Government progress update: ICAI review of the Blue Planet Fund

Introduction

The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) review of the Blue Planet Fund was published on 30 November 2023. The government’s response was published on 19 January 2024.

In June 2025, we wrote to the government to follow up on the steps taken in response to our recommendations. The government provided ICAI with a progress update in September 2025, which we have published below.

Background

The ocean and marine habitats play a critical role in sustainable development through supporting livelihoods, economies and food security. The Blue Planet Fund (BPF) represents a significant UK contribution to UN sustainable development goal 14 ‘to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development’. It is a portfolio of Official Development Assistance (ODA) programmes, led by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) and delivered in partnership with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). The BPF works with partners to enhance the resilience of coastal communities and ocean economies to the impacts of climate change, support livelihoods and communities, and protect vulnerable marine ecosystems and biodiversity.

In November 2023, the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) completed a review of the BPF which highlighted several challenges and made four recommendations.

In January 2024 the government published a response which accepted the four recommendations made by ICAI. The response welcomed ICAI’s recognition of the progress that Defra and FCDO had already made, including establishing a monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) strategy, appointing regional coordinators to strengthen how the Fund delivers partner countries’ priorities and formalising governance of the Ocean Country Partnership Programme (OCPP) by putting in place a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Defra and the tier 1 delivery partner.

In this update the government provides an account of the further progress made against each recommendation.

Recommendation 1

As the strategic lead for the Blue Planet Fund, Defra should put in place formal core central management functions, including results management and reporting systems to enable the Fund to demonstrate impact and value for money.

Progress

Defra has strengthened the core central management of the BPF. In April 2024 Defra created a new Division in the International Biodiversity and Climate Directorate to oversee the BPF. Defra appointed a new Deputy Director to lead this Division reporting to the Director responsible for the majority of Defra’s ODA portfolio. This has enabled closer collaboration with Defra’s ODA hub to improve the delivery of Defra’s BPF programmes in line with the best practice set out in Defra’s ODA operating manual. Examples of ODA Hub support to Defra BPF programme teams include capability building and assurance of programme risk registers, logframes and annual reviews.

Within this Division, Defra appointed a Grade 6 official in June 2024 to oversee the BPF’s portfolio management office and the BPF evidence team. The portfolio management office (PMO) of 3 full time employees (FTE) acts as the BPF secretariat. Across the portfolio PMO lead on portfolio level risk management, coordination with FCDO and provide the secretariat for the portfolio’s governance board, the Joint Management Board (JMB). Defra has introduced a regular reporting cadence of financial management, risk management and programme oversight led by the PMO. This includes oversight meetings every six weeks with the Defra Deputy Director. The BPF evidence team, of 3.6 FTE works across the portfolio to strengthen the evidence base that underpins BPF programming, promote coherence in MEL approaches across BPF programmes, and deliver cross portfolio learning. Within Defra they provide analytical advice to ensure that programme management and decision making in BPF programmes is underpinned by evidence at all stages of the programme cycle.

Defra has put in place mechanisms to track the BPF’s progress along the pathways identified in the updated BPF theory of change (ToC) and demonstrate the BPF’s effectiveness, impact, and value for money (VfM). Working closely with FCDO, Defra has introduced key performance indicators (KPIs) for the BPF that build on relevant international climate finance (ICF) KPIs. These were approved by the JMB in October 2023. All programmes report on at least one ICF KPI and 9 out of 10 active programmes have adopted relevant BPF KPIs into their logframes, the only programme not to have done so is among those closing this year. In October 2024 Defra contracted ITAD to deliver an independent evaluation of the BPF. The evaluation will address evidence gaps and make recommendations on whether and how to adapt the BPF to increase its impact. It will also inform the design of any future programming in the BPF or other funds. The interim evaluation completed in December 2026, will focus on process, consider progress towards impact and include a partial VfM assessment.

In summer 2024 Defra reviewed its existing and planned BPF programmes with FCDO to ensure they were effective, value for money and deliverable within available resources. This informed decisions to proceed with the closure of three of Defra’s programmes, including OCPP. Defra also decided to stop work on four programmes that were in the development and design stages, including Seascapes. In June 2024 the JMB had already agreed that Defra should reprofile its spend to align with FCDO’s timelines on the BPF (to 2030). Reprofiling Defra’s spend has enabled continuing programmes to benefit from the strengthened oversight, core management functions and lessons learnt from the BPF to date. This helps address some of ICAI’s concern that remedial action on the BPF was taken after the majority of Defra’s funding had been committed or spent.

In July 2024, Defra’s commercial team reviewed the corporate overhead drivers and rates charged by Defra arm’s length bodies (ALBs) in OCPP. They concluded that the overhead costs are the result of the cost models and specific expertise of the ALBs and that resource costs compare favourably with benchmarked commercial providers. We have worked with the ALBs to improve financial reporting in OCPP so that Defra can better assess VfM overall. We have reduced spend through OCPP in its final year and it will close in March 2026.

Defra and FCDO have used our programme websites and DevTracker to improve public access to information on the BPF. For example, the OCEAN grant programme website and the ORRAA programme website. We recognise that external communications is an area where more progress could still be made. Defra has set up a communications working group to deliver this. The government will publish an annual report for the BPF at the end of 2025.

Recommendation 2

Given the major risks identified by this review, cross-government oversight of the Fund should be strengthened.

Progress

We have strengthened cross-government oversight of the BPF through the JMB and coordination at working level between Senior Responsible Officers (SROs) and regional coordinators.

The JMB’s remit is to provide strategic direction to the BPF, monitor delivery including finances and risk, advise on new investments and monitor performance. In June 2024 the JMB reviewed its role in oversight. The outcome was an updated terms of reference for the JMB. This was reviewed and amended again in July 2025 as part of an annual process. The key changes agreed include:

Clarifying the JMB’s role in monitoring the delivery of the BPF.
Establishing the JMB’s responsibilities for monitoring how effectively BPF responds to the needs of partner countries.
Clarifying that the JMB advises on new investments at concept note stage and will be consulted on programme extensions or uplifts.
Introducing two supplementary JMB meetings per year with stakeholders in key UK embassies and High Commissions to support integration of BPF programmes with HMG’s country priorities.
Strengthening the JMB’s role in promoting the use and uptake of monitoring, evaluation and learning.
Clarifying that the JMB’s role in risk management is to advise risk owners on how to manage or escalate portfolio risks through departmental governance structures. The JMB has no role in programme risk management.

In June 2024 the JMB agreed that it would not escalate risks to cross-government boards such as the ICF management and strategy board, because these boards do not have a mandate for decision making or risk management on individual programmes or portfolios. As the strategic lead, portfolio risks that require escalation will be escalated through Defra’s departmental governance structures, keeping FCDO informed. BPF programmes report to the ICF board through KPI reporting only.

ICAI suggested that oversight of the BPF would be more robust if the JMB had a formal role in approving business cases. However, Defra and FCDO have robust departmental processes for approving business cases and will retain decision-making on individual programmes in accordance with accounting officer responsibilities.

Defra has strengthened its reporting to the JMB to ensure the JMB has the information it needs to provide meaningful oversight of the portfolio. The JMB receives a quarterly management information pack that presents updates on key programme and portfolio deliverables, portfolio risk management, finance forecasting and actuals, delivery on gender equality and social inclusion (GESI), safeguarding, and delivery in country. The JMB will be presented with an annual report by the BPF evidence team at the end of 2025.

Action has also been taken to improve coordination of the BPF at programme and country level. At country level, BPF country plans have strengthened the coordination of programmes in country. In March 2025 the JMB recognised that there are other ways to achieve this including through business planning in UK embassies and High Commissions (see recommendation 4). Defra and FCDO have strengthened coordination between SROs for example through a monthly cross-government meeting. BPF regional coordinators in the Pacific, South and Southeast Asia, Eastern and Southern Africa, and Latin America work with BPF SROs to provide oversight of the BPF programmes operating in the countries in their regions. For example, the most recent PROBLUE Annual Review was informed by interviews undertaken by a regional coordinator with regional and national World Bank offices.

Recommendation 3

The Fund should ensure that poverty reduction, as the statutory purpose of UK aid, is the primary focus of its programming.

Progress

Poverty reduction is the primary purpose of the BPF. An evidence review produced by the Knowledge for Development and Diplomacy (K4DD) programme in 2021 establishes that the scope of the relationship between marine biodiversity and poverty is very significant. Since January 2024, Defra has increased its emphasis on demonstrating impact on poverty reduction and additional measures have been put in place across the BPF to ensure poverty reduction is at the forefront of investment and programme decisions.

In February 2025 the JMB approved changes to the BPF investment criteria. This made assessing an intervention’s impact on poverty reduction the first criteria of five that guide investment decisions. Defra has updated the BPF ToC so that it identifies explicit pathways for BPF activity to contribute to poverty reduction. The BPF evidence team and ITAD will review the ToC annually as part of the portfolio evaluation’s annual learning cycle.

Within existing programmes, decisions have prioritised poverty reduction. For example, the OCEAN programme refreshed its selection criteria for round two to increase the focus on poverty and GESI. The Sustainable Blue Economies (SBE) programme uses the BPF investment criteria to assess proposals to its technical assistance platform and uses a development advisory panel to consider poverty, GESI and other criteria.

Defra and FCDO have strengthened our understanding of the global evidence base on poverty reduction and marine biodiversity. Between July 2024 and January 2025, we commissioned three evidence reviews through K4DD and the COAST programme. These focussed on coastal poverty, vulnerability dynamics and extractive threats. FCDO produced a rapid evidence assessment on biodiversity, climate, and poverty which included relevant marine interventions such as marine protected areas, blue bonds and sustainable aquaculture. These products informed the review of the portfolio ToC. We acknowledge the limitations of the global evidence base and that the effects of marine interventions on poverty reduction are highly context specific. We will continue to improve the evidence base underpinning the BPF. For example, the BPF learning plan includes an objective to generate practical evidence on how programmes can recognise and navigate trade-offs between environmental, social and economic outcomes.

The BPF MEL approach helps to ensure that the BPF delivers poverty reduction. BPF KPIs capture several aspects of multidimensional poverty, including income and food security. Poverty reduction is the primary focus of our portfolio evaluation and BPF programme evaluations have evaluation questions on poverty reduction. Defra has used annual reviews as a management tool to strengthen the approaches its programmes take on poverty reduction. For example, the 2024 Global Fund for Coral Reefs (GFCR) annual review included recommendations on improving the MEL framework to better capture the programme’s contribution to poverty reduction.

Defra and FCDO recognise that inequality is a dominant driver of poverty. Therefore, GESI responsive programming is an effective way to address poverty. The updated ToC provides a framework for how GESI helps the BPF achieve poverty reduction. Defra has prioritised supporting its BPF programmes to be responsive to GESI issues using GESI ambition statements and action plans. Across Defra and FCDO six BPF programmes are considered GESI sensitive, two are GESI empowering and one is GESI transformative. OCPP will achieve GESI sensitive status this year.

Defra created a strategy team for the BPF with a mandate to improve the contribution of the BPF to poverty reduction and appointed a GESI lead. Defra’s BPF team has worked with social development advisers in Defra’s ODA hub and in FCDO to benefit from their expertise. Where delivery partners do not have their own GESI expertise we have supported them in sourcing additional resources.

Recommendation 4

Defra and FCDO should ensure that governments and other national stakeholders in the countries where the Fund operates are empowered to shape programmes by creating formal channels for them to communicate their priorities and needs.

Progress

Defra and FCDO have created several formal and informal channels for governments and other national and subnational stakeholders to shape programme delivery. We acknowledge ICAI’s concerns that programming was committed before Defra had fully established its approach to meeting partner country needs through the BPF. Many of Defra’s BPF programmes are flexible. Therefore, we have focussed on empowering BPF regional coordinators and country partners to shape the delivery and management of existing programmes to deliver against country priorities.

At the portfolio level, strategic alignment with host government priorities is achieved through BPF country plans, BPF technical working groups (TWGs) and the four BPF regional coordinators. A fifth regional coordinator was in place in West Africa until May 2024. BPF programming in West Africa has reduced with the planned closure of OCPP and therefore this position was no longer needed.

BPF country plans have improved the visibility and understanding of the BPF for host governments and FCDO posts. They create a bilateral framework for considering how the BPF aligns with partner countries’ priorities. Defra and FCDO have jointly developed four BPF country plans for Mozambique, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Three country plans have been endorsed by partner governments and two country plans have been used in strategic bilateral dialogues with governments in Indonesia and the Philippines. For example, in January 2025 Defra Permanent Secretary Dame Finkelstein and FCDO Minister West co-launched the Indonesia BPF country plan with Indonesia’s Minister for Marine Affairs and Fisheries, demonstrating strong alignment between the BPF and Indonesia’s ocean and coast priorities.

TWGs, with representatives from the UK and host governments, are a forum for discussing country plans, ensuring continued alignment of programming with national priorities. TWGs have been mobilized to support delivery of BPF country plans in Indonesia and the Philippines with similar existing arrangements used in Mozambique. The COAST programme has ensured that its approach in Vietnam, Mozambique, Indonesia and the Philippines is aligned to the BPF country plans to demonstrate how the programme meets existing country priorities. FCDO will use the TWGs to get feedback and endorsement of the COAST country plans to ensure host government buy-in.

The four existing BPF country plans have provided a mechanism for country engagement. However, they are resource intensive and the process of developing them needs to be adapted to each country context. In March 2025 the JMB agreed that ownership of country plans should be transferred from the BPF strategy team to teams in UK embassies and High Commissions. The BPF Strategy team will continue working with FCDO to maximise the effectiveness of existing plans and explore other ways to integrate the BPF’s programming into the work programmes of relevant embassies and High Commissions.

BPF regional coordinators have developed relationships with key stakeholders, supported programme decisions by providing insights on country contexts and priorities, raised awareness of BPF work with sub-national stakeholders, supported applicants through funding rounds, raised awareness of BPF with other funders in country and delivered meetings with national partners. For example, they have:

Supported the establishment of the TWG in Indonesia, leading engagement with the host government and provided technical and contextual feedback on the development of the COAST country plans.
Established a quarterly meeting between staff in UK embassies and High Commissions in Latin America and the Defra programme team that manages GPAP to facilitate stronger communications on regional insights, risks and opportunities.
Facilitated workshops and provided strategic advice in the pacific that has helped increase local stakeholder engagement and participation in BPF programmes.
Presented on BPF programmes at the Blue Economy Working Group in Mozambique which brings together donors to promote coordination of their programming and joint policy dialogues with the government.

Stage 3 of the refreshed BPF investment criteria embeds recommendation 4 into programme decision making. The criteria requires investments to demonstrate strong alignment with partner country priorities. At the grant level, OCEAN, GFCR and SBE require applicants to demonstrate alignment to country priorities. For example, by explaining how grants meet host government national priorities, showing evidence of engagement with host countries during project development, or through requiring a letter of support from recipient governments. Staff in UK embassies and High Commissions, including BPF regional coordinators, provide advice during grant selection processes on SBE, OCEAN and GFCR.

Some BPF programmes are demand-led during their delivery, for example:

The Global Ocean Accounts Partnership (GOAP) engages with governments and other local stakeholders to develop national ‘roadmaps’ to ocean accounts. This process identifies and tailors programming to support country specific needs.
The World Bank works with local policy makers and client country partners to co-design projects co-financed by PROBLUE that deliver on national blue economy priorities.
GPAP’s National Plastic Action Partnerships are delivered in close collaboration with the public sector, including through ministerial and official representation on steering boards and working groups.
The COAST programme will include local stakeholders such as provincial governments and civil society organisations in the advisory groups and committees of the programme to inform delivery.

Where programmes are closing, we are working with local partners to support sustainable exits. Working with national and subnational partners and staff in UK embassies and High Commissions, OCPP is developing sustainable transition strategies that promote knowledge transfer, learning and policy impact. For example, in Belize, OCPP is building on strong country engagement by bringing together partners, including the government, through a transition process that supports the government’s ambition on the ocean and ensures continued momentum and long-term impact.