Algeria - Science and Technology University Development Project

 ICRR 10265 Report Number : ICRR10265 ICR Review Operations Evaluation Department 1. Project Data : OEDID: OEDID : L3266 Project ID : P004934 Project Name : Science and Technology University Development Project Country : Algeria Sector : Higher Education L/C Number : L3266-AL Partners involved : none Prepared by : Helen Abadzi, OEDST Reviewed by : Andres Liebenthal Group Manager : Alain Barbu Date Posted : 03/01/1999 2. Project Objectives, Financing, Costs and Components : The supported universities were to turn into centers of excellence that would serve as models for other institutions . The project was to (a) provide an institutional model (based on peer review and transperency ) for the allocation of investment resources to higher education and (b) assist the government in upgrading graduate and undergraduate teaching and research of the three major universities of science and technology . The project was to finance improvements in university management, curriculum relevance, teaching quality, teacher qualifications in selected degree programs, and improved regional cooperation . Loan amount was US$65 million, of which US$48 were disbursed. The loan became effective in FY 92 and closed in FY98. 3. Achievement of Relevant Objectives : The project was implemented during seven years, but none of the objectives were achieved . Civil war in the country made it impossible to carry out important reforms, raise the numbers of students in technological subjects, or forge closer links with the local industry and other universities . 4. Significant Achievements : The main achievement of this project was acquisition of library and scientific equipment, which was installed and was mostly operational when the project closed . Despite visa problems, several faculty training courses were carried out. The project also resulted in significant enrollment increases in the graduate faculties of science and technology. 5. Significant Shortcomings : Due to the war, the Bank did not closely supervise the project . Task managers changed often . Institutional capacity was weak; the implementing agency also lacked experience with Bank procurement procedures . It was hard to attract foreign suppliers and ensure adequate delivery and installation of equipment . Local banking procedures were complicated, and there was a lack of counterpart funds . Overall, this was a high-risk project that maybe should have never been implemented. 6. Ratings : ICR OED Review Reason for Disagreement /Comments Outcome : Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Institutional Dev .: Partial Negligible Despite efforts, there was no evidence of sustained improvement in the country's ability to manage technological and scientific higher education. Sustainability : Unlikely Unlikely Bank Performance : Deficient Unsatisfactory Borrower Perf .: Deficient Unsatisfactory Quality of ICR : Satisfactory 7. Lessons of Broad Applicability : The Bank should develop a capacity to assess political risks and adequate response mechanisms . It should have been able to consider different options to supervise or restructure the project . The Bank should act early on project risks . Perhaps projects considered high -risk before effectiveness should be implemented conditionally, and expectations changed in accordance with realistic assessments . Institutional reforms needed for a project's success must be based on legislative and regulatory measures; the steps needed to carry them out must be clearly identified if the reforms are to take place as expected . The Bank should make sure that there is sufficient commitment on the part of the borrower to implement a project; policy letters, assessments of stakeholders and decisionmakers can indicate if this commitment exists . 8. Audit Recommended? Yes No 9. Comments on Quality of ICR : The ICR gives a frank opinion of project implementation