CAADP MDTF: Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) Child Trust Fund (P121913)

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized AFRICA Africa Agriculture Global Practice Recipient Executed Activities Specific Investment Loan FY 2011 Seq No: 2 ARCHIVED on 06-Jan-2016 ISR22011 Implementing Agencies: Public Disclosure Authorized Key Dates Key Project Dates Bank Approval Date:09-Sep-2010 Original Closing Date:31-Dec-2013 Project Development Objectives Effectiveness Date:22-Nov-2010 Revised Closing Date:31-Dec-2015 Public Disclosure Authorized Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document) PHPDO Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective? No PHRPDODEL Components Name Public Disclosure Authorized Overall Ratings Name Previous Rating Current Rating Progress towards achievement of PDO Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Implementation Status and Key Decisions After five years of implementation, the ECCAS CTF will close on December 31, as planned. The CTF has successfully financed: (i) capacity building of the ECCAS Secretariat through the provision of human resources, training, and procurement of office equipment material, and accounting and management software; (ii) facilitation and coordination of the CAADP process at national level; (iii) facilitation and coordination of the CAADP process at the regional level; and (iv) the establishment of cross-cutting functions such as a CAADP information and communication systems, and the development of partnerships with other CAADP stakeholders. Key achievements to date include: (i) establisment of a solid foundation and supportive environment for implementation of CAADP in the Central Africa region which has the potential to provide concrete prospects for increased investments in agriculture, civil society commitment and reform for the region's agriculture sector; and (ii) an overall well advanced CAADP process in Central Africa where; (a) all ten ECCAS member countries have 1/6/2016 Page 1 of 13

2 prepared and validated their National Agriculture Investment Plans (NAIPs); (b) the ECCAS member countries have prepared and validated a Regional Agriculture Investment Plan (RAIP); (c) the capacity of the ECCAS Secretariat's Agriculture & Rural Development Unit (ARD) has been strengthened to support the CAADP process at national and regional level (it went from a one man Unit to a team of six at its peak:1 project coordinator, 2 agriculture specialists, 1 financial management specialist, 1 M&E specialist, and 1 program assistant); in addition, each member country has a dedicated CAADP country focal point who, in coordination with the ECCAS ARD team, is empowered to closely follow up on coordination of the CAADP process at the country level; (d) significant increase in the presence and visibility of ECCAS in the region within the agriculture sector; (e) provision of computer software, and establishment of information & communication systems which could also serve other parts of the ECCAS Secretariat and or other projects, as well as some inputs into a CAADP M&E strategy; and (d) adoption by the Central African Heads of States of four key strategic decisions for the agriculture sector: (i) the establishment of a common agriculture policy; (ii) the establishment of a regional policy on food security for Central Africa; (iii) the establishment of a regional investment program on food security and nutrition; and (iv) the need for increased capacity strengthening in the region for agriculture and rural development. Further details and an assessment of the overall grant progress and achievements by component at project end are provided in the public aide-memoire of the final implementation support mission held in November 2015 (document attached). There is complementarity between the NAIPs and the RAIP in the sense that the priority regional investments are not to replace or duplicate national investments, but are meant to apply the subsidiarity principle in order to support four critical objectives for the agricultural sector in Central Africa: (i) enhancing agriculture productivity in key value chains (such as cotton, cassava, banana and meat production, for example) with a view to increase income for rural households and reduce major regional food production deficits; (ii) better natural resource management focussing on sustainability; (iii) the promotion af a favourable africultural policy framework and private business environment for job creation; and (iv) enhancing the overall food balance and nutritional status oin Central Africa. Eleven priority regional investment programs have been outlined in this respect. Notwithstanding these positive investments and advances made in the region, the sustainability of the grant achievements following the closure of this grant is at risk as the ECCAS Secretariat faces a number of key challenges, primarily due to severe financial constraints. These include: (i) the absence of a long term vision and internal resource mobilization for staffing and capacity building to advance the region s agriculture agenda, especially in the context of the Malabo Declaration and country engagement in further advancing the CAADP; (ii) uncertainty on the sustainability of investments made at ECCAS, including institutional capacity building, retention of the technical staff capacity built by the CTF, as well as other investments made during the course of implementation of the CTF; and (iii) insufficient capacity and fiancial resources to implement and monitor the various regional agriculture policies and anticipated agriculture priority regional investments described in the RAIP. ECCAS recognizes the fact that resource mobilization is a long term issue that requires continuous dialogue, committment and ownership at the institutional, country and regional levels by the member States. It has pledged to continue its resource mobilization efforts for the immediate future, in particular to cover the forthcomimg gap period following closure of the grant and the agreed institutional strenghtening of the ARD Unit per the decision of the Heads of Central African States. Furthermore, there is current discussion about a possible merge of ECCAS and CEMAC (Central African Economic and Monetary Community), which has increased the institutional uncertainty and would ultimately inpact the Agriculture & Rural Development units of both institutions. To support the region in the short-to-medium term, the World Bank is also currently exploring two new avenues for future support to CAADP in Central Africa. For the former, funds from all the CAADP MDTF CTFs (i.e. AUC, NEPAD, ECOWAS, COMESA, SADC and ECCAS) not used by December 31, 20015, could be pooled together and redistributed with a portion reallocated to each of the CAADP MDTF grant recipients to complete implementation of a series of identified key remaining priority activities in For the latter, the World Bank is also working on preparation of a new Multi-Donor Trust Fund to specifically support implementation of the Malabo Declaration on the continent. Furthermore, implementation of the NAIPs and RAIP, which was not possible during the grant timeframe, could provide entry points for the development partners to provide potential further support to the region's agriculture sector in the long term. All Countries and the regional level all well aware of the coming challenges to request donor harmonization and alignment and start actual imlementation of their NAIPs and of the RAIP, in order to further develop the large potential of the agricultural sector in Central Africa. As part of the grant closing procedures, a series of evaluations are being\will be prepared to provide a more detailed comprehensive and global assessment of the overall achievements, challenges and lessons learned from implementation of the grant. This includes: (i) an ECCAS self evaluation of its implementation performance for the ECCAS grant (readily available), which will feed into a final independent performance evaluation of the overall CAADP Multi-Donor Trust Fund (underway); (ii) a performance report for the grant covering the period from inception to completion of the Trust Fund (TF) prepared by ECCAS (already available for public disclosure); and (iii) an implementation completion report (ICR) for the grant to be prepared by the Bank team (which will be available no later than June 30, 3016). 's internal rating for the grant, for both the achievement of the project development objective and overall implementation progress is therefore "moderately satisfactory". Risks Overall Risk Rating 1/6/2016 Page 2 of 13

3 Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating Overall Moderate -- Moderate Results Project Development Objective Indicators PHINDPDOTBL 1. Effectiveness of national structures in agricultural policy making (disaggregated by countries and type of changes achieved). (Percentage, Custom) Value The level of effectiveness evaluates the contribution of CAADP to changes that occurred in the region's agriculture sector. Based on the findings of the final survey conducted in at the end of November 2015, the CAADP country focal points as the main survey participants, believe that CAADP has significantly contributed to achieving progress in the agriculture sector. Likewise they believe that CAADP has significantly re-energized the agricultural sector in the eight ECCAS member States. The survey responses are as follows: 1. Neutral: 16.67% 2. Important: 53.33% 3. Very important: 30% Regarding the type of changes achieved, CAADP has contributed to elevating the importance of the agricultural sector in the region. Under this framework, some countries have launched processes that were previously not considered priorities. PHINDPDOTBL 2. Inclusiveness of national structures in agricultural policy making (disaggregated by countries and type of changes achieved). (Percentage, Custom) Value The level of inclusiveness determines the level of participation of different stakeholders (government, farmers organizations, CSOs, private sector and others) in events and processes held by each country. All listed actors are strongly involved in decision-making in the agricultural sector. The level of inclusiveness disaggregated by country is as follows (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of participation, meaning High and Very High): 4. Gabon: 67.5% 5. Chad: 70% 6. Sao Tome e Principe: 87.5% 7. Congo Brazzaville: 42.09% 1/6/2016 Page 3 of 13

4 8. CAR: 45.83% 9. Angola: 100% 10. Cameroon: 80% 11. Equatorial Guinea: 37.5 The level of participation of the listed stakeholders (government, farmers organizations, CSOs, private sector and others) is as follows: 12. Very weak: 8.45% 13. Weak: 8.42% 14. Average: 18.82% 15. High: 20.48% 16. Very high: 43.83% The global level of participation of the listed stakeholders is as follows (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of participation, meaning High and Very High): 17. Government: 100% 18. Farmers organizations: 61.25% 19. CSOs: 52.09% 20. Private sector: 35.21% PHINDPDOTBL 3. Percentage of investment plans and programs demonstrating resource alignment with the Regional Compact\CAADP evidenced priority sectors. (Percentage, Custom) Value The global level of alignment of investment plans and programs with all four CAADP principles is 77.92% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of alignment, Somewhat Aligned and Totally Aligned). The level of alignment of all the processes, plans and policies with all four CAADP principles is as follows: %: not aligned at all %: only a little aligned %: fairly aligned %: somewhat aligned %: are totally aligned The level of alignment of investment plans and programs with CAADP principles: 26. Transparency and Accountability: 78.33% 27. Local Ownership and Responsibility: 78.33% 28. Partnerships and Collective Responsibility: 81.66% 29. Inclusiveness: 73.33% The level of alignment of partners support/interventions in the agriculture sector to the CAADP values and principles is 68.22% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of alignment, Somewhat Aligned and Totally Aligned). The level of alignment of partners support/interventions is as follows: %: not aligned at all %: only a little aligned %: fairly aligned %: somewhat aligned %: totally aligned Partners support/interventions are in majority aligned with the Inclusiveness principle (75.72%), when taking into account all levels of 1/6/2016 Page 4 of 13

5 alignment. The level of alignment of partners support/interventions with the Inclusiveness principle is as follows: %: not aligned at all %: only a little aligned %: fairly aligned %: somewhat aligned %: totally aligned PHINDPDOTBL 4. Percentage of stakeholders satisfied with the quality and utility of CAADP related sector planning, programming and accountability mechanisms and structures. (Percentage, Custom) Value The global satisfaction level of partners regarding the technical assistance received is 65.54% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning satisfied and very satisfied). The global satisfaction level of partners regarding technical assistance received is disaggregated as follows: %: strongly unsatisfied %: not satisfied %: neutral %: satisfied %: very satisfied The satisfaction level of the different partners regarding technical assistance is as follows (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning satisfied and very satisfied): 45. Government: 89.52% 46. Farmers organizations: 72.62% 47. CSOs: 59.52% 48. Development partners: 90.57% 49. Private sector: 38.09% 50. Others: 34.85% PHINDPDOTBL 5. Number of African agricultural policy positions advocated at regional (Ministerial) level. (Number, Custom) Value agricultural policy positions were advocated at regional level. 1/6/2016 Page 5 of 13

6 On May 25, 2015, at the Heads of States Summit in N djamena, the PAC (Décision n 36/CEEAC/CCEG/XVI/15) and PRIASAN Décision n 39/CEEAC/CCEG/XVI/15) were adopted. Overall Intermediate Results Indicators 1.1 ECCAS CAADP operational Team fully resourced. (Yes/No, Custom) Value Y Y Y Y The ECCAS ARD CAADP team is fully resourced. The CTF supported the recruitment of 4 people. This brought the (therefore having 5 persons in the ARD Service (with the Director of the agriculture department at ECCAS) + operational means for action and FM/Procurement guidelines). CTF funds also allowed for the purchase of software such as TOMPRO and WINDEV. Overall, the Trust Fund increased ECCAS credibility and visibility in the region in the agriculture sector. 1.2 ECCAS Regional Agricultural Investment Plan (RAIP) completed and approved. (Yes/No, Custom) Value N Y Y Y The CAADP Compact was signed in July ECCAS signed the Regional Agriculture Investment Plan (PRIASAN) in the first week of September Its External Technical Review took place from October 26 to October 30, The Business Meeting will not be held in 2015 and therefore CTF funds will not be used for this event. 1/6/2016 Page 6 of 13

7 1.3 Number of countries in the current year where CAADP principles are embraced in processes, plans and policies. (Number, Custom) Value All the ECCAS countries (Gabon, Chad, Sao Tome e Principe, Angola, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Congo Brazzaville and the Central African Republic) have adopted processes, plans and policies aligned with CAADP principles. The level of alignment is as follows: %: not aligned at all %: only a little aligned %: fairly aligned %: somewhat aligned %: are totally aligned The overall level of alignment of all the processes, plans and policies according to each CAADP principle is as follows (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of alignment, meaning Somewhat Aligned and Totally Aligned): 56. Transparency and Accountability: 78.33% 57. Local Ownership and Responsibility: 78.33% 58. Partnerships and Collective Responsibility: 81.66% 59. Inclusiveness: 73.33% All the processes, plans and policies are for the most part aligned with the Partnerships and Collective Responsibility principle (81.66%), when taking into account all levels of alignment. The level of alignment of all the processes, plans and policies with the Partnerships and Collective Responsibility principle is as follows: %: only a little aligned %: fairly aligned %: somewhat aligned %: totally aligned 1.4 Numbers of RAIP/NIAP technical reviews in which cross-cutting issues have been positively addressed. (Number, Custom) Value Technical Reviews of RAIP/NIAP were undertaken in 2015, as follows: 3 Internal Technical Reviews 64. Angola (October 9, 2015) 65. Equatorial Guinea (July 17, 2015) 66. Gabon (February 12, 2015) 3 External Technical Reviews at national level 67. Gabon (October 26-30, 2015) 1/6/2016 Page 7 of 13

8 68. Chad (July 20-27, 2015) 69. Congo Brazzaville (July 16-25, 2015) 1 External Technical Review at regional level: CEEAC (October 26-30, 2015) Cumulatively, 15 Technical Reviews (internal and external) have been undertaken since project inception, covering all 8 ECCAS countries and the Central Africa region cevered by the CTF. 2.1 Permanent Committees for Knowledge Management and Evaluation are operational in all ECCAS Member States. (Number, Custom) Value None of the member States have operational Permanent Committees for Knowledge Management and Evaluation (National SAKSS). This requires technical and financial resources that are currently not available in ECCAS member States. 2.2 Permanent Regional Committee for Knowledge Management and Evaluation is operationalized (Yes/No, Custom) Value N N N Y ECCAS does not have any regional Permanent Committees for Knowledge Management and Evaluation (ReSAKSS) operationalized. This requires technical and financial resources that are currently not available at ECCAS. In addition, a decision was made not to set up ReSAKSS but to focus instead on simplified mechanisms. 1/6/2016 Page 8 of 13

9 2.3 Levels, quality and satisfaction of/with responsiveness of ECCAS to stakeholders (Percentage, Custom) Value Based on data from the survey the overall level of satisfaction with ECCAS responsiveness to stakeholders is 57.14% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning Satisfied and Very Satisfied). The breakdown is as follows: %: not satisfied with ECCAS responsiveness to stakeholders %: neutral (moderately satisfied) with ECCAS responsiveness to stakeholders %: satisfied with ECCAS responsiveness to stakeholders 3.1 Number of mutually agreed technical assistance initiatives and other capacity strengthening initiatives to support country and regional level activities. (Number, Custom) Value ECCAS has 11 mutually agreed technical assistance initiatives and other capacity strengthening initiatives with: 73. FAO 74. IFPRI 75. Hub Rural 76. CORAF 77. Centre Phytosanitaire Interafricain 78. World Bank 79. AUC 80. NPCA 81. GIZ 82. WWF 83. CARBAP 1/6/2016 Page 9 of 13

10 3.2 Levels of demand for CAADP information and/or technologies. (Percentage, Custom) Value The indicator demonstrates the visibility of CAADP, where the level of demand is defined as the survey respondent s indication that they would like CAADP information or tools for their national planning, programming or policy dialogue processes. Gabon, CAR, Angola, Equatorial Guinea and Sao Tome e Principe did not respond to this survey question. This is because these countries are not very familiar with CAADP information and technologies, as documents in English have not been translated into the official languages of these countries. Only Chad, Cameroon and Congo Brazzaville replied to this survey. One can then assume that these three countries have requested CAADP information and/or technologies. Furthermore, communication tools have not been made available to most of the countries. This demonstrates that CAADP information and technologies are not visible enough and widespread in the region and as a result, ECCAS countries are not familiar with these tools. This data is thus not representative. 3.3 Levels of satisfaction with, and utilization of CAADP information and technologies. (Percentage, Custom) Value All ECCAS member States (8 countries) responded to this survey question.the overall level of satisfaction with CAADP information and technologies is 15.48% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning Satisfied and Very Satisfied). The survey data breakdown is as follows: %: strongly unsatisfied (Angola for January to June and Congo Brazzaville) %: not satisfied (Cameroon for January to June, Angola for July to December and CAR) %: moderately satisfied/average with and utilization of CAADP information and technologies (Cameroon for July to December, Gabon, Sao Tome e Principe and Equatorial Guinea) %: satisfied with and utilization of CAADP information and technologies (Chad) 4.1 Levels of partner satisfaction with partnerships. (Percentage, Custom) Value /6/2016 Page 10 of 13

11 The level of satisfaction with AUC, NPCA and ECCAS is 50% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning satisfied and very satisfied). AUC: %: Not satisfied %: Neutral %: Satisfied : Very satisfied NPCA: %: Not satisfied %: Neutral %: Satisfied %: Very satisfied ECCAS: %: Not satisfied %: Neutral %: Satisfied On the quality of the technical independent review: %: Satisfied %: Very satisfied The global satisfaction level of partners regarding the technical assistance received is 65.54% (taking into account levels 4 and 5 of satisfaction, meaning satisfied and very satisfied). 4.2 Number of partnerships for effective technical support and joint assistance developed (as measured by number of formal MOUs, TORs, contracts, conventions or frameworks) (Number, Custom) Value Partnerships are defined as engagement/collaboration among countries, RECs, specialized thematic/pillar related institutions, civil society, private sector, donors, or other development agencies to support CAADP related activities. 8 partnerships were established with: 101. FAO 102. IFPRI 103. Hub Rural 104. PROPAC 105. CORAF 106. Centre Phytosanitaire Interafricain 107. WWF 108. CARBAP Overall 1/6/2016 Page 11 of 13

12 Data on Financial Performance Disbursements (by loan) Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed P TF USD % Key Dates (by loan) Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date P TF Oct Nov Nov Dec Dec-2015 Cumulative Disbursements Restructuring History There has been no restructuring to date. Related Project(s) 1/6/2016 Page 12 of 13

13 There are no related projects. 1/6/2016 Page 13 of 13