Senegal - Second Small Rural Operations Project

 ICRR 10720 Report Number : ICRR10720 ICR Review Operations Evaluation Department 1. Project Data : Date Posted : 07/21/2000 PROJ ID : P002327 OEDID: OEDID : C1992 Appraisal Actual Project Name : Second Small Rural US$M ) Project Costs (US$M) 26.1 21.9 Operations Project Country : Senegal Loan /Credit (US$M) Loan/ US$M ) 16.1 14.2 Sector, Major Sect .: Other Agriculture , US$M ) Cofinancing (US$M) 7.0 4.8 Agriculture L/C Number : C1992 FY ) 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 (including non -compliance with safeguard policies ): 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 : ICR OED Review Reason for Disagreement /Comments Outcome : Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Institutional Dev .: Partial Modest Same rating, different lexicon Sustainability : Unlikely Unlikely Bank Performance : Deficient Unsatisfactory Same rating, different lexicon Borrower Perf .: Deficient Unsatisfactory Same rating, different lexicon Quality of ICR : Satisfactory 7. Lessons of Broad Applicability : (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? Yes No 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.