Independent Evaluation - Home > Search

Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review - Second Small Rural Operations Project


  
1. Project Data:   
ES Date Posted:
07/21/2000   
PROJ ID:
P002327
Appraisal
Actual
Project Name:
Second Small Rural Operations Project
Project Costs(US $M)
 26.1  21.9
Country:
Senegal
Loan/Credit (US $M)
 16.1  14.2
Sector, Major Sect.:
Other Agriculture,
Agriculture
Cofinancing (US $M)
 7.0  4.8
L/C Number:
C1992      
   
Board Approval (FY)
  89
Partners involved
IFAD 
Closing Date
06/30/1998 12/31/1999
         
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Group Manager: Group:  
John R. Heath
Ridley Nelson Ridley Nelson OEDST

2. Project Objectives and Components:

a. Objectives
"Encourage local initiative and thereby broaden popular participation in decision-making on rural investments", with a view to which the project would "encourage small groups of producers to constitute themselves into legally-recognized units...and render these creditworthy in the judgment of the local banking system; create employment in rural areas to help decrease rural-urban migration; and strengthen the existing Senegalese capacity for identification and preparation of small rural projects. The specific projects to be financed would increase crop, fruit and vegetable production, enhance security of production and raise rural living standards" (ICR).

b. Components

  • Consolidation and rehabilitation of 12 of the 28 irrigated rice and vegetable perimeters developed under the first Small Rural Operations Project;
  • Construction, equipment and technical services for (a) 10 rice and vegetable perimeters of 30 hectares each, (b) 4 rice and vegetable perimeters of 20-30 hectares each (for four women's and youth groups), (c) six perimeters of cereals, banana and citrus fruit, and (d) 2 banana perimeters of 15 hectares each;
  • Individual and collective equipment and technical services for 150 traditional beekeepers;
  • Unidentified subprojects/activities; and
  • Improvement of the project management structure.

c. Comments on Project Cost, Financing and Dates
None


3. Achievement of Relevant Objectives:

Impossible to assess with any accuracy owing to the absence of ex-post and ex-ante economic analysis, and the lack of subproject records. With respect to the pre-defined perimeters, the actual number of subprojects completed was 27, against the initial estimate of 77; and the number of hectares covered was 636, compared to the target of 1,010 hectares.

4. Significant Outcomes/Impacts:

The number of beneficiaries was greater than projected at appraisal: 114,000, against 51,000. The quality of the subprojects improved toward closing, owing to greater beneficiary involvement. This was made possible by the restructuring of the project and its new implementation and institutional arrangement.

5. Significant Shortcomings (include non-compliance with safeguard features):

Weak performance by the implementing agency led to difficulty in developing a pipeline of subprojects and to low output relative to capacity and overhead costs. The cost of irrigation works was almost twice as high as that in similar projects in neighboring Mauritania. Subproject identification and implementation was not always decided on the merits of the subproject, being influenced by politics. Financial management was weak and the project management unit was unable to account for all the funds used by the project.
6. Ratings:ICROED ReviewReason for Disagreement/Comments
Outcome:
UnsatisfactoryUnsatisfactory
Institutional Dev.:
PartialModest
    Same rating, different lexicon
Sustainability:
UnlikelyUnlikely
Bank Performance:
DeficientUnsatisfactory
    Same rating, different lexicon
Borrower Perf.:
DeficientUnsatisfactory
    Same rating, different lexicon
Quality of ICR:
Satisfactory

7. Lessons of Broad Applicablity:


(a) Long delays between identifying and implementing subprojects will push up costs and sap beneficiary support.
(b) It is better to cancel projects with major design flaws and weak implementation than to waste time trying to redesign them, or trying to change the approach of implementing agencies.

8. Audit Recommended?  No

          Why?  

9. Comments on Quality of ICR:

No ex-post economic analysis because, at appraisal/midterm there was no ex-ante estimate of economic rates of return or unit costs.

© 2012 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions