The project’s executing agency is CORALINA (Corporation of the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andres, Old Providence and Santa Catalina), which is the environment authority in charge of the project focus region. The TE didn’t single out a chapter assessing the CORALINA’s performance as the project executing agency, nor had it provided a rating in this area. This TER will rate the project’s execution as “Moderately Satisfactory” considering the CORALINA’s performance as the project executing agency.
CORALINA has undertaken the sole major responsibility in executing the project, and it has worked hard to secure a project outcome at the “Moderately Satisfactory” level. In the project executing process led by CORALINA, documents/Strategies/Procedures …show more content…
Even though CORALINA has endeavored to seek alternative source of project financing. (TE, p.53), the project lacks sustainable financial support, and the CORALINA’s needed actual cost for managing MPA is high above its current financial capacity (TE, p.47). This lack of financial sustainability also contributed to the high rotation of qualified technical experts at CORALINA. (TE, p.54) Also, the administrative structure of COLALINA which limited the project’s financial execution, and the asymmetry between the CAROLINA and IDB in terms of procedures and requirement for project implementation, have caused delays at the project start (although the project caught up with its original planned progress after MTE). (TE, p.15, p.17, p.i) The CORALINA’s management team has undergone some change in 2013, which shifted the organization’s priority therefore negatively affected the project execution. (TE,p.16) In addition, the TE recommended that the CORALINA to improve its communication with beneficiaries and the IDB in order to facilitate the information exchange and coordination therefore to make the project execution more effective (TE, p.12), and it pointed out the positive role of other project stakeholders such as the local government in contributing to project design and finance (TE, p.55), all of which are pointing out to the weakness of
CORALINA has undertaken the sole major responsibility in executing the project, and it has worked hard to secure a project outcome at the “Moderately Satisfactory” level. In the project executing process led by CORALINA, documents/Strategies/Procedures …show more content…
Even though CORALINA has endeavored to seek alternative source of project financing. (TE, p.53), the project lacks sustainable financial support, and the CORALINA’s needed actual cost for managing MPA is high above its current financial capacity (TE, p.47). This lack of financial sustainability also contributed to the high rotation of qualified technical experts at CORALINA. (TE, p.54) Also, the administrative structure of COLALINA which limited the project’s financial execution, and the asymmetry between the CAROLINA and IDB in terms of procedures and requirement for project implementation, have caused delays at the project start (although the project caught up with its original planned progress after MTE). (TE, p.15, p.17, p.i) The CORALINA’s management team has undergone some change in 2013, which shifted the organization’s priority therefore negatively affected the project execution. (TE,p.16) In addition, the TE recommended that the CORALINA to improve its communication with beneficiaries and the IDB in order to facilitate the information exchange and coordination therefore to make the project execution more effective (TE, p.12), and it pointed out the positive role of other project stakeholders such as the local government in contributing to project design and finance (TE, p.55), all of which are pointing out to the weakness of