Development Projects. in Malawi: Progress Asssessment. Malawi Government

Transcription

1 Malawi Government Development Projects in Malawi: Progress Asssessment Ministry of Economic Planning and Development, P.O. Box 30136, Capital City, Lilongwe 3. October 2005 Tel: Fax: /131

2 Contents Preface 3 Introduction 4 1. Education Projects 6 2. Health Projects 7 3. Agriculture Projects 9 4. Water Projects Fisheries Projects Lands and Housing Projects Energy Projects Transport Projects Overall Summary Recommendations 18 Appendix 19

3 Preface Within a period of almost one year, October 2004 to July 2005, the Ministry of Economic Planning and Development has been able to visit and monitor government development projects in eight different sectors of the economy. The basic aim of the visits were to learn practical issues that were being faced in implementing projects and propose some measures for resolving any outstanding difficulties. The results of these visits were compiled into reports on the performance of projects in each sector and these reports have already been widely distributed to the relevant stakeholders including the National Assembly. This report brings together overall findings, in summary form, of the major issues that are affecting the progress of government development projects in the country. Whilst not all the sectors have been visited, it is believed that the issues to be confronted in project implementation in those sectors would not differ much from what is outlined in this report. According to this report, we are likely going to find that the objectives for establishing the projects are clear and relevant, but physical and financial progress and project management are likely to be weak or poor. But there is some variation across sectors, and within sectors, in terms of the intensity of problems being faced. At the end of the report, some general recommendations are put forward to improve on the implementation of development projects. The recommendations are quite general that those who are looking for more specific details are referred to individual sectoral reports. This report is not supposed to be a substitute for sectoral development projects reports. This report presents an important milestone in the work of the Ministry of Economic Planning and Development when it comes to reporting on the progress of development projects and programmes in the country. It is the first time it has been done amidst formidable constraints in terms of staff skills, capacity and resources for carrying on such work. The support from our cooperating partners, especially UNDP and the European Union, is what has made it possible for us to reach this far and we greatly value such support. Hon David Faiti Minister of Economic Planning and Development

4 Introduction Government is implementing numerous projects in all sectors of the economy. The Public Sector Investment Programme (PSIP) has registered no less than 700 projects at various levels of implementation in the year Some of the projects are not even recorded in the PSIP, mostly because their nature small and shortterm, and may be even implemented within a period of one year. Information flow between the Ministry of Economic Planning and Development and the various implementing agencies is also not smooth, resulting in information gaps at the central level This report gives an overview of implementation status at sectoral level using internally developed scoring criteria. The scoring criteria was applied to five categories or aspects of a project profile and these are: OB objectives, PD project design, ME monitoring/evaluation arrangements, PP physical progress, FP financial progress, and, PM project management. A scoring scale of 1 5 was used on each aspect of the project profile with the following meaning: 5 means excellent or very good, 4 means good, 3 means average, 2 means weak, and, 1 means poor. Where a score of 0 has been given it means that the project has not yet started. The issues covered under each category of scoring are as follows: i) OB (Objectives): clarity in specification, measurability, and consistency with national development priorities (MPRS or MEGS). ii) PD (Project Design): beneficiary specification, geographical coverage, inter-linkages, implementation structures, and specification of the benefits.

5 iii) iv) ME (Monitoring/Evaluation Arrangements): Supervision arrangements and its frequency, presence of a Steering Committee and its effectiveness, availability of periodic progress/performance reports. PP (Physical Progress): Availability of physical progress (output) indicators, their relevance, conformity to planned schedules, consequences of delays on time and finances, and quality of completed work. v) FP (Financial Progress): Availability of up to date financial records, conformity of spending to plan, disbursement problems, and whether project spending represents good value for money when compared to project outputs. vi) PM (Project Management): whether the project have its won staff (fully paid by the Project), whether they apply initiative, prevalence of problems of a managerial nature (e.g. procurements delays, wrong procurements)

6 1. Education Sector The policy objectives for the education sector are designed to suit three levels of education namely basic education, secondary school education and higher education. The Projects sampled in this report mostly concern basic and secondary school education. The Projects address key policy issues like improving the quality and relevance of education, improving access and equity, and decentralizing administration. The sample for the education sector had 16 projects listed below: (i) Maghemo (Karonga) Day Secondary School (funded by ADB) (ii) Chikale Primary School (Nkhata-bay, funded by JICA). (iii) Maula Community Day Secondary School (Nkhata Bay, MASAF) (iv) Namadidi Primary School (Mulanje, Government). Graph 1: Average Score Education Sector Technical Rating of Projects Education (v) Lilongwe Teachers Training College (GTZ). (vi) Luwinga Day Secondary School (Mzuzu City, World Bank). (vii) Santhe Day Secondary School (Kasungu, World Bank). (viii) Guilline Boys Primary School (Mchinji, Government). (ix) Nkhula Full Primary School (Salima, UNICEF & NORAD). (x) Chinkombe Full Primary School (Salima, UNICEF). (xi) Domasi Teachers Training College (Zomba, JICA). (xii) Chisombezi Full Primary School (Salima, DfID). (xiii) Bangwe Day Secondary School (Blantyre City, World Bank) (xiv) Nkomachi Primary School (Lilongwe City, various donors). OB PD ME PP FP PM As can be seen from Graph 1 above, all projects had their objectives in line with those stipulated in the MPRS and MEGS (average score=5.0). In addition, PD

7 (project design), and FP (financial progress) were above average score (3). However, the sector performed poorly in ME, PP, PM (average score<3). It can also be noted in Table 1 that all projects did well on Objectives (OB), and many more on PD, PP and FP. The scores of 1 and 2 indicate that there were projects in this sector that were poorly executed and may have resulted in very poor quality of work. Table 1: Education Sector Projects Score OB PD ME PP FP PM The Health Sector The overall goal of the health sector, as stated in the National Health Plan ( ), is to raise the level of health status of the population by developing a delivery system capable of promoting health, preventing, reducing and curbing diseases, protecting life, and fostering general well being and increased productivity, and reducing the occurrence of premature death. The sample for health sector had five projects, namely, (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Rural Health Care III Project (Mchinji, Nkhotakota, Salima, Phalombe, Ntchisi, Mzuzu, and Nationwide Activities funded by ADB), Improvement of Health Services in Chitipa District (funded by KfW), The New Nkhotakota District Hospital (OPEC funds), Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Thyolo and Chiradzulu District Hospitals (European Union) Integrated Urban Health Services (Zomba) Project (KfW, NORAD, DfID, and EU)

8 A total of five projects were visited in the health sector. All the projects had their objectives in line those in the MPRS and MEGS, while project design and financial progress averaged at 3.2 and 3.0 respectively (refer Graph 2). However, monitoring and evaluation systems (for projects) were rather weak (average score=2.4). The same applies to physical progress and project management, which averaged at 2.8 and 2.4 respectively. Graph 2: Health Sector Average Score Technical Performance of Projects in the Health Sector Health OB PD ME PP FP PM Table 2: Technical Performance in Health Score OB PD ME PP FP PM Table 2 also indicates that 3 out of 5 projects (60%) scored below average (score=2) in both monitoring and evaluation, and project management.

9 3. The Agriculture Sector The agriculture sector remains the key sector to the economic development agenda of the country. Despite numerous attempts at diversification over the last two decades, agriculture still dominates both local and export production. The big risk to the country s economy is that most of the agriculture production takes place under unreliable rain fed conditions. The agriculture sector has been and is still a beneficiary of a number of development projects, mostly funded by donors, and this section covers eight of them. Within the agricultural sector, most of the projects appear to address a set of different issues: livestock production, crop production, irrigation, institutional development, etc, all under one project. The main focus or beneficiary of the projects appears to be always the same smallholder farmer who subsists on customary land. A total of nine projects (refer Table 3) were monitored under the agriculture sector. As per Graph 1, on average, all the projects had objectives in line with those in the national strategies (MPRS and MEGS) which are poverty reduction and economic growth respectively. However, the sectoral projects performed below average in ME (Monitoring Graph 3: Agriculture Sector Average Score Technical Performance of Projects Agriculture and Evaluation), PP (Physical Progress), FP (Financial Progress), and PM (Project Management). OB PD ME PP FP PM As can be noted in Table 3 below, at least half of the projects (55.6%) were facing financially related problems. However, 6 out of 9 projects reported having a Monitoring and Evaluation System. While 5 out of 9 projects had very poor financial progress. The projects that have scored 1 or 2 on more than three criteria need an urgent review or should be wound up, depending on results of a more thorough assessment.

10 The projects are as follows: Table 3: Agriculture Projects Performance i. The Southern Africa Newcastle Disease Score OB PD ME PP FP PM Control Project (Dedza, Lilongwe, and Dowa, funded by Australian Government) ii. Rural Income Enhancement Project (RIEP) (Nkhata Bay, 0 Rumphi, Dedza, Ntcheu, Mulanje, Nsanje and Thyolo ADB funds) iii. Special Programme for Food Security Phase I (Karonga, Mzimba, Mchinji, Salima, Ntcheu, Zomba, Thyolo and Nsanje ADB funded) iv. Horticulture and Food Crops Development Project (Rumphi, Mzimba, Kasungu, Lilongwe, Dedza, Salima and Nkhota-kota ADB funded) v. Smallholder Flood Plains Development Programme (Karonga, Salima and Machinga ADDs IFAD and Irish Government) vi. Mwanza Rural Development Project (ADB funded) vii. Small Farms irrigation Project (SFIP) (Mangochi and Nkhata Bay, BADEA funded) viii. Lobi Horticultural Appropriate Technology Extension Project (Dedza, JICA) ix. Smallholder OutGrower Sugarcane Production Project (Dwangwa, ADB funded) 4. The Water Sector Within the Water and Sanitation Sector, government has initiated a number of projects aimed at increasing access to portable water and sanitation facilities by constructing and rehabilitating water facilities such as boreholes, piped water, gravity schemes, extending water supply capacity, conserving and managing water resources and sanitation. This is part of the overall effort to improve the health and living standards of the people of Malawi and enhance the productivity and overall development of the country. Increased provision of safe, portable and adequate water supply and enhancement of improved sanitation services to the people is one of the measures used in assessing poverty reduction.

11 In order to achieve its objectives, the Ministry of Water Development has initiated a number of projects that have been reported and assessed in this section. The names of the projects are: Graph 4: Water Projects Average Score Technical Performance of Projects in the Water Sector PD (i) Integrated Rural Water 3.0 ME 2.5 Supply and Sanitation PP 2.0 Project (ADB funded) FP 1.5 PM (ii) Mpira/Balaka Rural Piped 1.0 Water Supply Scheme (ADB funded) Water (iii) Nkhamanga Rural Gravity-fed Piped Water Supply Project (World Bank) (iv) Dwambazi Rural Gravity-fed Water Supply Project (World Bank) (v) East Mangochi Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project (KfW) (vi) Community Water, Sanitation and Health Project (COMWASH) (Thyolo and Phalombe, CIDA) (vii) Pedaflo Pump Pilot Project (Countrywide, Government) (viii) Construction of Ngodzi Gravity-fed Piped Water Supply Scheme (Salima and Dedza, Government) (ix) Construction of 400 Boreholes (Southern & Northern Region, Government) A relatively high number of projects were sampled and monitored in the water sector, which came up to nine projects. The sector showed good capability in aligning its projects objectives (OB) to those in the national strategies (in improving access to potable water) which averaged 4.9. It also did well on project design (PD), which averaged 4.0. But there was weak performance in monitoring, physical and financial progress, and finally project management. This can also be seen in Table 4, where about 6 out of 9 projects (66.7%) scored below 3 in ME, PP, FP and PM. Table 4: Water Projects OB Score OB PD ME PP FP PM

12 5. Fisheries Sector Projects covered in this section are all on fisheries. The fisheries sector is a major source of animal protein for most Malawians and a source of income for fishermen and those engaged in fisheries related activities. It is therefore a very important sector in terms of poverty reduction activities. The list of projects that form part of the assessment in this section are as follows: i. HIPC Support to Small Scale Fish Farming Project (Mzuzu, Mangochi, Nkhota-kota, Salima, and Karonga) ii. Domasi JICA Aquaculture Project (JICA) iii. Salima OVOP Programme (JICA) iv. Songwe River Transboundary Catchment Management Project (WWF) v. Lake Malawi Artisanal Fisheries Development Project (ADB funded Nkhata Bay, Nkhota-kota, Salima, Mangochi Districts) Five projects were monitored under the fisheries sector. On average, the projects had that were linked to those in the national strategies at an average score of 4.8, relatively lower than in the previous sectors (agriculture, education and energy) Graph 5: Fisheries Projects Average Score Technical Performance of Projects Fisheries OB PD ME PP FP PM Table 5: Fisheries Projects Performance Score OB PD ME PP FP PM In addition, Table 5 on the left shows that 4 out of the 5 visited projects had above average score (3) on project objectives (OB). However, 3 out of 5 projects performed below average in physical progress, and 4 out of 5 performed poorly in monitoring and evaluation as well as in project management.

13 6. Lands and Housing Sectors Malawi is an agrarian economy and access to land has a direct impact on the livelihood and quality of life for the majority of its people, particularly those in the rural areas. There is considerable inequality in land distribution. The most notable reason for this situation is that in some areas large amounts of land have been transferred from customary tenure to leasehold, leaving many smallholder farmers with very little or no land to live on. This problem is more pronounced in Mulanje and Thyolo districts where a vast area of land is covered by tea estates. As shown in Graph 6, the sector scored highly (average score=5) in OB implying that its objectives were clear and in line with the national strategies. Again, project design, monitoring and evaluation, financial progress and project management was good, averaging at 3.3, 3.0, 3.0 and 3.7 respectively. Despite these registered achievements, physical progress was minimal, averaging at 2.3. Graph 6: Lands and Housing Projects verage Score A Technical Performance of Projects in the Lands and Housing Sector Lands OB PD ME PP FP PM Table 6: Lands & Housing Projects Score OB PD ME PP FP PM It is also shown in Table 6, that one project scored 1 in physical progress implying very slow progress if any at all.

14 The projects covered in this section are three and these are: (i) Community Based Rural Land Development Project (IDA/World Bank - Machinga, Mangochi, Mulanje, Thyolo) (ii) Government Buildings in Blantyre (Malawi Government). (iii) Capacity Building Project at the Polytechnic (European Union). 7. Energy Sector The Energy Sector is one of the key supportive sectors to the successful implementation of Malawi s development programmes, especially the Malawi Economic Growth Strategy. All the power that will be needed for manufacturing and other services will be supplied and managed by this sector. The main challenge in this sector is to provide adequate energy resources for both industrial and domestic use in the country. Of particular importance is the need to increase access to electricity from the current average of 6 percent of the population to 10 percent by the year There is also need to find adequate sources of power for heavy scale industries like those of mining. Development projects and programmes in the energy sector should therefore address the priority needs of the sector. The list of projects that forms part of the analysis in this sector are as follows: Graph 7: Energy Sector Average Score Technical Performance of Projects (i) The Malawi Rural Electrification Programme (MAREP IV, partly funded 6.0 by JICA, covering all parts 5.0 of the country) 4.0 (ii) Malawi-Mozambique Power Interconnection 3.0 Project (World Bank) 2.0 (iii) Programme for Biomass 1.0 Energy Conservation 0.0 (ProBEC, GTZ and EU) Energy (iv) Barrier Removal To Renewable Energy In Malawi Project (BARREM, UNDP funded, all parts of the country) OB PD ME PP FP PM

15 As can be observed on Graph 7, all the projects had well defined objectives (OB) which were also in line with those in the MPRS and MEGS, had good project design and an average monitoring and evaluation system. But physical and financial progress, and project management were below average. Table 7 too indicates some weak and poor technical performance for one project in terms of physical and financial progress as well as project management where the score is 1. This is the type of project that requires a serious review if not abandonment. Table 7: Energy Projects Performance Score OB PD ME PP FP PM Transport Sector This is also a very important sector for economic development. Though the roads dominate attention when it comes to transport, all other modes are equally important rail, water, and air. There are a number of projects taking place involving all these modes of transport. This section looks at twelve of them, and these are: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi) (xii) (xiii) Limbe Choda Chisitu Road (Government) Bangula Nsanje Marka Road (funding being sourced) Naminga Chiponde Mangochi Roads (Kuwait/OPEC/BADEA) Mangochi - Monkey Bay Road (European Union) Masasa Golomoti Monkey Bay Road (European Union) Mponela Ntchisi Road (funding being sourced) Msulira - Nkhotakota (Game Reserve) Road (ADB) Chiweta Rumphi Junction Road Resealing (European Union); Karonga Songwe Rehabilitation (European Union) Karonga Chitipa Road (ADB) Construction of Rivirivi Rail Bridge (DfID), and Rehabilitation of Nkhata Bay Port (funding being sourced) Establishment of Nkhata Bay to Mbamba Bay Capacity to Ferry (funding being sourced)

16 The transport sector had the largest number of projects monitored, amounting to 15. The sectoral projects registered very clear objectives and very good project designs. On the other hand, the sector did not perform well on monitoring, physical and financial progress, and project management. It is also substantiated in Table 8 where 12 out of 15 projects (80%) scored poorly to nothing in Graph 8: Average Score Transport Sector Technical Performance of Projects in the Transport Sector Transport OB PD ME PP FP PM Table 8: Transport Projects Performance Score OB PD ME PP FP PM na both physical and financial progress. In addition, 10 out of 15 projects (66.7%) performed poorly in project management. Nevertheless, some of the projects can be exempted, as their implementation had not yet started at the time of the visit. n.a. is a score for projects that have not yet started.

17 9. Overall Summary: Project Technical Performance All Sectors In summary, almost all the 64 projects monitored in 8 sectors had clear objectives linked to those stipulated in the national strategies, the MPRS and MEGS, as they scored (OB) above 4.5 on average. Project design (PD) too was impressive across the sectors as substantiated by average scores ranging between 3.1 and 4.1. Almost in all the sectors, monitoring and evaluation systems were either nonexistent or weak. The trend is as well poor in physical and financial progress, and project management. In terms of numbers, Table 9 shows that about 30 out of 64 projects (nearly 50%) had poor M&E systems, 34 out of 64 projects (53%) registered poor physical progress, and 32 out of 64 (50%) experienced financial hiccups due to reasons that include uneven financial disbursements. Finally, 33 out of 64 (50%) projects were poorly managed. Table 9: Summary Projects Performance Score OB PD ME PP FP PM n.s

18 10. Recommendations General lessons ought to be clear from this report. Setting objectives for projects and designing their implementation arrangements is relatively good and above average, but there is a lot of work to be done where performance matters most, that is, physical progress. Projects generally fair average and below on this score. Very closely related to this score, and probably contributing factors, are monitoring and evaluation, financial progress and project management. Here again most projects fair average and below. Individual sector reports have shown that both government and donors have their own share of problems to blame for the dismal performance in project implementation. Government, especially the Ministry of Finance, has been found to be quite slow and disorganized in resolving requests for contracted government contribution and payment of resettlement compensation claims. The Government procurement system is too centralized and slow to be effectively used by projects. Some donors have equally cumbersome procurement procedures, and even more bureaucratic in resolving project related problems. In the process, disbursements are held up or suspended for protracted periods on relatively straightforward matters. Projects have a limited lifespan and their effectiveness depends on a system that facilitates timely decision-making. Standard procedures for normal government work ought to be streamlined to accommodate these time constraints. The Ministry of Economic Planning and Development and the Ministry of Finance should take a lead role to develop a conducive atmosphere for project implementation in government. This is not an excuse, however, for responsible sector Ministries and institutions to do nothing about the slow pace of project implementation. The sector Ministries and institutions can achieve a lot even within the existing system by employing competent project management and staff, and improving monitoring arrangements.

19 Appendix A Summary of Recommendations from Sectoral Reports Office of the President and Cabinet Insulate project identification and implementation from political directives, especially if projects require donor funding. Ministry of Finance Government should honour Part 2 funding in projects, or else, it should not commit itself to such obligations Government should ring fence money for the payment of compensation claims related to development projects, or else, the cost of compensation should be in-built in the cost of the projects. Ministry of Finance should waive the payment of surtax by NRA to contractors, or else, as a second best alternative, is for NRA to pay surtax directly to MRA. Government should not pay the $11million cost escalation on the Naminga- Nselema-Mangochi road. This Project has the hallmarks of a rip off. Government should be extremely careful with Kuwait/OPEC/BADEA loans for road construction projects. The restrictive conditionalities in procurement do not lead to value-for-money contracts. Ministry of Economic Planning and Development Establish centralized registry for all important project documentation for purposes monitoring. Canvass for more project funding from donors Energy Sector Create a project implementation unit for the Rural Electrification Programme that will be separate from the Department of Energy. Ensure high-level support for the implementation of the Malawi-Mozambique Power Inter-connection Project. 19

20 Transport Sector There are serious problems with local contractors in the unlimited category. NRA should be encouraged to invite international contractors. If this cannot be done for all projects, it should start with projects of a critical nature The Ministry of Transport should stop implementing road projects directly. Almost all the serious implementation problems are on projects implemented by the Ministry itself. Should establish institutional arrangements to allow for smooth implementation of urban road projects to avoid delays and eventual cost escalation claims. Issues of irregular land developments, slow movements in relocating utility infrastructure, etc, can be addressed in such forums. The Fisheries Sector Explore better species of fish for small-scale fish-farming. Build adequate capacity for the fisheries staff in monitoring and evaluation of the fisheries projects and programmes. Enhance training programmes for the beneficiary farmers. The institutional arrangements for the Songwe River Basin Development Programme should be strengthened, especially in terms of accountability. The Lands and Housing Sector Convene meetings on CBRLD Project with other stakeholders conducting similar Projects in the common target areas to resolve conflicting messages on land policies and redistribution. Should beef up capacity at the District level by deploying (as one of the means) District Lands Officers at every district. Monitoring and evaluation should be intensified to enhance and speed up implementation of the Projects and Programmes. Discuss with the donor should on design shortcomings in the CBRLD Project, focusing on a lack of holistic approach and the principle of direct land purchase by communities themselves. The Water Sector The Mpira/Balaka Rural Piped Water Supply Scheme has outgrown community management arrangements. A study should be quickly organized to consider a proper institutional structure that would ensure sustainable provision of water to communities alongside commercial provision. The Pedaflo Pump Project is a complete failure and the pumps should be sold to defray expenses incurred by government. Projects that cover a specific geographic area (one district and below) should be delegated to the District Assembly level, if there is capacity. 20

21 Improve the monitoring of community managed water supply schemes. Communities need to be assisted with advocacy work to encourage their participation and ownership of the Schemes. The Agriculture Sector There is need for new policy debate as to the proper focus and limit for the Ministry of Agriculture. Most of the Projects monitored do not look like pure agriculture, they are a compound mixture of agriculture and other things. Explore the decentralisation of its projects this is the permanent solution to Projects that have diffuse implementation arrangements like the agriculture ones. Sector Wide Approach many agriculture projects represent routine functions that the Ministry is supposed to be doing anyway, like improving crop husbandry, maintaining irrigation schemes, encouraging crop diversification, etc. The sector wide approach would save valuable time and energy that top management of the Ministry of Agriculture spend in chasing progress and outcomes on isolated projects. With or without the sector wide approach, consider establishing one PIU for ADB Projects. It can have regional offices, if need be, rather than have four or more independent PIUs centred in one place each covering Project activities across the whole country. The Monitoring Unit in the Ministry of Agriculture requires strengthening building its capacity and providing it with the necessary resources. The Education Sector All school building projects should be implemented and managed at the district level. Funds can still be mobilized at the Ministry level, but not implementation. Build adequate capacity for monitoring and regulating projects. It should have senior and adequately trained M&E staff who should keep up to date records on all development projects in the sector. The sector wide approach is recommended for this sector. Resources for building schools can be pulled together, and after that, clear criteria and prioritization can be developed for funding individual projects coming from different areas of the country. The Ministry should institute independent capacity for investigating value for money project completion assessments. Final payments to contractors should always be linked to this exercise. The Health Sector i) The ADB funded Rural Health Care Project III may be best done at district level, if there is capacity. All its activities are stand alone on a geographical basis. 21

22 ii) The rehabilitation and reconstruction of extensive hospital infrastructure should be discouraged. A case in point is Chitipa District Hospital and Zomba Central Hospital. The inconveniences on the ground can be quite huge both psychologically and financially. The citizen would get a better service if government just opted to build new hospitals entirely. iii) Better design of modern hospital infrastructure need to be encouraged to avoid design changes when some works have already been constricted. iv) The Ministry of Health needs to have specific capacity at the management level to monitor Project delivery and resolve a number of implementation problems. 22

23 23