping generate concrete cultural policy measures and the 35 culture managers raise large funds with the skills acquired during the training.

Score:

5. SUSTAINABILITY

5.1 To what extent are contractors and partners involved in the implementation of the project’s activities? Has the role of each contractor and/or partner been clearly described?:

The contractors have clear assigned roles in the implementation. The role of SOMAS and INLD, two professional partners, is not specified.

5.2 How does the project relate to and/or complement the work that is already being carried out in the country/region in terms of cultural policies and/or industries?:

The project loosely fits to ongoing processes in the country.

5.3 What measures/steps are proposed to ensure that the project’s impact/long-term benefits can be achieved?:

This is not sufficiently unfolded in the proposal.

5.4 What measures/steps are proposed to follow up with the beneficiaries of the project after its completion?:

The applicant would be the main direct beneficiary but how it would be able to run the acquired resources is not explained in the proposal.

Score:

Overall evaluation:

The proposal contains actions which are useful and can considerably forward the cause of the cultural industries in Mozambique. They nevertheless do not constitute a solid strategy and their level of specification does not assure benefits that are commensurate with the required investment.

Expert 2

Sub-Total Expert 2 : 9

IFCD Expert Evaluation form - o_ojoma - 08/18/2018 - 23:14

Submitted by o_ojoma on 18 Aug 2018

Brief summary of the project:

This project aims to map the creative and cultural industries, build capacities and lobby for the revision of the copyright law and build a digital platform to create more opportunities for information sharing and engagement between stakeholders in the industry.

1. RELEVANCE AND APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PROJECT TO THE OBJECTIVES AND AREAS OF INTERVENTION OF THE IFCD

1.1 Please describe how the project objectives and proposed impact/long-term benefits are aligned with at least one of the IFCD’s outcomes and associated expected results.:

The project contributes to Outcome 1 and creates opportunities for cross sectoral engagement (1.1) and more civil society engagement with government (1.3). it will also contribute potentially to Outcome specifically 2.1 by undertaking advocacy in relation to the copyright law.

1.2 How do the objectives of this project proposal meet the current needs and priorities of the country/ region in terms of cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

There is limited data on the creative industries, weak skills base of sector players for engaging with government and poor information sharing mechanisms. The proposed project activities propose to change this.

1.3 To what extent are the project’s objectives specific and measurable?:

Objective 1 is clear. Objective 2 talks about enforcement but the project activities relate to revision. Objectives 3 and 4 are quite broadly defined.

The digital platform will provide more international networking links and create opportunities for North Sout South collaboration. No specific objectives are outlined in relation to youth or women.

Score:

2. FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS THE RELEVANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS MODALITIES OF EXECUTION

The natcom review confirms that the applicant has participated in a number of key creative industries support activities and that the organisation has some of the best professionals in the sector.

2.2 To what extent do the activities address relevant issues? Please explain how the methodology is appropriate to achieving the objectives?:

The proposed methodology aligns with the objectives as outlined. The indicators designed however are at quite a high level and downstream that it might be challenging to realistically measure the indicators as outlined.

2.3 To what extent is the time frame realistic and coherent with the activities?:

The proposed timeframe of 16 months seems reasonable for the proposed project scope and is consistent with the multiple activities.

The direct beneficiaries defined are perhaps more appropriate as indirect as the groupings are quite wide and will not all be involved directly in the project.

Score:

3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The proposed budget seems reasonable and per diems within UNESCO rates.

Overheads costs requested about 5%

3.3 Does the project proposal indicate any additional financial contributions to the project, such as co-funding and/or self- funding?:

3.4 What actions have been foreseen to ensure financial accountability (e.g. Involvement of a financial officer)?:

While there is a project staff with an accountancy degree, they are named as an administrative assistant. No other staff is listed as having financial management responsibility specifically. The narrative does not outline how financial management will be carried out but outlines the approach taken in a previous instance.

Score :

4. IMPACT AND EXPECTED RESULTS, INCLUDING POTENTIAL FOR STRUCTURAL CHANGE

4.1 Are the project’s expected outputs and/or deliverables concrete, measurable and realistic? To what extent are they likely to achieve the objectives of the project?:

The indicators are defined at quite a high level and so will likely be difficult to measure

4.2 To what extent are the main activities and the budget relevant and appropriate to achieving the intended outputs and/or deliverables?:

The activities and budget relate well to the intended objectives of the project.

4.3 To what extent is it expected that this project will have an impact/long-term benefits on the country/region’s cultural policies and/or cultural industries?:

As one strand of the project focuses on copyright law reform, it this is achieved, it will have structural impact / impact on the cultural sector policy.

As the main focus is on copyright law, if achieved, it will impact.

Score:

5. SUSTAINABILITY

5.1 To what extent are contractors and partners involved in the implementation of the project’s activities? Has the role of each contractor and/or partner been clearly described?:

The partners are named with clear responsibility.

5.2 How does the project relate to and/or complement the work that is already being carried out in the country/region in terms of cultural policies and/or industries?:

The project builds on already conducted mapping, reviews existing legislation and connects with initiatives already in progress.

5.3 What measures/steps are proposed to ensure that the project’s impact/long-term benefits can be achieved?:

By working with its members to monitor outcomes from the project after it is finished.

5.4 What measures/steps are proposed to follow up with the beneficiaries of the project after its completion?:

By working with its members to monitor outcomes from the project after it is finished.

Score:

Overall evaluation:

The project has four objectives but only one (the creation of a digital platform) was specific in terms of outcome. The indicator listed quite a few things the platform would achieve but this seems a bit unrealistic. The other objectives while laudable are defined at quite high levels and so will be difficult to achieve and or measure. No financial management plan is outlined so it is questionable the capacity to manage the budget.

IFCD Submissions details

Recommandation review

IFCD Recommendation form - j_casas - 11/13/2018 - 17:34

Submitted by j_casas on 13 Nov 2018

Recommendation Status:

Non recommended

Evaluation summary:

This project aims to map the country’s creative and cultural industries, increase the artists’ capacities, lobby for the revision of copyright law, raise awareness on the importance of the creative industries, as well as build a digital platform to create more opportunities for information sharing and engagement between stakeholders. While the proposal contains activities that would be useful to develop the cultural industries in Mozambique, the evaluators did not find it to be up to IFCD funding requirements due to the generality of the objectives, making them difficult to achieve or measure. The likelihood of structural change was assessed as weak, although some of the planned activities, focused on the copyright law, could lead to a longer-term impact on policy making, provided that the general strategy and level of specification, the methodology and the financial accountability had been reworked.