Implementation Status & Results Togo Togo Agricultural Sector Support Project (P118045)

Transcription

1 losure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Togo Togo Agricultural Sector Support Project (P118045) Operation Name: Togo Agricultural Sector Support Project (P118045) Project Stage: Implementation Seq.No: 4 Status: ARCHIVED Archive : 28-Nov-2012 Country: Togo Approval FY: 2011 Product Line: IBRD/IDA Region: AFRICA Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Implementing Agency(ies): Key s Board Approval Original Closing Planned Mid Term Review 14-Apr-2014 Last Archived ISR 08-May-2012 Effectiveness 14-Dec-2011 Revised Closing Actual Mid Term Review Project Development Objectives Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document) The objectives of the Project are to (i) rehabilitate and reinforce productive capacities among targeted beneficiaries across Selected Value Chains, and (ii) foster an enabling environment for the development of the agricultural sector, in the Recipient's territory. Project Beneficiaries (within all five administrative regions of Togo) 1) 60,000 crop farmers 2) 13,000 animal herders 3) 1,600 fish producers 4) 500 fish merchants 5) 650,000 households raising poultry and/or small ruminants will benefit from dedicated animal vaccination campaigns PDO Level Results Indicators 1) Farm output subject to project supported post-harvest value-adding schemes (rice,corn); 2) Increase of crop (coffee, cocoa) and continental fisheries output, and of livestock population (small ruminants, poultry) among project beneficiaries; 3) Rates of PNIASA financial execution (for PASA, PADAT and WAAPP altogether) and; 4) Number of direct beneficiaries. Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project? Yes Component(s) No Component Name Component Cost Promotion of strategic food crop, export crop and freshwater fish development Recovery of the livestock sub-sector Support for capacity building and sector coordination Overall Ratings Page 1 of 8

2 Previous Rating Current Rating Progress towards achievement of PDO Satisfactory Satisfactory Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Overall Risk Rating Implementation Status Overview Moderate The Agriculture Sector Support Project (PASA) is effective since mid-december At time of last ISR, Project launch had taken place as well as the overall framework under it - PNIASA Launch- in February The ICF had its entire team (4 experts) on board. The project team is in place as well as the International Consultancy Firm (ICF) i.e. SOFRECO, hired to support the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MAEP) in project implementation. Approved Annual Work Plan and Budget (AWPB) is implemented, many activities have started and numerous key procurement tenders for related significant contracts shall soon be completed by end of calendar year, which will greatly improve disbursements (8.2% at the end of September 2012, all sources of funds). Operational assessment: clear and agreed upon operational objectives were set in last Aide-memoire prepared during implementation support mission in November-December 2011 (just before effectiveness was accomplished); however, few operational objectives have been completed by MAEP yet, translating in project slow start and disbursements. General understanding of the profound changes required at all levels for optimal project implementation (and its long term objective to head towards SWAp approach) still needs to be achieved, notably in terms of fiduciary matters and internal management deemed necessary to reach PASA development objectives. For example, the issuance of a Ministerial memorandum (Note Circulaire) to clarify new internal management responsibilities at MAEP was considered essential in early 2012 but took time to be approved as it was only signed and dispatched at the end of September 20, This memorandum states the roles and responsibilities of the Secretary General, of the Operational Coordinators and of the MAEP Directors in the implementation of PNIASA projects. Fiduciary Aspects: redeployment of MAEP staff took place on September 14, 2012, just before the actual beginning of the supervision mission, with Project allocation of one (1) accountant and two (2) national experts in procurement. Clear FM and PR "roadmaps" have been prepared and sent to the Government along with the Aide-memoire to highlight what needs to be done for the coming 6 months, i.e. at the time of next supervision mission (probably to be held by end of March 2013). (i) Financial Management (FM): current FM assessment is rated moderately satisfactory (MS). - Staffing/general management: redeployment of staff at MAEP (one accountant) for PASA has taken place on September 14, Internal/External Auditing: the internal auditor has been recruited in June 2012, is in place at MAEP and has started his assignment. The internal auditor already provided useful advice to strengthen internal management control systems of the project. The external auditor hiring process is still ongoing. - FM Software/Reporting requirements: actual purchase of FM Software (TOMPRO) is in final stage, process is to be completed in October Hence, a computerized accounting system is not yet in place and MAEP is currently still using Excel sheets. IFRs have however been produced as required. (ii) Procurement: current Procurement assessment is rated moderately unsatisfactory (MU). - Staffing/general management: redeployment of two full time personnel to assist existing procurement staff has just been completed by MAEP on September 14, Delay in this redeployment, required per Financing Agreements, partially explains the difficulties encountered in this area. A "roadmap" was prepared calling for (i) weekly coordination meetings with key stakeholders involved (beneficiaries and Directorates) and (ii) hiring of a PASA national procurement expert, which will work under the supervision of the SOFRECO procurement expert. MAEP was suggested to call for multiple sub-commissions for the assessments of bids/tenders/proposals so that they can work in parallel for PNIASA projects. (iii) Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E): current M&E assessment is considered as moderately unsatisfactory (MU). - Staffing/general management: until recently, no personnel from MAEP had been redeployed to strengthen M&E functions, which created difficulties. Redeployment of staff at MAEP (one expert for PASA) has taken place on September 14, Assessment: Actual purchase of the M&E Software (TECHPRO) is in its final stage (the process is to be completed in October 2012). The "roadmap" that was prepared has recommended the following: (i) Operationalisation of the manuals (i.e. set up and sharing of data collection and utilization, in the form of workshops gathering all stakeholders) ; (ii) elaboration of implementation procedures as regards activities for data collection, processing and utilization ; (iii) set up of a list of indicators between the PNIASA M&E system and Page 2 of 8

3 that of the projects (incl. PASA) ; (iv) appropriate conditions for the deployment of TECHPRO software (harmonization of analytical plan/accounting/awpb, preparation of requested formats for output tables, acquisition of equipment and computer software required for proper operation of TECHPRO). Locations Country First Administrative Division Location Planned Actual Togo Not Entered Region des Savanes Togo Not Entered Region des Plateaux Togo Not Entered Region Maritime Togo Not Entered Region Centrale Togo Not Entered Prefecture de l' Ogou Togo Not Entered Region de la Kara Togo Not Entered Mangbeto Reservoir Results Project Development Objective Indicators Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline Current End Target Rate of PNIASA Financial Execution Percentage Value Sep-2012 this includes 2.0% financial execution for PADAT; 7.3% for WAAPP/1C-Togo and 8.5% for PASA Direct project beneficiaries Number Value Female beneficiaries Percentage Supplemental Value Increase of crop and fisheries output, and of livestock population among project beneficiaries Number Value Page 3 of 8

4 Poultry Number Small Ruminants Number Fish (Tons) Number Coffee (tons) Number Cocoa (tons) Number Farm output subject to project supported postharvest value-adding schemes. Metric ton Corn Metric ton Rice Metric ton Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Apr-2011 Value Intermediate Results Indicators Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline Current End Target Farmers adopting improved animal husbandry Number Value Poultry Number Value Page 4 of 8

5 Farmer's organizations participating in the warrantage scheme Targeted clients who are members of newly created ESOPs Number Value Number Value New Or upgraded fish farms Number Value Area regenerated or newly planted Hectare(Ha) Value Coffee Hectare(Ha) Value Apr-2011 Cocoa Hectare(Ha) Value Apr-2011 Animal growers using superior breeding stock Number Value Small ruminants Number Value Poultry Number Value Apr-2011 Page 5 of 8

6 Water area covered by new management plans adopted by fishers Lake Nangbéto Hectare(Ha) Hectare(Ha) Value Value Other water bodies Hectare(Ha) Number of sub-sectoral policies and implementation plans adopted Resultsbased management and accountability system developed and implemented MAEP structures using annual work pland and budgets in line with the RBMAS manual, and submitting activity reports to the Secretariat General in line with the RBMAS manuel Value Number Value Apr Sep-2012 Aquaculture Development Strategy has been designed Percentage Value Apr Sep-2012 Target was 0% the first year Percentage Value Apr-2012 Target was 0% the first year Staff in MAEP structures participating in Percentage Value performance agreements in line with the 12-Apr-2012 RBMAS manual. Target was 0% the first year Training delivered to MAEP staff Number Value Sep-2012 RBMAS Number Value Apr Sep-2012 FM Number Value Page 6 of 8

7 M&E Number Animals Participating in the vaccination campaign Number Poultry Number Small ruminants Number 12-Apr Sep-2012 Value Value 12-Apr Sep-2012 Value Value Data on Financial Performance (as of 06-Nov-2012) Financial Agreement(s) Key s Project Ln/Cr/Tf Status Approval Signing Effectiveness Original Closing Revised Closing P IDA-H6640 Effective 12-Apr Apr Dec-2011 P TF Effective 18-Apr Apr Dec-2011 P TF Effective 18-Apr Apr Dec-2011 Disbursements (in Millions) Project Ln/Cr/Tf Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed P IDA-H6640 Effective USD P TF Effective USD P TF Effective USD Disbursement Graph Page 7 of 8

8 Key Decisions Regarding Implementation Nine months following effectiveness and seven months following technical launch, the PASA records slow disbursements due to delays in launching activities at MAEP mainly as regards procurement, insufficient MAEP management and strategic planning, procrastination for some key decisions (MAEP reform, hiring/reallocation of support personnel for the project, modernization of infrastructures) and lack of ownership from technical directorates. Restructuring History There has been no restructuring to date. Related Projects There are no related projects. Page 8 of 8