Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00005331 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT ON GRANTS FROM IDA IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 41.9 MILLION (US$ 60.8 MILLION EQUIVALENT) (IDA- H855-NE AND IDA-D219NE) AND TRUST FUNDS FROM FROM THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY (GEF) TRUST FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF US$4.52 MILLION (TF- 14700) AND FROM THE JAPAN POPULATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (PHRD) TRUST FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF US$2.25 MILLION (TF- A7627) TO THE Republic of Niger FOR THE NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 {January 13, 2021} Agriculture And Food Global Practice Africa West Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective {Nov 31, 2020}) Currency Unit = XOF XOF 547.18 = US$1 US$ 1.43 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR July 1 - June 30 Regional Vice President: Ousmane Diagana Country Director: Soukeyna Kane Regional Director: Simeon Kacou Ehui Practice Manager: Chakib Jenane Task Team Leader(s): Elisee Ouedraogo ICR Main Contributor: Aimee Marie Ange Mpambara ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AF Additional Financing AIP Annual Investment Plans ANFICT Agence Nationale pour le Financement des Investissements des Collectivités Territoriales (National Agency for the Financing of Municipalities) APL Adaptable Program Loan ARENI Associations des Régions du Niger (Niger Association of Regional Governments) ASI Achats Service International (International Purchasing Service Company) CAP Community Action Program CAP3 Third Community Action Program CAPCR Community Action Project for Climate Resilience CDD Community-Driven-Development CDP Communal Development Plans CERC Contingent Emergency Response Component CPF Country Partnership Framework CPS Country Partnership Strategy COGES Comités de Gestion des Sites (Site Management Committees) EFA Economic and Financial Analysis EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return EX-ACT Ex-Ante Carbon-Balance Tool FCFA Francs CFA FCV Fragility, Conflict, and Violence FIL Fonds d’Investissement Local (Local Investment Fund) GEF Global Environment Facility GHG Greenhouse gas GoN Government of Niger GP Global Practice HC3Ni Haut Commissariat à l ’Initiative 3N (High Commission for the 3N initiative) ICRR Implementation Completion Results Report IDA International Development Association IRM Immediate Response Mechanism ISR Implementation Status Report LG Local Government M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MTR Mid Term Review 3 N initiative’ Les Nigériens Nourrissent les Nigériens (Nigeriens feed Nigeriens initiative NPV Net Present Value PAD Project Appraisal Document PDES Plan de Développement Economique et Social (Economic and Social Development Plan) PDO Project Development Objective PHRD Policy and Human Resources Development PNEDD Plan National de l’Environnement pour un Développement Durable (National Environmental Plan for Sustainable Development) RDP Regional Development Plans, SFM Sustainable Forest Management SLM Sustainable land management SLWM Sustainable Land and Water Management STEP Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement TF Trust Fund TTL Task Team Leader WB World Bank TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 6 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................6 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) ..................................... 12 II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 14 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 14 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 15 C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 18 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 20 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) ............................................................................ 21 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 23 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 23 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 24 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 26 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 26 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 27 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 28 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 30 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 31 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 33 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 51 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 54 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 55 General Efficiency Considerations ............................................................................................. 55 Economic and Financial Analysis ............................................................................................... 58 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 70 ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name P132306 NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 Country Financing Instrument Niger Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B) Related Projects Relationship Project Approval Product Line Supplement P143079-PSG: 31-May-2013 Global Environment Project Integrated Ecosystems Management Additional Financing P163144-Additional 29-Jun-2017 IBRD/IDA Financing for the Niger Community Action Phase 3 Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Republic of Niger Ministry of Agriculture Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The Development Objectives (PDO) of the proposed CAP3 are to strengthen the Recipient's local development planning and implementation capacities, including the capacity to respond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency, and to improve the access of the targeted population to socio-economic services. Page 1 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Revised PDO The PDO under the AF was slightly revised to strengthen the Recipientslocal development planning and implementation capacities, tosupport thetargeted population in improving agriculture productivity, and torespond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency. PDO as stated in the legal agreement To strengthen the Recipient’s local development planning and implementation capacities, to support the targeted population in improving agriculture productivity, and to respond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency. FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing P132306 IDA-H8550 40,000,000 40,000,000 37,889,407 P132306 TF-A7627 2,250,000 2,250,000 2,162,607 P132306 IDA-D2190 20,800,000 20,800,000 20,477,500 P143079 TF-14700 4,518,000 4,089,083 4,089,083 Total 67,568,000 67,139,083 64,618,597 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Borrower/Recipient 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 Total Project Cost 67,568,000 67,139,083 64,618,597 KEY DATES Project Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing P132306 24-May-2013 07-Jun-2013 13-Oct-2015 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 Page 2 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 29-Jun-2017 34.30 Additional Financing Change in Project Development Objectives Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Loan Closing Date(s) 12-Dec-2019 59.49 Change in Loan Closing Date(s) KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Substantial RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 31-Dec-2013 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 3.33 02 01-Oct-2014 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 6.54 03 14-Apr-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 11.38 04 15-Oct-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 16.14 05 31-Dec-2015 Satisfactory Satisfactory 18.97 06 13-Jun-2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 24.15 07 18-Dec-2016 Satisfactory Satisfactory 29.48 08 05-Jun-2017 Satisfactory Satisfactory 34.30 09 15-Dec-2017 Satisfactory Satisfactory 41.16 10 26-Jun-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 44.20 11 15-Jan-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 49.42 12 28-Jun-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 58.76 13 26-Dec-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 59.60 Page 3 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 14 22-Mar-2020 Satisfactory Satisfactory 60.53 15 29-Jul-2020 Satisfactory Satisfactory 60.53 SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 50 Agricultural Extension, Research, and Other Support 10 Activities Other Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 40 Public Administration 30 Other Public Administration 30 Social Protection 20 Social Protection 20 Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Public Sector Management 30 Public Administration 30 Municipal Institution Building 30 Urban and Rural Development 40 Rural Development 40 Rural Non-farm Income Generation 10 Land Administration and Management 30 Page 4 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Environment and Natural Resource Management 30 Climate change 10 Mitigation 10 Renewable Natural Resources Asset Management 20 Biodiversity 10 Landscape Management 10 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Ousmane Diagana Country Director: Ousmane Diagana Soukeyna Kane Director: Jamal Saghir Simeon Kacou Ehui Practice Manager: Martien Van Nieuwkoop Chakib Jenane Task Team Leader(s): Amadou Alassane Elisee Ouedraogo ICR Contributing Author: Aimee Marie Ange Mpambara Page 5 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context 1. At the time of project appraisal in 2013, Niger was facing long term development challenges including rapid population growth and climate variability and drought. With 84 percent of the population dependent on natural resources, the vulnerability of livelihoods to shocks was very high. Though poverty had marginally declined since the early 1990s, its incidence remained high. Public finances were being affected by declines in commodity prices. The country was also threatened by the deterioration of the security situation caused by the Libyan crisis and by social unrest in Mali and Northern Nigeria. 2. Niger was ranked last in the world in the Human Development Index with more than 50% of the population affected by food and nutrition insecurity. Over the three decades 1980-2011, the rate of growth of food production had lagged the rate of population growth, with the increase in the food deficit being filled by imports. An estimated 2.5 million people in Niger were chronically food-insecure and unable to meet their basic food requirements even during years of average agricultural production and many millions more were vulnerable at times of bad harvests. Some 40% of children under five were underweight, malnutrition accounted for more than one-third of child mortality in the country and micronutrient and vitamin deficiencies were major public health problems. Subsequently the situation did not improve. Niger remains last in the UNDP’s Human Development index and poverty remains high with the extreme poverty rate at 41.4% in 2019, affecting more than 9.5 million people. Food insecurity and malnutrition also remain high. 3. To address these challenges, the country had developed a range of policies and strategies. At the time of appraisal, these policies and strategies had been consolidated in a medium - term plan, the Plan de Development Economique et Social 2012-2015, (PDES) adopted in August 2012. The Plan was organized in four strategic areas: (i) creation of conditions conducive to sustainable, equitable and inclusive development; (ii) food security and sustainable agricultural development; (iii) promotion of a competitive and diversified economy; and (iv) promotion of social development. The food security and sustainable agricultural development strategy was to be carried out through the ‘’3 N Initiative’’(Nigeriens feed Nigeriens) of which the objectives were to protect communities from hunger and malnutrition and to guarantee them adequate conditions to participate in production and income generating efforts. 4. Decentralization, which had been a central policy since the 1990s, was considered as one the key factors for the success of the PDES Plan. Empowering local government was viewed as the pathway both to strong democratic governance and engagement and to accountability in local development. 5. It was in the context of these policies and strategies that in 2004 the World Bank embarked on support to decentralization and local development initiatives through a twelve year three-phase adaptable program loan (APL). The overall objective of the Community Action Program (CAP) was to support the Government of Niger (GoN)’s decentralization efforts by using a community-driven development (CDD) approach to improve access to services for local communities and to address the issues of poverty and food insecurity. From its inception, the CAP APL introduced a change from previous World Bank-financed rural projects, which had focused mainly Page 6 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) on agriculture. The APL took a CDD approach to services across sectors. Local administrations and communities were to take the lead in the identification and implementation of development investments1. 6. The design of the first phase, CAP-1, had a strong focus on building community capacity for decentralized and inclusive decision-making and planning, and on micro-projects managed by local government at commune level to incentivize and shape the process of decentralization and community-led decision making. CAP-1 was implemented in 54 of Niger’s 266 communes. 7. The second phase (CAP-2) scaled up the work to 164 communes (65 percent of the country’s communes), while also increasing the capacity of local governance structures to design and implement development plans and projects. 8. The third phase – the present project, CAP-3 – was to scale up the support to cover all 266 local governments of Niger, while focusing on the sustainability of the APL results. Prepared just after the enactment of the 3 N initiative, CAP 3 was to contribute to the implementation of this initiative. It put more emphasis on the food security agenda than the previous phases by targeting investments aligned with the 3 N Initiative packages. CAP- 3 was also designed to test innovative forms of horizontal collaboration between communes and the strengthening of the capacities of regional councils through a special funding window for inter-communal micro- projects. At the time of the restructuring and additional financing of CAP-3 in 2017, GoN’s request for a stronger emphasis on food security and agriculture resulted in a change to focus on agriculture productivity. Table 1: Three phases of the CAP program Phase Period PDO Geographic coverage CAP 1 2004-2007 Assist the Government to design and 54 communes implement planning and implement decentralized, transparent and participatory development mechanisms by involving local governments; and to promote a sustainable, community-based management of ecosystems CAP2 2008-2012 Improve local government capacities in the 164 communes participatory design and implementation of local development plans and budgets in order to improve rural livelihoods CAP 3 2013- 2020 Strengthen the Recipient's local 266 local governments entities (91 development planning and implementation new communes and 164 communes capacities, including its capacity to respond from phases 1 and 2), 7 regional promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis councils and 4 urban councils or emergency; and improve the access of the targeted population to socio-economic services CAP 3 AF 2017-2020 Strengthen the Recipient’s local 266 local governments entities (91 development planning and implementation new communes and 164 communes 1 CAP 1 and CAP 2 ICRRs Page 7 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) capacities, to support the targeted from phases 1 and 2), 7 regional population in improving agriculture councils and 4 urban councils productivity, and to respond promptly and Focus on nutrition in 5 communes (2 effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency in Maradi and 3 in Tahoua regions) 9. The Project was firmly embedded in the Government’s decentralization and food security agenda. It was aligned with the four implementation principles of the 3 N Initiative, which were: (i) working through local governments/communes; (ii) involving beneficiaries in planning and implementing development projects; (iii) developing resilient crops; and (iv) scaling up sustainable management of natural resources. 10. The GoN has always recognized that rural productivity is constrained by land degradation, soil infertility and climate hazards. In that regards, the CAP program was designed with a strong ecological focus and received funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Biocarbon Fund to finance environmental activities integral to the project such as landscape restoration and afforestation, the latter being eligible for carbon credits. These investments were made in parallel to other environmental investments across the Sahel that formed part of what is referred to as the Great Green Wall. The GEF grant was closed in 2017. 11. The Project was fully aligned with the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Niger for FY13-16. The CAS was framed around two strategic pillars: (a) promoting resilient growth; and (b) reducing vulnerability. The Project design, which focused on empowering local governments and communities to participate in local development planning, access investment facilities to better manage their natural resource base, improve livelihoods, diversify incomes, and improve access to social services was well suited to respond to these CAS objectives and contributed to three of the CAS’s outcomes : Outcome 1.3 Increased Agricultural Productivity of Selected Crops in Selected Areas ; Outcome 2.2 Increased Access of Poor and Food Insecure People to Safety Net Programs; and Outcome 2.3 Increased Adoption of Climate Resilience Policies and Actions in Targeted Communes. Theory of Change (Results Chain) 12. CAP-3 was designed around two outcomes contained in the PDO: (i) strengthened local development planning and implementation capacities, and (ii) improved access of the targeted population to socio-economic services. These outcomes were to be achieved by targeted capacity building to communes; by preparing tools to help communes implement and operate local development projects; and by funding local development micro- projects. A third outcome – strengthened capacity to respond promptly and efficiently to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency – referred to the Contingent Emergency Response component which was not in the event used and which is therefore not considered further in this evaluation. 13. While the PAD did not include a Theory of Change or a Results Chain, one is presented in Figure 1 below, as inferred from the Project description at appraisal. Throughout, the achievement of the outcomes rested on two critical assumptions, namely effective collaboration between central and local government, and local capacity to operate and maintain project investments sustainably. To address these assumptions, project design focused on Page 8 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) building the capacity of communes and of local development committees as well as of national institutions which were to continue support to local development after the end of the APL. Figure 1: Theory of Change for the CAP3 project *Capacity building focused on 4 areas: participation, equity, social accountability, and natural resources management Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 14. As stated in the Financing Agreement (FA), the objectives of the project were to: (i) strengthen the Recipient's local development planning and implementation capacities, including its capacity to respond promptly and effectively to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency; and (ii) improve the access of the targeted population to socio- economic services. 15. GEF was also a partner with IDA in project financing. The Global Environment Objective for the GEF financing was to: promote sustainable land and natural resource management and productive investments at the commune level in selected areas of Niger. 16. Achievement of the PDO was to be measured by the following indicators: • Percentage of newly targeted communes that have defined and put in place governance practices in the areas of participation, financial accountability, and social equity. Page 9 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) • Percentage of targeted communes that are enabled to sustain proper operation and maintenance of local development investments. • Direct project beneficiaries (number), of which female (percentage) [IDA core indicator] • Percentage of farming households which have adopted sustainable agro-sylvopastoral practices and technology promoted by the project [IDA core indicator]. • Additional land area under sustainable land and water management (SLWM) and Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) practices (hectares) [GEF indicator]. • Time taken to make funds available as requested by Government in case of an eligible crisis or emergency [Immediate Response Mechanism (IRM)-related indicator Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 17. It is clear from the project documents that appraisal design aimed at two broad outcomes: • Strengthened capacity of local government, which was measured by PDO indicators 1 and 2. • Improved access to socio-economic services by the targeted population, which was measured by indicators 3,4 and 5. 18. In addition, the PDO included a contingent outcome: capacity to respond promptly and effectively to a crisis or emergency. In the event that crisis or emergency action were to be triggered, this outcome would have been measured by indicator 6 Components 19. Component 1: Capacity Building (appraisal: US$8.35 million; at closing U$11.61 million 2). Under this component, the activities aimed at capacity building of local stakeholders by (i) enhancing the governance of communes for inclusive planning and implementation of local development activities and sustainable use of natural resources; and (ii) enhancing the capacity of community organizations through activities aimed at awareness raising and behavior change to increase adoption of sustainable agriculture practices and improved household nutrition. The project also funded activities aimed at: promoting transversal collaboration among communes (intercommunal collaboration); and capacity enhancement of regional government such as capacity needs assessments and strengthening regional planning. The component also supported the capacity of the National Agency for the Financing of Municipalities (ANFICT) to enable it to manage funds to be allocated to communes for their respective investments. Capacity building was also to be provided for sectoral line departments and non-state actors supporting the national agenda for decentralization in local development planning and monitoring. The component had four sub-components: • Capacity building for communes and communities and improving local governance. • Promoting inter-communal collaboration. • Building capacities of Regional governments. 2 The end-of-project disbursement for this component was US$ 11.3 million Page 10 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) • Building the capacities of the Agency for the Investment of Local Governments, sectoral line departments and non-state actors. 20. Component 2: Local Investment Fund (appraisal: US$29.39 million; at closing US$45.14 million) 3 Under this component, the project was to assist communes to make investments through a Local Investment Fund (FIL). The FIL was to be established to support microprojects identified and planned by local beneficiaries under the leadership of their local governments. The FIL comprised two ‘windows’: a first window of 95% of the total FIL, for investment in individual communes; and a second ‘window’ of 5% to fund pilot initiatives defined and implemented by two or more communes (intercommunal development initiative). The GEF funds would be used for sustainable land management activities and, and to promote climate smart technologies and agriculture. The component, which was implemented using a CDD approach, had two sub-components • Implementing targeted investments of Commune Development Plans (PDCs); including: (a) Sustainable and improved land and water management practices (estimated 40% of total funds), focusing on: (i) improving the sustainability of protected area systems; and (ii) mainstreaming biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into production landscapes and sectors4. The project was also to promote energy efficient cook stoves and other technologies aimed at reducing pressure on forest and woodlands. (b) Diversification of income generating activities (estimated 35% of total funds), aimed at improving income of individuals and households, improved nutrition, and reducing pressure on natural resources. And (c) Creation and maintenance of collective economic facilities and infrastructure (estimated 25% of total funds), focusing on rural infrastructure such as cereal banks, storage of agricultural and veterinary inputs and equipment, workshops to repair agricultural equipment and engines, livestock market-related facilities, slaughterhouses, vaccination parks, livestock transhumance corridors and access ways to water points, rural radio facilities, facilities for the sale of non-timber forest products, etc. • Implementing targeted investments of inter-communal development initiatives. This sub-component was to focus on two areas: (i) sustainable management of intercommunal natural resources, and (ii) provision of inter-communal social services. 21. Under this component, the project also supported activities related to the Bio-Carbon Initiative that were to receive carbon financing through the Clean Development Mechanism of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.5 22. Component 3: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation and Communication (appraisal: US 6.78 million; at closing US$10.81 million)6 This component covered Project management costs, safeguards, M&E, and communication and knowledge management. There were three sub-components: • Coordination and management activities. 3 The end-of-project disbursement for this component was US$ 45 million 4 Practices and techniques included: soil/moisture conservation methods, water harvesting, reduced tillage, agro-forestry, nutrient- enhancing rotation systems, animal health and nutrition; and improved gum tapping practices. 5 This included maintenance of Acacia Senegal trees in 26 sites 6 The end-of-project disbursement for this component was US$ 14.1 million Page 11 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) • Planning and M&E. • Communications, knowledge management and sharing. 23. Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response (appraisal: US$ 0 million; actual: US$ 0 million) . The component to be used to provide immediate response to an eligible crisis or emergency, channeling resources from a rapid restructuring. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 24. June 2017 major restructuring. In June 2017, the project was restructured with additional financing of a US$22.85 million grant (of which $20.8 million IDA and $2.25 million PHRD). The closing date was extended by two years from December 20, 2017 to December 20, 2019 for the IDA funds, but there was no extension for the GEF funding. 25. The PDO was revised as “Strengthen the Recipient’s local development planning and implementation capacities, to support the targeted population in improving agriculture productivity, and to respond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency”. Essentially the outcome contained in the original PDO of improved access to socio-economic services was narrowed down to the more specific outcome of improved agriculture productivity. Revised PDO Indicators 26. The revised PDO indicators after the restructuring and additional financing were: • Number of farmers adopting improved agricultural technology, of which female [NEW] • Number of farmers reached with agricultural assets or services, of which female [NEW] • Area provided with new/improved irrigation or drainage services [NEW] • Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops - (tomato, cassava, onions, pepper) [NEW] • Number of direct project beneficiaries, of which female [TARGET REVISED] 27. All of the original PDO indicators were dropped with the exception of # 5 Number of direct project beneficiaries, where the target was increased. All the other indicators were new and all related to the new agricultural productivity outcome Revised Components 28. The 2017 restructuring revised the scope of components and sub-components to focus more on agriculture productivity and nutrition. With a focus on agriculture, the project was to invest more in small scale irrigation and horticulture production and to discontinue investment in health facilities and schools. The intercommunal investments also were discontinued due to lack of interest from the communes. The sub-components for three components were also revised. Page 12 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 29. Component 1: Capacity Building. Under this component, the previous emphasis on supporting the participatory design and management of local development, through the Communal Development Plans (CDPs) was reduced. Instead activities focused more on targeted training and agricultural advisory services needed by small farmers for the implementation of agricultural micro-projects. PHRD funds were to be used to build the capacity of small farmers and producer organizations to increase their knowledge for increasing agricultural productivity, with a focus on high nutritional value crops. The number of sub-components was reduced from four to two: • Strengthening the contracting capacity of communes and delegated contract management capacity of communes and communities. • Strengthening capacity of smallholder farmers. 30. Component 2: Local Investment Fund. Under this component, the project continued to support micro-projects in the areas of sustainable land management micro-projects; income generating activities, socio-economic infrastructures. The focus of the micro-projects was, however, shifted towards increasing agriculture productivity through promotion of soil and water conservation technologies for agro-sylvo-pastoral purposes7, small scale irrigation, improved seed production and distribution to increase productivity of agricultural and pastoral land, livestock fattening, livestock replenishment, and post-harvest structures/equipment (storage and processing). PHRD funds were earmarked for small scale irrigation for 5,000 women in five selected communes.8 The component had three sub-components: • Sustainable and improved land and water management. • Diversification of income generating activities and an increase in agricultural productivity (including through small-scale irrigation). • Creation and/or maintenance of essential socio-economic infrastructure. 31. Component 3: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation and Communication. This component covered Project management costs, safeguards, M&E, and communications and knowledge management. It included also funds to finance key studies on agricultural sector development and for the preparation of another agricultural project. PHRD funds were to be used for targeted nutrition communication and M&E activities. The component had four sub-components • Coordination and Management. • Planning, M&E, and Preparation of Studies. • Communication and Knowledge Management. • Nutrition-related Activities and M&E. 7 The upgrading was done through mechanical recovery techniques (half-moons, zai, wood plantations, Acacia Senegal) and seeding of herbaceous species with high pastoral values, and included development of food crops as an adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change. 8 Two communes in Maradi (Korgom and Hawandawaki) and in three communes in Tahoua (Kao, Bombèye, and Bangui) Page 13 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 32. As the original project neared completion, it was evident that the CAP APL, implemented over nearly thirteen years had substantially achieved its targets, but also that poverty, food insecurity and malnutrition remained Niger’s principal challenges. GoN’s priority was therefore to accelerate implementation of its 3N Initiative. 33. In line with this national priority, GoN and the Bank agreed that the well-performing CAP program should be extended and scaled up with additional financing (AF) with a specific focus on increasing agricultural productivity. This restructuring was also an opportunity to pilot approaches to reducing malnutrition, and a PHRD grant9 was added to the financing for this purpose. The project was reappraised, and a full Project Paper formed the basis for Bank approval of the AF in June 2017. 34. The changes introduced with the additional financing and the focus on irrigation, agriculture productivity and nutrition resulted in a slight departure from the original theory of change, replacing the outcome “improved access of the targeted population to socio-economic services” by ”increased agriculture productivity”. 35. Second restructuring: In a second restructuring approved in December 2019, the closing date was extended by six months, from December 20, 2019 to June 20, 2020. Almost all project activities had been completed except for those related to nutrition-sensitive agriculture which had been delayed because the approval of the grant agreement by the Japanese Ministry of Finance took longer than expected (the grant was signed only in September 2018). The extension also allowed the project to support the completion of the first disbursement of the carbon credits through the Biocarbon Fund. II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs 36. PDO Relevance Rating: High. The PDO remained aligned with the World Bank Country Strategies (CPS 2013-16, CPF 2018-22) throughout the duration of the project. The original PDO was consistent with the CPS 2013-16 objective of promoting resilient growth and reducing vulnerability by empowering local governments and communities to access investment facilities to better manage their natural resource base, improve access to social services and increase agriculture productivity. 37. The 2017 revised PDO continued to be relevant and was in line with CPF 2018-22, especially its objective ‘increased rural production with diversified output in the agriculture and livestock sectors’. It also contributed to the CPF objective on governance “strengthened public finance (which includes planning and implementation of investments) and human resource management for improved service delivery”. 38. Throughout its duration, the project was in line with long-term GoN policy (see Section 1A above). It was also consistent with the updated Economic and Social Development Plan (PDES 2017–2021) and with the 3N Initiative (2012) and its action plan 2016-2020. In particular, PAC-3 was well aligned with the 3N initiative principle of empowering local government in project implementation and scaling up sustainable management of natural 9 PHRD grant which was aimed at supporting nutrition sensitive agriculture activities in five selected communes. Page 14 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) resources. Working in all communes of Niger, the Project was considered as one of the key programs supporting the roll out of the 3N initiative. B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) 39. This ICRR unpacks the PDO into three outcomes and applies a split rating. Before the restructuring, the efficacy of the project is assessed against the two outcomes that were contained in the original PDO (1) improved local development and implementation capacities; (2) increased access to socio-economic services. Outcome (3) increased agricultural productivity is introduced after the restructuring. 40. The use of split ratings is justified by the change in the PDO at restructuring, which replaced the outcome “increased access to socio-economic services” by “increased agricultural productivity”, a significant change which narrows down “economic services” to “agriculture”. Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 41. Outcome 1 Increased planning and implementation capacities of local government (substantial). Project achievements on this outcome were measured by the PDO indicator ‘percentage of communes implementing good governance practices. The original target of 85% was fully achieved at the time of the 2017 restructuring. By completion all communes except a small handful were complying. The indicator was based on ten criteria for participation, accountability and equity. Surveys measured the satisfaction of beneficiaries (both men and women) against these criteria as well as objective factors like timely accounts and clean audits. 42. The rating of this outcome is substantial both before and after the restructuring. Assessment of this outcome is supported by the four intermediate results indicators where the original targets were exceeded by the time of the 2017 restructuring, and the higher targets then set were either met or exceeded after the restructuring (see Table 2). Table 2: Increased planning and implementation capacities of local government Indicator Original target Achieved 2017 Revised target At closing Outcome Indicators Communes with good governance 85% 87% 98% 98% practices (%) Intermediate Results Indicators 1. Communes delivering timely financial 75% 76% 76% 98% reports (%) 2. Communes with working grievance 65% 75% 85% 100% mechanisms 3. Deconcentrated line departments 90% 90% 99% 99% strengthened 4. Regional agencies planning capacities 60% 85% 85% 87% strengthened 43. This assessment is supported by qualitative evidence in the project final report which illustrated good progress in development of commune capacities, especially as related to participatory planning and ability to maintain investments. Page 15 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 44. These results are in line with the data from the World Bank Governance Team10 showing participation in budget planning at the local level in Niger, as well as high levels of citizen engagement with, for example, 73 percent of communes having citizen participation in budget preparation and 90 percent of budgets explained to citizen in public settings. 45. Outcome 2 Increased access to socio-economic services (substantial). This outcome was measured by the PDO indicator ”percentage of communes enabled to operate and maintain local development investments sustainably.” The target of 100% was met at the time of the 2017 restructuring with minimal exceptions (99%). The indicator continued to be tracked after restructuring and reached the revised 100 % target. 46. This outcome is also tracked by the intermediate results’ indicators that measured how efficiently communes put their investment allocation to good use. At the time of the restructuring, the original target had been exceeded, and by completion the achievement had reached 100%, well ahead of target. However, at the time of the 2017 restructuring, the project had not achieved the two intermediary results related to access to education and to health and nutrition services. Nonetheless, it did achieve by completion the target for the new intermediary result of access to nutrition services which had been introduced at the time of the restructuring (Table 3). After restructuring, the project also supported (through the PHRD grant): (i) horticulture production on small-scale irrigation sites, with 375 tons of fruits and vegetables produced in 2020; (ii) nutrition-related education for health center staff; and (iii) targeted communication and cooking demonstrations to promote home consumption of nutritious food. The last project household survey conducted in 2019 showed that 183,040 beneficiaries reported increased consumption of fruits and vegetables. Table 3: Increased access to socio-economic services Indicator Original target Achieved 2017 Revised target At closing Outcome Indicators 1. Communes able to operate and maintain 100% 99% 100% 100% investments sustainably (%) Intermediate Results Indicators 1. Communes using at least 80% of their 80% 86% 86% 100% investment allocations (%) 2. Population of newly targeted communes 90% 20% DROPPED DROPPED whose access to education improved 3. Percentage of populations in targeted 90% 23 % DROPPED DROPPED communes whose access to health and nutrition services improved 4. Populations of newly targeted communes NA NA 50% 50% whose access to nutrition services improved11 47. Outcome 3: Increased agricultural productivity (substantial). This outcome was added to the PDO at the time of the 2017 restructuring and is assessed only after restructuring. Outcome indicators were set in terms of the number of farmer beneficiaries and in terms of increased yields of basic food crops (cassava) and of cash crops. The number of farmer beneficiaries adopting improved agricultural technologies was double the target. The ICRR 10WB Local Government Census, 2019 11This indicator replaced the indicator “Percentage of populations in targeted communes whose access to health and nutrition services improved” Page 16 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) team used data from the 2019 field survey (collected before COVID-19 pandemic)12 for yields estimate which seems to be more accurate. Although net yield increased in the project sites that were in some cases below the ambitious increased yields targeted (see Table 4), these yield increases after just one year of project activity were significant compared to yields in other sites in the same areas13. Table 4: Increased agricultural productivity – outcome indicators Indicator Target At closing 1. Number of farmers adopting improved agricultural technologies 109,800 202,060 2. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops – tomato (tons/ha), 60 t/ha 42.5 t/ha 3. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops - onions (tons/ha) 50 t/ha 43.t/ha 4. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops - pepper (tons/ha) 35 t/ha 28 t/ha 5. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops -, cassava (tons/ha), 30 t/ha 31 t/ha 48. Sustainable land management. With the GEF financing (see Section IA above), PAC-3 aimed at the outcome of sustainable land and natural resource management at the commune level. Initially, the GEF outcome was tracked by the PDO indicator ‘additional land area under sustainable land and water management and sustainable forest management practices. Although the indicator was dropped from the results framework at the 2017 restructuring, after the closing of the GEF grant, the M&E system tracked it throughout the project life. 49. By April 2017, 86,000 hectares had come under improved management. By project closing, boosted by the new focus of the project on agriculture, more than a quarter of a million hectares (254,000 hectares) had come under improved soil and water management practices. This area included: areas of natural regeneration (197,725 ha); dune stabilization (1,389 ha); agro-forestry (9,055 ha); pasture management improvement (7,250 ha); and improved water management, including half-moons, zai and soil erosion control (38,790 ha). The impacts included both soil and water conservation, ecosystem restoration, and increased production – for example, an additional 130,000 tons/year of fodder production. 50. Taken together, sustainable land management activities and the Biocarbon Initiative made a substantial contribution to the Sahel-wide initiative, the Great Green Wall (see the box below)14. 12 PAC 3 and MAGEL statistics survey, December 2019 13 Yields from national statistics in the same areas are: 25.1 t/ha for tomatoes; 30.6 t/ha for onions; 18.6 for pepper and 25.3 for cassava 14 This needs to be taken in the context of a growing discussion about the attribution of the greening of the region, which could be from increasing rains. Page 17 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Regreening Niger: ‘A vast transformation’ Evidence shows regreening of degraded land in Niger as a result of joint actions for land restoration which took place during the implementation period of CAP and were in part supported by it. A USGS study reported: ‘High resolution images present a timeseries view of an agricultural landscape typical of the heavily settled plains south of Zinder, in 1957, 1975, 2005, and 2014. The timeseries highlights the increase in on-farm tree density between 1957 and 2014. Satellite images confirm that a vast transformation has taking place. Trees reduce wind speed and evaporation, produce at least a six-month supply of fodder for livestock, and provide firewood, fruit, and medicinal products that farm households can consume or sell. Today, the agricultural landscapes of southern Niger have considerably more tree cover than they did 30 years ago. These findings suggest a human and environmental success story at a scale not seen anywhere else in Africa’. Source: https://eros.usgs.gov/westafrica/case-study/transforming-farmlands-through-farmer-managed-re-greening-success-story-southern-niger Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 51. Overall efficacy rating is Substantial for both phases of the project. The project achieved its two outcomes before the restructuring and the revised outcomes after the restructuring. The project delivered on both the initial and the revised PDO apart from the shortfall on two intermediate results which had been only partly met when the two results were discontinued in the restructuring, and from the somewhat lower yields than targeted, which can be explained both by over-ambitious targets and by the fact that only one year’s productivity improvement could be counted, with data on 2020 yield increase not available at the date of this ICRR. Overall, the indicators are comprehensive and there are solid grounds to justify the achievements both from performance against indicator targets and from comparisons with other sources of information C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating 52. Financial and economic analysis. Financial and economic analysis at appraisal was complicated by the demand- driven nature of the project and its significant institutional development and capacity building components which were non-revenue earning. Although some estimates of expected household income increases were made, no overall economic analysis was conducted. At the time of the 2017 restructuring, financial and economic analysis was conducted based on expected benefits from the agricultural micro-investments. This analysis found an expected 19% Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) based only on the AF financing. 53. The analysis at completion followed the 2017 methodology and was based on empirical data and on investments made in the Local Investment Fund component of the project. The financial and economic analyses were derived from models of eight activities undertaken through the Local Investment Fund. Together these activities account for 71% of total micro-project expenditures. All other project costs were then added into the analysis. The Page 18 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) resulting NPV was US$ 108 million and the EIRR was 52 percent. 15 54. Given the project’s strong focus on soil and land management, the project greenhouse gas (GHG) balance was also estimated for the economic analysis.16 The World Bank uses the Ex-Ante Carbon-Balance Tool (EX-ACT) to estimate the impact of agricultural investment lending on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and carbon sequestration. EX-ACT is a land-based appraisal system for assessing a project’s net carbon balance—the net balance of tons of CO2 equivalent (tCO2eq) of GHGs that were emitted, or carbon sequestered as a result of project interventions—compared to a “without project” scenario. While the tool is designed for ex-ante estimates, it was used in this case to estimate GHG emissions where ex-post project data was not available, mostly soil and land management activities other than the biocarbon sites. Based on a set of assumptions presented in Annex 4, the project has a total balance of -194,887 tons of CO2 equivalent (TCo2eq.), excluding the biocarbon site additional carbon sink, which means that the project resulted in a carbon sink. Economic results accounting for the project GHG emissions are presented in Annex 4. 55. Overall the analysis shows that the project generated very substantial returns on investment, especially considering that some project benefits could not be quantified, for instance the nutritional benefits of the Japanese grant, the longer-term impact of capacity building activities and the project’s contribution to improving gender equality. In particular, the project invested significantly in local capacity building, which should increase the fiscal multiplier of local public spending over the long term. Nonetheless, the analysis found significant disparities in the returns on individual activities. For instance, while irrigated horticulture plots are extremely profitable, the livestock feed warehouses were not profitable and the sheep fattening was only profitable if the entrepreneur sold the sheep during the Tabaski17 holiday, when sheep prices peaked. Table 5: Financial Results Margin, year 3, NPV per Micro-project NPV,' 000 FCFA NPV, US$ IRR US$ beneficiary, US$ Horticulture 10,786 24,311 43,779 3,660 94% Sheep fattening 20 52 93 93 NA Goat breeding 347 694 1,249 1,249 345% Livestock feed warehouse -5,284 -26,914 -48,467 -10 NA Cassava processing 2,804 294 530 0 11% Zai 17 9 17 2 22% Half moon 101 86 156 14 27% Biocarbon sites 130 97 174 93 22% 15 The socio-economic infrastructures not focused on agriculture in the first phase of the project, such as the building of classrooms, are not modelled due to insufficient data, but they did not account for a significant share of project outputs. One activity was quite significant in terms of budget and could not be modelled: the regénération naturelle assistée, which amounted to 25% of the SLM expenditure (10% of all MP expenditure). 16 For the biocarbon sites, the benefits of carbon sink were directly included in the financial and economic model of the sites. The sites were not included in the EX-ACT to avoid double counting these benefits. 17 Muslim Aïd el-Kebir festival Page 19 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 56. M&E data confirm that the project succeeded in increasing beneficiaries’ incomes. The estimates of income increases made at appraisal (80 percent of beneficiaries would receive a 30 percent increase in income) and at the 2017 restructuring (90 percent of beneficiaries) were met at completion, when 91 percent of beneficiaries reported enjoying a 30 percent increase. 57. Value for money. Costs per beneficiary were lower than planned: 3.1 million beneficiaries were targeted with a total cost per beneficiary of US$23.1. At completion, 3,2 million beneficiaries were reached at cost per beneficiary of US$21.6. Costs for selected investments were in line with experience in Niger (for example for the water harvesting and sustainable land and water management investments) or with expectations at appraisal (for example, for investments in sheep fattening and goat breeding). 58. Administrative efficiency. The project delivered its outputs and achieved its targeted outcomes without cost overruns on investments. However, management costs were relatively high, and the project overran the management budget (130%). This is explained mostly by the wide compass of the project and the additional tasks that were put upon it, rather than by inefficiency. The IDA financing closed 96 percent disbursed. The closing date was extended by six months to compensate for the delay in approval of the PHRD grant and did not result in cost overruns. 59. Overall, the evidence is adequate to assess project efficiency as substantial. Although management costs were on the high side and analysis showed wide disparities in the profitability of different investments, the project was overall efficient. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING 60. The project objectives were relevant at appraisal and at the 2017 restructuring and remained so at the time of closing, justifying a rating of Substantial. The results tracked by the results framework together with contributory evidence demonstrate the efficacy of the project in achieving its objectives, justifying a rating of Substantial. Although methodologies for evaluating efficiency in a CDD project with a very heavy institutional development component are inevitably constrained, the evidence is enough to rate project efficiency Substantial. The overall outcome rating is Satisfactory, based on these assessments. Table 6 provides the detailed split rating analysis. Table 6: Split rating assessment Before restructuring After restructuring Relevance of PDO High Efficacy (PDO) Substantial Substantial Outcome 1: Increased planning and implementation Substantial capacities of local government Outcome 2: Increased access to socio-economic services Substantial Outcome 3: Increased agricultural productivity High Efficiency Substantial 1. Outcome rating Satisfactory Satisfactory 2. Numerical value of the outcome rating 5 5 Page 20 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 3. Disbursement US$38.39 million US$67.14 million 4. Share of disbursement 0.57 0.43 5. Weighted value of the outcome rating 2.85 2.15 6. Final outcome rating (5) Satisfactory E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) Gender 61. From the outset the project promoted gender equity and female participation. More than 53 percent of project beneficiaries were women. The Intermediate Outcome indicator ‘communes whose approved projects integrate gender equity’ set a 90 percent target which was consistently exceeded, reaching 98 percent by project end. 62. The project enabled large numbers of women to increase their incomes mostly from income generating activities such as animal fattening and agro-processing. More than 100,000 women adopted improved agriculture technologies. 63. At restructuring in 2017, the design of the agricultural productivity components specifically identified “women only activities”, for example on specific sites for small scale irrigation. The project also supported other women - specific capacity building activities related to agro-processing. The PHRD grant specifically targeted women not only for nutrition but also to build their capacity in horticulture production. 64. Focus group discussions with women beneficiaries by the ICRR team confirmed these high levels of participation and benefit. They did, however, reveal areas where lessons could usefully be learned. One is on women’s access to land, where irrigation investments remain doubtful because women could not obtain long term tenure.18 Another is on budgeting: it emerged that women spent much of the extra income generated through the project on socio-cultural and religious events such as weddings and baptism celebrations. More guidance on managing their finances might have helped women to improve the balance between consumption and reinvesting some of their earnings in developing their income-generating activities further. Institutional Strengthening 65. Institutional development and capacity building were central to the entire CAP program and its objectives. CAP- 3 continued the strong commitment to strengthening the institutional capacity of local governments and community organizations for local development planning and for implementing and managing local development projects. All six of the indicators for Outcome 1 - Increased planning and implementation capacities of local administration19– measured the strengthening of planning and administration capacities of local government, and all six were successfully achieved. 18 In the design of the additional financing, it was proposed that irrigation investment be made on sites with certified security of tenure for the female farmers’ groups for a period of 30 years However, in Niger, women are rarely landowners in their own right and in practice this activity worked with women who had only short term (less than five years) or even seasonal leases. 19 See Section III B above and Table 2. Page 21 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 66. Specific activities for institutional strengthening for local government planning included the adoption of local government planning tools.20 The project also invested heavily in reinforcing the capacity of the more than 700 local management committees (COGES) which were key to ensuring the maintenance and sustainability of different investments. For many committees, considerable capacity building has been provided over the fifteen years life of PAC. However, some committees created towards the end of PAC-3 may need further strengthening, and a measure of continued institutional support could be required for all COGES. It was also not clear how these COGES would continue to be supported without a specific project. 67. At a higher level, the project supported the formulation of a number of decrees,21 The project was also successful in developing and institutionalizing carbon financing know how.22 Targeted support was also provided to the Niger Association of Regional Governments (ARENI) to develop capacity to continue the training provided by PAC after the closure of PAC-3. 68. One area of institutional development that was less successful was the project aspiration to build up the National Agency for the Financing of Municipalities (ANFICT) as a key part of PAC’s ‘exit strategy’ – on ANFICT see Section IV B below. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 69. The project targeted poor farmers, contributing to Niger’s overriding objective of poverty reduction and also to the World Bank’s twin goals of ending extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity. By design, the project targeted poor communities and smallholders to improve their livelihoods and the success of this is shown by the high proportion of beneficiaries reporting substantial increase in their incomes. 70. Project design included two main activities that specifically targeted the poorest: • Cash for work: The project used cash-for-work in a labor-intensive approach to sustainable land management activities. This program provided 108,000 temporary jobs and a significant income boost to poor households. The calendar of the sustainable land management activity coincided with the local lean season, and these seasonal jobs helped build resilience for the poorest, especially women and youth. Income from these seasonal jobs have not only allowed beneficiaries to access food during the lean season, but also to make some small investments such as buying livestock, a key savings medium for poor households. 20 Regional Development Plans (RDPs), Communal Development Plans (PDCs) and annual investment plans (AIPs). 21 This included decrees for (i) transfer of skills and resources to municipalities and regions (Decree N°2016-75 and 2016-76/ PRN/MI/SP/DACR/MES/MSP/ME/F/MH/A/MESU/DD/MEP/T/MFP/RA of January 26, 2016); (ii) setting the legal regime for cooperation between local and regional authorities (Decree No. 2016-301 / PRN / MI / SP / D / ACR of June 29, 2016) and (iii) Law on the autonomous status of staff of local authorities and its implementing decrees (Law No. 2019-26 of June 17, 2019). 22 Through the Bio Carbon Acacia Senegal activity, institutional capacity within the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock and the Ministry of Environment was strengthened in areas of estimating carbon sequestration and different methods of verification for the carbon financing. Page 22 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) • Small Grants for income generating activities: More 60 percent of the beneficiaries of seed funds and capacity building for income generating activities have built up capital to continue and expand their business. More than 20 percent have diversified into other major economic activities (for example, moving up from sheep fattening to cattle fattening, diversification of processing and trade activities, etc.). Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 71. Reduced conflict between pastoralists and crop producers. The project supported improved pasture management (5,265 hectares of grazing areas) and transhumance corridors (200 km). These pastoral areas contributed to reducing conflicts between farmers and pastoralists. In particular, demarcation of transhumance corridors prevented cattle straying into croplands during the transhumance movements – this had been a traditional source of conflict between farmers and pastoralists. Much anecdotal evidence confirms this positive result. 72. Biocarbon Initiative. Over the life of the PAC program, support was provided to communities to benefit from the Biocarbon Fund. The initiative aimed at restoring degraded lands through plantation of Acacia Senegal (Arabic gum) trees), which were eligible for carbon credits under the Kyoto protocol. Planting started in 2006. A first partial payment was made in February 2020 for US$450,000 (carbon equivalent of 108 527 tons) for 26 sites benefitting 100,000 people. By 2020, the trees were also producing gum Arabic (1,200 kg/year). Under this initiative, the World Bank facilitated a deal worth US$ 3.5 million with a new buyer of carbon credits up to the year 2035, through which communities will continue receiving payments. At the date of this ICRR a second buyer had completed negotiations with the private sector partner of the initiative (ASI) for further carbon credits on the sites. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 73. Articulation with Government’s objectives and continuity with previous CAP phases. CAP-3 was a third phase of the CAP program aimed at scaling up and consolidating activities of the first two phases. The project model was well-known and appreciated within the country. PAC-3 was fully aligned with the Plan for Economic and Social Development 2012-2015 and the new project was seen by the government as the main vehicle to roll out the 3N Initiative’ (“Nigeriens feed Nigeriens”) nationwide. 74. Clear design at appraisal. As this was essentially the third project in a series, implementation procedures and capacity were in place and the ways to implement the components were well understood by the experienced staff. 75. Inclusion of measures to prepare an exit strategy from the program. In addition to the classic measures of building local capacity and motivation, the design of PAC-3 also included specific measures to continue the institutional development activities (through ARENI) and financing (through ANFTIC). Page 23 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 76. Incorporation of multiple lessons learned from previous phases of CAP and other projects. The Project design took on board lessons that came through during the implementation of CAP-1 and CAP-2. Particular lessons were the approaches to sustainable land and water management, and ways to improve targeting of women and youth. 77. Continuity of the activities supported by the GEF and Bio Carbon Fund. These activities covered all three phases of the CAP. This allowed design to build on the past results of the sustainable land and water management activities and to bring the carbon financing activity to its first fruition. 78. Implementation readiness. As a final phase of an APL, the effectiveness requirements (key personnel, implementation manuals, steering committee in place) were met quickly and the project became effective in less than a month after approval. B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION Factor subject to government and project entity’s control 79. Government support and monitoring. Government support for and interest in the project was strong. At the local level, all communes remained committed to the project till its closure. The project was also strongly supported by the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, which became increasingly involved as agricultural activities came to predominate. The ministry provided regular monitoring and technical audit missions which helped to diagnose and solve problems at field level. 80. Project staff turnover. Though the project had a complete team at the outset, which allowed a quick start, the project was faced by a high turnover of staff, including of the coordinators - by mid-term, the project was on its third national coordinator. However, this official did remain in place till the end of the project. As the end of the APL approached, project staff began moving to other projects and institutions. For example, at closure, there was no procurement specialist, which affected the project’s ability to archive properly different contracts, especially those related to the communes’ micro-projects. 81. Limited interest in inter-communal collaboration. In an effort to support efficient use of human and financial resources at the local level, the project design was to pilot inter-communal collaboration through a special window for projects proposed by two or more communes “inter-communal projects” in areas of sustainable land and water management and shared social services. However, the component was under-prepared: it took time for the project to prepare guidelines and to carry out the needed awareness and training program. In the event, only a few projects were financed. The pilot never gained traction as leadership at commune level preferred projects supporting their own constituencies. Activities and indicators related to this inter-communal collaboration were discontinued at the restructuring in 2017. 82. The challenge of ANFICT. One area that was less successful was the project aspiration to build up the National Agency for the Financing of Municipalities (ANFICT) as part of PAC’s ‘exit strategy’. The creation of the ANFICT was in fact one of the two triggers from phase 2 to phase 3 of the CAP APL The idea at appraisal was that the project would strengthen ANFICT and then ANFICT would begin to take over the financing of local government investment programs. The project was to finance a procedures manual, training, study tours, equipment etc. However, prior to the 2017 restructuring an assessment of ANFICT’s legal, administrative, financial and operational capacities was not encouraging and the continued support of ANFICT as part of the exit strategy was therefore dropped. Page 24 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 83. Acceleration of the 3N Initiative. As discussed above, in 2017, towards the end of the implementation period of the original project, GoN wished to give more impetus to its struggle to achieve food security and improved nutrition in line with its action plan for accelerating the 3N Initiative. This resulted in an effort by the officials of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock and of the High Commission for 3Ni to encourage communes to prioritize micro-projects focused on agriculture. This resulted in a reduced number of micro-projects supporting health centers and schools. Six months before the original closing date of the project, GoN then agreed with the Bank to restructure the project and to add additional financing exclusively for agricultural projects. The CDD approach was retained but with a strictly agricultural menu of eligible investments. 84. Changes in commune administration. Despite the fact that there were no local elections during the period of project implementation, the central government replaced more than 70 percent of municipal councils. The new appointees required significant capacity building to get up to speed with the project approach. Although this placed an added burden on the project, in the end it had only a minor effect on the speed of implementation. 85. A thinly spread project. Project design provided for adequate implementation capacity for most core activities, even taking account of the ultimately nationwide coverage. By closure, the team was following more than 1,200 sub-projects in 125 new communes and conducting capacity building for the nearly three quarters of councilors nationwide who were newly appointed. This core business the team took in its stride, but staff were also stretched by the complexity of other demands. For example, capacity building activities were to be carried out for ten agencies and ministry departments. By mid-term, the project had already spent 78 percent of its coordination budget. Towards the end of the project, the team was given responsibility for preparing another project, while following up with the completion of the carbon credit certification and with winding up PAC-3 and preparing an orderly exit strategy. Factors subject to World Bank control 86. Delays in the Japanese PHRD grant. The US$ 2.5 million financing from the Japanese PHRD grant effectiveness took longer than anticipated. Though the PHRD grant was processed at the same time as the IDA additional financing, the grant agreement was only signed in late September 2018 due to internal clearance and approval processes with the donor. Implementation began only in April 2019. This delay resulted in a late start of nutrition sensitive activities23 which in turn resulted in the need for a six months project extension. At the closing of the project, the training in horticulture production and the consolidation of women producer groups were only just being completed. 87. Delays in the carbon credits from the Biocarbon Fund. Payment of the first installment of the carbon credits from the Biocarbon Fund was finalized late in the project implementation. Factors beyond government/project entity control 88. The 2014 drought. A severe drought in July 2014 impacted the livestock sector. Although the CERC component was not triggered, affected communities were able to mitigate impacts by reallocating funds from their Annual Investment Plans.24 23PHRD grant activities started in April 2019 24Though the government did not trigger the CERC component, the project supported the purchase of 1,394 tons of animal feeds through micro-projects to 29 Communes in the regions of Agadez, Diffa, Maradi and Zinder, using a Climate-related hazards and Page 25 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 89. Increasing insecurity. The security situation, which was deteriorating at appraisal, worsened and Niger was classified as a country affected by the development challenge of FCV (Fragility, Conflict, and Violence) in the 2020 World Bank FCV strategy. There was relatively little direct impact on implementation, but counterpart funds dwindled as GoN had to increasingly transfer finance to security. Access to several project areas was constrained and some of the training roll out which was to be financed by government could not be carried out. 90. COVID -19. With the project closing in June 2020 and virtually all activities complete before then, the COVID-19 pandemic had no measurable impact on implementation or results. However, the essential precautions prevented the collection of primary data and field visits. As a result, the final report of the project – and consequently this ICRR – have had to rely considerably on phone interviews and virtual meetings. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 91. As this was a third phase project, M&E design was straightforward. Overall, the results framework was well designed and comprehensive and was appropriately adjusted at the 2017 restructuring. 92. There were however some shortcomings. The Original PDO indicators did not to capture adequately the project development objectives as there was no indicator to directly measure the objective “improve the access of targeted population to socio-economic services, only the proxy indicator measuring the ability of communes to operate and maintain investments. The methodology for computing some indicators could have been clearer. For example, the methodology for indicators measuring increased institutional capacity, adoption of messages, and improved services was not explicit in the M&E manual. 93. The revised results framework at the 2017 project restructuring was somewhat limited in its coverage. For example, by limiting the PDO measure of increases in agricultural productivity to input-intensive cash crop products, productivity increases could appear much larger than average. The results framework also did not capture well the nutrition improvement. The targets for some indicators were not very ambitious. or, in the case of yield increases, were perhaps too high. contingency windows of the micro-projects which was introduced in the project to allow communes to rapidly and efficiently re-affect to community-based emergency initiatives a portion or the totality of the funds that have already been allocated by the Communes to their respective ‘Annual Investment Plans’ (AIPs). Page 26 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) M&E Implementation 94. The quality of M&E implementation was adequate. The Project Implementation Manual detailed the M&E arrangements, including definitions and data collection modalities for most indicators. The project was well equipped with appropriate hardware and software and benefitted from specialized training. There was an electronic M&E system using DELTA Monitoring and Evaluation software. Project staff and partners were trained on GIS and remote sensing and on use of the EX-ACT tool. The project team was also designated by the World Bank as a champion for using KOBO TOOLBOX, an application recommended for the production of geo-localized data and information. 95. The M&E system allowed regular monitoring and reporting of progress in project activities and of results and indicators. The factual basis of reporting was strengthened by regular beneficiary surveys - five surveys were conducted during the implementation period, with the last one in 2018. 96. The project conducted a performance evaluation at project closure. This was not a formal impact evaluation but consisted of sample surveys about project results and beneficiary satisfaction and of compilation and evaluation of data from project reports. M&E Utilization 97. The project had a good communication strategy used to report on the progress of project implementation. The strategy employed various communication media including a newsletter and briefs and documents on project activities (for example, sustainable land management, nutrition etc.). The project also made some documentary films on bio-carbon sites, COGES, SLM activities and nutrition. A prime communication tool was the use of community radio in local languages, especially on nutrition messaging for the PHRD-financed program. 98. The information generated by the Project’s M&E system was key to reporting on project implementation, especially for World Bank missions. Project data on sustainable land management were used by the GoN to report on progress in the context of the Sahel Great Green Wall initiative. The use of GIS localization and KOBO TOOLBOX made it possible to monitor progress of implementation closely, especially of the sustainable land and water management activities. Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 99. The overall M&E quality is rated Substantial The M&E system was generally adequate to assess the achievement of the PDO and to document links in the results chain. The communications program was excellent. There were, however, some weaknesses in the methodology and practice of data collection for some indicators. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 100. Environmental and social safeguards compliance: The project was classified as Category B at appraisal. The following safeguards were triggered: Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01; Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04), Pest Management OP/BP 4.09; Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11; Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12, and Page 27 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Forests (OP/BP 4.36). An Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), Pest Management Plan (PMP), and Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) were prepared, as subproject sites were unknown at project start. Supervision missions regularly reviewed project environmental and social safeguards and noted environmental and social (E&S) issues related to the implementation of micro-projects. The key concerns were (i) delays and inconsistencies in recording and reporting complaints; and (ii) the haphazard and incomplete documentation and filing of land gift and tenure cases. These issues, especially the documentation issue, created a limited risk and resulted in the decision to downgrade the project social safeguard rating from Satisfactory to Moderately Satisfactory for lack of compliance with the policy requirements, following the last Implementation Support Mission.25 101. Financial management: Supervision missions regularly reviewed project financial management arrangements and procedures to ensure compliance with fiduciary requirements. A Financial Management Manual was prepared, and a simplified manual was prepared for communes to guide implementation of micro-projects. Although the Bank missions initially noted some financial management weaknesses, in the first years of implementation such as lack of key staff in the regions and delays in financial reporting remedial actions were taken to resolve the problems. Bank supervision missions’ FM ISR rating were generally satisfactory with timely submission of IFR reports and acceptable annual financial audit reports with mostly unqualified opinions. Issues raised by the auditors were satisfactorily resolved. At the end of the project, financial management performance of the project was rated Satisfactory. By the disbursement deadline date of October 20, 2020, the project had properly closed out all aspects of the grants including full accounting of the designated account. The project closed with US$ 849,596.29 undisbursed26. 102. Procurement: Supervision missions regularly reviewed project procurement management arrangements and procedures to ensure compliance with fiduciary requirements. An Implementation Manual including procurement procedures together with a simplified manual for communes were prepared and approved to guide implementation of micro-projects. Early in the project, Bank missions noted some procurement management weaknesses, such as non-adherence to prior review requirements, non-publication of the procurement plan and contracts awards, lack of proper filing of procurement files, and weakness in using the PROCYS system and later on of the STEP. The bulk of these issues were satisfactorily resolved. However, the problem of the lack of a procurement specialist in the final months affected the uploading of procurement documents in STEP and resulted in downgrading the project Procurement Management rating to Moderately Satisfactory at the last ISM mission.27 C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 103. Project design was well aligned with Government and Bank priorities and thoroughly informed by lessons learned from the previous CAP phases. The Project was an integral part of the national decentralization, food security and natural resources management program. The institutional arrangements were clear. The fiduciary systems were 25 It is also important to note the inconsistency between project-related documents, where the last ISR maintained an Satisfactory rating whereas the aide-memoire had downgraded the social safeguards to Moderately Satisfactory 26 Client Connection data of November 15, 2020 27 The ICRR noted a discrepancy of the rating between the aide memoire and the ISR, which did not capture this downgrading of rating. Page 28 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) adequately designed with clear identification and risk and effective mitigating measures. Project risks were largely well identified and clearly understood. 104. Areas where, with hindsight, more might have been done at the design stage to foresee and mitigate risks were: • The inter-communal component, which was an excellent idea, but the design was incomplete when the project started and the likely demand for the facility had not been fully assessed. It was, it is true, planned as a pilot but the modalities and demand could have been more fully thought through at appraisal. • The large number of agencies that the project was called on to work with. • Readiness and risk assessment for ANFICT 105. At the 2017 restructuring a very thorough reappraisal was carried out and the correct decisions were made to drop the inter-communal and ANFICT activities. More could, however, have been done to think through measures to ensure financing and support to communes and local development investments in preparation for the exit strategy. 106. Overall, quality at entry is rated Moderately Satisfactory. Quality of Supervision 107. Bank supervision had several shortcomings. Supervision missions were irregular and relatively infrequent. The project had three TTLs, only one (at appraisal) based in the country office, and with each change of TTL came a hiatus in missions and a break in the follow up on issues. On average, there was only one mission a year, and there were sometimes lengthy intervals between missions. There was a 15-month gap between effectiveness and the first mission, a time when Bank implementation support would have been most valuable. Bank support was also patchy towards the end of the project. There was no mission between August 2018 and February 2020, a period when there were vital issues of sustainability and exit strategy in the final phase of a 16 years APL to be worked on. There were two missions in the last six months of the project. These, however, came too late to influence implementation with more than 99 % of funds disbursed, and they focused on the mechanics of closing the project. 108. Missions were, on the whole, adequately staffed. The missions adequately assessed the fiduciary and the safeguards aspects of the project. During the period where there were no missions, ISRs were filed but they did not cover aspects related to safeguards (land tenure documentation) and procurement (STEP update and procurement staffing), which remained uncorrected until the end of the project. The team composition also could have benefited from specific expertise, particularly on decentralization, nutrition and M&E. There was also delay in processing the last restructuring (to extend the closing date by six months). This was completed less than two weeks before the project original closing date. Overall, the quality of supervision is rated Moderately Satisfactory. Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 109. Bank performance is rated Moderately Satisfactory. Overall, the design was robust, well aligned with government and Bank priorities, and though the supervision was not as effective, the Project outcomes were satisfactory. Page 29 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME Institutional sustainability of decentralized development in Niger 110. Throughout the life of the APL, the Bank posed the question of sustainability of the project achievements and benefits. The PAD for PAC-3 focusses on elements important for institutional sustainability: (i) ownership of the decentralized development process at all levels; (ii) partnerships with permanent national institutions to continue support to local development; and (iii) empowerment and capacity building of stakeholders at the local level. 111. This outline ‘exit strategy’ is at least partially in place now that PAC has drawn to a close. • Ownership of decentralized development approaches have become integral to policy and practice in Niger. • Partnerships between central and local government and links between line ministries and local communities are embedded in policy, strategy and practice. ARENI, the agency that was supported under PAC-3 to provide specific training support at the local level, is operational. Its proper functioning however will require external funding, but at closing this had not been identified. The notion at appraisal that financial support to communes and local development could be provided through a national agency, ANFICT, turned out to be not viable, with the result that with the end of the APL financial flows to local development initiatives will be more difficult because there is no ready vehicle or source of finance. This represents a risk to continuation of further local development initiatives (but not to the investments already made). • After sixteen years of empowerment and capacity building, the communes and local committees (COGES) have built up capacity and can be considered viable but further support may be required to maintain and build on this capacity. There is also a risk that communes and committees that came into the program in its last months and years have not yet built up the needed capacity. Here the services of ARENI will be essential. In addition, the start of carbon credit payments is providing income for communities in the 26 carbon sites, as well as resources for maintenance of the sites. Economic sustainability of local development investments 112. Economic and financial sustainability would depend on the viability of socio-economic investments made at local level, on the profitability of the income-generating investments, and on links to continued sources of guidance and seed capital. Here the prospects of sustainability are good, as the profitability of most investments appears relatively high (see Section II C and Annex 4) and there is good access to complementary sources of advice and finance, including from the follow-on Bank-supported agriculture and livestock project. Specific questions of sustainability related to PAC-3 113. Within this overall picture of moderate risk to sustainability of the overall program, there are queries on the sustainability of some of the specifics of PAC-3. Areas of concern include (i) the horticulture sites for women groups, Page 30 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) where tenure is short term and uncertain, and (ii) mechanisms for further monitoring of sites which have not been consolidated.28 114. On Biocarbon sites sustainability, as already stated above, The World bank facilitated a deal worth US$ 3.5 million for the purchase of carbon credits from the community plantations established by PAC up to the year 2035. This includes US$ 350,000 that should be paid for by early next year. The deal is between ASI (the private company who aggregates the Arabic gum and the carbon credits from the plantations) and Eco-Act (a French company who advises and sources credits for companies such as Carrefour, Chanel, Coca-Cola, L’Oréal and others). This is 8 times the value of the previous deal administered by the World Bank’s BioCarbon Fund (valued at $450,000), and the deal is also at an above-average price for the carbon market. The majority of these funds will flow directly to beneficiary communities. These funds will help support the sustainability (and even expansion) of the plantations established by PAC, and also a variety of local development initiatives (in health, education, agriculture, water). 115. More generally, there is a risk that insecurity and violence in parts of the country will affect the continuity of community development, especially as government resources will continue to be directed towards security instead of local development. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 116. A considerable achievement but with questions over sustainability. After sixteen years of continuous GoN and Bank commitment, a considerable dynamic of decentralized development has emerged in Niger. However, the achievement is inevitably subject to particular risks in the world’s poorest country, including the risk that a very weak fiscal position will not be able to underwrite continuation of local development at even the most modest of levels, once project support ends. Recommendation: A thoroughgoing institutional, financial and economic review of the entire PAC program would contribute to: (1) an assessment of the sustainability of the decentralized development process and identification of any follow up required; and (2) a comparison of Niger’s achievement in relation to parallel programs (including Morocco). 117. There are strongly positive returns to a focus on gender but support to women needs to be assessed carefully. In the project, the strong provision for gender inclusion proved to have positive economic consequences. Women were in fact more successful at specific types of micro-projects - more energetic and responsible in their commitments for financial and in-kind contributions, and better at making their micro-projects profitable than men, mixed groups, or commune administration. However, proper study and assessment in designing opportunities for women are essential – PAC-3 fell short, for example, in promoting irrigation by women where their access to irrigable land was constrained. Also the project seems to have not invested in capacity building for women in areas of financial management and budgeting, areas which have shown great impacts in other countries such as India, Mali and Rwanda where adequate skills building assisted in creation of women-run enterprises which can become significant players in the rural economy. 28 Key documents for the sites including land titles and contracts with the private intermediary (ASI) were still not properly filed at the project closure and a meeting between the project team and the ministry of environment was the only form of handover of the activity. Page 31 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Recommendation: Build on these finding in future policy advice and investments in Niger and apply them mutatis mutandis in other situations. 118. Payments for ecosystem services (in this case carbon) can foster environmental conservation. The PAC-program made a significant contribution to the regreening of Niger through the CDD model. Even though communities generally preferred investments that brought immediate benefits such as income generating projects, agricultural and livestock investments and health and education, the project was able to create incentives for environmental investments where the returns were less palpable or took longer to emerge through the cash for work program and the Biocarbon Initiative. Recommendation: Promote environmental investments within CDD programs with specific incentives tailored to the local situation and, if necessary, open a dedicated funding window. To improve efficiency, public sector environmental staff may also need incentives, such as transport, training, and allowances. 119. The APL may be a very appropriate instrument for long term engagement. GoN and the Bank showed great foresight in engaging on a three phase, fifteen-year APL. In the event, this time frame turned out to be the right one, allowing completion of nationwide coverage, the capitalization of lessons, and the extension of the CDD model to a wider menu of agricultural and natural resource management activities. Recommendation: For long-haul investments in capacity and local development, consider whether the case exists for a flexible but firm longer-term commitment under a phased vehicle such as an APL. . Page 32 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Strengthen local development capacities and improve agriculture productivity Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Farmers adopting improved Number 0 109,800 202,060 agricultural technology 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Jun-2020 Farmers adopting improved Number 0 76,900 104,099 agricultural technology - Female Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded target by 84%. Improved technologies promoted by the project include sustainable land management technologies, improved seeds and fertilizers, organic phytosanitary products and irrigation. These were promoted through targeted extension services to different group of farmers. Page 33 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Direct project beneficiaries Number 0 3,000,000 3,110,142 3,194,961 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Jun-2020 Female beneficiaries Percentage 0 50 52 56 Comments (achievements against targets): Project achieved 106% of original target and 102 % of revised target (3,110,142). Beneficiaries are estimated at 456,423 households of smallholder rural producers, with an emphasis on the poorest and vulnerable, who were mostly reached through micro-projects under component B, and beneficiaries of training and capacity building activities under component A. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Farmers reached with Number 0 109,800 109,800 201,974 agricultural assets or services 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2019 20-Jun-2020 Farmers reached with Number 0 76,900 96,902 Page 34 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) agricultural assets or services - Female Comments (achievements against targets): Project achieved 184% of target. These include farmers reached by natural regeneration activities, improved seed distribution, animal stocking activities, irrigation, and also the PHRD grant Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Area provided with Hectare(Ha) 100 1,350 1,350 1,351 new/improved irrigation or drainage services 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project achieved target Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Increase in agricultural Metric ton 0 0 0 productivity of major crops - (tomato, cassava, onions, 21-Apr-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 pepper) Page 35 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Increase in agricultural Metric ton 30 60 60 61 productivity of major crops - tomatoes 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Increase in agricultural Metric ton 30 50 50 53 productivity of major crops - onions 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Increase in agricultural Metric ton 15 35 35 35 productivity of major crops - peppers 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Increase in agricultural Metric ton 15 30 30 34 productivity of major crops - cassava 21-Apr-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached target for all crops A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: +COMPONENT A: Capacity Building Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Page 36 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Targeted communes that are Percentage 9 100 100 enabled to sustain proper operation and maintenance of 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 local development investments Comments (achievements against targets): The project supported capacity of communes through training of more than 15,00 local government officials in good practices for project planning and management, annual budgeting, financial reporting, and grievance mechanisms. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted Communes that have Percentage 0 85 98 98 defined and implemented good governance practices 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Dec-2019 20-Jun-2020 (participation, accountability, and equity) Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded original target by 15 % and reached the revised target of 98% . The project supported the preparation/ updates of communal and regional development plans, annual plans, and encouraged communities participation by supporting NGOs and consultation meetings. Page 37 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted communes that Percentage 6 75 76 98 timely prepare annual financial reports (with legal delays) 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Dec-2019 17-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded original target by 30% and by 28 % the revised target of 76%. This was supported by targeted capacity building for financial reporting to communes Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Commune whose approved Percentage 0 90 98 98 micro-projects integrate gender equity 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Dec-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceed original target by 8% and reached revised target of 98%. This was achieved through guidance to micro-project preparation which included gender integration Page 38 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted communes whose Percentage 0 60 100 planning and AIP sessions are public 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Dec-2020 21-Apr-2017 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached 60 % of target. The indicator was discontinued with the restructuring and additional financing. Project supported the public consultation on the AIP Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Communes whose grievance Percentage 8 65 85 100 mechanisms have been created and are operational 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded original target by 53% and by 17% the revised target of 85%. The project supported the establishment of the grievance mechanism project as part of compliance to social safeguards. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Page 39 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Targeted communes effectively Percentage 0 60 34 practice intercommunalite 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 01-Sep-2017 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached 57% of original target. Indicator was discontinued with the restructuring and additional financing Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Representatives of key Percentage 0 60 85 87 Regional agencies whose planning capacities have been 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 strengthened Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceed by 45% the original target and by 2% the revised target of 85% This was achieved through training, equipment, technical assistance to prepare and update regional development plans and support preparation of regulations and decrees Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Representatives of Percentage 0 99 99 Page 40 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) deconcentrated line 24-May-2013 17-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 departments whose local development-related capacities have been strengthened Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached its target. This was reached through targeted training to local officials Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Populations (disaggregated by Percentage 0 50 50 gender) of newly targeted communes whose access to 24-May-2013 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 nutrition services improved Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached its target. This was achieved through activities aimed at increasing capacities in food processing, cooking demonstration, nutrition training for health officials and communication campaigns on good nutrition practices.. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Page 41 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Targeted communes that are Percentage 9 100 100 enabled to sustain proper operation and maintenance of 24-May-2013 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 local development investment Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached its target. Results were achieved through the establishment and training of local management committees (COGES) and training of local officials Component: COMPONENT B: Local Investment Fund Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Beneficiaries whose income Percentage 0 80 90 91 increased by 30% because of farm and off-farm jobs created 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 by approved micro-projects Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded its original target by 14% and by 1% its revised target of 90% Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted communes utilizing at Percentage 0 80 86 100 Page 42 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) least 80% of their investment 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 allocations Comments (achievements against targets): Project has exceeded its original target by 25% and by 16% its revised target of 86% Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Storage and processing Number 0 65 65 67 facilities built 21-Apr-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceeded its target by 3% Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted communes which Percentage 0 70 90 90 have protected and/or restored at least 200 hectares 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 of land Comments (achievements against targets): Page 43 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Project exceed its original target by 29% and reached its revised target of 90% Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted inter-communal Percentage 0 50 38 initiatives which have been implemented 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 01-Sep-2017 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached 76% of its target. Indicator was discontinued at restructuring and additional financing Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Populations of newly targeted Percentage 0 90 28 communes whose access to education improved 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 01-Sep-2017 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached 31% of target. Results were achieved through the construction of 109 schools rooms. The indicator was discontinued at restructuring and additional financing. Page 44 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Beneficiaries that have Number 0 240,000 183,040 increased consumption of fruits and vegetables 21-Apr-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached 76% of target. The results were achieved through support to horticulture production and nutrition communication and messaging. Component: COMPONENT C: Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation and Communication Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Targeted knowledge & Percentage 0 80 90 93 communication products prepared and disseminated 24-May-2013 22-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 Comments (achievements against targets): Project exceed the original target by 16% and by 3% the revised target of 90%. The project used different tools of communication including a newsletters, preparation of briefs documents related to project activities (SLM and nutrition), and some documentaries (bio-carbon sites, COGES, SLM activities and nutrition). The key communication tool was the use of communities’ radio in local language especially on nutrition messaging through the PHRD Page 45 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Component: COMPONENT D: Contingent Emergency Response Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion IRM established and ready to Number 0 1 1 provide access to financial resources to Niger in case of an 24-May-2013 20-Jun-2020 20-Jun-2020 eligible emergency Comments (achievements against targets): Project reached its target Page 46 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective/Outcome 1 Increased planning and implementation capacities of local administration Outcome Indicators 1. Communes with good governance practices (%) 1. Communes delivering timely financial reports (%) 2. Communes with working grievance mechanisms Intermediate Results Indicators 3. Deconcentrated line departments strengthened 4. Regional agencies planning capacities strengthened 1. Equipment to 20 directorates/ departments 2. 15,171 local government officials trained Key Outputs by Component 3. Preparation of 38 CDP (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 1) 4. Preparation off 750 AI 5. Support preparation of regulations and decrees. Objective/Outcome 2: Increased access to socio-economic services Outcome Indicators 1. Communes able to operate and maintain investments sustainably (%) 1. Communes using at least 80% of their investment allocations (%) 2. Population of newly targeted communes whose access to education improved 3. Percentage of populations in targeted communes whose access to health and nutrition Intermediate Results Indicators services improved (replaced with the AF in 2017) 4. Populations (disaggregated by gender) of targeted communes whose access to nutrition services improved (introduced in 2017) Key Outputs by Component 1. socio-economic infrastructures micro projects (9 food and feed storages facilities, 39 (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2) warehouses, 9 administration offices, 109 schools, 18 health posts and communities’ radios Page 47 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 2. income-generating activities such as animals (sheep, goats, and cattle) for sheep and bovine fattening and livestock replenishment, small scale irrigation, grain mills, fishponds, animal feed banks for livestock and cereal banks, and small agro-processing units 3. sustainable Land and Water Management micro projects. 4. nutrition awareness campaigns and training Objective/Outcome 3: Increased agricultural productivity Outcome Indicators 1. Number of farmers adopting improved agricultural technologies 2. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops – tomato (tons/ha), 3. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops - onions (tons/ha 4. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops - pepper (tons/ha) 5. Increase in agricultural productivity of major crops -, cassava (tons/ha), Intermediate Results Indicators 1. Area provided with new/improved irrigation or drainage services 2. Targeted communes which have protected and/or restored at least 200 hectares of land 3. Storage and processing facilities built 4. Beneficiaries whose income increased by 30% because of farm and off-farm jobs created by approved micro-projects Key Outputs by Component 1.Distribution of agriculture inputs (seeds, fertilizers and pesticides) (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2) 2.Small scale irrigation (1378.7 ha) 3.Provision of 1708 irrigation motor pumps 4.Provision of drip irrigation kits 5. Support agroforestry (9055 ha). Page 48 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) C. ACHIEVEMENT AGAINST INDICATORS -PARENT PROJECT At the PDO level, targets on management capacity, governance practices at the Commune level, and access to socio-economic services provided by the project have been fully achieved. As examples, to date: End of project target Actual at April 21, PDO indicator Level of achievement (December 31st, 2017) 2017 Newly targeted communes that have defined and implemented good 85% 87% Fully achieved governance practices (participation, accountability, and equity) Targeted communes that are enabled to sustain proper operation and 100% 99% Fully achieved maintenance of local development investments Newly targeted farming households who adopted sustainable agro-sylvo- 90% 92% Fully achieved pastoral practices and technology promoted by the project Direct project beneficiaries 3,000,000 3,000,342 Fully achieved ▪ Of whom female 50% 52% Fully achieved Time taken to make funds available as requested by Government for an 4 1 eligible crisis or emergency (Weeks) GEO Indicator Additional land area under sustainable land and water management 60,000 85,788 Fully achieved (SLWM) and Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) practices (Hectare(Ha)) Intermediate outcome indicator Component A Capacity-building Targeted communes whose planning and AIP sessions are public 60% 100% More than fully achieved Targeted communes that timely prepare annual financial reports 75% 76% Fully achieved Percentage of Communes whose approved microprojects integrate gender 90% 95% More than fully achieved equity Percentage of Communes whose grievance mechanisms have been created and are operational 65% 75% More than fully achieved Percentage of targeted Communes effectively interested in 60% 39% Not achieved Intercommunalité. Percentage of representatives of key Regional agencies whose planning 60% 85% More than fully achieved capacities have been strengthened Page 49 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Percentage of representatives of deconcentrated line departments whose 90% 90% Fully achieved local development-related capacities have been strengthened. Component B Local Investment Fund Targeted communes utilizing at least 80 percent of their investment 80% 86% Fully achieved allocations Targeted communes which have protected and/or restored at least 200 70% 79% Fully achieved hectares of land Beneficiaries whose income increased by 30 percent because of farm and 80% 85% Fully achieved off-farm jobs created by approved micro-projects Percentage of populations (disaggregated by gender) of newly targeted 90% 23% Not achieved Communes whose access to health and nutrition services improved Percentage of populations of newly targeted Communes whose access to 90% 20% Not achieved education improved Percentage of targeted inter-governmental initiatives which have been 50% 35% Partially achieved implemented Component C Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation and Communication. Percentage of targeted knowledge & communication products prepared 80% 85% More than fully achieved and disseminated Component D Contingent Emergency Response IRM established and ready to provide access to financial resources to Niger 1 1 Fully achieved in case of an eligible emergency Page 50 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Amadou Alassane Task Team Leader(s) El Hadj Adama Toure Team member (agriculture) Dahlia Lotayef Team member (environment) Abdoulaye Toure Team member (agriculture) Soulemane Fofana Team membe (agriculture) Juvenal Nzambimana Team member (operations) Mohamed Khatouri Monitoring and Evaluation Laurent Valiergue Carbon Finance Adrien de Bassompierre Carbon Finance Gayatri Kanugo Environment specialist Paul Jonathan Martin Social Specialist Yacouba Konate Social Specialist Medou Lo Social Specialist Supervision Soulemane Fofana Task Team Leader (From 2014 -October 2019) Elisee Ouedraogo Task Team Leader(From October 2019) Mahamadou Bambo Sissoko, Procurement Specialist (ADM at project closing) Maman Hassane Gabari Procurement Specialist Arcade Bigirindavyi, Procurement Specialist Rahmoune Essalhi Procurement Specialist Page 51 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Ibrah Rahamane Sanoussi Procurement Specialist Harouna Djibrilla Djimba Procurement Specialist Boubacar Diallo Procurement Specialist Sylvain Auguste Rambeloson Procurement Specialist Andre Zombre, Procurement Specialist Ahohouindo Mongnihoude Jean L Gbaguidi Financial Management Specialist (ADM at closing) Josue Akre Financial Management Specialist Celestin Adjalou Niamien Financial Management Specialist Joanne Catherine Gaskell Team member Amadou Ba Team member Brahim Sall Team member Demba Balde Social Safeguard Specialist (ADM at closing) Yacouba Konate Social Safeguard Specialist Medou Lo Social Safeguard Specialist Nyaneba E. Nkrumah Environmental Safeguards Specialist (ADM at closing) Bougadare Kone Environmental Safeguards Specialist Laurent Valiergue Team member (Natural Resources) Mirko Ivo Serkovic Natural Resources Specialist (Biocarbon) ICR Elisee Ouedraogo Task Team Leader(s) Mahamadou Bambo Sissoko, Maman Hassane Gabari Procurement Specialist(s) Ahohouindo Mongnihoude Jean L Gbaguidi Financial Management Specialist Demba Balde Social Safeguards Specialist Amadou Konare Environmental SafeguardsSpecialist Mirko Ivo Serkovic Team Member Aimee Marie Ange Mpambara ICRR author Anne Christelle Ott (FAO) ICRR EFA Christopher Ward ICRR editor Page 52 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY13 15.972 190,398.03 FY14 13.897 52,020.72 FY15 17.199 78,611.42 FY16 2.875 13,399.99 Total 49.94 334,430.16 Supervision/ICR FY14 .926 13,880.63 FY15 7.395 63,570.12 FY16 20.244 115,475.02 FY17 15.097 79,155.80 FY18 15.722 121,801.22 FY19 6.942 86,574.12 FY20 16.766 66,345.59 Total 83.09 546,802.50 Page 53 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Amount at Approval Actual at Project Percentage of Approval Components (US$M)* Closing (US$M)** (US$M) COMPONENT A: Capacity 8.35 11.3 135 % Building COMPONENT B: Local 29.39 45.0 153% Investment Fund COMPONENT C: Project Coordination, Management, 6.75 14.1 208%0 Monitoring and Evaluation and Communication COMPONENT D: Contingent 0 0 0 Emergency Response Total 44.52 70.4 158 % *Parent project (IDA and GEF grant) **Actual disbursed (including AF and PHRD grant) The actual project costs include beneficiaries and government contribution, and exchange rate gain Page 54 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS This annex presents the ex-post economic and financial analysis (EFA) of the Third Community Action Program Support Project (CAP III). General Efficiency Considerations Introduction This annex analyses the efficiency of the Third Community Action Program Support Project (CAP III) (P132306) in Niger, financed by the World Bank in the context of its Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICRR). Project efficiency was assessed by i) the actual project costs and duration for realising project objectives versus the plan; ii) the actual costs per beneficiary and per unit of output iii) the project economic rate of return as computed through an economic and financial analysis (EFA), and how it compares to ex ante estimates. This project has four components. 1) The first component (A), Capacity Building, aims at building Capacity Building through targeted training and agricultural advisory services for smallholder farmers for the implementation of their micro-projects. The second component (B), Local Investment Fund, supports local investment for agriculture-related micro-projects in 125 communes and has three sub-components: (a) Micro-projects to improve land and water management, including strengthening climate-resilience, funded entirely by IDA; (b) Microprojects for income-generating activities, and (c) Micro-projects (MPs) to invest in socio-economic infrastructures including (i) development of small-scale irrigation on one thousand hectares and (ii) investment in small-scale irrigation micro-projects in five selected communes. 3) Component (C), Project Coordination, Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, covers project coordination. The fourth Component (D), Contingent Emergency Response, provides an immediate response mechanism to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency. Overall, the project succeeded in meeting most of its targets without a cost overrun. While the project was extended by six months, with the initial closing date of 20 December 2019 being postponed to 20 June 2020, the extension merely aimed to allow more time for project implementation to compensate for a delay in the approval of the Japanese grant and did not result in a cost-overrun. The project was also initially extended from December 2017 to December 2019 together with the additional financing. Cost Efficiency Costs by Financing Entity. The project disbursed from all its sources of financing, with disbursement rates at 96% on average. Beneficiaries contributed to 4% of project costs, and the Government contributed to 2% of total project costs. While beneficiaries contributed more than initially planned, Government counterpart financing was lower than planned. Page 55 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 1. Planned and actual costs by financing entity Project costs by financing Original Revised Actual % % of total entity amount amount disbursed IDA Loan, design million US$ 40.0 40.0 37.9 95% 55% IDA Loan, AF million US$ 20.8 20.8 20.5 99% 30% GEF million US$ 4.5 4.1 4.1 91% 6% PHRD million US$ 2.3 2.3 2.3 100% 3% Total million US$ 67.6 67.1 64.8 96% 94% Beneficiaries million US$ 1.7 2.9 2.9 4% Government million US$ 2.6 1.5 1.5 2% Total project costs million US$ 71.9 71.5 69.1 96% 100% Management Costs. The project had significant management costs and overspent on Component C. Component C expenditures amounted to about 20% of total project expenditures29. While these management costs are high, they are not particularly high considering i) that the project followed a Community-Driven Development (CDD) approach, which tend to have higher management costs; ii) the relatively higher costs of management in the region. The six months extension probably contributed to higher management costs as well. The Central Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) spent 67% of Component Costs, while the regional PCUs spent the remaining 33%. Salaries only accounted for 22% of the Central PCU costs but they accounted for more than 56% of regional PCUs costs. For the Central PCU, the main expenditure categories were recurrent costs (33% of costs), followed by salaries (22% of costs) and consultants (20% of costs). Costs per beneficiary. Costs per beneficiary was very low, US$ 18.3 per beneficiary, because the project reached a high number of beneficiaries. In some cases, the number of beneficiaries reported per activity seems unexpectedly high and results in a low additional revenue per individual beneficiary. It seems that the number of beneficiaries per activity alternatively refers to the number of household beneficiaries or of total beneficiaries, including all members of beneficiary households. Despite the project having provided a definition of the indicator, there might be discrepancies on how the indicator was reported on. Table 2. Planned and actual cost per beneficiary Planned Actual % Number of beneficiaries people 3,110,142 3,194,961 103% Cost per beneficiary, IDA only US$ 19.5 18.3 94% Cost per beneficiary, total costs US$ 23.1 21.6 94% Costs per output. Where data was available to compare project cost per output with norms, evidence shozs that the project was reasonably aligned with national norms and expected costs. For instance, according to the Cadre stratégique de la gestion durable des terres au Niger et son plan d’investissement 29 Based on project data from 20/05/2020 Page 56 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) 2015-2029, the cost per hectare for zai and demies lunes are respectively FCFA 52,000 and FCFA 90,000- 120,000. The average cost per hectare for land and soil management micro-project was FCFA 103,000, so in line with these norms. For sheep fattening, the model estimates that project costs per micro-project beneficiary30 would amount to FCFA 67,000, and actual expenditure per beneficiary amounted to FCFA 113,026. For goat breeding, the model estimates a cost per beneficiary of FCFA 90,00031 compared to an expenditure of FCFA 109,409. Micro-project costs also include provisions for the micro-project committees and potentially other costs, so it is also expected that they would be somewhat higher. Economic and Financial Analysis Results The Economic and Financial Analysis at completion finds an economic Net Present Value (NPV) of US$ 108 million, and an Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) of 52%, showing very positive and substantial returns to investment. If CAP III’s carbon sink benefits are taken into consideration, the project benefits are even more substantial, with the NPV reaching US$ 119 million with the higher carbon social price. This shows that the project was very profitable, especially considering that some project benefits could not be quantified, for instance the nutritional benefits of the Japanese grant, the longer-term impact of capacity building activities and the project’s contribution to improving gender equality. Project efficiency was higher than what was projected at design. The EFA conducted for the project Additional Financing (AF) projected an NPV of US$ 23.4 million and an EIRR of 19.4%. While the AF only estimated the benefits associated with AF investments, US$ 22.59 million out of US$ 68.3 million (33% of project costs), the return on investment on the full budget can be estimated by extrapolating a similar return for all project costs. Assuming that all project sources of financing have similar returns as the modelled AF activities, the expected NPV for the full project as projected during the AF would reach US$ 70.7 million, lower than the estimates of this analysis. Generally, the EFA done for the AF does not fully reflect the activities eventually undertaken by the beneficiaries, which is not surprising given the demand- nature of the project. For instance, there is no model for goat herds, and the horticulture model focuses on the production of onion, cassava and sweet potatoes. The analysis finds significant disparities in the return of individual activities, mostly in line with the project’s own assessments of the efficiency of specific investments. For instance, while irrigated horticulture plots are extremely profitable, the livestock feed warehouses were not profitable and the sheep fattening was only profitable if the entrepreneur sold the sheep during the Tabaski holiday, when sheep prices peeked. Some project assessments document the lack of profitability of the livestock feed warehouses and the importance of the timing of sales for sheep fattening, and the project should be commended for having conducted its own efficiency analyses. The efficiency analyses conducted by the project however sometimes excluded investment costs borne by the project, and therefore over-estimated the efficiency of some activities, for instance transformation activities. Overall, and in light of the evidence above, the project efficiency is deemed to have been substantial. 30 one sheep per household, a shelter and part of the feed costs 31 This cost corresponds to the purchase of three goats Page 57 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Economic and Financial Analysis Overview of the Methodology and Activities Modelled This section presents the hypothesis and methodology used to construct the Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA) of the CAP III in the context of the ICRR. The objective of the analysis is to estimate the costs and benefits of the project from the perspective of project beneficiaries (financial analysis) and from the perspective of society and the economy (economic analysis). It will first introduce the methodology of the analysis, including the activity models used to represent project investments and the main assumptions behind these models. The section will then present the specific parameters and results of the financial analysis, followed by the specific parameters and results of the economic analysis. The methodology is a cost-benefit analysis that estimates the costs and benefits of the project and the activities supported by the project. The data used for the analysis primarily come from the following sources: i) data on outputs and costs per output from the project Completion Report and Impact Evaluation Report; ii) data on specific activities collected from various project reports and former project staff members; iii) business plans prepared as part of the project and presented in various reports; iv) secondary sources found online. The modelled investments come from activities in Component B, the Local Investment Fund. This Component accounts for 67% of project expenditures. Nonetheless, the other components contributed to the success of the investments undertaken as part of Component B. In particular, Component A contributed the necessary capacity building for communes and communities and different local institutions, thereby providing institutional support at the local level to ensure the success of Component B investments. As noted above, the project also had benefits that were not quantified through the production models. The modelled investments represent the three main types of investments that came from the Local Investment Funds: micro-projects to improve land and water management (LSM, 40% of the Fund), micro- projects for income-generating activities (IGA, 35% of the Fund) and micro-projects to invest in socio- economic infrastructures (ISE, 25% of the Fund). The models are based on the most popular investment choices by beneficiaries, obtained from monitoring and evaluation data on micro-projects. The activities represent 45% of LSM expenditures and 82% of IGA expenditures32. The expenditures on socio-economic infrastructures include establishing micro-irrigation for horticulture plots, and were therefore added to the expenditures on horticulture micro-projects in the IGA activities. The models are summarised in 32There is no break-down of ISE expenditures. The ISE expenditures were all considered to correspond to irrigation for horticulture plots. The costs per production unit for horticulture therefore include the ISE costs. Page 58 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 4 below. Each model is then summarised at the level of a production unit, based on available data. For some activities, there was information on output per type of investment activity, for instance hectares for SML activities and animals distributed for livestock activities33. In this case, the production unit is based on the output unit (one hectare, one sheep etc…). In the case of the warehouse and transformation activities, each MP corresponds respectively to a warehouse and a transformation unit. To triangulate the information, the estimated costs per model was compared with data on expenditure per production unit. M&E data on outputs and total expenditure per activity was used to compute an average expenditure per output/production unit. This was used to ensure that the scale of the models was on par with the scale and investment per production unit. The results of this exercise, summarised in Table 3, shows that the scales and costs of the models are on par with project expenditures. Cost per production models are almost always a bit lower than expenditures (except for the biocarbon sites), but this was expected as micro-project expenditures would include the costs for the management committees and other associated costs not included in the models. Table 3. Costs per Production Unit, Project Data vs Models Model Model production Expenditure Cost per % difference unit (A) per prod. production (D) unit, project unit, model, data, FCFA FCFA (C) (B) Horticulture Hectare 6,695,622 5,806,391 87% Sheep fattening Sheep 94,641 67,400 71% Goat breeding 3 goats herd package 109,927 90,000 82% Livestock feed warehouse Warehouse 16,060,249 14,442,499 90% Cassava processing Transformation unit 11,638,050 10,200,000 88% Zai Hectare 103,097 101,000 98% Half moon Hectare 49,745 203% Biocarbon sites Hectare 49,745 53,892 108% The M&E data also allowed for the computation of beneficiaries per production unit. While for some models the production unit corresponds to one household (e.g. for the livestock models), in most cases, more than one household would benefit from a production unit. It is important to note however that the data on the number of beneficiaries for some production units are unexpectedly high. For goat breeding, conversations with the project team revealed that the number of beneficiaries in the impact evaluation table corresponded to total beneficiaries, including all household beneficiary members, so the number was modified to reflect household beneficiaries. For transformation units, it seems surprising that more 33 Categories were not always clearly defined so assumptions had to be made in some cases Page 59 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) than 1000 direct beneficiaries would benefit from one transformation unit on average. For the LSM models as well, 11 direct beneficiaries per hectare would result in a very small surface per household. Page 60 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 4. Summary of Models Beneficiaries per Fund Model Unit of production model IGA Horticulture Hectare 12 IGA Sheep fattening Sheep 1 IGA Goat breeding 3 goats herd package 1 IGA Livestock feed warehouse Warehouse 4,779 IGA Cassava processing Transformation unit 1,533 LSM Zai Hectare 11 LSM Half moon Hectare 11 LSM Biocarbon sites Hectare 2 For all models, a situation without project (WOP) is compared to a situation with project (WP), to understand the additional benefits generated by project investments. A specificity of PAC III is its focus on soil and land management, which included the rehabilitation of previously un-used plots of land. Whenever the activities take place on previously uncultivated land (degraded or fallow) or when the activity did not require land, it was considered that there was no WOP situation. This is for instance the case for the half moon or bio-carbon site models. The opportunity cost of labour is however included in all models, to account for additional labour requirements. In the case of horticulture, project investments allow for an increase in the surface cultivated and an increase in yields. The increase in yields in the horticulture and zai models (see Table 6), are respectively based on the data from the project Results Framework and the Rapport d’achèvement du projet FEM/PAC3. Table 5. Without Project and With Project Situations Model WOP WP Horticulture 0.5 hectares, lower inputs and lower 1hectare, micro-irrigation, more inputs yields, 1 cycle on average and higher yields, 1.5 cycles on average Sheep fattening No WOP fattening of one sheep Goat breeding No WOP Raising of goat herd Livestock feed warehouse No WOP One livestock feed warehouse Cassava processing No WOP Cassava processing Zai Sorghum production Sorghum production with zai Half moon No WOP Sorghum production with half moons Biocarbon sites No WOP Biocarbon sites Page 61 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 6. WOP and WP Yields, kilo per hectare per cycle WOP WP Onion 30,000 50,000 Tomatoes 30,000 60,000 Pepper 15,000 35,000 Sorgho, with a nd without zai 400 800 Financial Analysis For the financial analysis, costs and benefits are analysed from the point of view of project beneficiaries. All costs are included, whether these costs are incurred by project beneficiaries or not, with the exception of capacity building and training costs and the costs of micro-project committees. As noted above, salaried and family labour costs are included to reflect the additional work necessary to implement certain activities. A discount rate of 10% is used to discount results. All models are analysed over a ten-year period, with the exception of goat breeding which is analysed over a five-year period, as evidence from the field suggests that beneficiaries would eventually transition into cattle breeding. For the goat herd model, the demography of the herd and the model were computed using the Livestock Sector Investment and Policy Toolkit34. Financial Results The financial analyses show that most activity models were profitable and viable, but with strong discrepancies across activities and some unprofitable activities. On a per model basis, the most profitable model was by far horticulture, with a Net Present Value (NPV) of US$ 46,302 over ten years. The high profitability of the model stems from i) the very significant increases in yields reported by the project, ii) the increase in cropped areas iii) the fact that some plots could produce two cycles per year. The goat herd model is also very profitable, because it is assumed that beneficiaries do not need to purchase feed for the goats and because of the demographic growth of the herd. One model has negative results, livestock feed warehouse. The project acknowledges that these investments were not sustainable as these warehouses often discounted heavily the sales prices, without considering long-term financial sustainability. The cassava processing model is also only profitable if labour costs are set at FCFA 550 per day or lower, which implies that the model has a very low return to labour. Considering that the investment on which the model was based was designed to provide employment opportunities for handicapped women who might otherwise not find sources of income, the activity can still be considered as financially attractive. Sheep fattening and zai are rather easy to implement activities with fairly low investment costs and positive returns, but not extremely profitable. 34 The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), together with the World Bank, the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), have developed the Livestock Sector Investment and Policy Toolkit (LSIPT) toolkit to support teams and decision-makers to increase and improve policies and livestock investments that contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The toolkit enables a shift from the traditional approach centred on livestock production to one that focuses on households and human well-being with the goal of poverty reduction. Page 62 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) For sheep fattening, the model is only profitable if the beneficiary sales the sheep at a sales price of FCFA 90,000 or more. These sales prices are common around the time of the Tabaski, when there is a high demand for sheep, but more difficult to obtain at other times of the year. Table7. Financial Results Results of the Margin, year 3, US$ NPV,' 000 NPV, US$ NPV per IRR Financial Analysis FCFA beneficiary, US$ Horticulture 10,786 24,311 43,779 3,660 94% Sheep fattening 20 52 93 93 NA Goat breeding 347 694 1,249 1,249 345% Livestock feed -5,284 -26,914 -48,467 -10 NA warehouse Cassava processing 2,804 294 530 0 11% Zai 17 9 17 2 22% Half moon 101 86 156 14 27% Biocarbon sites 130 97 174 93 22% The NPV per household can provide a more useful metric of the return on investment per beneficiary, since the model’s production unit does not always correspond to one beneficiary. In this case as well, the highest return on investment per beneficiary are for the horticulture model (US$ 3,660 per beneficiary) and for the goat breeding model (US$ 1,249 per beneficiary). Cassava processing has a very low return per beneficiary because, as noted above, the number of beneficiaries per transformation activity is very high. The Internal Rates of Return (IRR) are also very high for the horticulture and goat breeding models. For horticulture, this is simply because the model is very profitable, even if the year of the investment is assumed to bring no revenues as planting only starts in year 2 and if full yields are only achieved in year 4. For the goat herd, the investment is assumed to start immediately, once the goats are purchased. The sheep fattening model has no IRR because the incremental benefits are positive for each year of the model, as the production cycle lasts less than a year. There is also no IRR for the livestock feed warehouse because the model incremental benefits are consistently negative. Economic Analysis For the economic analysis, the analysis takes the perspective of the society, rather than individual beneficiaries. The financial models are turned into economic models using conversion factors, the models’ additional economic benefits are aggregated as per project M&E data on the phasing of activities, and the greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting is added to the final results, to account for the economic costs of project GHG. Page 63 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) To transform the financial models into economic models, prices were adjusted to remove the values of transfers within the economy in the form of taxes or subsidies. Conversion factors were computed for categories of goods and services, defined on the basis of different categories of taxes (Value added tax (VAT) and import tariffs) and applied to all prices in that specific category. Table 8 presents the different conversion factors used. Table 8. Conversion Factors Financial Economic Conversion price/index price/index factor Exchange rate 555 585 1.05 Import substitute, food items 100 103 1.03 Imports, agricultural inputs other than fertilizer 100 98 0.98 Imports, fertilizer 100 103 1.03 Imports, others 100 79 0.79 Non-tradable, with VAT 100 84 0.84 Non-tradable, without VAT 100 100 1.00 Taxes 100 0 0.00 Labour 100 70 0.70 The economic models were subsequently aggregated. The activities modelled account for 71% of the expenditures for micro-projects, but 100% of the micro-project expenditures were accounted for by allocating the remaining 29% of expenditures to the modelled activities (see Table 9). Table 9. Aggregation of Models, Total Expenditure Allocated per Model Allocation across MPs Project expenditure % micro- % Expenditure for the activity, FCFA project reallocated allocated to the (A) expenditure (C) model, FCFA (D) (B) Total MP costs 23,766,059,320 - - Horticulture 9,045,785,551 38% 54% 12,809,582,092 Sheep fattening 1,039,162,082 4% 6% 1,471,539,638 Goat breeding 1,244,304,409 5% 7% 1,762,038,176 Livestock feed 722,711,191 3% 4% 1,023,418,948 warehouse Cassava processing 372,417,598 2% 2% 527,374,186 Zai 1,999,584,290 8% 12% 2,831,577,088 Half moon 1,999,584,290 8% 12% 2,831,577,088 Biocarbon sites 359,408,414 2% 2% 508,952,103 Page 64 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) The aggregation of models was phased based on data on the yearly expenditures of the Local Investment Fund. These expenditures were allocated across activity models on the basis of the percentages above (Table 9, Columns C and D35) and the average expenditure per activity (Table 3, Column B). The resulting total for the aggregation per model is presented in Table 10, Column C. As the table shows, project output (Column A) is similar to the total production units aggregated (Column B), although the total aggregated is systematically higher than the output because of the reallocation of non-modelled activities expenditures. Finally, to account for the fact that not all activities would become financially viable and be sustained by beneficiaries, a success rate of 80% was applied to the total (Column C). The resulting phasing of models for the aggregation is presented in Table 11. Table 10. Total models vs project outputs Unit Total, project Total, based on Total, budget output (A) expenditure allocation allocation (B) with 80% success rate (C) Horticulture Hectare 1,351 1,913 1,531 Sheep fattening Sheep 10,980 15,549 12,439 Goat breeding 3 goats herd 11,319 16,029 12,823 package Livestock feed warehouse Warehouse 45 64 51 Cassava processing Transformati 32 45 36 on unit Zai Hectare 19,395 27,465 21,972 Half moon Hectare 19,395 56,922 45,537 Biocarbon sites Hectare 7,225 10,231 8,185 35 Expenditures per production unit were used, because they were higher than the investment cost per model. Page 65 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 11. Phasing of Models Phasing, with Production 2 014 2 015 2 016 2 017 2 018 2 019 2 020 TOTAL success rates Unit Horticulture Hectare 98 256 407 200 186 377 6 1,531 798 2,079 3,310 1,624 1,509 3,068 51 Sheep fattening Sheep 12,439 3 goats herd 823 2,143 3,413 1,674 1,555 3,163 52 Goat breeding package 12,823 Livestock feed 3 9 14 7 6 13 0 51 Warehouse warehouse Cassava Transformatio 2 6 10 5 4 9 0 36 processing n unit 1,409 3,673 5,847 2,869 2,665 5,419 89 Zai Hectare 21,972 2,921 7,612 5,946 5,523 185 Half moon Hectare 12,119 11,231 45,537 Biocarbon sites Hectare 525 1,368 2,178 1,069 993 2,019 33 8,185 The additional economic benefits per model were aggregated according to this phasing, to compute the total additional economic benefits for the project. The economic analysis covers the years 2013 (project start) to 2029 (when activities that started in 2020 reach their 10-year duration). Project costs not included in the activity models were added as additional costs; these corresponds to all project costs other than Component B costs. A discount rate of 6%, in line with the average GDP growth rate of 5.7% over the period of the project duration, was used to estimate economic results. Finally, given the project’s strong focus on soil and land management, the project greenhouse gas balance was estimated. The World Bank uses the Ex-Ante Carbon-Balance Tool (EX-ACT) to estimate the impact of agricultural investment lending on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and carbon sequestration. EX-ACT is a land-based appraisal system for assessing a project’s net carbon balance—the net balance of tons of CO2 equivalent (tCO2eq) of GHGs that were emitted, or carbon sequestered as a result of project interventions—compared to a “without project” scenario. While the tool is designed for ex-ante estimates, it was used in this case to estimate GHG emissions where project data was not available. For the EX-ACT activities, project data on land use change were input in the EX-ACT. The biocarbon sites were not considered, because the carbon capture resulting from these sites was already included in the financial analysis. The main hypotheses behind the EX-ACT were: • Description: an implementation phase of 7 years and a capitalisation phase of 8 years, for a total duration of accounting of 15 years; • Land use changes: 19,395 hectares from degraded land to annual crop (half the surface reported, as some surfaces were already annual crop-land): 7,252 hectares of degraded land to grass land; 1,389 hectares from degraded land to other for the fixation of dunes. Page 66 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) • Cropland: 19,395 hectares from degraded land to annual cropland of grains, with improved management options (half-moons for instance); 676 hectares of horticulture (WOP) becoming 1,351 hectares of horticulture (WP) with improved management options; 19,395 hectares of cropland remaining cropland with improved management options. • Grassland: 7,252 hectares of moderately degraded land to improved pasture without nutrient management; an additional 1,276 cattle, 25,737 sheep and 171,601 goats with a few technical mitigation options36. • Inputs: the inputs used for the horticulture, biocarbon, zai and half-moon models were included (see EFA Excel file for detailed computations); 1351 hectares or IRRS for the horticulture, 21,839 houses in concrete and 62,266 garages based on project M&E data. Based on these assumptions, the project has a total balance of -194,887 tons of CO2 equivalent (TCo2eq.). There is an important carbon sink from the land use change (-1,056,802 TCo2eq.), but there are also important emissions resulting from the livestock activities (914,554 TCo2eq.). The GHG emissions are overall negative, which means that the project has resulted in a net carbon sink. The carbon sink amount to -4.1 TCo2eq. per hectare on average and -12,992 TCo2eq. per year. The results of the EX-ACT analysis are summarised in Table 12. 36For fattening models, the number corresponds to animals distributed by the project. For the herd models, the numbers are adjusted for herd growth: for sheep and cattle, the animals distributed are multiplied by 3 while the herd growth is based on the LSIPT demographic modelling for goats. Page 67 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 12. Project GHG accounting results Continent Africa Dominant Regional Soil TypeTotal area (ha) 48106.5 Gross fluxes Result per year Components of the project Without With Balance Without With Balance All GHG in tCO2eq Land use changes Positive = source / negative = sink Deforestation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Afforestation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other LUC 0 -1,056,802 -1,056,802 0 -70,453 -70,453 Agriculture Annual -463,629 -540,274 -76,645 -30,909 -36,018 -5,110 Perennial 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rice 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grassland & Livestocks Grassland 0 -94,796 -94,796 0 -6,320 -6,320 Livestocks 0 914,554 914,554 0 60,970 60,970 Degradation & Management Forest degradation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peat extraction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Drainage organic soil 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rewetting organic soil 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fire organic soil 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coastal wetlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inputs & Investments 4,685 123,487 118,802 312 8,232 7,920 Fishery & Aquaculture 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total -458,944 -653,831 -194,887 -30,596 -43,589 -12,992 Per hectare -9.5 -13.6 -4.1 Per hectare per year -0.6 -0.9 -0.3 -0.6 -0.9 -0.3 Economic Results Based on these assumptions, the project has an economic NET Present Value of US$ 108 million, and an IRR of 52%. The project is more profitable when project climate mitigation effects are added to the results; the NPV reaches US$ 119 million and the IRR 65% with the lower carbon social prices and the NPV reaches US$ 113 million and the IRR 57% with the higher carbon social prices. Page 68 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) Table 13. Economic Results Economic Results, Without GHG Emissions NPV, @6%, million FCFA 60,211 NPV, @6%, US$ 108,427,886 EIRR 52% Economic Results, With GHG Emissions, Lower Carbon Social Price NPV, @6%, million FCFA 63,003 NPV, @6%, US$ 113,455,641 EIRR 57% Economic Results, With GHG Emissions, Higher Carbon Social Price NPV, @6%, million FCFA 65,820 NPV, @6%, US$ 118,528,989 EIRR 65% Most project benefits come from the horticulture model, as shows Table 14. This is somewhat expected given that horticulture also accounts for about half of the modelled expenditures. Nonetheless, it also reflects the fact that some models were not profitable, and that horticulture was by far the most profitable model. Table 14. Weight of models in costs and benefits Allocation across MPs % of modelled % of economic benefits expenditures Horticulture 54% 63% Sheep fattening 6% 1% Goat breeding 7% 13% Livestock feed warehouse 4% -2% Cassava processing 2% 0% Zai 12% 4% Half moon 12% 20% Biocarbon sites 2% 7% To test the robustness of the results, the economic analysis was re-computed assuming lower yields for the horticulture model, a decrease of 10 tons per hectare per commodity. The economic results are robust to this decrease in productivity, and the resulting project NPV without GHG social costs reached US$ 82 million. Page 69 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS Page 70 of 71 The World Bank NIGER COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PHASE 3 (P132306) ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 1. Country Partnership Strategy for the Republic of Niger for the Period FY13-FY16, IDA, IFC, MIGA, April, 30, 2013. 2. Republic of Niger, Systematic Country Diagnostic, November 28, 2017. 3. Country Partnership Framework for the Republic of Niger for the Period FY8-FY22, IDA, IFC, MIGA, March, 3, 2018. 4. Evaluation de l’Impact du Programme d’actions Communautaires Phase III, Rapport définitif, Juin 2020 5. Document Cadre de politique nationale de la Décentralisation, République du Niger, Juin 2011 6. Initiative 3N pour la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnel et le développement agricole durables « Les Nigériens Nourrissent les Nigériens », Avril 2012. 7. Stratégie de Développement Durable et de Croissance Inclusive (SDDCI), Niger 2035. 8. Plan de Développement Economique et Social 2017-2021, « Un Niger renaissant pour un peuple prospère », Septembre 2017. 9. Plan d’action 2016-2020 de l’Initiative 3 N (Les Nigériens Nourrissent les Nigériens). 10. Rapport d’audit technique des activités du PAC 3 par l’Inspection Général des Services du MAGEL, Juillet 2019. 11. Rapports de suivi évaluation des résultats du PAC 3 : enquête numéro 1 (Août 2015), enquête numéro 2 (Août 2016), enquête numéro 3 (Décembre 2016), enquête numéro 4 (Juillet 2017), enquête numéro 5 (Avril 2019). 12. World Bank Local Government Census, 2019. Page 71 of 71