Document of The World Bank Report No: 28608-MAI IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (IDA-31360) ON A CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$66 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALAWI FOR A SECOND SOCIAL ACTION FUND PROJECT May 26, 2004 CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective July 31, 1998) Currency Unit = Malawi Kwacha (MK) MK1 = US$ 0.0374 US$ 1 = MK26.693 FISCAL YEAR July 1 - June 30 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome BA Beneficiary Assessment CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBOs Community Based Organizations CES Capacity Enhancement and Studies CSP Community Sub-Projects DCA Development Credit Agreement DEC District Executive Committee DFID Department for International Development ECAM Employers Consultative Association of Malawi EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ERR Economic Rate of Return FBOs Faith Based Organizations GDP Gross Domestic Product GOM Government of Malawi IDA International Development Association IEC Information, Education and Communication LAs Local Authorities MASAF Malawi Social Action Fund MASAF II Malawi Second Social Action Fund M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MIS Management Information System MU Management Unit of MASAF NGOs Non-Government Organization NRSC National Roads Safety Council O&M Operation and maintenance PMCs Project Management Committees PWP Public Works Program SOCAM Society of Accountants in Malawi SSP Sponsored Sub-Projects TWC Technical Working Committee Vice President: Callisto Madavo Country Director Hartwig Schafer Sector Manager Dzingai Mutumbuka Task Team Leader/Task Manager: Hope C. Phillips Volker MALAWI Second Social Action Fund CONTENTS Page No. 1. Project Data 1 2. Principal Performance Ratings 1 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 2 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 8 6. Sustainability 11 7. Bank and Borrower Performance 12 8. Lessons Learned 13 9. Partner Comments 14 10. Additional Information 14 Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix 17 Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing 18 Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits 20 Annex 4. Bank Inputs 21 Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components 24 Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance 25 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents 26 Annex 8. Beneficiary Survey Results 27 Annex 9. Stakeholder Workshop Results 28 Annex 10. Capacity Enhancement Achievements 66 Annex 11. Borrower's ICR 75 Project ID: P049599 Project Name: MASAF II Team Leader: Hope C. Phillips TL Unit: AFTH1 ICR Type: Intensive Learning Model (ILM) of ICR Report Date: May 26, 2004 1. Project Data Name: MASAF II L/C/TF Number: IDA-31360 Country/Department: MALAWI Region: Africa Regional Office Sector/subsector: Primary education (40%); Other social services (30%); General water, sanitation and flood protection sector (20%); Health (10%) Theme: Social risk coping (P); Other social protection and risk management (P); Civic engagement, participation and community driven development (P); Other urban development (S); Rural services and infrastructure (S) KEY DATES Original Revised/Actual PCD: 03/15/1997 Effective: 02/10/1999 02/10/1999 Appraisal: 04/14/1998 MTR: 02/15/2002 Approval: 10/15/1998 Closing: 05/31/2003 11/30/2003 Borrower/Implementing Agency: Government of Malawi/Malawi Social Action Fund Management Unit Other Partners: STAFF Current At Appraisal Vice President: Callisto E. Madavo Callisto E. Madavo Country Director: Hartwig Schafer Barbara Kafka Sector Manager: Dzingai B. Mutumbuka Ruth Kagia Team Leader at ICR: Hope C. Phillips Norbert Mugwagwa ICR Primary Author: Suleiman Namara 2. Principal Performance Ratings (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HL=Highly Likely, L=Likely, UN=Unlikely, HUN=Highly Unlikely, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory, H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible) Outcome: S Sustainability: L Institutional Development Impact: SU Bank Performance: S Borrower Performance: S QAG (if available) ICR Quality at Entry: S Project at Risk at Any Time: No 3. Assessment of Development Objective and Design, and of Quality at Entry 3.1 Original Objective: The preparation of this intensive learning ICR included holding a stakeholders workshop that was attended by the Project staff, Government (central and local) staff, non-governmental organizations, and donors. The workshop discussed the 2003 Beneficiary Assessment,the Listenership, Readership and Viewership Survey, a Department for International Development (DFID) evaluation of the Public Works Program, among others. The outcome of the stakeholders workshop is contained in Annex 9. The Malawi Second Social Action Fund (MASAF II) was a follow-on operation of MASAF I, and the US$66 million Credit became effective while MASAF I was still under implementation. The development objective of MASAF II was to enhance and sustain the provision and use of resource endowments by beneficiary communities which would contribute to poverty reduction through: (a) addressing the need for socio-economic infrastructure development in rural and urban areas; (b) supporting safety net programs through creation of temporary employment for the very poor and financing initiatives to assist the most vulnerable groups such as orphans, street children, persons with disabilities, the aged and those affected by Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS); and (c) enhancing in-country capacity to identify, prioritize and implement projects by training of stakeholders at national, regional, district and community levels. The development objective was clear, realistic, and in line with the (a) Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) of August 4, 1998 (Report No. 18349 MAI) whose objectives included reducing poverty through targeted interventions for the poorest, as well as (b) Government of Malawi (GOM) Poverty Alleviation Program. The Project was not overly demanding on the Management Unit (MU), notwithstanding the inclusion of a new component, and was not complex or risky. It continued to support nation-wide activities, and the number of institutions that would be involved could not be predetermined. There were no co-financiers, although parallel financing was provided part way through the Project. 3.2 Revised Objective: Project objectives were not revised. 3.3 Original Components: The project had the following five components. Community Sub-Projects (CSP) would finance community demand driven socio-economic infrastructure (rehabilitation, extension and construction of primary and secondary schools, health facilities, rehabilitation and construction of markets, small scale water supply, storm drainage and sanitation, pavement of access roads, and construction of roads and bridges) in rural and urban areas. The component was premised on the vision, endowments and capabilities of community groupings to forge a development process that would produce intermediate to long-term benefits to the poor. Pro-active participation of beneficiaries in identification and prioritization of needs, decision making, implementation, social mobilization and capacity building, beneficiary targeting, project monitoring and evaluation and information, education and communication (IEC) were integral parts of this component. Project Management Committees (PMCs), with technical support from the Local Authorities (LAs), played a pivotal role in facilitating project implementation, including mobilization of the required community contribution. Public Works Program (PWP) would finance labor-intensive works as a safety net scheme in targeted poor rural and urban areas and, in so doing, not only created assets, but also provided a cash transfer to the - 2 - beneficiaries. MASAF II paid a wage rate below the minimum market rate as a self-targeting mechanism. Activities financed included road maintenance and rehabilitation, land husbandry, afforestation, water supply, sanitation and drainage schemes. Road networks for rehabilitation and maintenance were earmarked by the sector ministry but selection and implementation was done through community consultations using participatory approaches conducted by the District Executive Committees (DECs). Sponsored Sub-Projects (SSP) was going to support initiatives identified by NGOs/CBOs in collaboration with the vulnerable groups such as orphans, street children, persons with disabilities, the aged and the HIV/AIDS affected. All sub-projects were implemented through agencies including NGOs, CBOs and Faith Based Organizations (FBOs). This was a pilot to test whether NGOs/CBOs were effective and efficient providers of essential services to disadvantaged groups. Capacity Enhancement and Studies (CES) would finance capacity building of the MU, as well as national, regional and district agencies in the use of procedures and systems. The criteria for selection of the type and mode of capacity building was developed jointly amongst MASAF and the stakeholders. The component also financed project related studies, including Beneficiary Assessments, and specific studies to further enhance the operation and impact of the Project. The CES was implemented by the MU. Incremental Operating Costs would finance salaries, benefits, operational travel and subsistence of staff while supervising sub-projects; it also covered the operation and maintenance of offices, project vehicles, and equipment. Funding for the IEC activities was provided for under this component, and included financing of quality IEC interventions as articulated in the IEC strategy. A number of lessons from MASAF I were incorporated in the design including, among others: (i) the concern on management of strong community demand for sub-projects; (ii) the need to agree and build monitoring and evaluation systems around poverty reduction indicators; (iii) methods to sustain community based or local government supported maintenance of assets; (iv) capacity building techniques to foster inter-agency cooperation and collaboration; (v) recognition that communities have capacity to manage the full sub-project cycle in record time; (vi) strong ownership of the project at all levels of government; (vii) appreciation of the complementarities between the CSP and the PWP components; and (viii) the importance of involvement of Local Government staff. As a "repeater" operation, MASAF II continued to support the creation of community level social and economic infrastructure to benefit the poor, enhanced their participation in prioritizing and implementing sub-projects through PMCs, and the participation of women. In an economy that was prone to adverse weather shocks, MASAF II continued to provide support for the poor through targeted PWP. In response to the high HIV/AIDS infection rates, and the attendant rise in vulnerability, the SSP component was added to support the vulnerable through intermediary agencies such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or community based organizations (CBOs). MASAF II also built the capacity of staff from NGOs, private sector, MU, National, District, and Assemblies, thereby supporting the GOM's decentralization efforts. In addition to incorporating lessons from MASAF I, the design of these components also took into consideration the capacity of the MU, including its administrative and financial capacities, and the components were reasonably linked to achieving the Development Objective. 3.4 Revised Components: Project components were not revised. 3.5 Quality at Entry: - 3 - Based on the assessment of various elements of the project design and preparation, quality at entry is rated satisfactory. The project contributed to and was consistent with the CAS objectives of improving infrastructure, improving the quality and access to education and health services, as well as ensuring the provision of a safety net. It was also in line with GOM's priorities as articulated in the Poverty Alleviation Program. MASAF II built on the successes of MASAF I and fine-tuned its processes as the cornerstone of the new self help and community development paradigm adopted by GOM to deal with pervasive poverty. The design process was participatory, incorporated the lessons learnt from MASAF I and other international experiences, findings from the March 1997 Beneficiary Assessment (BA), and a number of studies carried out as part of the preparation. Mechanisms to increase the likelihood of sustainability, to minimize recurrent costs implications, to reflect sector priorities and the involvement of sector ministries were given due diligence during the design. The preparation process resulted in a product that had a good balance between what worked in MASAF I, and innovations arising from the preparation process. Although the output indicators were not as robust as they could have been, the ambiguity was clarified during the midterm review. The risks identified in the Project Appraisal Document were relevant, the mitigatory measures were adequate, and the "modest" risk rating was appropriate. Notwithstanding the capacity building efforts under MASAF I, the need for continued support towards sustainability efforts was properly included in MASAF II. The mainstreaming of the environment, through inclusion of environment impact assessments (EIAs) in the sub-project cycle, is to be lauded. 4. Achievement of Objective and Outputs 4.1 Outcome/achievement of objective: MASAF II enhanced and sustained the provision and use of resource endowments by beneficiary communities; therefore the outcome/achievement of objectives is rated satisfactory. The objectives of MASAF II are consistent with the CAS of May 14, 2003 (Report No. 25906 MAI) which indicates that three pillars would be built upon during this period, with the third pillar identified as "improving service delivery and strengthening safety nets." The assessment is based on impact studies undertaken after implementation (including the case study of Social Funds Experience in Africa­ Scaling Up of Poverty Reduction in Malawi and Zambia -April 2004), the Beneficiary Assessment (November 2003), the output indicators as provided in Annex 1, and Section 10 of this Report. Additionally, statistics indicate that social expenditures as a ratio of GDP in Malawi rose from 9% between 1998/99 to 2000/01 to 10.9% in 2001/02. MASAF being the biggest poverty reduction instrument in Malawi, with its strong focus on social capital formation, and putting cash in the hands of the poor communities and the vulnerable, a certain incremental percentage of social expenditure can partly be inferred to MASAF. According to the case study of Social Funds Experience in Africa ­ "Scaling up of Poverty Reduction in Malawi and Zambia" (April 2004), the impact of both MASAF and the Zambia Social Investment Fund is rated positive thus confirming that indeed MASAF benefited the project target beneficiaries. The study confirmed that MASAF project beneficiaries enjoyed : · Improved access to social services. · Increased utilization of these services and assets. · Higher quality of services and assets. · Opportunities arising from infrastructure development. · Gains from skills and abilities to work together and organize themselves. The 2003 BA also indicates that support through MASAF II to the education sector has significantly improved enrollments, reduced the walking distance to schools and reduced the drop-out rates. Similarly, investments in water and sanitation activities have reportedly reduced the incidences and treatment of - 4 - waterborne diseases in the sub-project areas, reduced distances to safe water sources thereby making more productive time available to women and children, and increased the prevalence of use of good hygiene habits. MASAF II has been able to address the community identified needs for socio-economic infrastructure in rural and urban areas. The BA (2003) also points to poor technical quality of sub-projects. While it is not possible to quantify the magnitude of sub-standard construction, statistics on the condition of MASAF I sub-projects carried out by the Centre for Social Research et. al. (October 2003) presents an indication of the magnitude of the problem under MASAF I. The study found that of the 121 education (school blocks and teachers houses) and 30 boreholes sub-projects sampled, 35% of the school blocks and 18% teachers houses reported having serious defects, with almost 50% of the school blocks having some damage on the floor. On the boreholes, 50% of the school boreholes and 2/3 of the stand-alone boreholes were reported as providing an adequate flow of fresh drinking water while 20% of the former and 10% of the later were no longer functional. These statistics need to be interpreted with the shortcoming outlined below. The study was for MASAF I and did not provide the factors that contributed to the defects of these assets. However it is likely that the poor quality of construction could have been a major contributor. Under MASAF II though an improvement in the design, incorporation of lessons learnt from MASAF I, strong MU and the greater involvement of the district staff in desk and field appraisals, monitoring and supervision, as well as the training of maintenance committees may have significantly reduced the magnitude of sub-standard construction found under MASAF I levels. Therefore the quality of construction of MASAF II assets is likely to be significantly better than that of MASAF I. With respect to the intention to support safety net programs through creation of temporary employment for the very poor, the BA looked at the benefits generated through the PWP, which included: temporary employment, and cash transferred into the hands of the workers, with the biggest expenditure item reported to be food. The BA found that roads and bridges constructed reportedly improved access for farmers to farm inputs, markets and clinics both during rainy and dry seasons thus improving on the quality of their lives. Although the BA findings reported that communities considered the wage rate below the market wage rate, the case study of Social Funds Experience in Africa concluded that the project was paying above the market wage rate. MASAF was paying on a task basis, whereas the minimum wage is a daily wage rate; this may have led to the impression that MASAF was paying a wage rate below the market. Both studies however conclude that the project was a major source of employment in the sampled areas and therefore had a great potential for poverty reduction. Community groups who participated in PWP have demonstrated that these interventions can be used for enhancing economic progression of the beneficiaries. Pursuance to this, a scheme with CARE Malawi, financed by DFID, in four districts is testing approaches that would add value to the effectiveness and impact of PWP beyond the wage transfer mechanisms. With respect to the aim of financing initiatives to assist the most vulnerable groups, a wide range of activities were supported. The target groups included orphans, street children, HIV/AIDS affected people, the aged, people with disabilities, widows and widowers. The interventions included early childhood development centers, vocational skills centers, agricultural activities for food security and nutrition and income generating activities. Though funding of sub-projects through the SSP commenced late in 2001, the completed projects are already distributing benefits to the vulnerable such as improving the nutrition standards of the orphans and a sense of hope to life. Some of the youth have gained skills in tailoring, carpentry and tin-smithing, tree planting, retention of soil fertility, and knitting. The disabled have improved mobility through provision of wheel chairs, tricycles, special sandals, crutches and special frames and increased confidence. With respect to the endeavor to enhance in-country capacity to identify, prioritize and implement projects - 5 - by training stakeholders at all levels, MASAF II has also succeeded in this. Community demand for sub-projects was overwhelming, intermediary agencies, local and National Government staff and PMCs were trained and an IEC strategy was developed and implemented. 4.2 Outputs by components: Community Sub-Projects (CSP) (US$51.1 million; IDA US$42.61 million, GOM US$2.24 million, and Beneficiary Communities US$6.24 million). The CSP component funded 2,255 sub-projects against the target of 2,164. According to the BA (2003), the sample indicated increased school enrollment which ranged from 1.4% to 63%, improved learning environment due to provision of permanent classroom blocks and furniture and reduced distance to schools. The percentage of infrastructure (schools, health units and other) used, managed and maintained is 98.2% against a target of 70%. The failure to attain 100% is mainly the result of health units which remain un-staffed. The component not only met the physical indicators, but also contributed to institutional development through the training provided to PMCs. Despite the shortfall on the training of artisans in skills improvement, the component related well to the development objectives, and is rated highly satisfactory. Public Works Program (PWP) (US$13.1 million; IDA US$12.5 million, GOM US$0.6 million). The target of 286 sub-projects was surpassed, with 382 completed. Against a target of 720,000 people to receive two months wages, only 535,676 had received these. The failure to meet this target was the result of variations from the original assumptions that (a) each sub-project would employ 630 people; participants per sub-project were actually 300; and (b) the duration of the sub-project would last between 3-4 months; the sub-projects typically lasted 8-9 months. While the number of beneficiaries was fewer than estimated, the period for which an individual received wages was for a longer duration. The number of women in receipt of wages for at least two months exceeded the targets by 144% (i.e., 244,274 women received wages for at least two months against the target of 100,000); however the percentage of women in PWP PMCs was only 25% against the target of 50%. The reasons advanced are that women in very poor and vulnerable households are so involved in survival activities that the opportunity cost of sitting in meetings is too high to be afforded. Impressive outputs were also recorded in the number of households receiving employment: 119,039 compared to the set target of 80,000. Sub-project costs going towards unskilled labor was 46%, surpassing the target of 40%. The component related well to the development objective, met the physical target set, and, notwithstanding the shortcomings noted above, is rated satisfactory. Sponsored Sub-Projects (SSP) (US$0.6 million; IDA US$0.5 million, GOM US$0.1 million). This component is rated highly satisfactory. The original allocation of US$0.5 million was for a pilot to test whether NGOs/CBOs were effective and efficient providers of essential services to the disadvantaged groups, and the target was for 43 sub-projects. Based on the performance of the NGOs/CBOs, and the community demand, an additional US$2.8 million was provided through savings from other components. While one would have expected, with the additional funding, that 258 sub-projects would have been supported, in fact the component financed 384 of the 1,344 community requests received, far exceeding the anticipated sub-project target. Although no targets were set relating to the number of people to benefit from SSP, of the 252,686 beneficiaries, 209,832 were orphans, 4,698 were the elderly, 40 were street children, 18,154 were chronically ill and those affected by HIV/AIDS, and 20,962 were people with disabilities. The proportion of women participating in committees was 54% against the target of 50%, and the number of NGOs/CBOs that were trained in project cycle management was 275 against the target of 10. Support to early childhood development centers provided the children with a conducive learning environment and opportunity for improved nutrition status through the feeding program. - 6 - The BA points to the need to clarify the roles of participants, in particular the Project Supporting Committees (PSCs), which were to serve as the link between the implementing CBO, direct beneficiaries and the wider community. Steps were taken to clarify this through workshops and it is expected that clarity of roles will go a long way in improving accountability and transparency thus contributing to empowering the vulnerable. The component also related well to the Development Objective, graduating from a pilot to a mainstream component, provided support to poverty reduction, and building capacity of both NGOs/CBOs, and also the beneficiaries. This component is rated highly satisfactory. Capacity Enhancement and Studies (US$3.9 million; IDA US$3.9 million). Although the performance of this component is mixed, with areas of success and targets which were not met, the component is rated satisfactory. During MASAF II, 614 public and private sector persons (excluding PMCs) had been trained in CSP, including village head persons, group village head persons and ward councilors. While it was expected that 2,900 artisans would receive training on skills improvement, only 30 benefited. This was due to lack of interest on the part of the technical training institutions in-country to provide this training. In the last half of the project life, the MU entered into a collaborative arrangement with the Technical and Vocational Entrepreneurship Training Centre to provide support in this area. Under PWP, the expectation was 300 people would undergo training; the target was surpassed as 195 Councilors were oriented, and 109 Assembly and sectoral staff were trained. Training was provided to 16,054 people, including CBOs, and the PMCs under PWP and CSP. The trained members of MASAF staff stood at 926 which included 18 internal training courses, workshops, studies, and field visits undertaken, with 17 staff provided with external training. The training contributed to enhanced capacities of MASAF staff and other implementing agencies to manage and implement sub-projects. Only 16 out of a target of 21 studies were undertaken by the end of the project period since the PHRD grant for preparation of MASAF 3 funded a number of studies on the future role of MASAF. Since EIAs were internalized in all project appraisals, the target of 1,395 was surpassed as almost all sub-projects were screened for EIA. Challenges under this component were mainly due to the vacancy of the Monitoring and Evaluation post. Incremental Operating Costs (US$7.5 million; IDA US$6.5 million, GOM US$1.0 million). The MU and Zone Offices functioned well. With support from Local Authorities and NGOs/CBOs, community demand to plan, prioritize, prepare and implement sub-projects was stimulated. This component also funded IEC to sensitize stakeholders on MASAF II procedures and processes, document lessons learnt and feed these back to the concerned stakeholders. IEC continued to be the oil that facilitated the MASAF II operations. A Listenership, Readership and Viewership Survey, covering 15 districts in 3 regions, indicated that more than 95% of those interviewed were aware of the Project and that men and women were equally targeted. However, there was reportedly a big knowledge gap regarding MASAF principles between PMC members and their communities. This could have been improved through: (i) creating a strong information interface at district level; (ii) ensuring that project related information circulated optimally between MASAF Zone Managers/field office staff, PMCs/PSCs, and communities; and (iii) developing information content and channels, factoring in the existing high levels of illiteracy. Overall, this component is rated satisfactory. 4.3 Net Present Value/Economic rate of return: An economic rate of return (ERR) of 29% was calculated at appraisal for primary education, water and roads under the assumption that communities are rational economic actors and that their choices reflect the greatest return to their inputs of labour, time and materials. At the time of appraisal ERR ranged from 15% for secondary schools to 50% for primary schools. ERR for roads was estimated at 26% at the time. It was also assumed that the communities in MASAF would follow the same pattern of sub-project selection as in MASAF I. On the basis of its orientation to supporting vulnerable groups, the economic justification for SSP was assumed strong. These assumptions, though theoretically sound, are not found - 7 - realistic as they fail to capture the immediate benefits (both in terms of quality and quantity) accruing to communities arising from public infrastructure and other externalities arising from these public investments. The ICR has therefore focused on the use of a cost effectiveness and efficiency analysis, comparing MASAF use of resources with other organizations. The least cost analysis undertaken at appraisal indicated that the unit costs of MASAF projects were about half the cost of commercial works. For boreholes, the unit cost difference was about 20% lower than the traditional projects. According to a 2003 review undertaken by EMC Jatula Associates, "Review of Cost Effectiveness and Design Standards", MASAF was found to be a least cost instrument for delivering infrastructure and social support to the poor (see Annex 3 for the cost comparisons). The study indicated that the cost of building a variety of structures such as classrooms, boreholes, bridges and pit latrines through MASAF was nearly 30-50% less than the cost of similar structures financed by donors, private contractors, Government Departments and the National Road Authority. As noted in the ICR for MASAF I, the analysis does not provide cost per square meter comparisons but rather unit cost comparisons, and not always at constant prices. Additionally, the analysis does not take into consideration quality issues. The data is therefore interpreted with these limitations in consideration. 4.4 Financial rate of return: No financial rate of return was calculated for the Project at appraisal. 4.5 Institutional development impact: The MU has maintained a strong quasi-autonomous agency under the Office of the President and Cabinet. A MASAF Board (with broad representation) was appointed to provide oversight functions, ensure compliance with guidelines as set out in the Project Manuals, give policy guidance, and monitor the impact of MASAF on communities served. Various documents reviewed in MASAF, indicate a strong impact of MASAF as an institution on achieving the various objectives. The MU has ensured that the demand driven nature of the project is realized at the community level, and provided the appropriate qualified staff to assist in the realization of the project goals. A strong partnership has been built between communities, CBOs/NGOs, private sector, local authorities, District Assemblies and the MU. The strong institutional impact is evidenced through the following: ü The capacity developed in the context of MASAF projects became crucial and useful in meeting the emergencies during the 2002 drought. The PWP was quickly expanded to augment incomes. The Bank supported Emergency Drought Recovery Credit shows that augmenting incomes and expanding food supplies are two crucial elements of the GOM's food security strategy. ü The project enhanced the nodes of social capital throughout the country in the form of PMCs for CSP and PWP, and PSCs for SSP. These organizations have the potential of being used to form the basis for economic organization such as savings and investments clubs. ü The project supported the GOM's decentralization efforts by improving targeting of resources and capacity building at District level to respond to community needs. ü Non-politicization of the project and transparency of its processes has kept the project free of political controversy. The institutional development impact is rated substantial. 5. Major Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcome 5.1 Factors outside the control of government or implementing agency: HIV/AIDS. Similar to many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, Malawi's HIV/AIDS prevalence rate is high--15% nationwide, with urban rates running as high as 23%. The pandemic has resulted in loss of life - 8 - mainly in the productive age groups of 15 to 49 years, contributing to an increase in the number of orphans and severely straining the resources at the household level and in the economy as a whole. Structure of the economy and external shocks. Malawi is a small, predominantly rural (85% of the population), landlocked country dependent on small subsistence agriculture both for food and export. The performance of the economy is highly dependent on weather patterns. The drought of 2001/2002 severely affected the production and output of food and cash crops. The country also remains vulnerable to exogenous shocks of decreases in international commodity prices of tobacco, tea and sugarcane. Macro-economic instability and high inflation rates coupled with the depreciation of the Kwacha, has adverse effects for large-scale agriculture and smallholder farmers. These conditions increased the challenge of pervasive poverty in Malawi, resulting in overwhelming demand for community development projects from MASAF, far beyond the capacity of the implementing agency. In 2001, over 10,000 sub-project proposals were returned to the Districts due to lack of funding. The overwhelming community demand for sub-projects resulted in (i) delays in sub-project approval, implementation, completion and, in some instances, poor technical quality; (ii) PWP wage rates not always keeping up with inflation, thereby continuously eroding its impact; and (iii) slow implementation of sub-projects due to poor weather conditions. The drought also diverted community energies from the provision of their contribution to survival mechanisms, thus contributing to delays in implementation. 5.2 Factors generally subject to government control: General and Local Government elections and implementation of the Decentralization Policy. The general elections in 1999 and the Local Government elections in 2000 created instability at the community and district level causing sub-project implementation delays. Critical staff at the district level were deployed as returning officers, while some PMC members were competing for elected positions in Local Governments. Staff recruitment by Local Government following the passing of the decentralization policy further compounded the problem. Recurrent Cost Implications for Community Assets Created. Some of the assets created under the Project have not been staffed due to limited financial and/or human resources at local and central government levels. Maintenance of rehabilitated roads has similarly been problematic due to limited resources. Some of the minimization measures taken by the MU included stopping the financing of sub-projects in the health sector and involvement of district staff in both desk and field appraisal, with a view to minimizing funding sub-projects without being sure of recurrent costs. 5.3 Factors generally subject to implementing agency control: Management information system (MIS) and the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system were not able to track outcome indicators. An MIS and M&E system were in place and being used by the MU to report progress against the agreed key performance indicators but there was poor linkage with poverty monitoring activities by the Ministry of Planning and Economic Development. Consequently, outcome indicators that were included in the design of the project were not being captured, making it relatively difficult to measure the impact of the Project on the beneficiaries/beneficiary communities. Additionally, the M&E position remained unfilled most of the project life due to difficulties in attracting (and retaining) skilled M&E staff. Financial management data was tracked through a computerized system but tracking physical achievements would have been improved by a computerized system. Effectiveness of poverty targeting and impact. As noted above, the poor have benefited from the SSP and - 9 - PWP components, and the 2003 BA indicates that, under the SSP component, the following people and methods were used: ü Church, village headman, Members of Parliament, Health Surveillance Assistants identified beneficiaries ü Chairman goes to village with written names of needy orphans ü Club members or CBOs identify beneficiaries ü Entire community did orphan count ü Volunteer poverty assessment committees identify beneficiaries ü Beneficiaries are identified through guardians who go to register ü Sponsored agency selects beneficiaries ü Project sub-committees identify beneficiaries Clearly, some of these methods were neither harmonized nor participatory. Additionally, under PWP, a self-targeting wage (20% below the market minimum wage rate) was used as a means of targeting, but led, in some instances, to the exclusion of the deserving and inclusion of the non- deserving due to high levels of labor supply. As noted previously, while the BA findings show that communities considered the wage rate below the market wage rate, the case study on Malawi and Zambia concluded that MASAF was paying above the market wage rate. The huge labour supply, lack of opportunities and the slow pace of wage revision may have led to the perception that the PWP wage rate was below the market wage rate. However, community perceptions need to be interpreted with the knowledge that this was a safety net, meant to provide incremental income to the poor. The experiences from the MASAF/CARE pilot, where savings are combined with PWP, are expected to generate lessons that will improve targeting in the future. Limited capacity in technical supervision. There was evidence of limited capacity in technical supervision. Communities interviewed during the 2003 BA attested to lack of technical capacity thus- "in some schools, the quality of infrastructure was poor...one of the sampled schools had deep cracks on the walls while the floors had many potholes. At another school, nearly all the toilets had sank in...In this case, it is apparent that there was no engineering supervision to advise". Discussions with the MU confirmed that the technical capacity at the MU and zone level was weak because this was meant to be the responsibility of the District; this compromised the quality of sub-projects in some cases. Building the capacity of sectoral staff at district and line ministry levels could minimize this problem. Lack of Standard Operating Bills of Quantities. To facilitate cost effectiveness in the delivery of the sub-projects, as well as taking into account different geographic requirements, it would have been helpful for communities, as well as other stakeholders, to have had access to Standard Operating Bills of Quantities which were appropriate to their literacy levels. The preparation of these would have aided in more accurate costing of sub-projects. Clarification of Roles and Responsibilities under SSP. The BA points to the need to clarify the roles of participants, in particular the PSC, which is supposed to serve as a link between the implementing CBO, direct beneficiaries and the wider community. Although steps were taken to clarify this, improved accountability and transparency would go a long way in empowering the vulnerable communities. 5.4 Costs and financing: The total project cost was estimated at US$76.10 million, with IDA providing US$66 million, GOM providing US$3.9 million, and communities contributing US$6.3 million. The actual/latest estimate shows that IDA contributed US$64.46 million, GOM provided US$3.67 million and communities contributed - 10 - US$9.2 million, approximately a 46% increase over the original estimate. Similar to other Projects in the portfolio, MASAF also experienced delays in receiving counterpart funds, although by the Project closing date all of the arrears had been repaid. As a result of MASAF II becoming effective while MASAF I was still under implementation, there was an initial delay of approximately 9 months before any significant disbursements were made from MASAF II as communities identified sub-projects and had them processed by Districts. During implementation, the allocations to the PWP and SSP components were increased as a result of the drought which affected communities' abilities to provide the requisite contribution, and by the demand on these components. The PWP and SSP components stimulated and supported the traditional coping mechanisms which rely on extended family mechanisms, reinforcing community livelihood systems. As a result of MASAF's success in this area, DFID provided funding for a PWP as part of the National Safety Nets Strategy for Malawi. The support, US$4.25 million in 2001/2, funded a CARE PWP pilot in four districts to test targeting approaches and determine the appropriate wage rate for PWPs to have an impact on poverty. MASAF procedures were utilized for this support. DFID provided to MASAF an additional US$7.67 million covering 2002/04 for improving livelihoods through PWPs. Due to the delays in the start-up, the impact of the drought on the CSP component, and the promise to fully utilize the Credit funds, the closing date was extended from May 31, 2003 to November 30, 2003. However, in addition to the US$0.76 million exchange rate loss that the Credit experienced, and notwithstanding assurances to the contrary, with the attention of staff focused on the preparation of MASAF 3, an equal amount was cancelled. 6. Sustainability 6.1 Rationale for sustainability rating: MASAF was established in 1995 before the decentralization policy was established and, as a result, it was working directly with communities and district teams of civil servants. When the decentralization framework was put in place in 2000, MASAF further involved the district staff in project selection, field and desk appraisal and technical monitoring and supervision. Capacity building of the district staff was an integral activity of the project. In addition, some of the studies undertaken by MASAF have been put at the disposal of the districts for use. Recognizing the need to further strengthen decentralization and ensure sectoral linkages without losing gains in community empowerment achieved under MASAF I and II, the design of MASAF 3 took a phased approach to integrating its operations into district development planning Framework adopted by Local Authorities (LAs) ­ helping each LA meet agreed delivery benchmarks defined by the sector. It is expected that this approach will further strengthen the decentralization agenda. - 11 - The community development approach under MASAF has been successful. Principles of community contribution, and procedures to involve communities in planning, design and implementation were emphasized as sustainability elements. For example, PMCs were established to build schools, and hand over to school management committees at completion, and community water management committees were provided skills for borehole maintenance. Skills were also transferred to district staff especially in appraisal, implementation and monitoring of sub-projects for purposes of maintenance and sustainability. Experiences in MASAF I and other regions show a positive correlation between community participation and sustainability of community sub-projects. A number of sectors have adopted the MASAF approach for community-based activities. In support of this approach, each relevant sector designated a desk officer that acted as a conduit between the sector ministry and MASAF. The advantages of this approach were many: (i) each sector internalized lessons learnt in an attempt to make recurrent costs of the assets created; (ii) communities take ownership of the assets and they take care of them; and (iii) some of the activities not financed by MASAF have been taken over by other development projects/stakeholders. Maintenance of roads, bridges and health units remained poor partly due to the public nature of these sub-projects but also due to inadequate technical and financial support from line ministries. Overall the sustainability of assets created under MASAF are rated likely. 6.2 Transition arrangement to regular operations: MASAF II was implemented largely through a decentralized framework involving communities, LA employees, NGOs, the private sector and line ministries. Attempts were made to build capacities of the various stakeholders during the project. Realizing the achievements made during MASAF I and II, GOM requested a third operation in order to build on the successes. Under MASAF 3, improved facilitation will allow communities to articulate their priority development concerns within the social funds criteria and the district planning framework. Priorities that emerge outside the project menu will be linked to other development programs. As was true in MASAF I and II, eligible sub-projects are to be derived from activities that largely deliver a community good rather than an individual benefit. The activities will be within the approved District Development Plan based on village action plans reflecting priority community needs. The PWP will continue to be implemented by LAs, and the SSP will continue to be implemented through NGOs/CBOs who have a history of working with such groups. MASAF 3 expects to gradually build the capacity of the Districts to take over the responsibility of funding communities, NGOs/CBOs so as to improve the sustainability of activities within their Districts. The transitional arrangement is rated satisfactory. 7. Bank and Borrower Performance Bank 7.1 Lending: The Bank's performance is rated satisfactory. The Project was in line with the CAS and the GOM Poverty Alleviation Strategy. A PHRD grant of US$500,000 (TF025443), requested by GOM for IDA administration, provided technical assistance in the preparation of MASAF II. The Grant funded studies relating to the regulatory framework, BA analysis and participatory approaches, evaluation of the on-going PWP and CSP components, and preparation of the SSP component, among others. The files indicate that Malawi benefited tremendously from this funding, as 90% of the studies were carried out by local consultants/institutions. The pre-appraisal mission of April/May 1998 was upgraded to an appraisal, and the Project was negotiated in July 1998, approved by the Board in October 1998 and declared Effective on February 10, 1999. While the sub-project components were repeaters, the design took into consideration lessons learned during the implementation of MASAF I, and a new component (SSP) was included to - 12 - respond to the needs of the vulnerable who were not catered for under the other components. The preparation team studied the operating environment, articulated the possible risks and proposed mitigation measures. The technical, financial and administrative issues were well addressed during the design. 7.2 Supervision: There were four changes in Task Team Leaders during implementation, but only one change in key staff supporting the Project. Supervision resources were adequate, and MASAF II was supervised on a semi-annual basis; a mid-term review was undertaken in February 2002. Ratings provided in the Project Status Report were realistic, and the review teams comprised the requisite skills including staff in the Country Office, and at the appropriate times. From mid-term onwards, efforts were made to harmonize the timing of the reviews with DFID, who was providing parallel support to the PWP component; these efforts continued to be strengthened during implementation with a view to complementing each other skills and leveraging resources. The Bank worked with the MU to guide implementation and ensured that the Development Credit Agreement (DCA) was complied with. The supervision missions devoted significant efforts into capacity and team building, and mutual learning efforts as evidenced by the issues covered under the various Aide Memoires. The Bank team quickly responded to issues, including those that required amending the DCA with respect to the Special Account and reallocations. The Bank, however, in some instances did not live up to its business standards relating to procurement turnaround times; fortunately this did not lead to major delays in activities. Notwithstanding these shortcomings, the Bank's performance is rated satisfactory. 7.3 Overall Bank performance: The overall Bank performance is rated satisfactory. Borrower 7.4 Preparation: The GOM prepared a project concept document, requested the Bank for support, prepared the pre-appraisal/appraisal jointly with the Bank team, negotiated and fulfilled effectiveness conditions. The design process was participatory. Design studies were undertaken, and workshops and other stakeholder meetings were financed through the PHRD Grant. The preparation team included line ministry staff, Local Government officials, donors and other agencies, and took into account lessons gained from MASAF I. The preparation of the credit by the Borrower is rated satisfactory. 7.5 Government implementation performance: There was high level political support for MASAF II, evidenced through briefs to His Excellency the President by the preparation and supervision missions, meetings held with various Ministers and Permanent Secretaries and district political leadership. The Board of Directors comprised of eminent Malawians who provided policy guidance and ensured that the MU had competent staff. Within the limitations of a weak decentralization framework coupled with weak technical capacities at District level, the sub-project cycle process was supported by District staff. In the case of SSPs, implementation was through NGOs, with implementation by communities and Districts in the case of CSPs and PWPs respectively. While there were continued delays in the receipt of counterpart funds, these were ultimately provided. On the basis of the foregoing, performance is rated satisfactory. 7.6 Implementing Agency: The implementation agency's performance is rated satisfactory. The MU was responsible for preparing the project documents, and facilitated IDA reviews. The MU made every effort to ensure that the Project complied with the DCA and GOM guidelines. It guided the technical implementation of the Project by providing on-the-spot answers to implementation questions. Staffing of the MU was adequate, with the - 13 - exception of M&E. The MU hosted international visitors representing countries that were interested in studying the operations of successful social funds. In some cases the staff provided technical assistance both within Malawi and abroad. The MU adhered to the principles of a social fund by remaining autonomous and protecting the project from political pressure. At the end of the project, the MU organized an intensive learning implementation completion workshop through which participants gave feedback on the successes of the project and shared the lessons learnt. Notwithstanding its numerous successes, the implementation of a strong M&E system to capture data on a regular basis continued to elude it, resulting in a failure to produce consolidated quarterly and annual reports in a timely manner; the lack of a robust computerized tracking system contributed to a failure to capture the outcome indicators. 7.7 Overall Borrower performance: The overall Borrower performance is rated satisfactory. 8. Lessons Learned Transparency and Accountability: Development communication has emerged as a critical area of ensuring accountability and transparency. The IEC continued to be the oil that facilitated MASAF II operations. It synthesized experiences from communities, local authorities and NGOs into useful knowledge and information that contributed to increased and informed community participation in the sub-project implementation process as well as accountability at the community level. Future operations will need to retain Development Communication as an integral element of the Project design. Effectiveness of Safety Nets Interventions: The Project demonstrated that in social funds, District managed public works and community development activities can work side by side. The need for PWP to be better linked to a productive investment like a savings activity, as piloted by CARE, has emerged as a better approach. This can be made even more successful by building on the social capital formed through the various PMCs under PWP and PSCs under SSP to create savings and investment organizations. Ownership: Thorough appraisal processes (extended participatory rural appraisals as well as desk and field appraisals) contribute to the building of ownership. Performance by Sectors: The provision of quality and timely service packages to communities requires better linkage between the work of the districts and central government officials responsible for ensuring that the resources are available to meet recurrent costs for community interventions. Harnessing social capital to create economic capital: MASAF I and II experiences with community participation has shown the potency of social capital as a vehicle for meeting economic ends, which would lead to a direct impact on poverty at the individual and household levels. Standard Operating Bills of Quantities: The implementation of CDD program such as MASAF, where acquisition of goods and services for the delivery of sub-projects involves many actors requires that costs for the types of infrastructure components funded are more or less estimated with a greater degree of accuracy. This not only facilitates cost effectiveness in the delivery of the Project, but also takes account of differing requirements for geographic location and the literacy levels of some of the implementers. Bank Supervision and Capacity Building: An enormous amount of time by the supervision missions went into mutual learning and team building for capacity building as evidenced by the issues covered under the Aide Memoires. This is a good practice. - 14 - 9. Partner Comments (a) Borrower/implementing agency: (b) Cofinanciers: (c) Other partners (NGOs/private sector): 10. Additional Information - 15 - PROGRESS TOWARDS INDICATORS As At March 2004 INDICATOR TARGET ACHIEVEMENT REMARK 1.0 National Indicators 1.1 Budget allocated to Social Sectors 5% Social expenditure as % increase between 1998 and 2002 ratio to GDP was 9% in 1998/1999 and rose to 10.9% in 2001/2002 1.2 Per capita income % increase 180% 7.06% According to the Economic Report between 1998 and 2002 2003 1.3 % decrease of people living under 10% None No change from 1998, currently IHS the poverty line by 2002 is under way and information will be available in 2005 1.4 Total population with increased 3.0 million 3.2 million Beneficiaries under CSP, PWP and access to infrastructure SSP 2.0 Community Sub Projects Component 2.1. Total number of community Not set 12,130 sub-project requests received 2.2. Total number of community 2,164 2,255 sub-projects funded. 2.3. Total number of community 2,164 2,216 39 not completed by EOP sub-projects completed 2.4 % of women participating in 39% 38.1% 99% achievement of this target PMCs 2.5 Proportion (% share) of women 50% 56% Composition of women higher in WPCs. than men in WPCs 2.6 Number of public and private 2,900 614 persons Comprises village head persons, sector persons trained in CSP persons Group Village head persons and (excluding PMCs) ward councilors 2.7 Percentage of infrastructure 100% 98.2% Some health facilities are waiting (schools, heath units and other) used, for staff. managed and maintained 2.8 Proportion of Water Point 100% 98% Some WPCs in Blantyre Zone Committee (WPCs) trained in CBM still not trained. for water facilities. 2.9No. of urban works (CSP) 100 93 These projects are also included in Completed 2.2 and 2.3 3.0 Public Works Program (PWP) 3.1 Number of sub-projects requests Not set 1,279 Based on requests from District received. Assemblies using Vulnerability Assessment Mapping. 3.2 Number of sub-projects funded 286 382 3.3 Number of sub-projects 6 not completed by EOP completed. 286 376 3.4 No. of individuals that received at 720,000 535,676 Average project duration is 8-9 least 2 months wages (IDA) 1998 ­ months. Number of participants per - 16 - 2003 project was not 630 as planned but 300. 3.5 Number of households benefiting 80,000 119,039 Per Zone quarterly reports from employment. 3.6 Number of women in receipt of 100,000 244,274 Per Zone quarterly reports wages for at least two months. 3.7 % share of subproject costs 40 % 46 % Per Zone quarterly reports. accounting for unskilled labor wages. 3.8 No of District Assembly 195 councillors Councillors oriented 300 302 3.9 Number of Assembly and 107 senior staff sectoral staff oriented. 3.10. Total number of people 3,400 3,508 (a) District - 405, cashiers - 39 and trained at sub-project level (b) foremen - 452, PMCs - 2,712 (a) District Level 444 (b) Project Level 3,164 3.11 % of women in PWP PMCs 50 % 25% 4.0 Sponsored Sub-projects Component (SSP) 4.01 Total number of sponsored Demand 1,344 sub-project requests received Driven 4.02 Total number of sponsored 43 384 sub-projects funded 4.03 Total number of sponsored 43 346 -10 cancelled due to gross projects completed. mismanagement of funds -28 not completed by EOP 4.04 Total number of people CBO/NGO 252,686 benefiting from sub-projects. dependent. - No of orphans Not set 209,832 - No. of elderly Not set 4,698 - No. of street children Not set 40 - No. of chronically ill and those Not set 18.154 affected by HIV/Aids - No. of people with disabilities Not set 20,962 4.05 Proportion (%) of females Not set 60% benefiting from sub-projects. 4.06 Proportion (%) of women 50 % 54% participating in committees (PSCs). 4.07 Number of NGOs / CBOs 43 275 trained in project cycle management in SSP 4.8 Number of PSC members 430 3,250 trained - 17 - Annex 1. Key Performance Indicators/Log Frame Matrix Outcome / Impact Indicators: 1 Indicator/Matrix Projected in last PSR Actual/Latest Estimate Enhanced and sustainable provision of and CSP: 1,100 subprojects - 1,055 water CSP 2,255, PWP 382, SSP 384 use of resource endowments by beneficiary subprojects; PWP 286 subprojects; SSP: 43 communities through a 25% increase in the subprojects number of CSP, PWP, SSP projects aproved, implemented and completed by End of Project Improved access, quality coverage, 3 million more people will have access and 3.2million sustainability and use of social services by use beneficiaries, including marginalized groups Enhanced capacity of implementing agencies 6,400 trained and using their skills 16,054 people in PMCs under PWP, CSP to manage and implement projects at and CBOs community level Increased income of targeted beneficiaries 720,000 persons received 2 month salary 535,676 persons received at least 2 months through temporary employment of salary Output Indicators: 1 Indicator/Matrix Projected in last PSR Actual/Latest Estimate Capacity of beneficiary communities to 275 communities trained; 30% completed 2,899 committees out of 3,021 trained in, identify, prioritize, supervise, monitor and projects per quality standards; 25% projects among other things, asset maintenance i.e., operate projects are improved and maintained after completion 96% completed projects strengthened; 30% projects completed per quality standards; 25% of subprojects maintained afer completion Community subprojects implemented, safety 2,164 CSP subprojects implemented; 286 2,255 CSP, 382 PWP, 384 SSP net programs established and in operation PWP subprojects established; 43 SSP and SSP projects implemented subprojects implemented NGOs and private sector agencies trained in 10 agencies trained 275 agencies trained SSP project cycle management Women's participation in MASAF activities 30% increase in women's participation in 29% increase in women in PMCs, 56% of increased and enhanced PMC; 50% of maintenance committee women in maintenance committee and members are women; 100,000 women 244,274 employed in PWP employed in the PWP Environmental impact assessed and 1395 environmental impact assessments Almost all sub-projects subjected to mitigation measures taken carried out environmental impact assessment, since it was built into the sub-project cycle Project relevant studies on impact 21 studies completed 16 studies completed; funding for future role assessment, future role of project of project funded from PHRD grant of management and beneficiary assessments MASAF 3 completed PMU capacity for M & E increased Quarterly reports on output indicators issued; 16 quarterly consolidated reports against the yearly report on developmental objective target of 24; 4 annual reports against the indicators issued; yearly report on Goal/CAS target of 5; 1 BA which gives contributions on indicators issued CAS indicators 1End of project - 18 - Annex 2. Project Costs and Financing Project Cost by Component (in US$ million equivalent) Appraisal Actual/Latest Percentage of Estimate Estimate Appraisal Component US$ million US$ million Community Subprojects 51.10 50.98 100 Public Works Program 13.10 13.98 107 Sponsored Subprojects 0.50 4.22 843 Capacity Enhancement 3.90 3.46 89 Incremental Operating Costs 7.50 4.69 63 Total Baseline Cost 76.10 77.33 Total Project Costs 76.10 77.33 Total Financing Required 76.10 77.33 Annex 2b: Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ million equivalent) at Appraisal Category Procurement Method ICB NCB Community Other NBF Total Participation 1. Community Subprojects 0.00 0.00 44.60 3.0 6.69 54.36 (42.42) (3.0) (45.42) 2. Works- PWP 0.00 0.00 12.78 0.68 0.06 13.51 (12.14) (0.66) (12.80) 3. Sponsored Subprojects 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.56 (0.41) (0.12) (0.53) 4. Equipment, Furniture 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.43 and Supplies (0.40) (0.03) (0.43) 5. Consultants, Training 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.18 0.00 4.18 and Workshops (4.14) (4.14) 6. Incremental Operating 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.68 0.43 3.11 costs (2.68) (2.68) Total 0.00 0.40 57.87 10.69 7.17 76.14 IDA (0.40) (54.97) (10.62) (66.00) Notes: Numbers in parenthesis refer to the amount financed by International Development Association. Annex 2c Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ million equivalent) -Actual - 19 - Category Procurement Method ICB NCB Community Other NBF Total Participation 1. Community Subprojects 0.00 0.00 42.48 0.00 8.50 50.98 (40.36) (40.36) 2. Works- PWP 0.00 0.00 13.98 0.00 0.00 13.98 (13.28) (13.28) 3. Sponsored Subprojects 0.00 0.00 3.52 0.00 0.70 4.22 (3.34) (3.34) 4. Equipment, Furniture 0.33 0.04 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.62 and Supplies (0.33) (0.03) (0.20) (0.56) 5. Consultants, Training 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.46 0.00 3.46 and Workshops (3.46) (3.46) 6. Incremental Operating 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.07 0.00 4.07 costs (3.46) (3.46) Total 0.33 0.04 59.98 7.78 9.20 77.33 IDA (0.33) (0.03) (56.98) (7.12) (64.46) Notes: Numbers in parenthesis refer to the amount financed by International Development Association. Financing arrangements combined Equipment as part of Incremental Costs. Project Financing by Component (in US$ million equivalent) Percentage of Appraisal Component Appraisal Estimate Actual/Latest Estimate IDA Govt. CoF. IDA Govt. CoF. IDA Govt. CoF. Community Subprojects 42.60 2.20 6.30 40.38 2.12 8.50 94.8 96.4 134.9 Public Works Program 12.50 0.60 13.28 0.70 106.2 116.7 Sponsored Subprojects 0.50 0.10 3.34 0.18 0.70 668.0 180.0 Capacity Enhancement 3.90 3.46 88.7 Incremental Operating 6.50 1.00 4.02 0.67 61.8 67.0 Costs - 20 - Annex 3. Economic Costs and Benefits Comparison of Construction Cost of MASAF with that of other Organizations MASAF Percentage Project Cost $'000 Cost $'000 Difference Classroom Block DFID 15.0 9.5 36.7 Single Pit Latrine DFID 1.4 0.4 71.4 Borehole DFID 4.40 3.2 27.3 Classroom GOM Building 15.0 9.5 36.7 Dept Single Pit Latrine GOM Building 1.5 0.7 53.3 Dept Maternity Block GOM Building 26.2 20.3 22.5 Dept Water Borehole/Tank GOM Building 16.2 8.0 50.6 Dept Admin Block GOM Building 8.1 3.5 56.8 Dept Bridge 9M ­ Single National Roads 47.8 36.3 24.1 Span Authority Classroom Block DANIDA 22.5 9.7 56.9 Borehole DANIDA 4.4 3.2 27.3 Source: January 2003, "Review of cost effectiveness and Design Standards." EMC Jatula Associates Malawi - 21 - Annex 4. Bank Inputs (a) Missions: Stage of Project Cycle No. of Persons and Specialty Performance Rating (e.g. 2 Economists, 1 FMS, etc.) Implementation Development Month/Year Count Specialty Progress Objective Identification/Preparation 01/28/1998 7 TEAM LEADER (1); ECONOMIST (2); WATER & SANITATION (1); CONSULTANT (3) Appraisal/Negotiation 04/14/1998 6 TEAM LEADER(1); PUBLIC SECTOR. MANAGEMENT (1); ECONOMIST (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); CONSULTANTS (2) 10/15/1998 4 TEAM LEADER(1); OPERATIONS (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); ECONOMIST(1) 12/05/1998 7 TEAM LEADER(1); OPERATIONS (1); FMS (1); ECONOMIST (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); MIS (1); INFRASTRUCTURE (1) Supervision 03/16/1999 5 TEAM LEADER (1); S S COMMUNICATIONS (1); INFRASTRUCTURE (1); FMS (1); PROCUREMENT (1) 10/04/1999 9 TEAM LEADER (1); S S OPERATIONS (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); ECONOMIST(1); RURAL DEVELOPMENT (1); FMS (1); PROCUREMENT (1) INFRASTRUCTURE (1) MIS (1) 04/15/2000 5 TEAM LEADER (1); S S COMMUNICATIONS (1); FMS (1); PROCUREMENT (1); INFRASTRUCTURE (1) - 22 - 12/07/2000 3 TEAM LEADER (1); S S COMMUNICATIONS (1); RURAL DEVELOPMENT (1) 02/19/2001 4 TEAM LEADER(1); ENV/ S S WATER/GENDER (1); RURAL DEVELOPMENT (1); PUBLIC HEALTH (1) 09/03/2001 8 TEAM LEADER (1); S S OPERATIONS (1); ENV./WATER/GENDER (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); RURAL DEVELOPMENT (1); FMS; HIV/AIDS (1); NUTRITION (1) ECONOMIST(1) 02/04/2002 11 TEAM LEADER (1); S S OPERATIONS (2); ENV/WATER/GENDER (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); RURAL DEVELOPMENT (1); FMS (1); PROCUREMENT (1); DFID (1); UNICEF (2) 10/10/2002 3 TEAM LEADER (1); S S OPERATIONS (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1) 05/26/2003 12 TEAM LEADER (1); SOCIAL S S DEVELOPMENT (1); FMS (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); INFORMATION OFFICER (1); PROCUREMENT (1); ARCHITECT (1); AUDITOR (1); INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE (1); DFID (ENGINEER, DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER) (2); CARE MALAWI (1) ICR 11/10/2003 12 TEAM LEADER(1); HS S SOCIAL FUNDS (1); COMMUNICATIONS (1); SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (1); FMS (1); M&E (1) PROCUREMENT (2); DFID (SAFETY NETS, ECONOMIST, ENGINEER, RURAL LIVELIHOODS) (4) - 23 - (b) Staff: Stage of Project Cycle Actual/Latest Estimate No. Staff weeks US$ ('000) Identification/Preparation 141.40 568.60 Appraisal/Negotiation 34.00 108.50 Supervision 149.89 933.20 ICR 26.30 145.10 Total 351.59 1,755.40 - 24 - Annex 5. Ratings for Achievement of Objectives/Outputs of Components (H=High, SU=Substantial, M=Modest, N=Negligible, NA=Not Applicable) Rating Macro policies H SU M N NA Sector Policies H SU M N NA Physical H SU M N NA Financial H SU M N NA Institutional Development H SU M N NA Environmental H SU M N NA Social Poverty Reduction H SU M N NA Gender H SU M N NA Other (Please specify) H SU M N NA participatory demand driven development Private sector development H SU M N NA Public sector management H SU M N NA Other (Please specify) H SU M N NA capacity building of Local Government staff, NGOs/CBOs, MU staff, PMCs and PSCs - 25 - Annex 6. Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (HS=Highly Satisfactory, S=Satisfactory, U=Unsatisfactory, HU=Highly Unsatisfactory) 6.1 Bank performance Rating Lending HS S U HU Supervision HS S U HU Overall HS S U HU 6.2 Borrower performance Rating Preparation HS S U HU Government implementation performance HS S U HU Implementation agency performance HS S U HU Overall HS S U HU - 26 - Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents Beneficiary Assessment by PAG (November 2003) The Listenership, Readership, Viwership Survey of MASAF's Development Communication Products Implementation Experiences and Challenges of Sponsored Sub-projects: A report of CBO/NGO Experience Sharing Workshops The Integrated Household Survey (2000) Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2002) Qualitative Impact Monitoring of the Poverty Alleviation Policies and Programmes in Malawi (2002) Social Funds: A Review of World Bank Experiences (2002) Poverty Reduction During Democratic Transition: The Malawi Social Action Fund (2003) The Social Funds Experience in Africa - Scaling up of Poverty Reduction in Malawi (2004) - 27 - Annex 8. Beneficiary Survey Results Highlights from the findings have been provided in the text, and the Report is available in the files. - 28 - Annex 9. Stakeholder Workshop Results Intensive Learning Implementation Completion Workshop Report by Management International ADC AREA DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CARE COOPERATION OF ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE CBO COMMUNITY BASED ORGANISATIONS CSP COMMUNITY SUB PROJECTS CSP COMMUNITY SUB PROJECT DA DISTRICT ASSEMBLY DC DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DDF DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT FUND DEC DISTRICT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DFID DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT DLG DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT FBO FAITH BASED ORGANISATIONS FC FINANCIAL COOPERATION GTZ GERMAN AGENCY FOR TECHNICAL COOPERATION HIV/AIDS HUMAN IMMUNE-DEFICIENCY SYNDROME IEC INFORMATION EDUCATION COMMUNICATION KISS KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION SHARING SYSTEM LA LOCAL AUTHORITY M&E MONITORING AND EVALUATION MASAF MALAWI SOCIAL ACTION FUND MDG MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS MEP&D MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MGPDD MALAWI-GERMAN PROGRAMME FOR DEMOCRACY MI MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL MIM MALAWI INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT MIS MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM MP MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT MU MANAGEMENT UNIT NACCEA NATIONAL ADVOCACY COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY NGO NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION NRA NATIONAL ROAD AUTHORITY PAG PARTICIPATORY ASSESSMENT GROUP PMC PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE PRA PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISALS PSC PROJECT SUPPORT COMMITTEE PWP PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMME SNP SAFETY NET PLUS SSP SPONSORED SUB-PROJECTS TAP TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY PRO. TC TECHNICAL COOPERATION TV TELEVISION TVM TELEVISION MALAWI UNDP UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME VAP VILLAGE ACTION PLAN VDC VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 29 - 1.0 Introduction This report sets out the proceedings and recommendations of the Intensive Learning and Implementation Review Workshop for MASAFII that took place at the Malawi Institute of Management (MIM) on the 19th and 20th of November 2003. Management International (MI) on behalf of the Malawi Social Action Fund (MASAF) and its partners such as the World Bank and Department for International Development (DFID) facilitated the Workshop. After this introduction, the report provides a background to the workshop, objectives of the workshop, methodology, workshop proceedings, emerging issues, lessons learnt from the implementation of MASAFII, recommendations and way forward, and a conclusion. 2.0 Background MASAFII will close on November 30, 2003 and is currently preparing to implement MASAFIII. Its main objective was to enhance and sustain the provision and use of resource endowments by beneficiary communities, which will contribute to poverty reduction. It aims to: a) address the need for socio-economic infrastructure development in rural and urban areas; b) support safety net programmes through creation of temporary employment for the very poor and financing initiatives to assist the most vulnerable groups such as orphans, street children, persons with disabilities, the aged and those affected by HIV/AIDS, and c) enhance in-country capacity to identify, prioritise and implement projects by training of stakeholders, at national, regional, district and community level. One of the preparatory activities to be undertaken as MASAFII transits into MASAFIII is to conduct a workshop with local authorities (LAs), sector ministries, donors and Non Governmental Organisations to deliberate on the experiences and lessons of the past 5 years of its implementation. (See Annex 1 for the Participant List) 3.0 Workshop Objectives 3.1 Main Objective The main objective of the Workshop was to facilitate the compilation of the Intensive Learning Implementation Completion Report by: · Drawing on lessons from MASAFII implementation as seen through the eyes of the beneficiaries and other stakeholders. · Providing a closure for MASAFII before the commencement of MASAFIII, whose design features are quite different from its predecessor. 3.2 Specific Objectives The specific objectives of the Workshop included: · Identifying the achievements and challenges in general by MASAF. · Hear reports on the Feedback from the Community Exchange Programme and the CBOs Workshop as well as MASAF's experience working with local development structures. · Discuss the findings of the Beneficiary Assessment currently underway and the recent DFID Evaluation of the Public Works Programme, and the Listenership, Readership, Viewership Survey of the MASAF Development of Communication Products, and perceptions of funding agencies. · Analyse the implications of the findings and the lessons with regard to the MASAFIII programme. · Develop recommendations for the way forward. - 30 - The full terms of reference that guided the facilitation of the Workshop are attached as Annex 2. 4.0 Workshop Methodology The methodology of the Workshop included: · Preparatory consultations, review of documentation and arrangements for workshop facilitation. (See Documents reviewed at Annex 3) · Presentations by MASAF, Consultants, and Funding Agencies. (See Annex 4 for Presentations). · Plenary Discussions after each presentation. · Group Discussions to have more in-depth understanding of the issues presented about MASAFII. Participants were divided into three groups according to MASAF components of CSP, PWP, and SSP. There was also an effort made to ensure that MASAF officials were represented in all the groups to clarify issues and to up date the knowledge of participants. Further, all the consultants were evenly spread out in the groups to facilitate their inputs into the discussions. The facilitators joined the groups to help them appreciate the dynamics around the issues being tackled and the background to recommendations made. Groups were furnished with questions by the facilitators to aid in more focused discussions of the issues arising from the presentations. (See Annex 5 for List of Questions for Day 1 and 2 of the Workshop). · Group presentation of issues and recommendations. (See Annex 6 for Group Presentations). · Plenary Discussions after Group Presentations to come to a consensus on issues, lessons, and recommendations. These are in turn elaborated below. 5.0 Workshop Proceedings 5.1 Presentation by MASAF MASAF officials made presentations on the achievements and challenges of implementing MASAFII to set the context for subsequent presentations and discussions. The presentation by MASAF also included Feedback from the Community Exchange Programme and the CBOs Workshop and its experience in working with local development structures. Presentations by MASAF confirmed the widely held belief that the programme has done well in terms of improving the lives of the common man, particularly at village level through the provision of infrastructure such as roads, schools, clinics etc and through safety nets programmes such as those under the PWP and the SSP. The Feedback from the Community Exchange Programme revealed that communities can learn from each other's experiences and that they highly valued such exchanges. It also revealed the communities' apprehension with the transference of certain MASAF responsibilities to the District Commissioner in the design of MASAFIII. The CBOs Workshop was primarily about raising awareness in the community concerning Sponsored Sub-Projects (SSP) and facilitating networking, collaboration and coordination of programmes. During the workshop, it was revealed that issues of capacity among CBOs affected the implementation of some activities under MSAFII. MASAF's experience working with local development structures indicates that significant levels of tension existed between itself and local authorities. The MASAF officials expressed concern during their presentation at what they perceived to be over reliance and dependency on it by communities. They also expressed some reservations with the calibre - 31 - of staff that represent sectors at district level, noting that many of them lack sufficient authority to make binding decisions on their Ministry Headquarters, thus compromising the quality of MASAF projects. In addition, MASAF officials expressed concern on what they perceived to be multiple donor approaches, which they identified as one of the main sources for creating confusion at community level. Further, MASAF expressed concern at the capacity of communities to provide the required contribution due to natural resource constraints. During plenary discussions on the MASAF presentation participants raised the following issues: · MASAF has facilitated the development of structures such as clinics without coordinating with the responsible Ministry leading to a number of `white elephants'. · There were reservations expressed by some at the quality of the physical structures built. · Concerns were expressed on the wage rate. It was generally seen to be too low to pull beneficiaries out of absolute poverty. · Some of the CBOs were not fully conversant with guidelines, procedures and requirements for helping communities in the implementation of project activities. 5.2 Presentations by Consultants Three groups of consultants were given an opportunity to present their findings and recommendations. 5.2.1 Beneficiary Assessment by Participatory Assessment Group (PAG) A presentation was made by PAG that undertook the Beneficiary Assessment. The highlights from their presentation included: · MASAF was largely seen by beneficiaries to have achieved its objectives. · Maintenance of school structures is a challenge because a School Committee that has not been trained replaces a trained Project Management Committee (PMC) at the end of construction. · Enrolment has been encouraged by the construction of structures, while compromising quality as teacher/pupil ratio has increased because of the Ministries inability to supply required teachers. · Improved access to services, although there are concerns about the range and quality of services provided. · Social capital built through skills training, autonomous management and direct financing. · Strong sense of ownership by the communities and hence a high degree of sustainability. · There were difficulties with low wages and with selection of PWP workers and also with late delayed payments. · The relationship between workers on PWP projects and the District Assembly (DA) was more of a boss and worker, other than development partners. · CBOs tend to identify problems of vulnerable groups in a manner that is not participatory. · VIP latrines were said not to meet standards. Many had fallen a few weeks after construction. In plenary, participants raised the following issues: · There was need to reconcile the demand driven approach used under CSP with supply constraints to assure reasonable delivery of services. · There was a need to revisit the minimum wage rate under PWP in terms of what needs to be achieved. Is it getting people out of absolute poverty or getting them to be self-reliant? · There were Issues raised pertaining to the duration and nature of employment under PWP. There seems to be an over reliance on road construction at the expense of other activities that can help people generate income. In a lot of cases road projects were done outside the `hungry period'. · There were concerns raised about the quality of roads constructed. They were said to be falling below standards. - 32 - · Quality of construction in many MASAF projects seems to be compromised by the quality of contractors engaged. 5.2.2 DFID Evaluation of the PWP A presentation was made by consultants contracted by DFID to evaluate the PWP programme. The key findings and recommendations of the study were: · Design Limitations of PWP ü Short term employment ü Seasonal inflexibility (interfere with harvest; and benefits not available in hungry period). · Low wage rate ü Primary targeting mechanism ü Jobs still oversubscribed ü Wage inadequate to meet even basic consumption needs. ü Study of the impact of higher wages (alternative targeting methods). ü Unlikely to contribute to poverty reduction. · Road standards constrained by: ü Minimum labour content ü Weak soils (rapid deterioration of earth roads) ü Local capacity · Recommendations ü Define minimum standards for district roads ü Training of supervisors ü Coordination of road funds by LAs/NRA · District Capacity ü Sub-project selection ü Late payment of wages ü New rules for MASAF funding to LAs · Monitoring ü Reliance on Beneficiary Assessments and Internal progress reports (technical) ü Baseline study as basis for future monitoring ü Use the new MIS ü DFID contribute to design of M&E system Overall, the presentation concluded by noting that due to the existing challenges, the programme may not adequately contribute to poverty reduction among the communities. In plenary, participants raised the following issues: · Plenary agreed that guidelines do not exist and that they need to be developed. · The need to resolve the issue of wage rate either by market rate or by government minimum rate. 5.2.3 The Listenership, Readership, Viewership Survey The study revealed that MASAF has managed to raise awareness of its programmes up to about 95 per cent. However, most of this has not been "deliberate", but "spontaneous" or occasional. The study also revealed that knowledge of its newest component, the SSP was low and that its communication strategy did not sufficiently take into account the lack of what the presenter called a "reading culture", and the low level of literacy. In addition, it was pointed out that the most effective way to communicate what MASAF was doing was by pictures. In plenary, participants raised the following issues: - 33 - · There was a need to relate MASAF's communication strategy to the needs of viewers, such as their entertainment. · There was need to relate MASAF's communication strategy to the problems and challenges it faces, such as addressing the role of chiefs and politicians. · MASAF should strive to use existing communication establishments such as the Extension Branch of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. 5.2.4 Perspectives of Funding Agencies Two funding agencies were invited to make presentations on their experience with MASAF and to indicate opportunities for collaboration under MASAFIII, namely GTZ and the UNDP. However, only GTZ was in a position to make a presentation. Highlights from the presentation by GTZ were as follows: · It has a programme that focuses on democratic decentralisation in the areas of: Support political capacity building (development) of the local elected leadership; Support to strengthening of the local revenue base of the DAs & the Development of capacity for the Technical Staff; Support to development of planning capacity for the technical staff; Support to the Management of the decentralisation process in Malawi. The programme is channelled through the Malawi-German Programme for Democracy and Decentralisation (MGPDD) in partnership with the Department of Local Government (DLG). · In terms of funding the districts; GTZ/Kfw in principle holds the view that the DDF should be used for funding district based activities, but awaits clarification of modalities to that end. It would want to see harmonisation of parallel funding mechanisms and harmonisation of planning and implementation structures (ADCs and VDCs) vis a vis structures of MASAF, etc. In plenary, participants raised the following issues: · Clarification was sought on the coverage of GTZ programmes. Does it work in all the districts or in some? In response plenary was told that between 1996 and 2003 the efforts of GTZ were sporadic, depending on need. It has now adopted a country-wide approach, and is in the process of establishing zonal offices. The first one has been established in Rumphi, and subsequent offices will be established in all the other regions, with a view of being close to the decentralisation process. · They wanted to know the extent to which the GTZ programme helps with the DAs to resolve the issues of the presence of chiefs, councillors and Members of Parliament (MPs). In response plenary was told that Government is in the process of reviewing the Local Government Act, and engaged consultants who among other things are reported to have made recommendations relating to the membership of chiefs and MPS in the DA. Plenary was further informed that the recommendations are in draft form and await the approval of Cabinet. · Plenary was also informed that in the Zambian scenario chiefs have been removed from the DA or equivalent body to avoid bringing in undemocratic elements. · Concerns were expressed during plenary on the calibre of Councillors. 5.3 Group Discussions and Presentations 5.3.1 Community Sub Projects (CSP) In response to the questions posed to the group, highlights of its presentation are presented below. · A communication gap was said to exist between district staff and central government. · Limited and inefficient utilisation of resources. · The civil service was largely seen to lack commitment. · There was demonstrated incompetence of some government staff. · The process of devolution was seen to be slow. - 34 - · PMCs should be given an opportunity to manage PWP projects under certain conditions. · There is inadequate capacity in research and monitoring and evaluation of MASAF activities. · MASAF should consider other capacity building measures apart from training such as community exchanges, resource supplies, and to put in place wider Knowledge and Information Sharing Systems (KISS). · The reduction of zonal offices would lead to more responsibilities being undertaken by the Local authorities, which were viewed to lack capacity. The support to the local authorities is likely to be less, which would mean that the quality of work produced by the LAs would be compromised. · The reduction in zonal offices will also signal a change in the role of Zone Managers from supervisory to advisory. · There are fears that focus on MASAF activities would suffer as a result of the reduction in zonal offices as LAs were seen to be overloaded with other responsibilities. In plenary, the following observations and recommendations were made: · There was general consensus on the capacity of DAs being inadequate to take on responsibilities that were performed by Zone Managers, particularly in terms of following up on issues, as Directors of Planning and Development who are going to be the focal points have several other things to do. · DAs have protocols and formalities that tend to make it extremely difficult for communities to access them. · Challenges were noted with extending the role of PMCs to manage PWP projects, particularly were PMCs covered longer distances. 5.3.2 Public Works Programme (PWP) In response to the questions posed to the group, highlights of its presentation are presented below. · The minimum wage is set in such a way as not to attract able people in other employment sectors to join MASAF funded projects. · The Group agreed to maintain the present wage rate in the meantime, while advocating for safety net plus on the following conditions: a) after looking at the impact of safety net plus results, b) cost of implementing the safety net plus, c) capacity of DA to implement SNP, and d) establishment of criteria for determining the wage rate. · The ideal employment period depended to some extent on the results of the safety net study indicated above. · Employment should be based on the lifespan of the project. · There should be an institutionalisation of safety net plus wages and savings for beneficiaries, which could be paid out during times of need. · Implementation of projects that are feasible during the hunger period, other than only focusing on roads. · There was a feeling that higher wages could not improve targeting, as this should be done through Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRAs) and wealth ranking. · Standards in the districts should be developed through a participatory approach involving all relevant players. · MASAF needs to strengthen its monitoring and evaluation. · MASAF should create forums for learning experiences by communities and other beneficiaries; support the capacitating of the resource base of DAs. · There is likely to be significant challenges in terms of implementing MASAFIII as DA capacity is minimal; there is political interference; demand of projects is higher than capacity; personality issues among stakeholders; and projects not community originated but rather politically influenced resulting in low community participation. In plenary, the following observations and recommendations were made: - 35 - § Government was considering raising the wage rate, although discussions seemed to be at early stage. DFID was willing to support a Study on the issue of wage rate. § There was consensus on the issue of targeting being achieved through extended PRAs. § There will be need for an institutional assessment to determine the real capacity needs of the DAs. Such an assessment should also look at what districts already have on the ground, instead of just focusing on the DA. § There was need for MASAF programmes to move from safety net to safety plus, as in that way people would be help over a long period of time. 5.3.3 Sponsored Sub Projects In response to the questions posed to the group, highlights of its presentation are presented below. · Projects should be identified through beneficiaries and communities. · Capacity building should be included into the projects. · CBO and NGOs, need a strong/effective Project Support Committee (PSC) to act as a link between beneficiaries and the implementing agency. · There should be economic empowerment of the beneficiaries, e.g. maize mill ­ proceeds should be used for the benefit of the beneficiaries for operational purposes and finally for re-investment. · There should be balance between field and desk appraisal. · There should be a checklist to be used for field appraisal. · Need for awareness campaign on purpose of SSP. · There seems to be agreed procedures but shortfalls in implementation. · Provide broad guidelines on approaches to vulnerability reduction rather than a `menu' of projects, to promote innovative solutions. · Community shared targeting. · Self-targeting (e.g. people with disabilities). · Need for a system to aid in targeting. CBO targeting should be more focused e.g. targeting a group of vulnerable people rather than trying to do a range of activities to capture wider funding opportunities ­ but deliver a poor service. · There is a need for an effective M&E system to inform and refine programming. Community scorecards are one tool. SSP financing agreement is another. · Formation of a consortium to work together e.g. Action Aid in Salima being the chain of the NGOs intergoverning the DC chairs. · NGO and CBO to register with the DCs (a legal framework). · DA need to take stock of CBOs and NGOs operating in a particular area. · Donors understanding and more flexibility of the working of DA staff where a staff may be visiting different projects within a particular locality and want to share resources e.g. transport between projects. · The Transparency and Accountability programme within MASAF III will coordinate these responsibilities. The NACCEA provides a useful forum for stakeholders to monitor accountability issues. · Capacity building of DA, NGOs and communities should include: Materials, equipment, coordination, planning, exchange visits, and study visits. · It is important for DA resources to be rationalized and used effectively. · To strengthen capacity, there should be a streamlining of systems e.g. M&E, MIS at District level. This will consequently reduce pressure on the DA. · Services of the Regional Zone Office and Field Offices will be demand driven (Justification, 2 Engineers, PRA Officers) and needs to be reviewed annually. · Handbooks will provide reference material. · Issues on community contribution ­Perception that bricks are the only important contribution (IEC) need clarity; guidelines of community contribution and flexibility on this. - 36 - · Coordination failure leading to duplication e.g. borehole drilling close together. · Self help projects suffering because of MASAF (Re-directing interventions). · Over-supply of infrastructure thus overwhelming the line Ministry capacities. There is need for progress in line with capacity of line ministries. · More sensitization to DA on SSP. · Clear guidelines and an IEC to improve knowledge and understanding can reduce political interference and protect those approving projects. In plenary, the following observations and recommendations were made: · There was a need to audit the resources at DAs level, if gaps are to be effectively addressed. · Capacities of the CBOs and Faith Based Organisations were neglected. · Communities should have a say in the performance of CBOs and FBOs. · The appraisal system should look at both direct and indirect beneficiaries. 6.0 Emerging Issues Many issues emerged out of the presentations by MASAF, consultants and GTZ. These are highlighted below according to component and those of a crosscutting nature: 6.1 CSP 1. Capacity of Local Assemblies a) Varying capacity levels in districts. b) Lack of familiarity with MASAF procedures, especially accounting ones. c) DPD's are not properly integrated into MASAF projects. 2. There is likely to be disruption of MASAF activities if zonal offices are shut down abruptly. 3. PMCs would have great difficulty managing PWP projects because of the logistics and design principles. 4. There is no mechanism for intra-district information sharing on resource allocation prior to processing of projects. 6.2 PWP 1. Information on the wage rate is inadequate. 2. Wages are often delayed. 3. The employment period does not currently take into account other relevant factors such season and duration. 6.3 SSP 1. Inadequate capacity amongst key stakeholders for example CBOs and communities. 2. Inadequate awareness of SSP among the stakeholders in general. 3. Low perception and lack of clarity on ownership of projects by beneficiaries. 4. Little benefits trickling down to the beneficiaries. 5. There is very little coordination among NGOs, CBOs, and FBOs, leading to duplication of services. 6.4 General Issues 1. Inadequate coordination at all levels of the programme particularly at Local Authority level. 2. Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation mechanisms. 3. There is politics of identity among key stakeholders at the district level i.e Chiefs, MPS, and Councillors. - 37 - 7.0 Lessons Learnt from the Implementation of MASAF II 7.1 Positive · Community involvement, empowerment and ownership can lead to remarkable results. · Availability and knowledge of procedures and guidelines does greatly help stakeholders in the implementation of project activities. · Strong Leadership at political level and dedicated management can make a significant impact towards the achievement of set objectives. · A strong awareness campaign can generate a lot of demand for services from the beneficiaries. · It is possible to implement a programme across the political divide. · When planning is followed by implementation there is a lot of enthusiasm by communities in government projects. · Communities can benefit from well-targeted safety net programmes, even when they are planned in a top down fashion. 72. Negative · Not carefully controlling or managing the demand for services from communities could in the long run endanger community involvement and participation. · When MASAF activities are not properly coordinated with those of sectors, there is likely to be poor services delivered. · When communication campaigns are not well packaged they tend not to generate much interest and enthusiasm about MASAF programmes, thus endangering the support of the targeted communities. · Political interference if not properly managed can be quite disruptive when implementing community programmes. · When activities of a new programme, such as MASAF are not properly synchronised or coordinated with traditional ways of delivering services, it does generate a lot of tension, competition, and duplication among stakeholders. · When political champions personalise programmes such as MASAF, it does tend to alienate other stakeholders. · When programmes such as MASAF are not properly coordinated with programmes with similar intent, there is likely to be significant disparities in how communities are handled. · Establishment of structures should not be an end in itself, but there maintenance once created. · There has to be a recognition that certain services cannot be delivered without the input of specialised technical services. · Safety net programmes only make sense where such inputs as wages are made available in good time and at reasonable rates. 8.0 Recommendations and Way Forward 8.1 CSP 1. Capacity audits of Local Authorities should be undertaken as a basis for capacity building efforts. 2. Zonal offices should not be shut down abruptly, but in a phased manner. They should be kept for at least a minimum of six months to allow for hands-on orientation of district staff to MASAF procedures and systems. 3. PMCs should not manage PWP projects because of logistical problems and the difficulties in applying technical design principles. 4. There should be a mechanism for intra-district information sharing on resource allocation prior to processing of projects. - 38 - 8.2 PWP 1. A Study should be undertaken to determine the wage rate, modalities for expediting the payment of wages and the employment period. 8.3 SSP 1. A capacity assessment of CBOs and FBOs should be undertaken to facilitate the strengthening of their capacity to effectively deliver services to vulnerable and marginalized groups. 2. A communication strategy should be devised that is appropriate for raising awareness on SSP activities. 3. A role clarification exercise should be undertaken to clarify the roles and responsibilities of key players in delivering SSP services. 4. Beneficiaries should be more involved in designing projects. 8.4 General 1. Coordination mechanisms should be developed for stakeholders at various levels to enhance coordination between them. 2. Monitoring and Evaluation mechanisms should be strengthened to facilitate close monitoring of devolved MASAF activities. 3. The MASAF communication strategy should include an aspect that addresses conflicts between Councillors, Chiefs and MPS. 9.0 Conclusion In conclusion, the MASAFII can be said to have largely met its objectives, albeit at great cost in terms of relations with crucial stakeholders at central and district levels. There are also indications that MASAF structures may not meet strict technical standards, as low calibre inputs seem to have been used in a lot of instances. There is therefore need for MASAFIII to pay particular attention to issues of coordination and quality as it gets underway. Intensive learning Implementation Completion Report ______________________________________________________________ Annex 1 LIST OF PARTICIPANTS NO N ORGANISATION ADDRESS A M E 1Mr S M Kakhobwe M P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 A S A F M U 2Mr C E Mandala MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 3F N Mkandawire M'mbelwa Assembly P O Box 132 M'mbelwa - 39 - 4M O Chimphepo Nkhata Bay DA P O Box 1 Nkhata Bay 5F L Mishael TASAF P O Box 9381 Dar es Salaam 6H M Lende Machinga DA P/Bag 1 Machinga 7R Manjanja MASAF PWP Zomba P O Box 1370 Zomba 8C Gunda MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 9C Nyasulu MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 10C Kamwendo MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 11S Kazira MASAF CSP Mzuzu P O Box 20350 Mzuzu 2 12A W C Nkhoma MASAF Kasungu P/Bag 142 Kasungu 13M H Kapatuka MASAF Dwangwa P/Bag 7 Dwangwa 14D A M Jangia MASAF CSP Blantyre P/Bag 5 Blantyre 6 15J H Wachepa MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 16V Luwambala MASAF Liwonde P/Bag 8 Liwonde 17B Chifundo MASAF CSP Zomba P O Bo 1370 Zomba 18G C Mamba Water Development Lilongwe 19G Matiki Water Development Lilongwe 20N Botolo CARE Lilongwe 21N Osborne CARE Lilongwe 22F Chiweza MASAF MU P/Bag 352 23C Dzimadzi Educ Consult P O Box 1404 Zomba 24M Mphande EP & D P O Box 30136 Lilongwe 3 25M Mizwa MASAF SSP Lilongwe P/Bag 105 Lilongwe 26A B Chidumu MASAF SSP Mzuzu P O Box 20350 Mzuzu 2 27Chimwemwe Chikusa Chikusa Consultants P O Box 1620 Lilongwe 28Efinita Banda MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 29G Chobezga Manda MASAF PWP Mzuzu P O Box 20350 Mzuzu 2 30Leigh Stubblefield DFID P O Box 30042 Lilongwe 3 31Janet Geddes DFID London, UK 32Anna McCord DFID C/o DFID 33Rob Geddes DFID C/o DFID 34Ida Manjolo MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 35H J Bimphi MASAF CSP Lilongwe P/Bag 105 Lilongwe 36H Kubwalo MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 37G A Rapozo Salima DA P/Bag 15 Salima 38Winter Chinamale MASAF PWP Lilongwe P/Bag 105 Lilongwe 39Manuel Maoni MASAF PWP Blantyre P/Bag 5 Blantyre 6 40Godwin Kamtukule MASAF Chikwawa P O Box 299 Chikwawa 41Amanda Manjolo MASAF Luchenza P O Box 339 Luchenza 42George Chaguza MASAF Ntcheu P O Box 228 Ntcheu 43Harry Mwamlima EP & D P O Box 30136 Lilongwe 3 44Ebrahim Jassat World Bank P O Box 2960 Harare 45Hope C Phillips World Bank Washington DC USA 46P C Mohan World Bank Washington DC USA 47N M Lenneiye World Bank Washington DC USA 48Paul Nkhoma PAG/MCG P O Box 1806 Lilongwe 49Christopher Chambula PAG Lusaka P O Box 51080 Lusaka 50Dr J T Milimo PAG Lusaka P O Box 51080 Lusaka 51Lloyd Sinoya MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 52Simon Chirwa MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 53Edward Kataika MOH&P P O Box 30377 Lilongwe 3 54J L Khozi MOEST P/Bag 328 Lilongwe 3 55S Chapola MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 - 40 - 56M G Tsoka CSR - Zomba P O Box 278 Zomba 57S Mchenga MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 58P H Kabambe Min of Agriculture P O Box 30314 Lilongwe 3 59Booker Matemvu MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 60G Chigona GTZ P/Bag 387 Lilongwe 3 61Murphy Kajumi MASAF MU P/Bag 352 Lilongwe 3 62Weston Seyama MASAF SSP BT P/Bag 5 Blantyre 6 63G Zimalirana Ministry of Finance P O Box 30049 Lilongwe 3 64R P Mwadiwa Ministry of Gender 65F Kadewere LGFC 66R F Tauka Lilongwe DA Lilongwe 67H K Twabi Mulanje DA Mulanje - 41 - Annex 2 Terms of Reference For Facilitation and Managing the Intensive Learning and Implementation Review Workshop 1.0 Introduction The Malawi Social Action Fund phase II will close on November 30, 2003 and is currently preparing to implement MASAF III. Its main objective is to enhance and sustain the provision and use of resource endowments by beneficiary communities, which will contribute to poverty reduction. It aims to: a) address the need for socio-economic infrastructure development in rural and urban areas, b) support safety net programs through creation of temporary employment for the very poor and financing initiatives to assist the most vulnerable groups such as orphans, street children, persons with disabilities, the aged and those affected by AIDS, and c) enhance in-country capacity to identify, prioritize and implement projects by training of stakeholders, at national, regional, district and community level. One of the preparatory activities to be undertaken as MASAF II transits into MASAF III is to conduct a workshop with Local Authorities, sector ministries, donors and Non Governmental Organizations to deliberate on the experiences and lessons of the past 5 years of its implementation. 2.0 Objective of the Workshop The overall objective of this workshop is to prepare an Intensive and Learning Implementation Completion Report (ILI). The workshop aims are: 1) draw on lessons from MASAF II implementation as seen through the eyes of the beneficiaries, and 2) provide closure for MASAF II as we move into MASAF III, whose design features are quite different from its predecessor. 2.1 Specific Objectives At the workshop participants will; 2.1.1 discuss the findings from I) the Beneficiary Assessment currently underway, II) a Gender Study which was undertaken during MASAF II implementation III) the recent DFID evaluation of the Public Works Program IV) the Development Communication Strategy study and V) any other relevant documents. 2.1.2 draw out the lessons learnt from the preceding two phases of MASAF 2.1.3 analyze the implications of the findings and the lessons with regard to the MASAF III program 2.1.4 develop recommendations as a way forward 3.0 Participants to the Workshop Participants will include District Assembly staff, sector ministry representatives, Non-Governmental Organizations, donor representatives, University of Malawi, World Bank staff, MASAF and consultants. It is expected that about 80 participants will attend. 4.0 Expected Outcome By the end of the workshop the Government will have agreed on the timetable with the World Bank for the preparation of the Intensive Learning and Implementation Completion Report, including dates by which any information not available during the Workshop would be provided to the Bank. 5.0 Role of the Consultant The consultant will; facilitate and manage the workshop for eight man days, work in close collaboration with the MASAF Management Unit (MU), and is expected to deliver the following output: · Review documents which will be discussed at the workshop · Develop a timetable for the seminar in liaison with MASAF management unit - 42 - · Help the presenters make clear and concise presentations in collaboration with MASAF Development Communication Unit · Select the venue of the workshop and make all the necessary arrangements for the smooth flow of the workshop · Outline materials and equipment required at the workshop · Facilitate discussions and guide presentations · Document all the critical issues raised · Guide further enquiry of the issues to list lessons learnt and best practices to be carried forward to MASAF III · Compile and submit the draft and final workshop report 6.0 Qualifications of the Consultant: The prospective consultant should have proven record and experience in facilitating workshop of this standard where study findings and experiences will be discussed, the lessons learnt during the past five years will be reviewed, and analyses of their implications will be done to develop recommendations as a way forward. The consultant should also have a sound understanding of Malawi Social Action Fund, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), Decentralization and the Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy. 7.0 Administrative Arrangements: 7.1 Obligations of the Client (MASAF) · MASAF will provide accommodation, food for the facilitator(s) to ensure the close contact of the facilitator(s), the MASAF (MU), World Bank team and the participants. · MASAF will provide stationery and make available the relevant MASAF documents that may be required by the consultant · MASAF will provide a coordinator as a contact between the client and the consultant · MASAF will ensure timely review of the workshop reports for approval with the scheduled time lines indicated under section 5 above. 7.2 Obligations of the Consultant 7.2.1 The consultant will provide experts all of whom shall be adequately qualified and experienced in the assignment and timely deliver the expected outputs. 7.2.2 Notwithstanding the qualification written above, the consultant shall remain fully responsible to deliver the described assignment out put. - 43 - Annex 3 List of Documents Reviewed 1. MASAF Beneficiary Assessment III ­ Draft final Report - by the PAG 2. MASAF III/CEDP Operational Manual 3. MASAF Annual Report 2001 4. Listenership, Readership, Viewership Survey of MASAF ­ by Educ Consult 5. Technical Appraisal of Public Works Programmes ­ by RN Geddes of Scott Wilson 6. MASAF ­ SSP CBOs/NGOs ­ Regional workshop Report ­ by Chimwemwe Chikusa 7. MASAF III Community Empowerment and Accountability - 44 - Annex 4 PRESENTATIONS BY MASAF, CONSULTANTS AND FUNDING AGENCY (GTZ) A. MASAF PRESENTATION a) FACT SHEET 1. ACHIEVEMENTS ü The project has made considerable progress on its key objectives of providing grants to communities and building capacities at the local level. ü Empowered communities with capacities to articulate their needs, manage and account for resources. ü Demonstrable impact of the safety net operations on beneficiaries' coping mechanisms. ü Communities have successfully demonstrated their ability to effectively manage sub-project implementation-procurement, financial management and construction monitoring. ü MASAF has become a strong unifying force, at the community level irrespective of different political persuasions now prevalent in Malawi. ü MASAF has assisted in creating and strengthening a cadre of enlightened people with the ability to articulate and represent their communities in accessing public or external development assistance. PHYSICAL ACHIEVEMENTS (PER PAD TARGETS) § TARGET§ ACHIEVEMENTS 2,493 sub-projects to be funded3,027 sub-projects funded 2,493 sub-projects completed 2,780 sub-projects completed to date All funds committed and disbursed (US$66.0 million)US$63.0 million (95.5%) disbursed 3.0 million beneficiaries reached3.2 million beneficiaries reached ACHIEVEMENTS BY COMPONENT § Community Sub-Projects§ Public Works 1,056 ClassroomsMK201.0 million wage income transfer 33,401 School desks116,410 (62,107 men 54,283 women) individuals afforded temporary employment) 2,964 VIP Latrines3,050 ha of bare land covered under afforestation projects 531 Staff Houses5624 km of earth road rehabilitated/constructed 3,616 Water points 125 Bridges 13 Health Units § Estimated total direct beneficiaries (2.4 million) Sponsored Sub-Projects 43 Early childhood Development Centres constructed 97 Health and Food Security Projects implemented 152 IGA Projects supported 86 Vocational Skills Training Projects undertaken 4 Home Based Care training projects undertaken § Total beneficiaries under SSP 252, 686. - 45 - CHALLENGES § Inadequate sectoral support and the impact of multiple donor approaches and requirements, e.g - Stringent sectoral norms - Confusion at community level resulting from uncoordinated donor activities. § Community capacity limitations e.g. difficulties in some instances to provide community contribution due to natural resource constraints. § Collegial management system for the PWP was weak. § Unequal distribution of NGOs in the country or over concentration. § Inadequate capacities in the NGO sector (financial, human, technical) b) IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCES & CHALLENGES OF SPONSORED SUBPROJECTS: A REPORT OF CBO/ NGOs EXPERIENCE SHARING WORKSHOPS PRESENTATION FOCUS § Objectives of SSP § Objectives of the CBO/NGO Workshop § Implementation Experiences & Challenges § Way forward (highlights) OBJECTIVES OF SSP § Provide Financial Grants and technical resources for Programmes targeted at marginalized groups § Support networking activities among NGOs/CBOs and other key actors working with vulnerable groups to exchange information for Policy Advocacy & Coordination of Programmes. CBO WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES § Assess understanding of MASAF Procedures and Guidelines and Audit level of application. § Share stakeholder Implementation Experiences and challenges § Develop a way forward based on challenges. PARTICIPANTS TO THE WORKSHOP § Community Based Organisations (CBOs) § Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) § Social Welfare Officers § Other Service Providers PARTICIPANTS TO THE WORKSHOP § In total, 269 CBOs and NGOs Participated § 573 Members benefited from the Training. ASSESSING UNDERSTANDING OF MASAF PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES § Out of the 269 CBOs/NGOs 90% of these are aware of the MASAF Procedures and Guidelines - Introduced through pre-launch Training. - Were able to state them in this workshop. APPLICATION OF THE PROCEDURES & GUIDELINES AND CHALLENGES - Formation of Groups - Project Identification and Application - Appraisals - 46 - - Implementation - Reporting - Project Sustainability - Collaboration with Partners GROUP FROMATION § 10% of the sponsoring Agencies were initiated by few individuals § 5% of individual who initiated the CBOs/NGOs assumed Coordinatory Roles. § 2% of Social Welfare Officers & other field staff were forming own CBOs § CBO/NGO/PSC Membership not gender balanced ­ 65% representation of Women PROJECT IDENTIFICATION & APPLICATION PROCECESSES - 80% CBOs were referred to MASAF by the Social Welfare Office - 15% Influenced by other Community Facilitators/ Groups and press (Radio) - 5% Self Facilitated through Coordinators PROJECT INDENTIFICATION & APPLICATION PROCESSES § Non involvement of Project Beneficiaries was noted in 7% of the CBOs/ NGOs COVERAGE/TARGETING § 99% of Sponsoring Agencies applied on behalf of Vulnerable persons and 1% on own behalf § 90% of CBOs Targeting too many groups § 40% of CBOs Operate in areas too large to manage § 0.5% cover too small an area § Applied for too many activities, which are not complementary and are beyond carrier capacities. APPRAISALS § 5% of projects not fully appraised at desk and field level (Leading to Implementation Problems) § 4% had no clear project plans on how to handle and Administer Benefits IMPLEMENTATION § 99% of the CBOs/NGOs Publicly launched their projects § 97% of CBOs/NGOs followed MASAF Community Procurement Procedures. § 5% of the CBOs complained of buying from far (Lilongwe, Blantyre & Mzuzu) § Social welfare staffs are not actively supervising projects due to lack of Transport. § 3% of CBOs did not formalize land and property ownership REPORTING § 100% of CBOs/NGOs understood the need for Reporting § 30% had difficulties in preparing first justification Reports § 40% CBOs/ NGOs justifying at 100% expenditure. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY § Sustainability of project not well planned for in 10% of the CBOs/NGOs. § 10% of CBOs' earlier initiatives died out upon receipt of MASAF Support. § Low understanding of principle of Sustainbility ­ Dependency Syndrome COLLABORATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS § Weak relationship among some stakeholders (Social Welfare not involving Land `O' Lakes and Vice Versa) - 47 - § Some Implementing Partners Influencing CBOs to modify structures without prior consultation with MASAF. WAY FORWARD § CBOs/NGOs were urged to; - Formalise and Legalise Land Issues to avoid personalization of the property. - Development project plans to assist in project management and Administration of benefits § In order to avoid Dominance by coordinators, SAs were advised to draw constitutions to guideline their operations c) PROJECT IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES AT VARIOUS LEVELS § Community ­ PMCs, PSCs, CBOs § NGO § Local Assembly. COMMUNITIES § Some PMCs do not Report to Communities as required ­ tended to be accountable to the Zone Office. § Poor Record Keeping ­ in some communities leading to delays in justification § Delay last tranche Justification-no motivation as project would have been completed; participation wanes when projects take long. § Delays in preparing justification Reports in some Projects § Manipulation of Quotations ­ Collusion with suppliers to undersupply etc § Community Contribution NGO § The level of accountability for some NGOs is less than adequate § Weak links with community withdraw in some case EXPERIENCE § LAs as Clearing Houses- capacities tend to be over extended as DEC members also involved in other Programmes § Some functions Performed by people that are not qualified for the job § Conflict of Interest in Procurement in some Districts. § LA Deliberations are sometimes dominated and Manipulated by influential Non-Elected members (MPS/Ministers) during LA Deliberations. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE OPERATIONS § Assess Capacity issues focusing on the functions that the LA (DEC) has to Perform and Address gaps if any § Need for Enforcement of Procurement Procedures and Principles at all levels and close Monitoring in order to Identify Lapses. § Need for continued interaction with Communities throughout the Project cycle processes and beyond § NGO/CBOs working with Communities to forge strong ties with Communities as Implementation and sustenance of Project benefits critically dependent on this. d) COMMUNITY EXCHANGE PROGRAMME FEEDBACK FROM THE 29TH 30 OCTOBER, 2003 - 48 - WORKSHOP IN MANGOCHI PRESENTATION OUTLINE Ø Objective of the C to C Background Ø Process and Content Ø Key Emerging Issues Ø Key Learning Points for Participants Ø Way Forward OBJECTIVE OF THE WORKSHOP Ø To share Experiences Ø Learn Lessons from the experiences Ø Develop action plans for follow up action BACKGROUND Ø Within the kiss and IK framework under tap component institutionalization in MASAF. Ø As one of the Strategies for enhancing capacities in the Implementation of Sub-Projects, akin to inter Committee Workshops or Meetings Ø The MASAF III Launch was an Opportunity for the Communities to Exchange Experience PROCESS § Fourty-one (41) Participants, one and a half days, ZMs and MU staff Present § Facilitators-MU and WB staff present § Facilitators-MU and WB Staff Methodology: · Role plays · Group discussions, plenary CONTENT Ø Introduction & expectations Ø Facilitating Knowledge exchange § Role play on Knowledge Seekers and § Knowledge Possessors at Community level. Ø Real Project Experiences and Lessons Ø Action Planning Ø Workshop Evaluation KEY ISSUES FOR MASAF ATTENTION Ø In general participants felt this was good experience for them. Ø They were able to Learn from the experience of others. Ø However, the following issues were raised by participants that required serious attention - Sub-Project "Savings" should be left with communities - Delayed and Low PWP wages - RCWP Road Projects without structures Bridges or Culverts should be followed up. - About MASAF III- 60% of Participants "Felt" Despondent and Betrayed by the fact that: · LAs will have oversight responsibility; and · Funding and Intra District resource allocation will be done by LAs - Political Influence in the Distribution of the Resource within the District - Less honest and not committed DA Officials. - What is wrong with the zones that you are removing them" - 49 - KEY AREAS OF LEARNING FOR PARTICIPANTS Ø How to Manage a School Construction Project Ø How to deal with Implementation Problems that could lead to project failure Ø How to apply for Financial Support for a School Project. Ø Need for Commitment by the Communities and chiefs before asking for Financial Support for Development Activities Ø Caring for Orphans through Dairy Cattle Farming Ø Disabled Persons being self reliant through productive skills Ø The need for commitment in caring for orphans Ø How to start Projects that would be easily sustained even after MASAF Support is no more § Such as keeping Dairy Cattle Ø How to supervise a Project to reach Completion Timely Ø Disabled Persons helping Able-Bodied Persons. Ø No Stigmatisation § Mixing Freely § Able bodied-Persons at Ease Ø Need for Cooperation in Flood Control Project Ø Participants given the freedom to give positive and Negative feedback to MASAF WAY FORWARD · Do more community Exchanges internally, international, regional, inter-SAF · Develop a Framework for Institutionalizing C2C in MASAF III Ø Develop Capacity for Implementation of Community Exchange Programmes · Training of Staff Ø Follow up on: § Community Action Plans § Concerns raised by participants B. PRESENTATION OF MASAF II BENEFICIARY ASSESSMENT FINDINGS INTRODUCTION: COVERAGE: 5% OF TOTAL NUMBER OF FUNDED SUB-PROJECTS -STATISTCALLY SIGNIFICANT PLUS 19 NON FUNDED PROJECTS 11 DISTRICTS IN ALL THE THREE REGIONS ALL CATEGORIES OF STAKEHOLDERS, I.E., BENEFITING COMMUNITIES, THEIR LEADERS, ESPECIALLY TAs, DAS ­DCs, DISTRICT PLANNERS, SECTOR GOVERNMENT STAFF AT DISTRICT LEVELS, MASAF MU & ZONES, SAs. CBOs, & NGOs, WORKERS IN PWP, VULNERABLE BENEFICIARIES IN SSP NON PROJECT BENEFICIARIES. ASSESSMENT METHODS USED: A COMBINATION OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE: WRITTEN RECORDS, INTERVIEW SCHEDULES/QUESTIONNAIRE & PRAs QUANTITATIVE USED TO GENERATE NUMBERS, FIGURES, PERCENTAGES. QUALITATIVE: FGDS, SSIs, PRAs ­ESPECIALLY TREND ANALYSIS (now and before matrices) & FLOW CHARTS. THESE WERE USED TO GET AT PEOPLE'S VIEWS, PERCEPTIONS, TO EXPLAIN THE NUMBERS AND FIGURES WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS - 50 - OBESERVATIONS: ESPECIALLY OF WATER AND HYGIENE FINDINGS NOTE: THE DESIGN PRINCIPLES ARE DISCUSSED TOGETHER WITH THE SECTOR INTERVENTIONS EDUCATION 1. MASAF OUTPUTS 4,273 CLASSROOM BLOCKS 1,481 STAFF HOUSES 96,733 SCHOOL DESKS/FURNITURE 2. IMPACT · INCREASED ENROLMENTS · IMPROVED TEACHER AND PUPIL MORALE · IMPROVED LEARNING ENVIROMENT · INCREASED PUPIL RETENTION RATES · REDUCED DISTANCE TO SCHOOL · INCREASED TEACHER/PUPIL & CLASSROOM/PUPIL RATIOS 3. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNT i) INCREASED ENROLMENTS ONLY WHEN CLASSROOMS ARE BUILT ­SENSITIZATION ii) IMPROVED MORAL ­YES BUT NOT WHEN SOME STRUCTURES NOT ATTENDED TO iii) INCREASED TEACHER/PUPIL RATIO UNDERMINES QUALITY iv) MAINTENANCE: TRAINED PMC REPLACED BY SCHOOL COMMITTEE 4. OVERALL CONTRIBUTION TO POVERTY REDUCTION HEALTH WATER AND SANITATION 1. MASAF OUTPUTS 5,238 BOREHOLES 676 PIPED WATER POINTS 6,607 VENTILATED IMPROVED PIT LATRINES 2. IMPACTS · INCREASED ACCESS TO POTABLE WATER · REDUCTION OF WATER BORNE DISEASES · INCREASED PREVANCE AND PRACTICE OF GOOD HYGIENE HABITS · REDUCTION OF DISTANCE TO HEALTH CENTRES 3. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNT · UNUTILISED 45.5 PER CENT OF MASAF FUNDED AND COMPLETED HEALTH SUB-PROJECTS · POOR QUALITY WORKMANSHIP WITH REGARDS TO SINKING TOILETS · DISTANCE BETWEEN WATER SOURCE AND VIPs · SUSTAINABILITY ­WATER BILLS BUT.... 4. CONTRIBUTION TO POVERTY REDUCTION ILL-HEALTH A MAJOR MANIFESTATION OF - 51 - POVERY ROADS AND BRIDGES (PWP & CSP) 1. MASAF OUTPUTS A TOTAL OF 8,807 KILOMETRES OF ROAD AND 880 BRIDGES 2. IMPACTS · INCREASED ACCESS TO, AND UTILIZATION OF, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SERVICES (HEALTH, EDUCATION, MARKETS, FARM INPUTS, ETC.) · REDUCTION OF DISTANCE TO SERVICES 3. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNT (DISCUSSED UNDER PWP BELOW) OTHER IMPORTANT BENEFITS OF CSP SUB-PROJECTS a) POVERTY REDUCTION THROUGH REDUCED DISTANCE, PROVISION OF HEALTH AND EDUCATION SERVICES b) SOCIAL CAPITAL BUILT THROUGH SKILLS TRAINING, AUTONOMOUS MANAGEMENT AND DIRECT FINANCING. c) STRONG SENSE OF OWNERS AND HENCE HIGH CHANCES OF SUSTAINABILITY. THE LATTER HOWEVER, DEPEND ON OTHER THINGS BESIDES SENSE OF OWNERSHIP (SKILLS, FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND MENTAL ATTITUDES. THE PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMME INTERVENTIONS INCLUDE ROADS, BRIDGES AND AFFORESTATION BENEFITS INCLUDE: · WAGES THOUGH SMALL WHICH WORKERS RECEIVE AND USE TO MEET ESSENTIAL NEEDS · REDUCTION OF DISTANCE TO SERVICES WHICH EASES LIFE · SKILLS LEARNT FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE, SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION · WOOD AND TIMBER AND INCOMES FROM AFFORESTATION PROJECTS PROBLEMS, CHALLENGE & LESSONS LEARNT · LOW WAGES · SELECTION OF PWP WORKERS · LATE AND OFTEN REDUCED PAYMENTS · WORKING RELATIONSHIPS WITH DAs SPONSORED SUB PROJECTS TYPES OF SUB-PROJECTS CATEGORIES OF BENEFICIARIES IMPACTS AND BENEFITS - 52 - PROBLEMS, CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNT TOWARDS DECENTRALISATION LESSONS LEARNT FROM CSP LESSONS LEARNT FROM PWP WAY FORWARD. C. DFID EVALUATION OF THE MASAF PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMME Key Issues · Design limitations of Public Works · Roads Standards · District Capacity · Monitoring Design Limitations of PWP (Contribution to Poverty Reduction) · Short term employment · Seasonal inflexibility - Interfere with harvest - Benefits not available in hungry period. · Low wage rate - Primary targeting mechanism - Jobs still oversubscribed - Wage inadequate to meet even basic consumption needs? - Study of the impact of higher wages (alternative targeting methods?) · Unlikely to contribute to poverty reduction. Road Standards · Constrained by: - Minimum labour content - Weak soils (rapid deterioration of earth roads) - Local capacity. · Recommendations: - Define minimum standards for district roads - Training of supervisors - Coordination of road funds by Las/NRA. Ø Reduced maintenance concerns Ø Better economic returns. District Capacity · Sub-project selection: - District planning process - Genuine involvement of communities? · Late payment of wages · New rules for MASAF funding to Las - Hinder the flow of funds to the beneficiaries? - Will MASAF relax the rules in the short term? or ... - 53 - - Provide additional support to the Las? (by-pass or build local capacity). Monitoring · Reliance on Beneficiary Assessments and internal progress reports (technical) - Sufficiently responsive management tools? - Need to include social and economic indicators in routine monitoring. · Baseline study as basis for future monitoring? · Use the new MIS? · DFID contribute to design of M&E system - CARE pilot activities. Summary · Design limitations of Public Works · Roads Standards · District Capacity · Monitoring D. THE LISTENERSHIP, READERSHIP, VIEWERSHIP SURVEY OF MASAF's DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION PRODUCTS OVERVIEW Ø Objective of the Survey Ø Methodology of the Survey Ø Key findings Ø Way forward OBJECTIVE OF THE SURVEY Ø Assess the impact, coverage, reach, use, content and language of MASAF communication products/materials in print, face-to face and electronic media METHODOLOGY Quantitative and Qualitative Ø Policy level Ø Operational level Ø Policy level - Literature review - Policy review - Institutional review Ø Operational level - Key Informant Interviews - Focus Group Discussions - Individual questionnaire (1,577 in 15 districts) - 54 - STUDY SITES REGION DISTRICTS TOTAL NORTH Rumphi, Mzimba 2 CENTRE Salima, Lilongwe, Dedza, 6 Ntcheu, Kasungu, Mchinji SOUTH Chikwawa, Phalombe, Thyolo, 7 Blantyre, Mwanza, Machinga, Zomba TOTAL 15 KEY FINDINGS 1. Awareness and knowledge levels of MASAF 2. Perceptions on MASAF methodology 3. Views on communication channels 4. Impact of MASAF DC activities (on communities and collaborators) 1. Awareness and knowledge levels of MASAF - Heard of MASAF 95% - Plan International 15.9% - CADECOM 12.5% - The rest <10% ...Awareness and knowledge levels of MASAF components MASAF COMPONENT % Community sub projects 82.4% Public Works Programmes 81.9% Sponsored sub projects 18% Capacity enhancement studies 2% ...Awareness and knowledge levels of MASAF principles and procedures MASAF principles and procedures % Community participation 50% Funding scope 43% Formation of PMCs 35% Accessing funding 25% 2. Perceptions on MASAF's practices and methodology MASAF principles and procedures % Respond to people's development needs 62% Involve target communities at all stages 39% Impose projects on target communities 10% - 55 - 3. DC channels - Ever listened to MASAF radio programmes 79% - Ever attended development meetings 40% - Ever listened to MASAF TV programmes 22% - Ever exposed to MASAF literature 10% 1. Radio - More accessible to men than women (93% vs 79%) - More "spontaneous" than "deliberate listeners" (84% vs 16%) - Reservations with "timing" and "lessons learned" 2. Meetings - Village and development meeting most effective - PMCs seldom give feedback to communities - Zone staff rarely meet communities - Politics of identify among leaders 3. TV - Accessible in relatively urban areas - Viewership of MASAF TV programmes = 22% - Reservations on targeting and content - Not all that effective in educating viewers 4. Print - Literature inaccessible ­ stockpiled at the district - Late delivery - Not durable - High illiteracy levels 4. Impact Impact of MASAF DC activities on Development Partners National Level - Interaction most bilateral at national level - Interaction mostly with government ministries - Limited number of fora exist - Limited and adhoc interaction Impact of MASAF DC activities on Development Partners District Level - Major forum is the DA - Significant partnerships blossoming under SSP - Coordination problems (3) - Contractual interaction with media - 56 - Impact of MASAF DC activities on the community - Lack of knowledge of MASAF principles and procedures - Collective action problems - Lack of quality leadership - Hunger crisis RECOMMENDATIONS Electronic channel Ø Develop a culture of deliberate listeners by making the programmes more interesting Ø Articulate the expected roles of facilitators Ø Consider phone in programs that will allow MASAF officials to clarify procedures Ø Consider cinema mobile unit in areas where TVM is not reachable ... Recommendations Face to face channel Ø Intensify technical support to the PMCs to make them more responsive to communities Ø Empower communities to sanction unproductive Ø Need more involvement of MASAF officials in DEC meetings Ø Use District Information Officers more ...Recommendations Print channel Ø Consider the high literacy levels Ø Intensify regular and timely distribution of literature Ø Take advantage of adult functional literacy where they exist Ø Consider billboards E. PRESENTATION BY A FUNDING AGENCY ­ GTZ German Government Contribution Since October 2002 and following the Government negotiations, the contribution of the German Government to Malawi falls in Three Core Sectors: 1. Health 2. Basic Education 3. Democratic Decentralization (There is also support to cross-cutting issues like HIV/AIDS; Gender and Non-Violent conflict Transformation) In the sector: Democratic Decentralization, there are three key players: 1. The German Development Cooperation Service (DED), for Personnel Cooperation (PC) 2. KfW for Financial Cooperation (FC) 3. GTZ for Technical Cooperation (TC) The GTZ-Technical Contribution to Democratic Decentralization is channeled through the - 57 - Malawi-German Programme for Democracy and Decentralization (MGPDD) in partnership with the Department of Local Government (DLG). Currently, this programme has focus in four key areas: 1. Support political capacity building (Development) of the local elected leadership 2. Support to strengthening of the local revenue base of the District Assemblies & the Development of capacity for the Technical Staff 3. Support to development of planning capacity for the Technical Staff 4. Support to the Management of the Decentralization process in Malawi. In terms of funding to the districts; GTZ/KfW in principle holds the view in support of the DDF as a funding mechanism to the Districts. However, it now would want clarification of modalities such as: 1. Harmonization of parallel funding mechanisms 2. Harmonization of planning and implementation structures (ADCs and VDCs) vis a vis structures of MASAF, etc - 58 - Annex 5 GROUP DISCUSSION QUESTIONS QUESTIONS FOR DAY 1 PWP 1. What should be the ideal employment period? 2. How can benefits available during the hungry period? 3. How can targeting be improved with higher wages? 4. Is minimum wage government or market rate? 5. How can standards be developed and implemented in the districts/communities? SSP 1. How can community empowerment/ownership be fostered? 2. How can SSP be better targeted for maximum impact? 3. How can coordination other players such NGOs be improved? CSP 1. Does MASAF III have enough strategies to assist communities cope with sectoral inadequacies? 2. If PMCs have successfully managed school construction, why can't they manage road construction under PWP? GENERAL QUESTIONS 1. MASAF MU ­ Does have ability in research and monitoring, evaluation and reporting? 2. Apart from training, what other capacity building strategies should MASAF III adopt or include for communities, district structures, NGOs etc? 3. With the reduction in Zonal offices, what are the implications for technical capacity backstopping? 4. What challenges or problems have been experienced with the implementation of MASAF projects? 5. What lessons can we draw from the design and implementation of MASAF Projects? 6. What are the implications of the lessons learnt from MASAF II for the implementation of MASAF III? 7. Develop recommendations for the way forward.QUESTIONS FOR DAY 2 GROUP DISCUSSIONS: EMERGING ISSUES, LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. From your group presentation and plenary discussions as well as presentations on various studies, consider or find to be the key emerging issues, lessons and recommendations from MASAF II for MASAF III. 2. What would you propose to be the way forward in the implementation of the MASAF III in view of these lessons and recommendation? MASAF Development Communication 1. How can the relationship between PMCs and communities be improved? 2. What are people's views on producing district specific information? 3. How best can stakeholders collaborate at the district level ­ to minimize competition and politics of identity - 59 - Annex 6 PRESENTATIONS BY GROUPS DAY 1: CSP GROUP PRESENTATIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1. MASAF III strategies to assist communities to cope with sectoral inadequacies 2. PMCs managing road construction under PWP. 3. General questions 2.0 STRATEGIES · Communication gap between district staff and central government - Communities will be guided by Community Service Packages and sectoral benchmarks during extended PRA process. · Limited and inefficient utilization of Resources - Reports to cover use of resources · Inadequate commitment of the civil service - Essential resources to be provided at district level i.e. vehicles - Inbuilt processes of community monitoring and mutual accountabilities geared towards change of attitudes · Demonstrated incompetencies from some government staff - Capacity Building through the Transparency and Accountability Pro. (TAP) - Enforcement of standards to ensure quality control i.e. technology choice, sanitation and environmental issues, concrete technology, water quality · Slow devolution process - 12 year MASAF III plan to strengthen and speed up the devolution process 3.0 PMCs MANAGING PWP ROAD PROJECT PMCs can manage PWP road projects · Under the following conditions - Multiple PMCs ­ main PMC and sectional committees - main PMC managing the bank account - LA staff to accompany PMC during paying parades · Limitations - Main PMC cannot manage long road section due to mobility challenges - Single PMC cannot command authority over long road sections - PMCs cannot handle the processes in wage administration 4.0 GENERAL QUESTIONS 4.1 There is inadequate capacity in research, monitoring and evaluation. i.e. MIS is not yet in place, no provision of research within the MASAF III programme 4.2 Training alternative to communities, Las and NGO - 60 - § MASAF should emphasise community exchange programme § MASAF to fill all material resource gaps § MASAF should provide `quality control' mechanisms § Emphasis on wider Knowledge and Information Sharing Systems(KISS) 4.3 Implications of technical capacity backstopping: § LAs would be empowered through assumptions of more responsibilities § Inadequate support to the LAs by the zone staff § Compromised quality of work produced by the LA's § Change of roles of Zone Managers from supervisory to advisory § LA staff overloaded with responsibilities that may lead to little attention to PMCs DAY 2: CSP GROUP PRESENTATION EMERGING ISSUES 1. Capacity of Local Assemblies a) Varying capacity levels in district hence capacity audit; b) Need for orientation in MASAF procedures to Local Authority staff, i.e. Accounting procedures; c) DPD to manage and coordinate MASAF funded activities; 2. Management of transition a) To maintain the existing Zone Offices to facilitate smooth and effective transition; 3. PMCs managing road projects PMCs cannot manage PWP roads because of the logistics involved and the design principles; GENERAL QUESTION 4. Minimization of competition and politics of identity among stakeholders at district level a) The exclusion of MPs and Chiefs in the Assemblies; b) There should be information sharing on intra-district resource allocation prior to processing of projects; c) The Assembly to approve a plan before appraisals. DAY 1: PWP GROUP PRESENTATION 1.0 MINIMUM WAGE RATE · Is it government or market rate? · Minimum of government rate Ø Consultative meeting in Salima Ø Not to attract much able people in other employment sectors to join MASAF funded Projects · Group agreed to maintain the present wage rate meanwhile · Way forward Group propose adopting safety net plus on the following conditions: § Impact of safety net plus pilot study results § Cost of implementing the safety net plus § Capacity at DA to implement SNP § Criteria for setting up the wage rate IDEAL EMPLOMENT PERIOD · Depends on point above especially results of safety net plus study results - 61 - · Employment based on sub-project life span i.e. PWP sub-projects is 12 months as long term and less than 12 months as short term beneficiary benefits AVAILABILITY OF BENEFITS DURING HUNGER PERIOD · Institutionalization of safety net-plus wages and savings for beneficiaries ­ arranged and paid out in time of need - Implementation of sub projects that are feasible during the hunger period. Temporary employment creation for the very poor - Raising awareness of PWP Sub Project diversification. BENEFICIARIES TARGETING · Higher wages can not improve beneficiary targeting · Achieved by extended PRAs and Intensive sensitization DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDS · For road standards, manual being compiled · Involvement of other stakeholders required for input as regards to labour intensive & machinery concept i.e. DA, NRA, EU, CARE · Interms of dams and other PWP sub projects, relevant sector ministries have to be involved for realistic specifications. GENERAL QUESTIONS · Yes but inadequate · MASAF needs to strengthen M & E capacity · Coordination with Economic Planning Development · MASAF M & E Unit to be empowered to commission any research by ED when need arise 2.0 CAPACITY BUILDING BY MASAF · MASAF to continue creating forums for relevant, experiences, challenges and feed back chaired by Local Government/Decentrisation · At community level, hands on implementation, development of community sensitization · NGOs, CBOs, FBOs orientation, registration with Das · At DA level, need for computers, vehicles, human capacity, connectivity of e-mail between DA and MU 3.0 REDUCTION IN ZONE OFFICES · Zone & field offices to back stop DA or support DA technically, financially, PRAs and M & E 4.0 CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING MASAF FUNDED PROJECTS · Capacity at DA minimal · Political interference · Demand of projects higher than capacity · Personality issues among stakeholders i.e. DA staff, zones staff etc · Projects not community originated but rather politically influenced resulting in low community participation. DAY 2: PWP GROUP PRESENTATION - 62 - EMERGING ISSUES, LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WAGE RATE ISSUES · Information on wage rate inadequate i.e. intention by government to revise the present rate · MASAF Safety Net and Safety Net plans as currently notable basis for wage rate · Results of study to finally determine way forward on wage rate · DFID willing to support the research DELAYED WAGES · Timely justification, proper justification and timely funding. · Use of available resource/proper planning in wage pay parade. · Some Assemblies take MASAF as a separate entity. COMMUNICATION · Enhanced by connectivity of e-mail between MU and DA personnel. · Need for role clarification of DC responsibilities as compared to other desk offices ( with over responsibility) · Balancing of responsibilities with responsibility. IDEAL EMPLOYMENT PERIOD · Short term and long term but 12 months definite ideal based on results of Safety Net plus results RECOMMENDATIONS · Assembly seem to be overloaded with responsibility hence need to set up a mechanism · Pending meeting of DC's with Minister, clarification of some bureaucratic points as part of devolution (thus empowering of DAs in recruiting personnel. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PMCS AND COMMUNITIES · PMCS report to communities on monthly basis · Operational guidelines of PMCs and enforcement of punitive measures should be followed · No duplication of roles for key members and to be both in PMC and VDC · M&E at Assembly level to monitor PMCs · PMCs to prove that they have reported to communities in form of report (minutes, letter with corresponding signatures. DAY 1: SSP GROUP PRESENTATION QUESTION ONE · Projects should be identified through beneficiaries, needs being identified by communities. · Capacity building should be included into the projects. · Communities must be part of the process of design. · CBO and NGOs, they need a strong/effective project support committee (PSC) to act as a link between beneficiaries and the implementing agency. · Economic empowerment. e.g. maize mill ­ proceeds should be used for the benefit of the beneficiaries for operational purposes and finally for re-investment. · Stakeholder roles should be made very clear both in appraisal and implementation. - 63 - · There should be balance between field and desk appraisal. · There should be a checklist to be used for field appraisal. · Need for awareness campaign on purpose of SSP. · There seems to be agreed procedures but shortfalls in implementation. QUESTION 2 · Provide broad guidelines on approaches to vulnerability reduction rather than a `menu' of projects, to promote innovative solutions. · Community shared targeting. · Self-targeting (e.g. people with disabilities). · A clear policy guideline on how issues of coverage e.g. area dependent on findings from the consultations that have taken place. · Need for a system to aid in targeting. A CBO targeting should be more focused e.g. targeting a group of vulnerable people rather than trying to do a range of activities to capture wider funding opportunities ­ but deliver a poor service. There is a need for an effective M&E system to inform and refine programming. Community scorecards are one tool. SSP financing agreement is another. QUESTION 3 · Formation of a consortium to work together e.g. Action Aid in Salima being the chain of the NGOs intergoverning the DC chairs. · NGO and CBO to register with the DCs (a legal framework). · DA need to take stock of CBOs and NGOs operating in a particular area. · Need to come up with better planning. · Donors understanding and more flexibility of the working of DA staff where a staff may be visiting different projects within a particular locality and want to share resources e.g. transport between projects. GENERAL QUESTIONS QUESTION 1 · Research is mostly contracted out. · Monitoring and reporting ­ shared responsibility. · Research to be conducted by a consultant or NGO after stakeholders agree TOR. · The Transparency and Accountability programme within MASAF III will coordinate these responsibilities. The NACCEA provides a useful forum for stakeholders to monitor accountability issues. QUESTION 2 · Capacity building of DA, NGOs and communities by consultants includes: Materials, equipment (an inventory is important), coordination, planning, exchange visits, and study visits. · It is important for DA resources to be rationalized and used effectively. · To strengthen capacity, streamlining systems e.g. M&E, MIS at District level will reduce pressure. QUESTION 3 · Services of the Regional Zone Office and Field Offices will be demand driven (Justification, 2 Engineers, PRA Officers) and needs to be reviewed annually. · Handbooks will provide reference material. - 64 - QUESTION 4 · Issues on community contribution ­Perception that bricks are the only important contribution (IEC) need clarity; guidelines of community contribution and flexibility on this. · Ownership. · Coordination failure leading to duplication e.g. borehole drilling close together. · Self help projects suffering because of MASAF (Re-directing intervention). · Over-supply of infrastructure thus overwhelming the line Ministry capacities need for progress in line with capacity. · More sensitization to DA on SSP. · Clear guidelines and an IEC to improve knowledge and understanding can reduce political interference and protect those approving projects. DAY 2 ­ SSP GROUP PRESENTATION KEY EMERGING ISSUES 1. Inadequate capacity amongst key stakeholders ü Identify stakeholders ü Assess current capacity ü Define their roles in SSP ü Propose necessary interventions to address capacity shortfalls 2. M&E ­ Crosscutting issue ü ToRs within IEC component all along the project cycle 3. Inadequate awareness of SSP in general ü Exchange visits ü Extensive campaigns 4. Low perceptions and lack of clarity on ownership ü Develop strategies for beneficiary participation and ownership at all levels ü Stakeholder roles articulated ü Effective project support committee ü Involvement of beneficiary committees in all aspects of the project cycle 5. Inadequate coordination at all levels of the program particularly the Local Authority level ü DAs to provide enabling by-laws to enhance coordination ü Local Govt. Act should articulate provision for directing the District Planning system as a tool for program coordination ü Donor coordination by Ministry of Finance and Safety Net by MEP&D 6. Benefits trickling down to the beneficiaries ü Need to institute mechanisms to ensure that benefits trickle down to the beneficiaries. ü After project completion, include a 3-month (proposed) observation period for management/utilization of accrued benefits. WAY FORWARD ü Implement the recommendations MASAF Development Communication ü Information from VAP level ü District specific information isolated from District Databank for defining program and sector specific data ü Capacity audits for relevant stakeholders - 65 - ü Capacity for data analysis needs to be enhanced ü Role of MASAF in monitoring project activities. Already built in under the TAP component in MASAF III to strengthen assembly structures ü Update on a continuous basis district performance assessment Political Influence ü Training for transformation - 66 - Additional Annex 10. Capacity Enhancement Table 1 WORKSHOP/TRAINING INTERNAL (April 2001 - Nov. 2003) No. of No. of Participants by Activity Participants Geographical Distribution How Often By Whom National Zonal District PMC 1 Budgeting and 26 MU (10) ZMs (16) 2nd to 4th April, Malawi College of Budgetary Control 2001 (3 days) Accountancy 2 Orientation on 3 MU (3) 23rd April, 2001 WISS Website Management (1 day) 3 Procurement 2 MU (2) 1st to 7th May, Treasury Workshop 2001 4 Autocard Orientation 3 MU (3) 23rd-24th May, LARRY 2001 Computers 5 Project Justification 68 12 DEC (56) 14th to 16th May, MASAF 2001; 21st to 23rd May, 2001; 28th to 30th May, 2001 (9 days) 6 Defensive Driving 2 MU (2) 11th to 13th June,National Roads Course 2001 (3 days) Safety Council (NRSC) 7 Price Data Bank on 51 MU (4) 19 ZMs, 28 9th to 16th July, Millenium Sub-Project Cost TSs 2001 Consultants Estimation 8 Internal Auditing 1 MU (1) 16th to 17th Society of Course August, 2001 (2 Accountants in days) Malawi (SOCAM) 9 Aspects of the 1 MU (1) 1st September, Employers Employment Act of 2001 (1 day) Consultative Malawi Association of Malawi (ECAM) 10 AIDS in the 1 MU (1) 17th December, ECAM Workplace 2001 (1 day) - 67 - No. of No. of Participants by Geographical Activity Participants Distribution How Often By Whom National Zonal District PMC 11 Orientation on 25 MU (6) ZMs (19) 8th to 10th UNICEF Human Rights November, Based Approach 2001 to Programming 12 Orientation of 136 Councilors December, MASAF Councilors in (136) 2001 PWP activities 13 Development 9 MU (4) February, University of Leadership Government 2002 (14 Zimbabwe/ Course (5) days) Institute for Development Studies (Sussex) 14 Industrial 2 MU (2) 2nd May, ECAM Relations course 2002 (1 day) 15 Mainstreaming 29 MU (10) ZMs (19) 3rd to 7th MASAF/ HIV/AIDS and June, 2002 (5 UNICEF nutrition issues days) into MASAF Activities 16 Justification 5 ZM (1) 16th to 17th MASAF Training for AA (1) May, 2002 Karonga Zone TSs (2) Staff OA (1) 17 Justification 24 ZAAs (24) 10th to 12th MIM Training for July, 2002 ZAAs 18 Justificaiton 13 2 AAs AAs (11) 29th July to 1stMIM Course August, 2002 19 Environment 26 8 Directors ZMs 18 13th to 17th Livingstonia Mainstreaming & Heads August, 2002 Beach Workshop 20 Receptionists/Te 1 1 25th Nov. to Multi lephone Receptionist 6th Dec. 2002 Country Operators Course - 68 - No. of No. of Participants by Geographical Activity Participants Distribution How Often By Whom National Zonal District PMC 21 Stores 1 1 AA 11th to 22nd Central Management November, Government 2002 (12 Stores days) 22 Leadership 1 MU (1) 2nd to 11th Bakili Muluzi Development February, Institute for Workshop 2003 (10 Social and days) + Economic Transformati on 23 Strategic 1 1 (MU) May 2003 to MIM Management November, Training (MBA) 2004 24 Justification 3 - 3 - - 5th to 6th MayMASAF Training for 2003 Chikwawa and Luchenza Zones 25 HIV/AIDS at 116 MU and May-03 Project Hope the Work Place Zones (116) 26 Leadership 5 3 (MU) 23rd May, MASAF Challenge 2003 Course 2 (Govt) 27 Motor Cycle 3 MU (3) 4th ­ Sept. National Riding Course 2003 Roads Safety Council (NRSC) 28 Video Training 1 1 15th to 29th Chancellor September, College 2003 TOTAL 559 193 174 192 - 69 - Table 2 WORKSHOP/TRAINING INTERNAL (August 2001 - October 2003) Activity No. of No. of Participants by Geographical How Often By Whom Participants Distribution National Zonal District PMC 1 Budgeting and 26 MU (10) ZMs (16) 2nd to 4th April, Malawi College of Budgetary Control 2001 (3 days) Accountancy 2 Orientation on Website 3 MU (3) 23rd April, 2001 WISS Management (1 day) 3 Procurement 2 MU (2) 1st to 7th May, Treasury Workshop 2001 4 Autocard Orientation 3 MU (3) 23rd ­ 24th May, LARRY 2001 Computers 5 Project Justification 68 12 DEC 14th to 16th May, MASAF (56) 2001; 21st to 23rd May, 2001 28th to 30th May, 2001 (9 days) 6 Defensive Driving 2 MU (2) 11th to 13th June,National Roads Course 2001 (3 days) Safety Council (NRSC) 7 Price Data Bank on 51 MU (4) 19 ZMs, 9th to 16th July, Millenium Sub-Project Cost 28 TSs 2001 Consultants Estimation 8 Internal Auditing 1 MU (1) 16th to 17th Society of Course August, 2001 (2 Accountants in days) Malawi (SOCAM) 9 Aspects of the 1 MU (1) 1st September, Employers Employment Act of 2001 (1 day) Consultative Malawi Association of Malawi (ECAM) 10 AIDS in the 1 MU (1) 17th December, ECAM Workplace 2001 (1 day) - 70 - Activity No. of No. of Participants by Geographical How Often By Whom Participants Distribution National Zonal District PMC 11 Orientation on Human 25 MU (6) ZMs (19) 8th to 10th UNICEF Rights Based November, 2001 Approach to Programming 12 Orientation of 136 Counci- December, 2001 MASAF Councillors in PWP llers activities (District Assemblies) 13 Development 9 MU (4) February, 2002 University of Leadership Course Government (14 days) Zimbabwe/ (5) Institute for Development Studies (Sussex) 14 Industrial Relations 2 MU(2) 2nd May, 2002 ECAM course (1 day) 15 Mainstreaming 29 MU (10) ZMs (19) 3rd to 7th June, MASAF/UNICEF HIV/AIDS and 2002 (5 days) nutrition issues into MASAF Activities 16 Justification Training 5 ZM (1) 16th to 17th May, MASAF for Karonga Zone Staff AA (1) 2002 TSs (2) OA (1) 17 Justification Training 24 ZAAs 10th to 12th July,MIM for ZAAs (24) 2002 18 Justification Course 13 2 AAs AAs (11) 29th July to 1st MIM August, 2002 19 Environment 26 8 Directors & ZMs 18 13th to 17th Livingstonia Mainstreaming Heads August, 2002 Beach Workshop 20 Receptionists/Telepho 1 1 25th Nov. to 6th Multi Country ne Operators Course Receptionist Dec. 2002 21 Stores Management 1 1 AA 11th to 22nd Central November, 2002 Government (12 days) Stores - 71 - Activity No. of No. of Participants by Geographical How Often By Whom Participants Distribution National Zonal District PMC 22 Sun Accounting System 5 MU (5) 8th to 24th Advance Net Course (Johannesburg, South December, 2002 (PTY) Africa) (17 days) Limited 23 Financial Management and 1 MU (1) 2nd to 13th World Bank Disbursement Procedures January, 2003 (12 Course for World Bank Aided days) Projects (India) 24 Sun Accounting System 3 MU (3) 13th to 24th Advance Net Course (Johannesburg, South January, 2003 (14 (PTY) Africa) days) Limited 25 Information Technology 1 MU (1) 2nd to 15th CS Holding Course (Durban ­ South February, 2003n Africa) (14 days) 26 Sun Accounting System 3 MU (3) 6th to 19th April, Advance Net Course (Johannesburg, South 2003 (14 days) (PTY) Africa) Limited 27 Internal Audit and Computer 2 MU (2) 6th to 26th April, DTI Auditing course (Mbabane ­ 2003 (21 days) Swaziland) 28 Management Development 3 MU (2) 1 AA 21st April to 17th ESAMI Programme for Executive May, 2003 (28 Assistants (Mbabane- days) Swaziland) 29 Records Management Course 1 MU (1) 27th April to 24th ESAMI (Arusha ­ Tanzania) May, 2003 (28 days) 30 Human Resources 1 MU (1) - - - 19th May to 13th ESAMI Management course (Arusha, June 2003 (28 Tanzania) days) 31 Management Development 1 MU (1) - - - 26th May to 20th ESAMI Programme for Executive June 2003 (28 Assistants (Mombasa, Kenya) days) 32 Electronic Records 1 MU (1) 1st to 28th June, DTI Management Course 2003 33 (Mbabane, Swaziland) Human Resources 1 MU (1) 3rd to 30th August,IDCA Management and Performance 2003 Enhancement (Mbabane, Swaziland) - 72 - Activity No. of No. of Participants by Geographical How Often By Whom Participants Distribution National Zonal District PMC 34 Audit for Internal Auditors 1 MU (1) - - - 17th August to 13 ESAMI Course (Nairobi, Kenya) September (28 September) 35 Financial Management Course 1 MU (1) 24 August to 20 ESAMI (Harare, Zimbabwe) September, 2003 (28 days) 36 Management Development 2 MU (2) 24 August to 20 ESAMI Course for Executive September, 2003 Assistants (Mbabane, (28 days) Swaziland) 37 Financial Management Course 1 MU (1) 15th September, Thames (ACCA) 2003 to May Valley 2004 University (UK) 38 Fiduciary Management in 5 MU (3) 28th September to World Bank Community Driven Govt (2) 4th October, 2002 Development Projects (7 days) Workshop (Kampala, Uganda) 39 Goods and Equipment 1 MU (1) 3rd to 26th Ghana Procurement Course (Accra, October, 2003 Institute of Ghana) (24 days) Management and Public Admin. 40 Advanced Management Course 1 MU (1) 5th October to 1stDTI (Mbabane, Swaziland) November, 2003 41 Dairy Cattle 21 1 5 15 23rd November, Kenya Management(Exchange Visit) 2003 Productivity Institute TOTAL 96 66 10 5 15 - 73 - Table 3 STRATEGIC AND TECHNICAL STUDIES CONDUCTED IN MASAF II (July 2000 to 30th Nov 2003) No. Study/Consultancy Date Details By Whom 1 Beneficiary Assessment (CSP) July ­ September, 2000 Technical assistance in the field of Bunda Team Beneficiary Assessment for CSP 2 Beneficiary Assessment July ­ September, 2000 Technical assistance in the field of Wadonda Consult (PWP) Beneficiary Assessment for the PWP Component 3 Technical Skill Training 18th September to 28th Orienting the District Technical staff David Mzandu Contract October, 2000 on the procedures to be followed in the implementation of MASAF funded projects 4 Technical assistance in the 23rd August to 22nd Analysis, design, development and WISS Limited field of Website Development September, 2000 implementing MASAF Project website. 5 Project Tracking System 31st October to 14th Technical assistance in the field of Siblini Development December, 2000 the supervision of project tracking system development 6 Biannual Audit Consultancy 1st November to 15th Ascertaining and enhancing proper KPMG, Graham Carr, December, 2000 and 0timely use and accountability Mwenelupembe and of funds advanced to the project and other Commercial to subprojects. auditors. 7 Salary positioning survey November, 2000 Reviewing MASAF pay structure in Imani Development comparison with NGOs and Ltd. industrial sector 8 Cost estimation training 9th to 16th July, 2001 Training technical staff on adopting EMC Consulting contract building standards, technical Engineers documents and skills in computerized cost estimation. 9 Radio Design Consultancy . Jan-02 Providing MASAF beneficiaries and MBC (Kumvetsa stakeholders with sufficient and Bwino Programme) accurate information order for them to participate effectively in MASAF Projects. 10 Biannual Audit Consultancy 12th December to 15th Ascertaining and enhancing proper Peter Holdworth, (Phase I) February, 2002 and timely use and accountability of Mwenelupembe & funds advanced to the MASAF Company, Deloitte & Project and to subprojects. Touche - 74 - No. Study/Consultancy Date Details By Whome 11 Biannual Audit Consultancy Apr-02 Ascertaining and enhancing proper Graham Carr, (Phase II) and timely use and accountability of Mwenelupembe, funds advanced to the MASAF Deloitte & Touche, Project and to subprojects. KPMG 12 MASAF Television Oct-02 Informing, sensitizing, clarifying and Television Malawi Production and Airing reporting on various types of projects local communities embark under the MASAF Project. 13 Borehole Technical Review October 2002 ­ Technical Assistance Services for a Willy and Partner Contract December 2002 detailed technical review of the Engineering Services MASAF borehole drilling 14 Biannual Audit Consultancy May ­ July 2003 programme. Ascertaining and enhancing proper Deloite and Touche, for year ending 31st December and timely use and accountability of Mwenelupembe, 2002 funds advanced to the MASAF Mhango and Company Project and to subprojects. 15 Radio Material Production 1st October 2002 ­ 31st Sensitising, clarifying and reporting Malawi Broadcasting and airing for MASAF May 2003 on MASAF project activities and Corporation. Programme. progress. 16 Beneficiary Assessment Study Sept ­Nov 2003 Evaluating qualitative Participatory accomplishments of MASAF II Assessment Project objectives and the design Group(Zambia) principles/assumptions through the CSP, PWP and SSP interventions. - 75 - Additional Annex 11. Borrower's ICR Government of Malawi OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND CABINET (OPC) MINISTER OF STATE RESPONSIBLE FOR POVERTY ALLEVIATION (ICR) For MALAWI SOCIAL ACTION FUND PHASE II (MASAF II 1999 TO 2003) Dated: Thursday April 8, 2004 - 76 - - 77 - Table of Contents Page List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................... i 1.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................. 2 2.0 MASAF II DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE ............................... 2 2.1 Institutional Set Up and Project Components ..................... 2 2.1.1 Community Sub projects Programme .............................. 3 2.1.2 Public Works Programme ........................................... 3 2.1.3 Sponsored Sub Projects Programme ............................... 3 2.1.4 Capacity Enhancement and Studies ................................. 3 3.0 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT ........................................ 3 3.1 Assessment of the Project Objectives ................................ 3 3.2 Project Design ......................................................... 4 4.0 ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVE .......................................... 4 4.1 Project Impacts ......................................................... 5 4.1.1 CSP Impacts .......................................................... 5 4.1.2 PWP Impacts .......................................................... 5 4.1.3 SSP Impacts............................................................. 6 5.0 OVERALL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCES 6 5.1 Project Level Experience ............................................. 6 5.1.1 Overwhelming Demand .............................................. 6 5.1.2 High Material Price Increase ........................................ 6 5.1.3 Parliamentary General Elections 1999 and the Local Government Elections in 2000 ............................................. 6 5.1.4 Drought Situation ..................................................... 6 5.1.5 Delayed Startup ....................................................... 6 5.1.6 Participation of Women .............................................. 6 5.1.7 Lack of functioning Computerised Project Tracking System .... 7 5.1.8 Inadequate LA Capacity .............................................. 7 5.2.1 Community Subprojects .............................................. 7 5.2.2 Public Works ........................................................... 7 5.2.3 Sponsored Sub Projects .............................................. 8 6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ............... 8 6.1 Controllable factors ................................................. 8 6.2 Uncontrollable Factors ............................................... 9 7.0 OTHER EXPERIENCES ..................................................... 10 7.1 Financial Management Issues ....................................... 10 7.2 Procurement Issues ................................................... 10 7.3 Sustainability .......................................................... 10 8.0 BANK AND BOROWER COUNTRY PERFORMANCE ................. 11 - 78 - 8.1 Bank Performance ................................................... 11 8.2 Borrower Performance ............................................... 11 9.0 MAJOR LESSONS LEARNT ................................................. 11 9.1 Critical Role in the Project ............................................ 11 9.2 The Need for Enhanced Knowledge and Information Sharing Systems ...................................................... 11 9.3 The Need to Improve subproject Appraisal Process .............. 12 9.4 The Need to Finance Education Infrastructure as a Package...... 12 9.5 Strengthened Monitoring and Evaluation System ................. 12 9.6 The Need to Harness Social Capita to Create Economic Capital 12 9.7 The Need for Field Based Standard Operating Bills of Quantities 12 9.8 Need for a More Systematic and Mainstreamed Environmental Management Process ............................... 12 9.9 The potential of the Social Fund to Help in Deepening Decntralization Process .............................................. 12 9.10 The Need for Increasing Community Voice in Service Delivery 13 9.11 The Need for Building LA Capacities and System for Development Planning ................................................................ 13 9.12 Effectiveness of PWP Safety Net Intervention .................... 13 9.13 The Need to Improve targeting Mechanisms Under PWP ........ 13 9.14 The Need for Strong Sector Linkages .............................. 13 9.15 Emphasis on Road Subprojects ..................................... 14 9.16 Scaling Up The SSP Pilot ........................................... 14 Annexes Annex 1 Progress Towards Indicators ....................................... 15 Annex II Project Cost By Component ......................................... 17 Annex III Capacity Enhancement ............................................... 18 Annex IV Workshop/Training Internal .......................................... 20 Annex IV Workshop Training External ........................................ 22 Annex V Project Costs By Procurement Arrangements at Appraisal ....... 26 Annex V Project Costs By Procurement Arrangements Actual ............ 27 LIST OF ACCRONYMS BA Beneficiary Assessment CSP Community Sponsored Projects CDD Community Driven Development CBO Community Based Organization DLG Department of Local Government - 79 - DEC District Executive Committee DFID Department for International Development DCA Development Credit Agreement ECDC Early Childhood Development Centtre EDRP Emergency Drought Recovery Programme FBO Faith Based Organization HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus IDA International Development Association LA Local Assembly M&E Monitoring and Learning MASAF Malawi Social Action Fund NGO Non Governmental Organization O & M Operation and Maintenance PWP Public Works Programme PMC Project Management Committee PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal PAG Participatory Assessment Group PIA Project Implementation Agency RCWP Relief Cash for Work Programme TEVET Technical and Vocational Entrepreneurial Training MALAWI SOCIAL ACTION FUND (MASAF) II IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT (ICR) 1.0 BACKGROUND - 80 - Poverty in Malawi continues to be pervasive, characterized by low per capita income, falling life expectancy, acute state of deprivation and lack of access to social infrastructure and services despite Government's investments into social and economic development. According to the Integrated Household Survey (IHS) 1998, the number of people living under the poverty line was 65.3%. The IHS currently underway will shed more light when the results are published by 2005. The pervasive nature of poverty was attributable to many factors impacting on the economy, and these include drought, the rising prices of basic commodities and the high prevalence of malaria, and high prevalence of HIV/AIDS (at 15% nationwide with urban rates at 23%). The HIV/AIDS pandemic continued to claim lives of those in the productive age group of 15-49 years (HIV/AIDS Survey, National AIDS Commission 2001). Illiteracy levels are high in Malawi at 40% (36.2% for men and 54% for women) and 43% of the population with no access to safe water. Against this background and within the context of the Poverty Alleviation Programme the Government established the second Malawi Social Action Fund (MASAF II) as a follow-up project to MASAF I, in a bid to continue addressing the poverty problems in the country. 2.0 MASAF II DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE MASAF II was designed to contribute towards poverty reduction within the context of the Poverty Reduction Framework. The main objective of the Project was to enhance and sustain the provision and use of resource endowments by beneficiary communities, which would contribute to their own socio-economic well-being. The specific objectives were to a) Provide additional resources and ensure sustainable use of services targeted at the poor vulnerable and marginalized groups through funding community level asset creation in education, health, water and other services; b) Support safety net programs through creation of temporary employment for the very poor and financing initiatives to assist the most vulnerable groups such as orphans, street children persons with disabilities, the aged and those affected by the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), and c) Enhanced stakeholders' capacity to identify, prioritise, and implement projects through provision of training, technical assistance and funding of qualitative studies. 2.1 Institutional Set Up and Project Components The MASAF Management Unit (MU), a quasi-autonomous agency under the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC), implemented the Project with delegated authority for decision-making on operational matters. The OPC appointed the Executive Director and the MASAF Board. The OPC also chaired the Board. The Board comprised: a Traditional authority, the Director for Social Research, the Executive Secretary for CONGOMA, the Secretary to the Treasury, the Secretary for Economic Planning and Development, the Secretary for Justice, the Secretary for Department of Local Government and two independent members one with skills in urban planning and the other with private sector experience. The Board provided policy oversight to the MU, and monitored the MU's adherence to guidelines for operations as set out in the negotiated Project Manuals. In addition the Board also monitored the impact of MASAF on the communities reached. The MU had five directorates: Community Subprojects (CSP); Public Works Programme (PWP); and Sponsored Subprojects (SSP); Finance; and Administration. MASAF had four support units and these were: Information Technology, Communication and Training, Internal Audit, and Technical Services. During the course of implementation the Internal Audit Unit became a directorate, and the Finance and Administration directorates were merged. Twelve Zone Offices supported the MU (all 12 housed the CSP zones, four housed the PWP and three of the four PWP housed the SSP zones). The District Executive Committee (DEC), the Project Management Committee (PMC) and the CBO/NGO managed the implementation of the PWPs, CSPs and SSPs, respectively at the district and the community levels. The CSP, PWP and the SSP were the three operational directorates through which the MASAF II Project was to achieve the objectives. The Capacity Enhancement and Studies (CES) was to facilitate the institutionalization of capacity building and development for stakeholders in the demand driven development approach. - 81 - 2.1.1 Community Subprojects Programme The Community Sub-projects Programme (CSP) Component accounted for US$40.36 million that represented 62.6% of IDA funding under MASAF II. It was aimed at contributing towards the attainment of the MASAF II Development Objective specifically by a) financing the creation of social and economic amenities for service delivery; and b) promoting participation with a view to contributing to development of capacities for participatory development management in rural and urban communities. 2.1.2 Public Works Programme The Public Works Programme (PWP) Component accounted for US$13.28 million of IDA funding representing 20.6%. The Programme was implemented as a safety net scheme financing labour intensive public works. The goal was to transfer cash income to targeted poor individuals and households in urban and rural areas. The specific objective of the PWP was to: a) create temporary employment opportunities for income transfer; and b) in the process build economic infrastructure. Apart from the funding received from the IDA under Credit 3136 MAI, US$6 million was received from the Emergency Drought Recovery Project Credit Number 3715 MAI for relief related work. In addition parallel funding from the Government of Malawi amounting to MK113 million (US$1.26 million) was made available to implement the Relief Cash for Work Programme (RCWP) and US$11.25 million from the Department For International Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom. 2.1.3 Sponsored Subprojects Programme The Sponsored Subprojects Programme (SSP) accounted for US$3.34 of IDA funding representing 5.2% as a pilot. The Component aimed at strengthening the capacities of vulnerable and marginalized persons (orphans, street children, the aged, those affected with HIV/AIDS, and people with disabilities) and communities to reduce and/or cope with social risks. The specific objectives of the component were to a) Provide financial grants and technical resources for programmes targeted at marginalized groups by funding the initiatives sponsored by agencies Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and Faith Based Organisations (FBOs) already working with these groups; and b) Support networking activities among NGOs, CBOs and other key actors working in this field to exchange information for policy and advocacy and co-ordination of programmes at the national level. 2.1.4 Capacity Enhancement and Studies The Capacity Enhancement and Studies aimed at financing capacity building and strengthening of the relevant MASAF stakeholders at all levels through training, workshops and study tours, commissioning beneficiary assessments; and other project related evaluative studies. 3 ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT This section looks at the Project objectives and design principles in the context of relevance to Government development priorities and prevailing conditions at the design stage. It will also assess the overall performance of the Project against its stated objectives. The assessment of the implementation is done in light of the extent to which MASAF II was able to meet its stated objectives. According to the Project Appraisal Document of September 17, 1998, and the Project Implementation Manual, the objectives of the MASAF Project did not change. The objectives are rated as satisfactory. The objectives remained relevant in the context of Government policies such as the poverty reduction and later dovetailed into the Malawi Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper and the Decentralisation policy of 1998. Provision of additional resources to communities to finance creation of assets in the social sectors of education, health and water continued to benefit the rural and urban poor. The safety net objective aimed at supporting the vulnerable able-bodied persons and the marginalized groups was relevant in the wake of continued need for support for these groups to access basic needs such as food. The effects of the drought in most areas and floods in some areas exacerbated the need for support under the - 82 - SSP and the PWP. The Capacity Enhancement and Studies aimed at financing capacity building and strengthening of the relevant MASAF stakeholders at all levels. A number of workshops were conducted for the various stakeholders; MASAF staff attended courses in country and abroad thereby strengthened their capacity for development management. The project managed to train 30 artisans only through the MASAF and Technical and Vocational Entrepreneurial Training (TEVET) collaboration. Studies were undertaken which provided lessons for shaping the design of MASAF III operations (see table A). 3.2 Project Design The Project design principles facilitated social capital formation and capacity building at the community level. The operative design principles of community participation, direct financing, autonomous management, transparency and accountability were instrumental in bringing about a sense of responsibility and accountability within communities. Community participation combined with autonomous management engendered a strong sense of ownership of the project by beneficiary communities, while the direct financing principle instilled a sense of self-confidence and importance in communities. Transparency and accountability as adopted by the project assisted in promoting horizontal (within community) accountability and trust amongst community members, and hence contributed towards enhancement of social capital, which is a critical ingredient in poverty reduction efforts. A Beneficiary Assessment (BA) carried out in 2003 has confirmed the effects of applying these principles and the resultant evidence of enhancement of social capital (Participatory Assessment Group, 2003). The application of these principles has been facilitated greatly by the IEC and other capacity enhancement initiatives aimed at strengthening collective responsibility. 4 ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVE Performance of the Project was tracked using the indicators presented in Table A, which provides the status of achievement as at November 2003 by component. Achievement of the Project objective is rated highly satisfactory. The CSP substantially achieved its objective as evidenced by the 2,255 subprojects funded against a set target of 2,164 and having completed 2,145 of the funded subprojects. Performance on all the other indicators was highly satisfactory except the number of public and private sector persons trained. The subproject investments have gone beyond the expectation to include the capacity building in the PMC members for project management as they were able to see the projects to completion and account for the funds entrusted to them by the communities. The PWP achieved its objective of transferring cash income to the poor individuals and creating social-economic infrastructure through implementation of 374 subprojects. While the target was to have 720,000 persons to receive at least two months wages 582,365 were reached receiving wages over a period of eight to nine months. The safety net operation was efficiently delivered at 46% of the total subproject budget accounting for the unskilled wages against a set target of 40%. The programme also helped improve project management capacities of the LA staff, councilors, PMCs (see table A) and supported the emergence and growth of small-scale construction contractors throughout the country. The skills transfer was achieved through the planned training sessions for the DEC, PMCs, and foremen and including the hands-on process for beneficiaries, most of who were able to get jobs with other contractors in the construction industry. The Sponsored Sub-Project component made considerable progress in assisting the Vulnerable and Marginalized groups. A total of 384 projects were funded. The subprojects benefited 252,686 vulnerable and marginalized persons, which included orphans, street children, elderly persons, people affected with HIV/AIDS, people with disabilities and communities where they live. Capacity building initiatives were carried out for the sponsoring agents and project support committees (see Table A). 4.1 Project Impacts - 83 - A recording of achievements on outcome indicators shows that there were a number of beneficial effects accruing to communities in the sub-project areas for all the components. This was as a result of creation of various infrastructure assets as well as undertaking capacity enhancement and sub-project cycle processes. Overall, an estimated 3.2 million people were direct beneficiaries of the various facilities see Table A. The BA undertaken in September 2003 (Participatory Assessment Group, 2003) records the CSP effects as presented in Table 3, as well as other qualitative achievements that communities reported on. In all the components, there was high cash injection into the rural economy, which led to a number of informal economic activities springing up. In all the three operational components due to lack of baseline data it has not been possible to quantify the percentage increases. This has been a major lesson for MASAF, which has informed the design of MASAF III, that baseline data is a must at the beginning of a project. 4.1.1 CSP Impacts The effects of CSP activities on benefiting communities range from those relating to a sense of cohesion and control as a result of project processes to effects arising from outputs created under the component. According to the BA, the following are outcomes from the various outputs under the CSP Component as perceived impacts by beneficiaries: Education Sector: There has been: a) increased enrolment rates in schools that ranged from 1.9 percent to 63 percent in the schools supported with MASAF CSP funding; b) improved learning environment through the provision of permanent classroom blocks and furniture, which compared favourably with the situation existing before MASAF support; c) increased teacher motivation as a result of improved housing conditions; d) increased pupil retention rates as pupils no longer left school close to them in search of good learning conditions; and e) reduced distances to schools. Health Sector: Reduced Incidences and treatment of water related diseases in project areas. Reported in 83 % of cases. Water Sector and Sanitation: There has been: a) reduced distances to water sources; and b) reduced incidence of water borne diseases as a result of access to clean and potable water and hygiene education. Transport: increased access to social and economic facilities as a result of the roads/bridges created under the CSP. In general, the BA confirmed that the investments under the CSP were having positive effects on the benefiting communities. In some communities, due to the great demand for facilities such as classroom blocks or water points relative to the population, it had been shown that the impacts of the investments were only marginal. As such the few classroom blocks and water points that were provided in some communities could not fully satisfy the demand for the facilities. However, this is reflective of the extent of need at national level in terms of social services, and it implies a continued focus on addressing these needs for future programs. 4.1.2 PWP Impacts Through the provision of temporary employment to 535,676 marginalized poor individuals, the program managed to transfer a total of US$ 1.91million cash income. The transferred wage income assisted the poor temporarily to cope with food insecurity due to shocks, the major ones being drought and floods and commodity price increases. 5,802 Kilometres of road length were created which contributed towards access and accessibility to social economic goods, services and facilities by rural communities. 3,050 hectares of land were planted with trees contributing towards reduced rate of soil erosion that leads to land degradation. However, the effect of the drought on the afforestation subprojects was that there was considerable reduction of survival of the transplanted seedlings. The water resource conservation subprojects enabled communities to engage in fish farming and irrigation consequently addressing food security. - 84 - 4.1.3 SSP Impacts Substantial benefits have been realised by the 252,686 beneficiaries of the various initiatives supported under the SSP. Notable are the vocational and business management skills acquired by the vulnerable groups and foster parents which enabled them to be self reliant economically in a sustainable manner. Support to Early Childhood Development Centre (ECDC) provided the children with a conducive learning environment and opportunity for improved nutrition status through the feeding programme. The ECDCs have also enabled foster parents gain some free time to attend to other household/economic chores. The PMC Pre-launch training sessions and the CBO/NGO/FBO orientation and experience-sharing Workshop accorded deeper understanding of the MASAF principles and procedures to 3,300 people and 842 sponsoring agency members, respectively. 5.0 OVERALL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCES 5.1 Project Level Experiences In the course of implementing the Project, a number of challenges met and they were characterized by the following: 5.1.1 Overwhelming demand: There was overwhelming demand from the communities for financial support for their projects. MASAF could not meet the demand. By 2001 there were over 10,000 project proposals that were not funded. This was an indicator of the degree of poverty in Malawi and also the interest in MASAF. 5.1.2 High Material Price increases: this put considerable pressure on sub-project budgets and was the main reason accounting for the budget overruns. Budgets had to be varied in order to accommodate these changes and to ensure that the subprojects were delivered as requested and planned by communities, District Executive Committees (DECs) and project implementation Agencies (PIAs) for service delivery. 5.1.3 Parliamentary General elections in 1999 and the Local Government elections in 2000: The general elections in 1999, and local government elections in 2000 created general instability at the district and community levels that affected the implementation of the Project. Critical staff at the district level was deployed as returning officers, while some PMC members were involved in competing for the local government elected positions. Staff movements and new recruitments by the Department of Local Government following the passing of the Decentralization policy further compounded the situation. 5.1.4 Drought Situation: In 2001/2002, a serious drought occurred and had a negative impact on Community participation particularly under the CSP as communities were more concerned with daily survival mechanisms that project work. Under the PWP the effect of the drought led to overwhelming demand for jobs due to food insecurity. The RCWP and the EDRP tried to scale up the support to the communities through safety nets, had impact on the capacities of the DECs. 5.1.5 Delayed Start-up: MASAF II was a follow on Project to MASAF I to avoid a financing gap and as such there was delay of about ten months in the start-up of MASAF II operations because MASAF I completion rate needed to reach 80% of the total approved subprojects before MASAF II subprojects could be approved. Effectively this had `a back-end' loading effect on the MASAF II scheduled of activities. 5.1.6 Participation of Women: An assessment of gender in community participation (Ndeti, 2003) revealed that there still existed social barriers that prevented women from actively participating in decision-making processes in sub-project implementation. Women participation continued to be hindered by factors such as viewing women as less than equal to men even if they were elected into decision-making positions. The ill scheduling of meetings (late afternoon) was also one of the reasons that led women to withdrawing their participation in decision-making processes. At the household level, the decision making power regarding expenditure of the wages earned from participation in the PWP was yet another area where women were not empowered as husbands continue to dominate in the decision making process. Under the SSP - 85 - the participation of women as foster parents or caregivers to the sick and the elderly was seen a benevolent act not befitting men. 5.1.7 Lack of Functioning Computerised Project Tracking System made it difficult to easily aggregate data collected in the various zones to construct the bigger picture of the MASAF Project status. For future operations, an effective data collection and project tracking system to track subproject progress should be a prerequisite. 5.1.8 Inadequate LA Capacity: This was characterized by the following a) The LAs were supposed to implement the PWP by design. Areas of concern included: poor targeting of beneficiaries; late payment of wages due to inadequate transport and poor commitment of some LA staff; b) Inadequate capacity to effectively carryout technical and financial supervision of the operations in all three components due to staff attrition; c) available staff capacity limitations in the quality of supervision, particularly in areas with difficult soil types where engineering input during appraisal and construction was required, appeared to be less than adequate; and d) Under all components MASAF provided resources for the LAs to carry out supervision, recognizing that such and arrangement was not sustainable. Experiences by Component In addition to the challenges under MASAF II general experiences, listed below were the component specific ones: 5.2.1 Community Subprojects Staffing of Health Facilities: A number of health units financed under MASAF 2 continued to be non-operational due to lack of staff to run the health facilities. This has left communities disappointed after investing in creating facilities to improve access health services. Under the MASAF 3, communities will be assisted to train people that can be deployed to provide the essential health services in the health units. 5.2.2 Public Works The following were the additional challenges specific to the PWP: (i) Coordination of Public Works initiatives at National and LA level Implementation of public works by different donor agencies using different approaches brought confusion at the community level. The issue of the wage rate was one example where different agencies working in the same area paid different wage rates and adopted different work norms due to differences in programme objectives, which were poorly communicated to the beneficiaries. Lack of explicit sectoral guidelines compounded the problem. (ii) Inadequate Operation and Maintenance Arrangements Implementation experiences indicated that there are weak operation and maintenance arrangements for road subprojects at the local authority level. There were no road network maintenance plans to guide operations, in addition there inadequate financial resources. It is hoped that the decentralization process will enable LAs overcome the problem through provision of resources from the central government, particularly appropriations from the fuel levy. (iii) Low Community Participation In most PWP subprojects community participation was mainly limited to unskilled labour provision. Despite having a PMC the Local Authorities have the upper hand in project implementation MASAF BA III (PAG). By design, major project management decisions e.g. procurement, project selection, were done by LA officials in most cases. It will be necessary to strengthen the participation of communities through the participatory rural appraisals to feef into the development LA Development Plans. This problem will be checked in MASAF - 86 - III through the open-ended and extended-PRAs and community score-card. 5.2.3 Sponsored Subprojects The major challenges experienced during the delivery of SSP were capacity problems, targeting, poor monitoring and reporting. (i) Weak Institutional Capacity: There were various forms of capacity problems that affected the operations of the sponsoring agencies including:(a) capacity problems by the implementing agencies in accounting of funds and management of interventions in a transparent way to ensure trickling of benefits to the intended beneficiaries. This called for upfront capacity building to ensure successful delivery of services in an efficient and effective manner and set time frame when benefits could start trickling down to the beneficiaries for each subproject type, and (b) there was limited capacity on the part of the beneficiary community to monitor activities and demand accountability from sponsoring agencies. This has been taken care of in the design of MASAF III where communities will be taken through the score-card process. (ii) Motives of implementing agencies. Some NGOs/CBO/FBOs had hidden motives whilst working in the field of vulnerability, the main interest was to access funds from MASAF for personal gains. To curb this problem, MASAF developed stringent screening criteria in conjunction with concerned, to ensure that support is channeled through legitimate institutions. (ii) Due to Unequal distribution of these implementing agencies it was problematic to reach the target groups in remote areas as they are not covered by the known NGOs/CBOs and FBOs, which tend to work in urban centers. MASAF responded to this challenge by facilitating registration of small groups of volunteers working in rural areas. (vi) Targeting In a country where 65% of the population is poor and 28% is described as ultra poor, it was not easy to come up with a targeting criterion that would avoid serious inclusion and exclusion errors. In this regard MASAF with the beneficiaries input defined vulnerability and its indicators. This formed the basis for developing the selection criteria for beneficiaries. 6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 6.1 Controllable Factors The lack of a functioning and computerized project tracking system greatly affected the data collection to facilitate monitoring and evaluation. Although the manual system worked satisfactorily, it was difficult to easily aggregate data collected in the various zones to construct the bigger picture of the MASAF Project status. Recruitment of other critical staff such as the Procurement Manager and the Monitoring and Evaluation Officer were not on board form Project inception. Maintaining the wage rate at below the rural/urban minimum wage rate had been an issue affecting the PWP operations. At the beginning of MASAF II, the wage rate was at MK15.90 per task rate. The wage was revised to MK25.00 and the to MK30.00. The wage levels under the PWP were challenged on account that if MASAF objective is to help the poor to improve their livelihoods, participating beneficiaries should be paid a wage that sufficiently meets their basic needs plus household investment requirements. Under the DFID supported PWP, a study will commissioned to look into ways of getting the wage right. - 87 - 6.2 Uncontrollable Factors High Material Price increases put considerable pressure on sub-project budgets and was the main reason accounting for budget overruns. Budgets had to be varied in order to accommodate these changes and to ensure that the community projects were delivered as requested and planned by communities, DECs and PIAs for service delivery. The general elections in 1999, and local government elections in 2000 created general instability at the district and community levels that affected the implementation of the Project as LA staff and PMC members were involved in one way or another. Staff movements and new recruitments by the DLG following the passing of the Decentralization policy, further compounded the situation. The drought in 2001/2002had led to acute food shortages such that it had a negative impact on project implementation. Communities were more concerned with survival mechanisms and their participation declined with the result that the general implementation pace of the Project, particularly under the CSP component slowed significantly. Under the PWP the effect of the drought led to overwhelming demand for jobs due to food insecurity. The HIV/AIDS pandemic continued to scourge the country at community district and national levels thereby negatively impacting on the Project implementation due to numerous deaths of productive persons. The time spent attending funerals by the communities erodes the availability of time and labor for productive work. The need for Increasing Community Voice in Service Delivery: Experiences with implementing the Project has shown the potential for increasing community voice in the development process in general, as well as in the delivery of services in particular. This has been demonstrated by the ability of communities to exact accountability on Project Management Committees and DECs that are charged with the responsibility of managing sub-project funds. Through similar processes under MASAF I and II that have enhanced social capital, there is potential for a more organized and coordinated possibility for bringing the accountability processes to a wider canvas. It is envisaged that the participatory community monitoring and accountability through the community scorecard system under the proposed MASAF III will go a long way in achieving this. Implementation experiences revealed inadequacies in the LAs' capacity to effectively plan and implement subprojects. MASAF Beneficiary Assessment III (Participatory Assessment Group)There are a number of incoherencies and contradictions in development planning and management in the LAs that are characterized by: a) duplication of similar activities funded by different agencies; b) concentration of projects in one geographical area while others that are equally deserving are starved; c) inactive participation of communities in subprojects identification. d) selection of projects mostly influenced by LA officials; and d) differing development approaches by different donors and development stakeholders. 7.0 OTHER EXPERIENCES 7.1 Financial Management Issues The total MASAF II funding was US$77.33million. The IDA contribution was US$66.0 million while the Government of Malawi contributed US$3.67 million and US$9.2million community contribution. US$64.46 million was disbursed from IDA. By March 2004, a total of US$50.98 million was disbursed out of a total allocation of US$51.10 million in the CSP, representing 99.8%, some funds were allocated away from the CSP. Under the PWP, a total of US$13.98 million was disbursed, representing 106.7% out of the initial allocation of US$13.1 million. The variance was due to reallocation of funds made available to the Component. A total of US$4.22 million (IDA, US$3.34 million; Government US$0.18 million; and - 88 - community contribution of US$0.70 million) under the SSP was disbursed, see Annex II. At inception MASAF II had a float of US$3 million in the Special Account from IDA. By April 2002 IDA approved an increase in the float from US$3m to US$4.5m. The increase in the float assisted in the cash inflows as the Project was on fast track disbursing to subprojects. In the course of implementing MASAF II there were two major changes to the DCA one was affecting the change in the float level and the second one was for effecting reallocation of funds amongst categories responding to the demands in the operations. Due to the robustness of the MASAF systems and procedures, MASAF was made to manage funds for the Village Housing Project on behalf of Government; Government also provided funding to MASAF for the Relief Cash for Work Programme; and the Department for International Development also started funding safety net operations through MASAF. 7.2 Procurement Issues In general, procurement at both Management Unit, Local Authority and community level was satisfactory. At community level, PMCs were able to procure materials, engage and supervise contractors and account for resources adequately. However, several challenges such as PMCs being cheated by unscrupulous traders, facilitation of procurement process by some officials and judgment by PMCs on what to buy and when, were met. Record keeping by some implementers was also problematic. The position of Procurement Manager was intermittently filled such that there was no continuity during implementation. Absence of the Procurement Manager until 2002, resulted in delays in carrying out critical steps that were a requirement of procurement processes. These experiences have informed the design of MASAF III and efforts will be focused on building capacity of implementers in procurement at Local Authority and community level, carrying out regular procurement audits and enforcement of good record keeping at all levels. 7.3 Sustainability The sustainability of sub-projects created under MASAF II is rated satisfactory. MASAF II subprojects were similar to those done under MASAF I, where community level institutional arrangements to ensure that the facilities created are sustainable are in place. These include parents and teachers association, school committees, water point committees and village natural resources committees that are charged with the responsibility for operation and maintenance. A survey (Bloom et al 2003) that looked at MASAF 1 contribution to reduction of poverty and sustainability of assets found that the arrangements for similar facilities constructed under MASAF 2 such water points that require frequent O& M contributions from communities were in place and functioning three to five years after the creation of the facilities. However, challenges continued to be faced with respect to road subprojects in regard to O&M arrangements. Building capacities for communities and LA for O&M of roads sub-projects should therefore be a critical consideration in designing future operations. 8.0 BANK AND BORROWER COUNTRY PERFORMANCE 31 8.1 Bank Performance The Bank's performance is rated satisfactory. The appraisal of the MASAF II was timely carried out during implementation of MASAF I, which ensured that there was no financing gap in the project activities. Bank staff provided technical advice during supervision missions throughout implementation. They made - 89 - effective follow up on issues raised during the visits particularly that required action from the Bank. For instance changes in the DCA for reallocation of funds and changes in float size were timely. Generally, the Bank support to the Project was invaluable, and contributed to the satisfactory achievement rates in the indicator targets. 8.2 Borrower Performance Government's performance is rated highly satisfactory. Government continued to accord MASAF the high profile it had in MASAF I as one of the poverty reduction instrument. This was demonstrated by the support from the President and the provision of counterpart funding by Government to the Project. Notwithstanding the fact that the counterpart funds were remitted intermittently, the Government performed well considering the financial resource constraints in the economy. The Project also had support from the Reserve Bank of Malawi, the Accountant General and the Debt and Aid Management Section in the manner disbursements were processed. The Auditor General was always on time for the audits as required by the DCA. The MASAF staff continued to demonstrate unprecedented commitment to work towards achievement of the Project objectives. Their commitment to transparency and accountability was demonstrated by their adherence to the DCA covenants as well as the MASAF code of ethics, which was put in place over and above the requirements as stipulated in the Project Implementation Manuals. The substantial achievements on key project performance indicators bear testimony to this commitment. 9.0 MAJOR LESSONS LEARNT Implementation of MASAF 2 has led to a number of lessons and experiences that need to be considered in designing future CDD operations. These lessons have been crystallized from MASAF's own reporting experiences, studies, direct feedback from communities and other stakeholders. Most of the lessons highlighted below have been incorporated in the design of MASAF III. 9.1 Critical Role of IEC in the Project: the IEC continued to be the oil that drove the MASAF II operations machinery. It synthesized experiences from communities, local authorities and NGOs into useful knowledge and information that contributed to increased and informed community participation in the sub-project implementation process. Future operations will need to retain Development Communication as an integral element of the Project design. 9.2 The need for enhanced knowledge and information sharing systems: during the course of implementing the Project, the need for an enhanced knowledge sharing system had arisen. Experience showed that there were varying degrees of understanding of the Project process and procedures by communities. While those projects implementing sub-projects had a thorough understanding of the processes and procedures, communities that had not benefited had only scanty information and knowledge of the processes. Moreover, not all people that had heard about MASAF were found to be deliberate listeners of the MASAF related information. There is need therefore, to find new ways of increasing knowledge and information sharing including `community to community exchanges', as well as making the messages interesting through drama and folklore in order to create deliberate listeners for MASAF messages, with a view to increasing both the quality and levels of participation in MASAF funded activities. - 90 - 9.3 The need to improve subproject appraisal process: it has been noted that engineering input, in places where the soil texture is clayey, particularly at the appraisal stage and during implementation is critical for successful implementation of the various facilities. Places such as Salima, where some facilities such as latrines collapsed shortly after construction confirms this need. Construction of flood control infrastructure is yet another area where there is need to improve appraisal process. Both the LAs and MASAF had demonstrated that capacity in this area is inadequate. 9.4 The Need to Finance Education Infrastructure as a Package: although there was a standard package for financing projects in the education sectors, implementation experience has shown that when only facilities such as staff houses or school halls are financed, the benefits to communities are only up to certain extent, resulting in low satisfaction rates for the facilities by the beneficiaries. There is need therefore, to finance holistically the various education infrastructure requirements, in line with communities' capacities to implement the packages financed. This has been taken care of in MASAF III as the community service package approach to project packaging will be a requisite. 9.5 Strengthened Monitoring and Evaluation System: the need for strengthened capacities for monitoring and evaluation was seen to be crucial for achieving program accountability. While the Project has been able to track trends in respect to internal efficiencies, the tracking of outcome and impact indicators has been partial. Furthermore, there are weak linkages with mainstream national level poverty monitoring arrangements. This has rendered assessing and quantifying the MASAF achievements and contribution to poverty reduction difficult, indeed. 9.6 The Need to Harness Social Capital to Create Economic Capital: MASAF I and II experiences with community participation have shown the potency of social capital to be used as a vehicle for meeting economic ends. Currently, the enhanced nodes of social capital spread throughout the country in the form of Project Management Committees and groups working under the PWP and SSP could be used to form the basis for economic organization such as savings and investments. This would lead to a direct impact on poverty at the individual and household levels. 9.7 The Need for Field Based Standard Operating Bills of Quantities: the implementation of a CDD program such as MASAF where acquisition of goods and services for the delivery of sub-projects involves many actors requires that costs for the types of infrastructure components funded are more or less estimated with a greater deal of accuracy. This will not only facilitate cost effectiveness in the delivery of the Project, but will also take account of differing requirements for each geographical location and the literacy levels of some of the implementing agents. 9.8 Need for a More Systematic and Mainstreamed Environmental Management Process: Experience with the application of Environmental Impact Assessment in the project cycle process shows that application has not been consistent across the three operational programs. There is therefore need to enhance the framework for ensuring that the Environmental Assessment Management Plan is effectively integrated into the subproject cycle processes. In view of this, the Project has developed a framework and sectoral checklist that require each sub-project to have an environmental management plan. 9.9 The Potential of the Social Fund to Help in Deepening Decentralization Process: while MASAF 1 and 2 largely operated to bridge the gap between the District Assembly and the communities, the empowerment processes and attainment made over the years are seen as a platform for achieving meaningful partnerships among communities, local governments and non-governmental organizations in the delivery of development projects and services. In this regard, a future operation should seek to leverage this comparative advantage in working with communities to strengthen the decentralization program and assist sectoral ministries to devolve to LA level. MASAF II had devolved to assembly by reducing number of zones from 19 to 3. - 91 - 9.10 The Need for Increasing Community Voice in Service Delivery: Experiences with implementing the Project has shown the potential for increasing community voice in the development process in general, as well as in the delivery of services in particular. This has been demonstrated by the ability of communities to exact accountability on Project Management Committees and DECs that are charged with the responsibility of managing sub-project funds. Through similar processes under MASAF I and II that have enhanced social capital, there is potential for a more organized and coordinated possibility for bringing the accountability processes to a wider canvas. It is envisaged that the participatory community monitoring and accountability through the community score-card system under the proposed MASAF III will go a long way in achieving this. 9.11 The Need for Building LA Capacities and Systems for Development Planning: Implementation experiences revealed inadequacies in the LA capacity to effectively plan and implement subprojects. MASAF Beneficiary Assessment III (Participatory Assessment Group)There are a number of incoherencies and contradictions in development planning and implementation in the LA's that are characterized by: a) duplication of similar activities funded by different agencies; concentration of projects in one geographical area while others that are equally deserving are starved; b) inactive participation of communities in subprojects identification. Selection mostly influenced by DA officials; and c) differing development approaches by different donors and development stakeholders. In view of this, there is need to ensure that Local Authorities work towards building capacities for effective development management. Support in this regard to LAs, should focus on enhancing their planning systems that will contribute to efficient intra-district allocation, transparency and accountability. In addition, LA officials should be trained in financial management, monitoring and evaluation, technical supervision skills, as well as participatory development management skills to assist them work with communities effectively. 9.12 Effectiveness of PWP Safety Net Intervention: Paying of a low wage rate MASAF wage was set 20% below the government rural minimum wage. that is set below the minimum rural wage rate coupled with the short duration 3 to 6 months of employment on PWP's, only afforded beneficiaries to meet their immediate consumption smoothing needs. This experience has given rise the need to critically review the PWP with a view to transforming it into an intervention for enhancing the economic progression of the beneficiaries out of extreme poverty. Pursuant to this, MASAF is working with CARE International in a DFID funded pilot project in four districts to test approaches that would add value to the effectiveness and impact of the PWP beyond the wage transfer to improve livelihoods in a more sustainable manner. 9.13 The Need to Improve Targeting Mechanisms under PWP: The programme wage rate was deliberately set below the minimum rural wage rate to ensure that only poor individuals self-selected themselves into the programme. In most LAs the number of qualified job applicants exceeded the available job quota under the PWP subprojects. Thus local community leaders who used a crude wealth ranking targeting methodology or a first come first served basis selection mode mainly led the beneficiary selection process. Such a selection process worked to the disadvantage of deserving poor community members who were mostly excluded to due to late registering or leakages in the wealth ranking processes. Getting the targeting right will go a long way in correcting inclusion and exclusion errors in the selection of beneficiaries. - 92 - 9.14 The Need for Strong Sector Linkages: Implementation of the MASAF Project called for greater need for strong working linkages between the district level staff (who are in contact with the community) and central government officials. The existence of a robust link between the two staff levels in the context of realigning the center would enhance efficiency in the management of development programs at the district level, including rational allocation of available resources and guided formulation of policies and norms at the national level. This follows from the fact that the LAs have access to and would provide up to date information of the situation on the ground that is vital for the guiding of the sector norms and to policy formulation. In turn the central government would respond appropriately in ensuring that resources are available i.e. qualified personnel to oversee management of the implementation of development programs and finances to meet recurrent costs for community investments realized from donor-funded programs. In the final analysis this would result in the provision of timely, quality and sustainable service interventions to the communities. 9.15 Emphasis on Road Subprojects A large share of the funded PWP subprojects was taken up by road rehabilitation/construction subprojects. However road works are easily and best done after the rainy season when the soil is moist but this period coincides with the crop harvest activities ­ this is the time of plenty. The `hungry period' that is almost cyclic occurs during the rainy season during which time road works are difficult to implement especially with labour based methodologies. The net effect seems to be a mismatch in terms of timing of the PWP road construction activities and the need. There is need to continue sensitizing the communities to consider other types of subprojects apart from roads which could easily be implemented during the rainy season. 9.16 Scaling up the SSP Pilot: The implementation of the SSP under MASAF was considered to be a pilot Programme although it was later scaled up considerably. A lot of lessons and experiences were encountered in the course of project implementation and these included the following: a) CBOs/NGOs/FBOs can deliver and are in better position to sustain their activities if they are given necessary support after proper capacity assessment. Capacity building is one important support aspect for PIAs and should be looked at holistically, thus there is need to build capacities of all systems that are associated with PIAs performance; b) There was need to determine subproject cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit accruals and the SSP will have to consider undertaking the study before supporting communities with subprojects; c) It is necessary to design simple and clear procedures and guidelines to support PIAs operations. These will assist PIAs throughout the subproject cycle processes; d) Well-trained personnel at the LA level to technically backstop the PIAs in project cycle processes is important for success of the project; and e) In order to effectively monitor that benefits are timely trickling down to beneficiaries, there is need to set time frame when benefits can start trickling down to the beneficiaries for each sub project type. - 93 - ANNEX I Table A PROGRESS TOWARDS INDICATORS As At March 2004 INDICATOR TARGET ACHIEVEMENT REMARK 1.0 National Indicators 1.1 Budget allocated to Social Sectors 5% - Data not available % increase between 1998 and 2002 1.2 Per capita income % increase 180% 7.06% According to the Economic Report between 1998 and 2002 2003 1.3 % decrease of people living under 10% None No change from 1998, currently IHS the poverty line by 2002 is under way and information will be available in 2005 1.4 Total population with increased 3.0 million 3.2 million Beneficiaries under CSP, PWP and access to infrastructure SSP 2.0 Community Sub Projects Component 2.1. Total number of community Not set 12,130 sub-project requests received 2.2. Total number of community 2,164 2,255 sub-projects funded. 2.3. Total number of community 2,164 2,216 39 not completed by EOP sub-projects completed 2.4 % of women participating in 39 % 38.1% 8.1 % increase over MASAF I PMCs attainment 2.5 Proportion (% share) of women 50 % 56 % Composition of women higher in WPCs. than men in WPCs 2.6 Number of public and private 2,900 614 persons Comprises village head persons, sector persons trained in CSP persons Group Village head persons and (excluding PMCs) ward councilors 2.7 Percentage of infrastructure 100 % 98.2 % Some health facilities are waiting (schools, heath units and other) used, for staff. managed and maintained 2.8 Proportion of Water Point 100% 98 % Some WPCs in Blantyre Zone Committee (WPCs) trained in CBM still not trained. for water facilities. 2.9No. of urban works (CSP) 100 93 These projects are also included in Completed 2.2 and 2.3 3.0 Public Works Program (PWP) 3.1 Number of sub-projects requests Not set 1,279 Based on requests from District received. Assemblies using Vulnerability Assessment Mapping. 3.2 Number of sub-projects funded 286 382 3.3 Number of sub-projects 286 376 6 not completed by EOP completed. - 94 - 3.4 No. of individuals that received at 720,000 535,676 Average project duration is 8-9 least 2 months wages (IDA) 1998 ­ months. Number of participants per 2003 project was not 630 as planned but 300. 3.5 Number of households benefiting 80,000 119,039 Per Zone quarterly reports from employment. 3.6 Number of women in receipt of 100,000 244,274 Per Zone quarterly reports wages for at least two months. 3.7 % share of subproject costs 40 % 46 % Per Zone quarterly reports. accounting for unskilled labor wages. 3.8 No of District Assembly 195 councillors Councillors oriented 300 302 3.9 Number of Assembly and 107 senior staff sectoral staff oriented. 3.10. Total number of people 3,400 3,508 (a) District- 405, cashiers-39 and trained at sub-project level (b) foremen ­452, PMCs 2,712 (a) District Level 444 (b) Project Level 3,164 3.11 % of women in PWP PMCs 50 % 25% 4.0 Sponsored Sub-projects Component (SSP) 4.01 Total number of sponsored Demand 1,344 sub-project requests received Driven 4.02 Total number of sponsored 43 384 sub-projects funded 4.03 Total number of sponsored 43 374 -10 cancelled due to gross projects completed. mismanagement of funds 4.04 Total number of people CBO/NGO 252,686 benefiting from sub-projects. dependent. - No of orphans Not set 209,832 - No. of elderly Not set 4,698 - No. of street children Not set 40 - No. of chronically ill and those Not set 18.154 affected by HIV/Aids - No. of people with disabilities Not set 20,962 4.05 Proportion (%) of females Not set 60% benefiting from sub-projects. 4.06 Proportion (%) of women 50 % 54% participating in committees (PSCs). 4.07 Number of NGOs / CBOs 43 275 trained in project cycle management in SSP 4.8 Number of PSC members 430 3,250 trained ANNEX II - 95 - Project Cost Financing Project Cost by Components (in US$ Million Equivalent) Project Cost by Component Appraisal Estimate US$ Actual Estimate US$ million Percentage of Appraisal million Community Sub Projects 51.10 50.98 99.8% Public Works Programme 13.10 13.98 107% Sponsored Sub Projects 0.50 4.22 843% Capacity Enhancement 3.90 3.46 89% Incremental Operating Costs 7.50 4.69 63% Total 76.10 77.33 102% a) Note that during implementation there were additional reallocation of funds to PWP and SSP hence Percentages are over the appraisal estimate figures b) SSP figures also went up due to community contribution which was not envisaged at appraisal. Project Financing by Component (in US$ Million Equivalent) Component Appraisal Actual Estimate Estimate IDA Govt. CoF IDA Covt. Cof IDA Community 42.6 2.20 6.30 40.36 2.12 8.50 95% Sub Projects Public Works 12.5 0.60 0.00 13.28 0.70 0.00 106% Programme Sponsored Sub 0.5 0.10 0.00 3.34 0.18 0.70 668% Project Capacity 3.9 0.00 0.00 3.46 0.00 0.00 89% Enhancement Incremental 6.5 1.00 0.00 4.02 0.67 0.00 62% Operating Costs TOTALS 66 3.9 0.00 64.46 3.67 9.20 0.98 Notes: Actual CoF Financing figures are an estimation of community Contribution for Community Sub Projects (CSP) and Sponsored Sub Projects (SSP) components ANNEX III Table 3 CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT: STRATEGIC AND TECHNICAL STUDIES CONDUCTED IN MASAF II (July 2000 - 30th Nov 2003) NO STUDY/ DATE DETAILS BY WHOM . CONSULTANCY 1 Beneficiary July ­ Technical assistance in the field of Beneficiary Bunda Team Assessment (CSP) September, Assessment for CSP - 96 - 2000 2 Beneficiary July ­ Technical assistance in the field of Beneficiary Wadonda Assessment (PWP) September, Assessment for the PWP Component Consult 2000 3 Technical Skill 18th Orienting the District Technical staff on the David Mzandu Training Contract September to procedures to be followed in the implementation 28th October, of MASAF funded projects 2000 4 Technical assistance 23rd August to Analysis, design, development and implementing WISS Limited in the field of 22nd MASAF Project website. Website September, Development 2000 5 Project Tracking 31st October to Technical assistance in the field of the supervision Siblini System Development 14th December, of project tracking system development 2000 6 Biannual Audit 1st November Ascertaining and enhancing proper and timely use KPMG, Graham Consultancy to 15th and accountability of funds advanced to the Carr, December, project and to subprojects. Mwenelupembe 2000 and other Commercial auditors. 7 Salary positioning November, Reviewing MASAF pay structure in comparison Imani survey 2000 with NGOs and industrial sector Development Ltd. 8 Cost estimation 9th to 16th Training technical staff on adopting building EMC Consulting training contract July, 2001 standards, technical documents and skills in Engineers computerized cost estimation. 9 Radio Design January 2002 Providing MASAF beneficiaries and stakeholders MBC (Kumvetsa Consultancy . with sufficient and accurate information order for Bwino them to participate effectively in MASAF Programme) Projects. 10 Biannual Audit 12th Ascertaining and enhancing proper and timely use Peter Holdworth, Consultancy December to and accountability of funds advanced to the Mwenelupembe (Phase I) 15th February, MASAF Project and to subprojects. & Company, 2002 Deloitte & Touche 11 Biannual Audit April 2002 Ascertaining and enhancing proper and timely use Graham Carr, Consultancy and accountability of funds advanced to the Mwenelupembe, (Phase II) MASAF Project and to subprojects. Deloitte & Touche, KPMG 12 MASAF Television October 2002 Informing, sensitizing, clarifying and reporting on Television Production and various types of projects local communities Malawi Airing embark under the MASAF Project. 13 Borehole Technical October 2002 Technical Assistance Services for a detailed Willy and Review Contract ­ December technical review of the MASAF borehole drilling Partner 2002 programme. Engineering Services 14 Biannual Audit May ­ July Ascertaining and enhancing proper and timely use Deloite and Consultancy for 2003 and accountability of funds advanced to the Touche, year ending 31st MASAF Project and to subprojects. Mwenelupembe, December 2002 Mhango and Company - 97 - 15 Radio Material 1st October Sensitising, clarifying and reporting on MASAF Malawi Production and 2002 ­ 31st project activities and progress. Broadcasting airing for MASAF May 2003 Corporation. Programme. 16 Beneficiary Sept ­Nov Evaluating qualitative accomplishments of Participatory Assessment Study 2003 MASAF II Project objectives and the design Assessment principles/assumptions through the CSP, PWP Group(Zambia) and SSP interventions. 17 Review of Cost Oct ­ Nov Analysing Project Cost effectiveness in terms of EMC Jatula Effectiveness and 2002 cost estimation procedures and project Associates Technical Design expenditure implementation Standards (PHRD Grands) 18 Review of MASAF Oct ­ Nov Assessing M&E arrangements and designing a STC Group M&E Systems 2002 comprehensive M&E system for MASAF (PHRD Grands) 19 Institutional Oct ­ Dec 2002 Reviewing and developing a MASAF MSC Development, HR Management structure, HR management systems Management and and policies, and training needs suitable for long Training Needs term project Assessment Study (PHRD Grants) 20 Study on Oct ­Dec 2002 Carrying out a qualitative and quantitative SADCC Center Development baseline survey for the MASAF development of Communication for communication programme and developing a Communication MASAF (PHRD communication campaign strategy for achieving for GRANT) positive behaviour towards community Development(Zi empowerment and development projects. mbabwe) 21 Review of Financial Oct- Nov 2002 Reviewing, revising and introducing improvements O&M Associates Systems of MASAF in the financial systems for effective implementation (PHRD GRANTS) of MASAF III 22 Institutional and LegalJan 2003-MarchAssessing MASAF mandate and legal framework Banda,Banda& Assessment of 2003 with a view to designing an appropriate framework Company MASAF (PHRD for a longer term organisation GRANTS) 23 Systematic Client March - AprilSoliciting the views of stakeholders for Millenium Consultation for 2003 improvements to the SSP in order for the Consulting Vulnerability and SSP programme to respond more positively to its target Group Interventions (PHRD group GRANTS) 24 Community Savings Jan ­April Assessing efforts in community savings and World and Investment 2003 investment promotion in the country and Education(Cana Promotion (PHRD designing a workable strategy for Savings and da) GRANTS) Investments in MASAF III - 98 - ANNEX IV Table 1 WORKSHOP/TRAINING INTERNAL (April 2001 ­ Nov 2003) Activity No. of No. of Participants by Geographical How Often By Whom Participants Distribution National Zonal DistrictP MC 1 Budgeting and 26 MU (10) ZMs (16) 2nd to 4th Budgetary April, 2001 Control (3 days)Mala wi College of Accountanc y 2 Orientation on 3 MU (3) 23rd April, Website 2001 (1 Management day)WISS 3 Procurement 2 MU (2) 1st to 7th Workshop May, 2001Treasu ry 4 Autocard 3 MU (3) 23rd ­ 24th Orientation May, 2001LARR Y Computers 5 Project 68 12 DEC Justification (56)14th to 16th May, 2001; 21st to 23rd May, 2001 28th to 30th May, 2001 (9 days)MAS AF 6 Defensive 2 MU (2) 11th to Driving Course 13th June, 2001 (3 days) National Roads Safety Council (NRSC) 7 Price Data Bank 51 MU (4) 19 ZMs, 28 9th to 16th on Sub-Project TSs July, Cost Estimation 2001Millen ium Consultants - 99 - 8 Internal 1 MU (1) 16th to Auditing Course 17th August, 2001 (2 days) Society of Accountant s in Malawi (SOCAM) 9 Aspects of the 1 MU (1) 1st Employment September, Act of Malawi 2001 (1 day)Emplo yers Consultativ e Association of Malawi (ECAM) 10 AIDS in the 1 MU (1) 17th Workplace December, 2001 (1 day) ECAM 11 Orientation on 25 MU (6) ZMs (19) 8th to 10th Human Rights November, Based Approach 2001UNIC to Programming EF 12 Orientation of 136 Counci-llor Councillors in s PWP activities (136)Dece (District mber, Assemblies) 2001MAS AF 13 Development 9 MU (4) February, Leadership Govern-ment (5) 2002 (14 Course days)Unive rsity of Zimbabwe/ Institute for Developme nt Studies (Sussex) 14 Industrial 2 MU(2) 2nd May, Relations course 2002 (1 day)ECAM 15 Mainstreaming 29 MU (10) ZMs (19) 3rd to 7th HIV/AIDS and June, 2002 nutrition issues (5 into MASAF days)MAS Activities AF/ UNICEF 16 Justification 5 ZM (1) 16th to Training for AA (1) 17th May, Karonga Zone TSs (2) 2002MAS Staff OA (1) AF 17 Justification 24 ZAAs (24) 10th to Training for 12th July, ZAAs 2002MIM - 100 - 18 Justification 13 2 AAs AAs (11) 29th July to Course 1st August, 2002MIM 19 Environment 26 8 Directors & Heads ZMs 18 13th to Mainstreaming 17th Workshop August, 2002Living stonia Beach 20 Receptionists/T 1 1 Receptionist 25th Nov. elephone to 6th Dec. Operators 2002Multi Course Country 21 Stores 1 1 AA 11th to Management 22nd November, 2002 (12 days)Centr al Governmen t Stores 22 Leadership 1 MU(1) 2nd to 11th Development February, Workshop 2003 (10 days)+Baki li Muluzi Institute for Social and Economic Transforma tion 23 Strategic 1 1 (MU) May 2003 Management to Training (MBA) November, 2004MIM 24 Justification 3 - 3 --5th to 6th Training for May Chikwawa and 2003MAS Luchenza Zones AF 25 HIV/AIDS at 116 MU and Zones (116) May the Work place 2003Projec t Hope 26 Leadership 5 3 (MU) 23rd May, Challenge 2 (Govt) 2003MAS Course AF 27 Motor Cycle 3 MU (3) 4th ­Sept Riding Course 2003Nation al Roads Safety Council (NRSC) 28 Video Training 1 1 15th to 29th September, 2003Chanc ellor College TOTAL 559 193 174 192 - 101 - Table 2 WORKSHOP/TRAINING (EXTERNAL) (August 2001 ­ October 2003) Activity No of No. of Participants by How Often By Whom Participants Geographical Distribution National Zonal DistrictPMC 1 Internal Audit 1 MU (1) 20th August Training to 14th (Tanzania) September, 2001 (26 days)ESAMI 2 Study tour to 4 Minister Government Officials, MU (4) 14th to 27th Thailand Social October, Fund 2001 (14 (Thailand) days) MASAF 3 Treasury 1 MU (1) 12th to 23rd Management November, (Tanzania) 2001 (12 days) ESAMI 4 Protecting the 3 MU (2) Vulnerable (Washington) Protecting the 3 MU (3) 1st to 12th Vulnerable December (Washington) 2002 (12 days) World Bank Protecting the 3 MU (2) ZM (1) 26th Vulnerable November to (Washington) 7th December, 2001 (12 days) World Bank 5 Ethio-Forum (2002) 2 MU (2) 13th to 20th (Ethiopia) January, 2002 (8 days) ASIFNET 6 Communication 2 MU (2) 17th to 31st Development March, 2002 Internership (15 (Zimbabwe) days)SADC 7 Community 2 MU (2) 9th to 22nd Development April, 2002 Course (14 (Washington) days)World Bank 8 Knowledge 2 MU (2) 18th to 27th Management course May, (Washington USA) 2002World Bank 9 Study Visit to 1 MU (1) 27th April to World Bank Office 13th May, (Washington) 2002 (17 days)World Bank 10 Regional Seminar 3 MU (1) ZMs (2) 18th to 27th for Labour-based May, 2002 practitioners (10 days)ILO (Maputo-Mozambiq ue) - 102 - 11 Community-driven 5 MU (1) ZMs (4) 6th to 10th Development May, 2002 Workshop (5 days)World (Lusaka-Zambia) Bank 12 Senior Management 1 MU (1) 13th to 25th Development May, Programme 2001ESAMI (Zanzibar) 13 Assuring the quality 2 MU (2) 18th to 29th of Bank Operations May, 2002 in Africa (12 (Washington) days)World Bank 14 Advanced Auditors 2 MU (2) Course (Durban ­ 27th May to South Africa 14th June, 2002 (20 days) ESAMI 15 Audit for Internal 2 MU (2) 19th August Auditors Course to 13th (Uganda) September, 2002 (28 days) ESAMI 16 Financial 1 MU (1) 25th August Management of to 1st Donor Funded September, Projects 2002 (28 (Harare-Zimbabwe) days)ESAMI 17 FAO/SADC 1 MU (1) 8th to 11th Workshop September, Zimbabwe 2002 FAO/SADC 18 Regional 1 MU (1) 8th to 18th Conference of the September, Europe and Central 2002 (8 Asia Regional days)ECANE Network of Social T Funds (ECANET) (Russia) 19 Prevention, analysis 1 MU (1) 6th to 26th and detection of October, corporate fraud 2002 (21 course (Uganda) days)ESAMI 20 Management 2 MU (1) AA (1) 26th October Development to 16th Programme for November, Executive Assistants 2002 (28 (Durban- South days)ESAMI Africa) 21 Community 1 MU (1) 17th Nov. to Management in 7th Water Supply and December, Sanitation Course 2002 (21 (Nairobi) Kenya days)Networ k for Water and Sanitation International (NETWAS) 22 Sun Accounting 5 MU (5) 8th to 24th System Course December, (Johannesburg, 2002 (17 South Africa) days)Advanc e Net (PTY) Limited 23 Financial 1 MU (1) 2nd to 13th Management and January, - 103 - Disbursement 2003 (12 Procedures Course days)World for World Bank Bank Aided Projects (India) 24 Sun Accounting 3 MU (3) 13th to 24th System Course January, (Johannesburg, 2003 (14 South Africa) days)Advanc e Net (PTY) Limited 25 Information 1 MU (1) 2nd to 15th Technology Course February, (Durban ­ South 2003n (14 Africa) days)CS Holding 26 Sun Accounting 3 MU (3) 6th to 19th System Course April, 2003 (Johannesburg, (14 South Africa) days)Advanc e Net (PTY) Limited 27 Internal Audit and 2 MU (2) 6th to 26th Computer Auditing April, 2003 course (Mbabane ­ (21 days)DTI Swaziland) 28 Management 3 MU (2) 1 AA 21st April to Development 17th May, Programme for 2003 (28 Executive Assistants days)ESAMI (Mbabane- Swaziland) 29 Records 1 MU (1) 27th April to Management 24th May, Course (Arusha ­ 2003 (28 Tanzania) days)ESAMI 30 Human Resources 1 MU (1) - -19th May to Management course 13th June (Arusha, Tanzania) 2003 (28 days)ESAMI 31 Management 1 MU (1) - -26th May to Development 20th June Programme for 2003 (28 Executive Assistants days)ESAMI (Mombasa, Kenya) 32 Electronic Records 1 MU (1) 1st to 28th Management June, Course (Mbabane, 2003DTI Swaziland) 33 Human Resources 1 MU (1) 3rd to 30th Management and August, Performance 2003IDCA Enhancement (Mbabane, Swaziland) 34 Audit for Internal 1 MU (1) - -17th August Auditors Course to 13 (Nairobi, Kenya) September (28 September) ESAMI 35 Financial 1 MU (1) 24 August to Management 20 Course (Harare, September, Zimbabwe) 2003 (28 days)ESAMI 36 Management 2 MU (2) 24 August to Development 20 Course for September, - 104 - Executive Assistants 2003 (28 (Mbabane, days)ESAMI Swaziland) 37 Financial 1 MU (1) 15th Management September, Course (ACCA) 2003 to May 2004Thames Valley University (UK) 38 Fiduciary 5 MU (3) Govt (2) 28th Management in September to Community Driven 4th October, Development 2002 (7 Projects Workshop days)World (Kampala, Uganda) Bank 39 Goods and 1 MU (1) 3rd to 26th Equipment October, Procurement Course 2003 (24 (Accra, Ghana) days) Ghana Institute of Management and Public Admin. 40 Advanced 1 MU (1) 5th October Management to 1st Course (Mbabane, November, Swaziland) 2003DTI 41 Dairy Cattle 21 1 23rd Management(Excha November, nge Visit) 2003Kenya Productivity Institute TOTAL 96 66 10 515 ANNEX V Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ million equivalent) AT APPRAISAL CATEGORY PROCUREMENT METHOD ICB NCB Community Other NBF Total Participation 1. Community 0.00 0.00 44.60 3.0 6.69 54.36 Subprojects (42.42) (3.0) (45.42) 2. Works-PWP 0.00 0.00 12.78 0.68 0.06 13.51 (12.14) (0.66) (12.80) 3. Sponsored 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.56 Subprojects (0.41) (0.12) (0.53) 4. Equipment, 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.43 Furniture and (0.04) (0.03) (0.43) Supplies 5. Consultants, 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.18 0.00 4.18 Training and (4.14) (4.14) Workshops 6. Incremental 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.68 0.43 3.11 Operating (2.68) (2.68) costs - 105 - Total 0.00 0.04 57.87 10.69 7.17 76.14 IDA (0.04) (54.97) (10.62) (66.00) Notes: Numbers in parenthesis refer to the amount financed by International Development Association. Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ million equivalent) ACTUAL CATEGORY PROCUREMENT METHOD ICB NCB Community Other NBF Total Participation 1. Community 0.00 0.00 42.48 0.00 8.50 50.98 Subprojects 40.36 (40.36) 2. Works-PWP 0.00 0.00 13.98 0.00 0.00 13.98 (13.28) (13.28 3. Sponsored 0.00 0.00 3.52 0.00 0.70 4.22 Subprojects (3.34) (3.34) 4. Equipment, 0.33 0.04 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.62 Furniture and (0.33) (0.03) (0.20) (0.56 Supplies 5. Consultants, 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.46 0.00 3.46 Training and (3.46) (3.46) Workshops 6. Incremental 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.07 0.00 4.07 Operating (3.46) (3.46) costs Total 0.33 0.04 59.98 7.78 9.20 77.33 IDA (0.33) (0.03) (56.98) (7.12) (66.46) Notes: Numbers in parenthesis refer to the amount financed by International Development Association. Financing arrangements combined Equipment as part of Incremental Costs. - 106 - - 107 -