The Selection Process

For identifying the most ambitious NAMAs, the NAMA Facility conducts open competitive Calls for NAMA Support Projects (NSPs). In the NAMA Facility’s 5th Call for NSPs, national ministries and eligible legal entities are invited to submit NSP Outlines to receive support for their NAMA implementation.

In order to identify the most ambitious and feasible projects, a competitive two-phase selection process applies.

Phase 1 (Outline Phase)

Selection is among the submitted NSP Outlines that undergo a thorough assessment by an independent external assessor. The assessment is cross-checked by the NAMA Facility’s Technical Support Unit (TSU). Projects that successfully pass the assessment are recommended to the NAMA Facility Board for approval to fund the Detailed Preparation Phase (DPP).

Phase 2 (Detailed Preparation Phase/Proposal Phase)

Selection is based on the fully fledged NSP proposal, which is the outcome of the Detailed Preparation Phase (DPP). NSP Proposals undergo an in-depth assessment; Proposals successfully passing the assessment are recommended to the Board. According to the assessment result and the available funding, the Board takes a final decision on providing funding for the implementation of the NSP.

5th Call Selection Criteria

For selecting the most ambitious and transformative NAMA Support Project Outlines, the NAMA Facility applies three sets of criteria:

The General Information Document includes further detailed information on the selection criteria applied in the 5th Call of the NAMA Facility. You can download the document here.

Eligibility criteria

Eligibility criteria serve to ensure that the NAMA Support Projects fulfil the formal requirements of the competitive bidding for NAMA Facility support. To be considered further, projects will need to meet all of the eligibility criteria.

The eligibility check consists of the following elements:

  • Timely submission
  • Completeness of documents (including endorsement letters)
  • Documents provided in English
  • Envisaged implementation duration of 3-5 years
  • Envisaged DPP duration of max. 18 months
  • ODA-eligibility of the country throughout the entire NSP implementation period
  • Qualification of the NAMA Facility funding as ODA finance
  • Funding volume requested from the NAMA Facility for implementation is in the range of EUR 5-20 million
  • NAMA Facility funding not used for the generation of tradeable GHG emission allowances in the compliance market such as CER or, if generated, allowances should be verifiably cancelled


Ambition criteria

The ambition criteria seek to ensure that the NAMA Facility supports the most ambitious projects. Projects are assessed on the basis of a point-based grading system. In total, up to 25 points can be assigned for ambition.


Potential for transformational change 
(11 points)

The potential for transformational change is crucial for the NAMA Facility. It implies to sustainably redirect the flow of public and private funds towards GHG mitigation actions. The political will and respective decisions towards GHG mitigation translate into laws and regulations as well as to the reallocation of finance and cash flow (e.g. subsidies).

Detailed criteria include:

  • Government commitment / endorsement
  • Embeddedness in national strategies, including co-benefits as drivers for implementation and the linkage to the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
  • Catalytic effect and scope (significant change)
  • Replicability/scalability at national and/or regional level
  • Sustainability (irreversible change)

Financial ambition 
(6 points)

The mobilization of public and private funding (i.e. leverage) in terms of national public contribution and private sector funding are seen as key for inducing and taking forward the transformational change towards a low-carbon development pathway. The financial leverage is assessed relative to the sector and the country context.

Detailed criteria include:

  • Removal of financial/economic market barriers
  • Significant private sector participation
  • Significant public budget contribution
  • Participation of other (possibly development) financiers 

Mitigation potential 
(8 points)

The mitigation potential shows the direct and indirect contribution of a NSP to the 1.5°/2° objective and the country’s NDC. It is assessed on relative terms, i.e. relative to the sector and the country.

Detailed criteria include:

  • Plausibility of underlying assumptions, baseline, calculations
  • Direct mitigation potential
  • Indirect mitigation potential
  • Cost-effectiveness 

Feasibility criteria

Feasibility criteria seek to ensure that the NSPs are not only highly ambitious but also likely to be implemented successfully. In total, up to 25 points can be assigned for feasibility.


Project rationale 
(10 points)

The key criterion for the project rationale is a comprehensive barrier analysis that clearly shows the current sector situation and what impedes transformational change. The NSP is to tackle these barriers and to not only work around them. To the greatest extent possible and where relevant, NSPs should use synergies with other projects.

Detailed criteria include:

  • Plausibility of barrier analysis
  • Plausibility of project rationale
  • Clear Logframe (indicators and risks)
  • Clear definition of target group
  • Clear definition of synergies with other projects
  • Appropriate and clear scope of the NSP
  • Justification of NSP funds/additionality 

Project design 
(13 points)

The project concept needs to respond to the barrier analysis and show how regulatory measures, financial mechanisms, technology shifts and capacity building work together towards the proposed transformational change. Especially the financing mechanisms of a NSP (based on sound business models for investors / consumers), possibly combined with regulatory initiatives, should kick-start a redirection of investment and cash flows in the sector.

Detailed criteria include:

  • Adequate institutional set-up
  • High level of readiness
  • Feasible and appropriate technology(ies)
  • Plausible business model(s) at investment level
  • Appropriate financial mechanism and possibly regulation
  • Clearly defined technical cooperation and assistance measures
  • Reasonable funding request 

DPP concept 
(2 points)

The concept for the detailed preparation phase (DPP) is to show that the applicant has a clear understanding of the required detail and readiness of a proposal and how to prepare for it. The concept should also show a self-reflection on what can be done in-house and where additional expertise (e.g. financial competence) needs to be hired from external sources.

Detailed criteria include:

  • Adequate focus
  • Comprehensiveness (complete and cohesive)
  • Adequacy of approach /methodology
  • Realistic timeline
  • Appropriateness of requested funding for DPP 


Note: While the NSP Outline template has a reduced “light” structure, the NAMA Facility’s expectations on both the readiness and ambition of NAMA Support Projects remain high. For further information please consult the FAQ document, the factsheets on lessons learned and financial mechanism and the documentation of the NAMA Facility’s webinars.

The assessment of proposals is similar to the NSP Outline assessment with a stronger emphasis on the feasibility.

For further information please consult section 5 of the General Information Document.

Read more on relevant topics