Madagascar - Accounting and Management Training Project

 Accounting and management training project Report No: ; Type: Report/Evaluation Memorandum ; Country: Madagascar; Region: Africa; Sector: Tertiary Education; Major Sector: Education; ProjectID: P001506 December 29, 1995 Madagascar: Accounting and Management Training Project (Credit 1661-MAG) The Madagascar Accounting and Management Training project (Credit 1661 for US$10.3 million equivalent) was approved in FY86. Cofinancing was provided by Canada, France and the United States. The credit was closed on December 31, 1994, after a two-year extension. About 40 percent of the credit was canceled largely due to grant financing made available to the borrower after appraisal. The Implementation Completion Report (ICR) was prepared by the Central Africa and Indian Ocean Department of the Africa Regional Office. The borrower's contribution is included in Appendix B. The project aimed to upgrade the expertise of Malagasy accountants, auditors and managers in order to strengthen the management planning and finances of local enterprises. A second objective of this operation was to improve the procurement procedures of the borrower. These objectives were to be achieved through: (i) the establishment and operation of a National Institute for Accounting and Management (INSCAE); this component was to account for 92 percent of total project cost; and (ii) the provision of technical assistance and training for borrower staff responsible for procurement. The project successfully contributed to an improvement in the quality and quantity of trained manpower. Under the project, INSCAE trained 603 qualified accountants and 101 business management graduates, achieved high enrollments and a 100 percent graduate placement rate. The borrower links these good results to the participation of the private sector, teachers and students in redefining INSCAE's curriculum. The improvement of procurement regulations and procedures was initially inadequate owing to differences of view on regulatory reform between IDA and the borrower. Over time, however, the borrower did take measures to improve procurement under Bank- financed projects. The Operations Evaluation Department (OED) rates project outcome as satisfactory (versus highly satisfactory in the ICR), as not all project objectives were fully achieved, and implementation of the procurement component was weak. OED rates institutional development as modest, equivalent to the ICR's partial rating. Like the ICR, OED rates sustainability as likely. Both OED and the ICR rate the performance of IDA as satisfactory. This operation offers some important lessons. One is that projects like this one, which benefit from a strong government commitment and are designed to meet widely perceived needs, have a high likelihood of meeting their development objectives. Another is that it is not advisable to pursue unrelated objectives—in this case education and improved central government procurement—in the same operation. The ICR is good, but would have benefited from a more thorough analysis of available project data. For example, although the ICR does not mention it, a review by the Canadian grant agency noted that about 40 percent of students are women, a high proportion for this type of training. No audit is planned.