Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) Report Number : ICRR0020127 1. Project Data Project ID Project Name P079749 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat Country Practice Area(Lead) Western Africa Transport & ICT L/C/TF Number(s) Closing Date (Original) Total Project Cost (USD) IDA-44350,IDA-44380,IDA-44390 31-Mar-2014 197,200,000.00 Bank Approval Date Closing Date (Actual) 19-Jun-2008 30-Jun-2015 IBRD/IDA (USD) Grants (USD) Original Commitment 190,000,000.00 0.00 Revised Commitment 188,250,077.79 0.00 Actual 175,559,173.76 0.00 Sector(s) Rural and Inter-Urban Roads and Highways(81%):Central government administration(10%):General transportation sector(7%):Other social services(1%):Health(1%) Theme(s) Regional integration(67%):Trade facilitation and market access(33%) Prepared by Reviewed by ICR Review Coordinator Group Ranga Rajan Krishnamani Peter Nigel Freeman Christopher David Nelson IEGSD (Unit 4) 2. Project Objectives and Components a. Objectives The project development objectives as stated in the Financing Agreements of Burkina Faso (Schedule 1, page 6), Mali (Schedule 1, page 6), Ghana (Schedule 1, page 6) and in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD, page ix) were: (1) To improve access by Burkina Faso and Mali to the ports in Ghana and port operations. (2) To facilitate the efficient movement of traffic along the Tema- Ougadougou- Bamako road transport corridor ("the Corridor"). Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) b. Were the project objectives/key associated outcome targets revised during implementation? No c. Components This project with three participating countries - Burkina Faso, Mali and Ghana - was the first pilot phase of the West Africa Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) / Ghana Road Program (RP-1). WAMEU is a regional economic organization with member countries, Benin, Togo, Burkina Faso, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Cote d'Ivoire. This phase focused on rehabilitation of roads along the port of Tema (Ghana) - Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso) - Bamako (Mali) road transport corridor. Component One. Corridor road infrastructure improvement. The total estimated cost at appraisal was US$162.70 million. (This included the appraisal estimate of US$60.80 million for Burkina Faso, US$29.90 million for Mali and US$72.00 million for Ghana).The actual total cost at closure was US151.39 million. (This included actual cost of US$51.39 million for Burkina Faso, US$27.60 million for Mali and US$72.00 million for Ghana). This component aimed at rehabilitating the key sections of the Corridor. Sub component activities included: (1) Rehabilitation of 54 kilometers (Km) of roads in Burkina Faso, 103 km in Ghana and 154 km in Mali. (ii) Construction of two rest stops in each country. (iii) Implementation of social and environmental mitigation measures (including Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and Environmental Mitigation Plans (EMP) in the three countries and an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan (ARAP) for Burkina Faso. (According to Operations Policies (OP 4.12), ARAP are expected to cover the following elements: (a) Census survey of displaced persons and valuation of their assets. (b) Description of compensation and other resettlement assistance to be provided. (c) Consultations with displaced people about acceptable alternatives. (d) Implementing procedures for grievance redress. (e) Arrangements for monitoring, and, (f) A timetable and budget). The ICR does not provide details on when ARAP is used. and, (iv), implementing corridor- specific Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS) action plans for mitigating the propagation of HIV/AIDS among high risk groups, such as truck drivers. and, (v) implementing corridor-specific road safety action plans and support for monitoring and evaluation. Component Two. Corridor transport and transit facilitation measures. The total estimated cost at appraisal was US$28.70 million. (including US$6.80 million for Burkina Faso, US$11.30 million for Mali and US$10.60 million for Ghana). The total actual cost at closure was US$21.93 million. (including US$3.40 million for Burkina Faso, US$7.93 million for Mali and US$10.60 million for Ghana). This component aimed at strengthening the capacity of customs and transport authorities of the project countries to manage transit traffic along the Corridor. Sub-component activities included: (i) Construction of a Satellite Truck Transit Village (STTV) adjacent to Tema port for transit trucks and truckers.(ii) Rehabilitation of the multidimensional platform at the dry port of Faladie (Bamako). (iii) Upgrading customs-related Information and Communications Technology (ICT) (including extension of the Automated System for Customs data (ASYCUDA ++) systems in Burkina Faso and Mali and connection between the ASYCDA system of Burkina Faso and the customs management system of Ghana) and introducing a cargo tracking system for monitoring transit traffic on the Burkina Faso and Mali section of the Corridor. (iv) Capacity building, technical assistance and training to the customs and transport authorities of the countries. Component Three. Project Management, monitoring and evaluation. The total estimated cost at appraisal was US$3.10 million. (including US$1.20 million for Burkina Faso, US$1.00 million for Mali and US$0.90 million for Ghana). The total project cost at closure was US$4.59 million. (including US$3.10 million for Burkina Faso, US$0.59 million for Mali and US$0.90 million for Ghana). This component financed activities associated with project management and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). d. Comments on Project Cost, Financing, Borrower Contribution, and Dates Project Cost. The total estimated cost at appraisal was US$197.20 million (This included the baseline cost and a Project Preparation Finance (PPF) advance of US$2.70 million). The actual cost at closure was US$180.87 million, 92% of the appraisal estimate. Project Financing. The project was financed by a total IDA Grant of US$190.00 million. (This included, US$70.00 million for Burkina Faso, US$40.00 million for Mali and US$80.00 million for Ghana). At closure, US$173.54 million of the grant was disbursed. (US$70.00 million for Burkina Faso, US$29.79 million for Mali and US$73.75 million for Ghana). There was parallel financing for complementary transport and transit infrastructure-related activities in the three countries from the African Development Bank (AfDB), the European Union (EU), The Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa (BADEA), the West African Development Bank (Banque Ouest Africaine de Developpement (West African Development Bank, BOAD) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Borrower Contribution. At appraisal, the borrower contribution was estimated at US$7.20 million (including US$2.20 million from Mali and US$5.00 million for Ghana). None was planned for Burkina Faso. The ICR does not provide reasons as to why no counterpart funding was planned for Burkina Faso). At project closure, the counterpart funding was US$7.33 million (Mali contributed more than planned at US$6.33 million and Ghana contributed less than planned at US$20.00 million). Dates. There were two Level 2 restructurings. The first, on March 28, 2013, reallocated grant proceeds between components in Ghana due to the delays in release of counterpart funding from the Government. This reallocation did not affect the implementation of Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) other project components in view of savings from lower roadwork costs. The second restructuring on March 10, 2014, extended the project closing date from March 31,2014 to June 30, 2016 for a combination of factors including, completion of ongoing activities in Ghana and Mali (activities in Mali had been suspended for about 11 months in the aftermath of the political crisis in March 2012), implementing the interface/interconnection of the customs management and cargo tracking systems on the Mali and Burkina Faso portions of the corridor and addressing the disbursement delays that the project had incurred against the PAD disbursement projections in the initial years of the project. The project closed 13 months beyond schedule on June 30, 2015. 3. Relevance of Objectives & Design a. Relevance of Objectives Burkina Faso and Mali are landlocked and dependent on the transport and transit services of neighboring countries for exporting and importing goods. Historically, the Abidjan (Cote d'Ivoire) -Ouagadougou - Bamako corridor was the main sea access corridor for Burkina Faso and an important corridor for Mali. The deteriorating security situation in Cote d'Ivoire for more than a decade had resulted in a shift in regional transit patterns, with transit trade from the two landlocked countries increasingly routed through other regional gateway ports, such as Tema port in Ghana. The transit cargo from Mali through Ghana increased by about 650 percent (from 38,000 to about 427,800 metric tons) and for Burkina Faso by 488 percent (from 78,000 to 428,000 metric tons), during 2001-2005. This increase, besides contributing to deterioration of roads in parts of the Corridor, had contributed to increasing port congestion in and around Tema. Movement of cargo along the corridor was characterized by high transports costs and transit times, due to a combination of factors, including poor condition of roads, incomplete implementation of regional transit arrangements and poor interconnectivity between the customs systems of the three countries. Given expectations at the appraisal stage that Tema would continue to remain a major access gateway in the coming years for Mali and Burkina Faso, the project objectives of improving access to Burkina Faso and Mali to the port and improving port facilities at Tema were highly relevant to the countries. The project objectives continue to be relevant to the government strategies of the three countries. At the appraisal stage, the third pillar of Mali's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) highlighted the need for improving transportation infrastructure and expanding domestic and international transport links. The first pillar of Burkina Faso's PRSP identified the need for upgrading and maintaining the priority road network. The first pillar of Ghana's PRSP highlighted the objective of improving private sector competitiveness. Burkina Faso's development strategy articulated in the Accelerated Growth and Sustainable Development Strategy for the 2011-2015 period had the objective of accelerating economic growth for sustained poverty reduction and creation of jobs. The new development strategy for Mali was yet to be prepared, since its post conflict focus had been on national reconciliation and peace consolidation. However, the government's short term Sustainable Recovery Development Plan for the 2013-2014 period identified the need for increasing food production through lowering transport costs. Of the seven pillars identified in Ghana's development plan for the 2010-2013 period (Ghana:Shared Growth and Development Agenda), the project objective was consistent with the pillar of increasing infrastructure spending for modernizing the existing main corridors linking major regional centers of the country with the capital and with neighboring countries. The project development objectives were relevant in the context of the Regional Transport Program of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). (ECOWAS was a regional institution of 15 countries in West Africa, including in addition to the three project countries, Benin, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo). This program highlighted the need for rehabilitating the missing sections of the existing deteriorated road corridors linking landlocked countries with West African ports. The project development objectives also supported the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) Action plan to improve transport and transit facilities along corridors serving landlocked countries. The project development objective was also consistent with the Almaty Action Program of the United Nations for landlocked countries. The development objectives continue to be relevant to the Bank strategy for the participating countries. While the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Burkina Faso (2006-2009) period highlighted the need for pursuing a long term vision based on regional economic integration for addressing the constraints associated with its landlocked location, the CAS for Mali (2008-2011) supported the development of basic road infrastructure for fostering regional economic integration and the CAS for Ghana (2008-2011) supported the creation of a stronger infrastructure asset base to achieve its development strategy. The current Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for Burkina Faso (2013-2016) highlighted the need for accelerating growth through creating value chains and improving access to transport. The Bank's Interim Strategy Note for Mali (2014-2015) identified the need for laying the foundations for long term accountability and stability. The CPS for Ghana ( 2013- 2016) highlighted the need for improving competitiveness and job creation through improved delivery of infrastructure services. The project objectives were relevant to the Bank's Regional Integration Assistance Strategy (RIAS 2001), continent wide RIAS endorsed by the Board in April 2008 and with the Bank's Africa Action Plan which supported regional integration and partnerships across Sub-Saharan Africa. Rating Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) High b. Relevance of Design The project development objectives were clear and the causal links between activities, components and outcomes were logical. And the intended outcomes were in principle, measurable. Component one activities such as rehabilitating key sections of the corridor, constructing rest stops and implementing road safety action plans, can be expected to improve the condition of the corridor, and this in turn can be expected to contribute to improving accessibility of Burkina Faso and Mali to the gateway port at Tema. Component two activities such as constructing a Satellite Transit Truck Village at Tema, rehabilitating the Faladie dry port, implementing interconnectivity of the national customs management systems and cargo tracking systems, and capacity building to the customs and transport authorities for monitoring transit traffic, can be expected to facilitate the efficient movement of transit traffic along the corridor. The combination of these activities can be expected to contribute to the higher level objective of corridor diversification strategies of Burkina Faso and Mali. • The design did not address the issue of symmetry of interests of the three participating countries and there were no activities aimed at sensitizing Ghana about the project's potential economic spinoffs (such as increase in port and transit revenue). While the project objective were important to the landlocked countries, Ghana did not perceive symmetrical benefits from the project and this in turn contributed to the weak ownership of the project by Ghana. Rating Substantial 4. Achievement of Objectives (Efficacy) PHREVISEDTBL Objective 1 Objective There were two objectives. (1) To improve access by Burkina Faso and Mali to ports in Ghana and port operations. (2) To facilitate the efficient movement of traffic along the corridor. Rationale Objective One. To improve access by Burkina Faso and Mali to the ports in Ghana and port operations. Substantial. Outputs. • 311 kilometers (Kms) of roads in key sections of the Corridor were rehabilitated as targeted (including 54 km in Burkina Faso, 103 km in Mali and 154 in Ghana). At project closure, about three-quarters of the roads in the Tema-Ouagadougou section of the Corridor were reported to be in good condition as targeted and 85 percent of the roads in the Bamako section of the Corridor were in good condition. This exceeded the target of 60 percent. • Two rest stops were constructed as targeted in Mali. The rest stops had been constructed at Burkina Faso but had not commenced operations at project closure. The construction of two rest stops and the truck transit yard was not complete at project closure. The ICR (page 13) notes that the construction of the Satellite Transit Truck Village (STTV) as envisaged required additional financing that the Government was not able to raise. Hence, it was decided to upgrade the existing truck transit yard adjacent to the port. • The HIV/AIDS action plan was implemented on their respective sections of the corridor by the three countries. • A road safety plan was designed and implemented by the countries, as targeted. Outcomes. Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) • Average transit time taken (for containerized cargo) from exit at Tema port to Burkina Faso reduced from seven days at the baseline to about five and half days at project closure, as targeted. • Average transit time from exit at Tema port to Bamako reduced from 15 days at the baseline to about five and half days at project closure. This exceeded the target of 12 days. • Variation in transit time from Tema port to Burkina Faso reduced from three days at the baseline to about two and half days at project closure, as targeted. • Variation in transit time from Tema port to Bamako reduced from six days at the baseline to three days at project closure. This exceeded the target of about four and half days. • Truck dwell time at the Tema port reduced from 48 hours at the baseline to 24 hours as targeted. While it is difficult to assess the extent to which this project contributed to the project development outcome given the complementary transport and transit facilitation activities in the corridor by other development partners, it is reasonable to conclude that the project activities contributed to improving the condition of the road corridor and thereby significantly contributed to improving accessibility from Burkina Faso and Bamako to the Tema port. Rating Substantial PHREVISEDTBL Objective 2 Objective Objective 2. To facilitate the efficient movement of traffic along the corridor. Rationale Objective 2. To facilitate the efficient movement of traffic along the corridor. Modest. Output • The number of fixed customs check points in Ghana reduced from six at the base line to five at project closure, as compared to the target of two and the number of fixed customs check points in Mali did not decrease but increased from four at the baseline to six at project closure. This was due to the non-completion of transit facilitation activities at closure. • Although the three countries had completed the activities associated with interconnection of the customs systems of the three countries, exchange of real time data between countries had not commenced at project closure. • A self-financing cargo tracking system was operational in the Ghana section of the corridor at project closure as targeted. Burkina Faso opted for a different system than Ghana and so the systems of the two countries are not compatible. The system for Mali was not operational at project closure. Outcome. • Border crossing time at Ghana/ Burkina Faso border posts reduced from five hours at the baseline to approximately an hour and a half at project closure. This exceeded the target of four hours. • Border crossing time on the Mali/Burking Faso did not decrease as targeted but increased from four hours at the baseline to about four and half hours at project closure, due to the non-completion of transit facilitation activities at project closure. A beneficiary survey was carried with the road users. The main conclusions of the survey are as follows. • Prior to the project, an average of 35 percent of the transport operators were able to travel from Tema to Burkina Faso within five days. After the project, over 90 percent of the transport operators could travel on this section of the corridor within two to five days. In the same way, while an average of about 65 percent of transport operators could move from Ouagadougou to Bamako within eight days, Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) after the project this had increased to 90 percent. • Annual average daily traffic of heavy trucks increased from 516 in 2011 to 685 in 2015, representing a 25 percent increase. The ICR provides no details on the methodology followed in administering the beneficiary survey (such as in terms of the number of beneficiaries who were surveyed). In the absence of the methodology, it is difficult to determine the robustness of the results of the survey. Given that most of the facilitation activities were not complete, it is reasonable to conclude that the project made a modest contribution to realizing the objective of facilitating efficient movement of traffic along the Corridor. Rating Modest 5. Efficiency Economic Analysis. An economic analysis was conducted for the road rehabilitation activities, at appraisal stage and at closure, using the Highway Design Model (HDM- 4). This component accounted for about 84 percent of the project cost. The benefits associated with road rehabilitation activities were assumed to come through savings in Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC's), savings in road maintenance costs and travel time savings. The ex post Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) at 12 percent discount rate was 12 percent for Burkina Faso, 13 percent for Ghana and 14 percent for Mali, as compared to the ex ante EIRR of 21 percent, 15 percent and 31 percent respectively for the three countries. The average ex post EIRR for the three countries was 13 percent as compared to the average ex ante EIRR of 22 percent. Traffic volumes along the corridor had grown faster than originally forecasted during the implementation period and while the increase in traffic increased time saving, the increase in traffic maintenance costs to levels that offset the incremental benefits and this resulted in reduction of project economic efficiency. An economic analysis was conducted at the appraisal stage for the economic benefits associated with facilitation measures. The benefits were assumed to come through the time savings due to simplified transit procedures in Ghana and Burkina Faso. The ex ante EIRR at 12 percent discount rate was 26 percent. Given that most of the transport facilitation activities was not complete at project closure, the economic analysis was not conducted at closure for the transit facilitation activities. Administrative and Operational Inefficiencies. Although the concept note had been cleared in 2003, the project was only approved four and a half years later in June 2008 because of implementation delays in the early years of the project.The delays were exacerbated by the effective suspension of project activities in the aftermath of the political crisis in Mali in 2012 and sociopolitical uprising in Burkina Faso in 2014, over which the Bank had no control. Despite the extension to the project closing date of over two years (27 months) some component One activities (such as commencement of rest stop operations in Burkina Faso and Ghana) and component two activities (facilitation activities) were either not complete or functional to date, due to delays in the implementation phase. Efficiency Rating Modest a. If available, enter the Economic Rate of Return (ERR) and/or Financial Rate of Return (FRR) at appraisal and the re-estimated value at evaluation: Rate Available? Point value (%) *Coverage/Scope (%) 83.00 Appraisal  23.00 Not Applicable 84.00 ICR Estimate  13.00 Not Applicable * Refers to percent of total project cost for which ERR/FRR was calculated. Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) 6. Outcome Relevance of Objective was rated as High and design was rated as Substantial. Efficacy of the dominant objective - to improve access to Burkina Faso and Mali to Tema port - was rated as Substantial. Efficacy of the second objective - to facilitate efficient movement of traffic along the corridor - was rated as Modest. Efficiency was rated as Modest. There were administrative and operational inefficiencies and despite the extension to the project closing date, some activities have to date not been completed. a. Outcome Rating Moderately Satisfactory 7. Rationale for Risk to Development Outcome Rating Government Commitment. There is a modest risk to ongoing benefits from this project, since it is not clear if sufficient funding would be provided for maintenance of the rehabilitated road assets, rest stop facilities or the customs modernization equipment in the three countries. This is particularly so, given that none of the participating countries had made a clear commitment towards allocating funding for maintenance of the assets. The team clarified that since the remote rest stop facilities and the Satellite Truck Transit Village (STTV) as part of the customs modernization equipment are operated by a private operator, the operator has the incentive to adequately provide for maintenance of these facilities for financial considerations. And since the rehabilitated road sections were part of a major transit corridor in West Africa and crucial to the land locked countries of Mali and Burkina Faso and a key source of transit income for Ghana, providing for maintenance of these rehabilitated roads would be a priority for the respective countries. Technical Risk. Given that Burkina Faso opted for a different tracking technology than Ghana, there is significant risk that the use of different technologies could obstruct the smooth working of the system through the length of the corridor. Political Risk. Given that both Burkina Faso and Mali had experienced political and social unrest in recent years, future breakups of unrest could disrupt movement of traffic along the corridor. a. Risk to Development Outcome Rating Modest 8. Assessment of Bank Performance a. Quality-at-Entry The project design was based on the lessons from prior Bank financed regional projects both in Sub-Saharan Africa (East Africa Trade and Transport Facilitation Project) and (Economic Community of Central African States (CEMAC) Transit and Trade Facilitation Project) and in other regions of the world (Trade and Transport Facilitation project in South Europe) and Greater Mekong Area Regional Integration Program in East Asia. Several risks were identified and mitigation measures were adopted and the overall risk of the project was rated as Moderate. At appraisal, appropriate arrangements were made for M&E (discussed in section 10) and compliance with safeguards and fiduciary (financial management and procurement) aspects (discussed in section 11). The project design underestimated the issues associated with the following issues. • Symmetry of countries' interests in multi-country operations. An evaluation of multi country operations by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG), " An Evaluation of World Bank Support of Multi-Country operations." published in December 19, 2006, noted that multi country programs/projects that addressed symmetry of countries' interests were generally more successful than projects that did not address these issues. In the case of this project, while access to the gateway port in Ghana was important to the landlocked countries and the governments of these countries were committed to the project, the same level of ownership was not demonstrated by Ghana, being a coastal country and not much dependent on the corridor. Enough provisions were not made to sensitize Ghana to the potential benefits that could accrue to the coastal countries from providing transit arrangements (such as transit revenue). Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) • The linguistic and institutional disparities between participating countries. A more homogenous set of participating countries would have helped for testing the feasibility of a pilot project which entailed regional facilitation activities (such as the interconnection of custom systems and exchange of information, the corridor tracking system and harmonized transit procedures and documents). These activities required extensive coordination and coordinated action among the three countries, for which language proved to be a barrier. • The combination of project activities which entailed both road rehabilitation component and transit facilitation component. While the former set of activities could be executed with a shorter implementation span, the latter activities were both politically (security threat) and financially sensitive (customs revenue accounting for a major part of fiscal revenue in developing countries), and hence required longer implementation time frames. This contributed to the implementation delays, extension of project closing date and even with the extended closing date, non completion of facilitation activities at project closure. Quality-at-Entry Rating Moderately Satisfactory b. Quality of supervision The supervision missions (17 over a eight year span) were as per the norm (twice a year). The missions were thorough and candid in reporting implementation progress and the supervision team was responsive in providing help and advice as and when requested and in closely monitoring progress. There was compliance with social safeguards and fiduciary issues (discussed in section 11). Quality of Supervision Rating Satisfactory Overall Bank Performance Rating Moderately Satisfactory 9. Assessment of Borrower Performance a. Government Performance Although the three participating countries demonstrated high project ownership and commitment at the preparation stage, the commitment to facilitation activities where political commitment was most needed was mixed across countries during the implementation phase. Both Burkina Faso and Mali complied with the loan covenants. In the case of Burkina Faso, although road rehabilitation was completed with a one year delay by mid 2013 due to the late mobilization of the contractor on site, the government enforced contractual delay penalty toward the end of the contract original closing date and this proved effective in improving the contractor's performance and in expediting the works implementation (ICR, page 12). Despite the unrest in Mali that delayed project activities, Mali was able to implement the activities in the latter years of the project and their contribution by way of counterpart funding was more than planned. In the case of Ghana, release of counterpart funding was a cause for delays in implementing project activities and their contribution was less than planned at the appraisal stage. Government Performance Rating Moderately Satisfactory b. Implementing Agency Performance The project was implemented by a regional agency and by the participating countries. At the regional level, the Department of Community Territorial Development, Information, Transport and Telecommunications of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) and a joint technical committee made up of the implementing agencies of the participating countries was in overall charge of project coordination. At the national level, the project activities were implemented by a Project Coordination Unit in the case of Burkina Faso and Mali and by existing government structures in the Ministry of Transport in Ghana. The ICR claims there was compliance with fiduciary and safeguards policies by the participating countries (discussed in section 11). Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) Implementing Agency Performance Rating Moderately Satisfactory Overall Borrower Performance Rating Moderately Satisfactory 10. M&E Design, Implementation, & Utilization a. M&E Design The two key M&E outcome indicators (the average transit time and the variance in transit time for containerized imports from exit at the Tema port to final distribution centers in Ouagadougou and Bamako) and the five intermediate indicators (percentage of roads in the corridor good condition, number of fixed customs checkpoints (excluding at borders) in the Ghanaian and Malian sections of the corridor, border crossing time, truck tracking system operating over the entire length of the corridor and truck dwell time at the Satellite Transit Truck Village (STTV) in Tema, were appropriate (dwell time refers to the time cargo spends within the port, before it is loaded onto the ships in the case of exports from landlocked countries or released for onward movement to final destinations in landlocked countries in the case of imports). b. M&E Implementation The monitoring of the project was done at the regional level by WAMEU and at the national level by the participating countries. Data collection for the monitoring indicators relied on robust sources such as the data collected by customs and Ghana Ports and Harbors Authority (GPHA) for the port and border transit data, the three countries' roads and highway authorities for traffic data, road surveys for road conditions, the police patrol for accident and fatalities data, data from the three countries' Ministry of Transport, USAID's West Africa Transit Hub for transit time, ECOWAS and WAMEU transport office and freight forwarders associations for the user surveys. c. M&E Utilization The indicators were mainly project specific. The ICR (page 17) notes that since M&E was funded through project resources and hence it is unclear if the recipient countries will continue to use it beyond the project closure date. M&E Quality Rating Substantial 11. Other Issues a. Safeguards The project was classified as a Category B project for environmental purposes. Two safeguard policies were triggered: (i) Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01). (ii) Involuntary Resettlement ()P/BP 4.12). At the appraisal stage, Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) were conducted and Environmental and Social Management Frameworks (ESMF) and Resettlement Action Plans were prepared and publicly disclosed, by the participating countries, as required (PAD, pages 25-26). The ICR (page 18) notes that there was compliance with the safeguards at project closure, albeit with delays in the case of Burkina Faso. In the case of Mali resettlements were made for seven households and compensations in all countries were made by counterpart funding. Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) b. Fiduciary Compliance The implementing agencies in the three countries had executed prior Bank financed projects and were familiar with the Bank's procurement and financial management policies and procedures. (PAD, page 23) . At the preparation stage, an assessment of the financial management capabilities of the implementing agencies was made and these were deemed to be satisfactory. The ICR (page 18) reports that there were no major fiduciary issues during the project execution phase. The ICR however provides no details on financial audits and procurement aspects during the project implementation phase. c. Unintended impacts (Positive or Negative) --- d. Other --- 12. Ratings Reason for Ratings ICR IEG Disagreements/Comment Outcome Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory --- Risk to Development Outcome Modest Modest --- There were shortcomings at Bank Performance Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Quality of Entry. Borrower Performance Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory --- Quality of ICR Substantial --- Note When insufficient information is provided by the Bank for IEG to arrive at a clear rating, IEG will downgrade the relevant ratings as warranted beginning July 1, 2006. The "Reason for Disagreement/Comments" column could cross-reference other sections of the ICR Review, as appropriate. 13. Lessons The ICR draws the following main lessons from the experience of implementing this project. (1). Careful design of regional projects is required to avoid a disconnect between the hard infrastructure components (road rehabilitation) and soft infrastructure (facilitation components). While a shorter implementation time span might suffice for the former set of activities, longer time span might be required to allow for the implementation of latter set of activities which entail behavioral and work practice change. (2) The design of regional project needs to take into account the symmetry of countries' interests for getting the commitment of countries. (3) The design should include provisions for maintenance of the assets created by the project. in the case of this project, the maintenance of the constructed physical assets was not part of the project scope. Given this, it is not clear if sufficient resources would be provided for sustainability of the development outcome. 14. Assessment Recommended? No Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review 3A-W Africa Transp. & Transit Facilitat (P079749) 15. Comments on Quality of ICR The ICR is concise and provides a candid description of the problems encountered while implementing this project. The ICR does not discuss auditing or procurement issues. The ICR could have provided more details on the methodology followed in administering the beneficiary survey and why an Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan was used for Burkina Faso. a. Quality of ICR Rating Substantial