Sunteți pe pagina 1din 30

South Sudan

South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project

Supervision report

Main report and appendices

Mission Dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013


Document Date: 12-Apr 2014
Project No. 1453
Report No: 3388-SS

East and Southern Africa Division


Programme Management Department
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Contents
Abbreviations and acronyms iii
A. Introduction 1
B. Overall assessment of SSLDP implementation 2
C. Outputs and outcomes 3
D. SSLDP implementation progress 6
E. Fiduciary aspects 8
F. Sustainability 9
G. Conclusion 10

List of Figures

List of Tables
Table 1: 2013 Budget Execution Review 30 September 2013 8

i
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Appendices

Appendix 1: Summary of project status and ratings 11


Appendix 2: Updated logical framework: Progress against objectives, outcomes and outputs 13
Appendix 3: Summary of key actions to be taken within agreed timeframes 15
Appendix 4: Physical progress measured against AWP&B, including RIMS indicators 17
Appendix 5: Financial: Actual financial performance by financier; by component and
disbursements by category 19
Appendix 6: Compliance with legal covenants: Status of implementation 21
Appendix 7: Knowledge management: Learning and Innovation 23

ii
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Abbreviations and acronyms

AWPB Annual Work Plan and Budget


BDC Boma Development Committee
BoQ Bill of Quantities
CCU County Coordination Until
EKN Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands
GORSS Government of the Republic of South Sudan
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IG Interest Group
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoAFTARFCRD Ministries of Agriculture, Forestry, Tourism, Animal Resources, Fisheries,
Cooperatives and Rural Development
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
MRB Ministries of Roads and Bridges
MTR Mid Term Review
MWRI Ministries of Water Resources and Irrigation
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
PMU Project Management Unit
SP Service Provider
SSLDP South Sudan Livelihoods development Project
ToR Terms of Reference
WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene
WFP World Food Programme

iii
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

A. Introduction
1. The Government of the Republic of South Sudan and The International Fund for Agricultural
1
Development (IFAD) fielded a Mission to the Republic of South Sudan during the period 20
October to 2 November 2013 to supervise and, where required, provide implementation support
to the South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project (SSLDP).The main objectives of the
supervision mission were to review: (i) Status of implementation against expected outputs and
2013/2014 Annual Work plan and Budget; (ii) Status of execution of actions agreed during the
Midterm Review; (iii) Procurement and contract management processes; (iv) Effectiveness of
programme coordination; and (iv) Development results to date and sustainability.
2. The Mission held discussions with the Ministries of Agriculture, Forestry, Tourism, Animal
Resources, Fisheries, Cooperatives and Rural Development (MoAFTARFCRD), Roads and
Bridges (MRB), Water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI). Discussions were also held with the
Project Management Unit, the County Coordination Units, and with the NGO Service Providers
to discuss issues related to the Project’s implementation progress, including any constraints
encountered. In 7 days, the Mission visited selected project sites in the 5 counties to interact
with the target groups and assess benefits to them. Places visited included Terekeka, Juba,
Bor, Lafon/Lopa and Magwi counties; where interest groups in the two payams at each of the
counties were visited and round-up meetings were held in the concerned counties. The purpose
of the round-up meetings was to present and validate the Mission’s observations, conclusions
and recommendations at County level.
3. A wrap-up meeting was held on the 1 November 2013 in Juba under the chairmanship of the
Hon. Lily Albino Akol Akol, Deputy Minister of MAFTARFCRD, and attended by
undersecretaries and representatives of the relevant government ministries and the
implementing units. The meeting discussed the Mission’s findings, conclusions and
recommendations as contained in the draft Aide Memoire.
4. The project financing agreement was signed on 5 February 2009 with an implementation
period of 6 years. The mid-term review of the project took place in August-September 2012.
The total project cost is USD 26.5 million with the GRoSS contribution of USD 2.8 million
(10.9%), beneficiaries USD 0.6 million (2.1%), Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands grant of
USD 9.0 million (34.8%) and an IFAD grant of USD 13.9 million (52.2%). The IFAD DSF 8022-
SS grant was declared effective on 5 February 2009 and is scheduled to be completed on 31
March 2015 and closed on 30 September 2015. The Netherlands C-NL-8022-SD grant was
effective on 16 July 2009 and is to be completed on 31 December 2014
5. The main objective of the project is to increase food security and income through improved
agricultural productivities and marketing and reduce natural resources based conflict in the
targeted counties. The main outputs of the Project are: (i) communities in the targeted counties
are organized and empowered with equal participation of women and vulnerable people; (ii) the
micro projects undertaken by community interest groups increase farm and off-farm production
and sales; (iii) the poor and vulnerable groups are the primary beneficiaries of the project; (iv)
the communities have improved access to markets through improved roads, water and other
enabling services to increase food security and incomes; (v) County Offices are capacitated to
assume their supervision/regulatory, planning and budgeting role.

1
Mission composition: The Mission was led by Robson Mutandi, Country Director, ESA, and assisted by Ms Hanneke
Vermeulen, Associate Professional Officer, ESA. The following were the other team members: Ben Onyango, Management
and Institutions Specialist, Guy Augustin Kemtsop, Rural Engineer, Guido Laurens Rutten, Water Management Specialist,
PTA, Rudolf Fombad, Livestock Development and Value Chains Specialist, Hirago Feleke Wago Agribusiness, Marketing
and Value Chains Specialist, Felistas Chikaura Gender, Targeting and Community Development specialist, Fabrizio
Vivarini, Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist, Celie Lovene Manuel, , Associate Professional Officer, ESA Godfrey Wanjobi,
Financial Management Specialist, Ann Turinayo, Knowledge Management Specialist, Wairimu Mburathi, Communications
Specialist.

1
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

B. Overall assessment of SSLDP implementation


6. The project is now in its fifth implementation year and it should be noted that the delay in
establishing a SSLDP results-based monitoring and evaluation system, the lack of a project
baseline study and the absence of clear annual targets at county level is making it difficult to
track annual and cumulative progress. The PMU is making efforts to track progress in an
unstructured manner. The mission noted that the project is lagging behind project targets
agreed to at MTR. However the project is showing positive progress, especially in Bor.

7. Likelihood of achieving project objectives. Project effectiveness against its 5 development


objectives is summarized in the table below and is assessed as moderately satisfactory.

SSLDP Objectives Rating* Observations


1. Communities in the targeted MS Although in all groups participation of women, men and youth
counties are organized and has been observed, the groups are at different development. In
empowered with equal participation of Bor facilitated groups are self-organised and have been
women and vulnerable people economically empowered.
2. The micro projects undertaken by MS There is strong evidence in terms of savings In bank accounts
community interest groups increase that incomes for fisheries groups have increased. Farming and
farm and off-farm production and vegetables groups in same areas (Bor, Magwi) achieved surplus
sales production but other groups were affected by natural hazards
(droughts and floods) and insecurity.
3. The poor and vulnerable groups are S The project is targeting the poor counties and all women, youths
the primary beneficiaries of the project and men as direct beneficiaries are poor and vulnerable
4. The communities has improved MUS No road has been finalized so far so there is no evidence of
access to markets through improved improved market access. The provision of boreholes has a poor
roads, water and other enabling overlap with the locations were other services are provided
services to increase food security and (partly due to insecurity). These are therefore not reinforcing
incomes although there is evidence of increased income. There is
evidence of increased food production.
5. County Offices are capacitated to MUS Most offices have been built but only few are assuming their
assume their supervision/regulatory, supervision/regulatory planning and budgeting role.
planning and budgeting role
*MS: Moderately Satisfactory, S:Satisfactory; MUS: Moderately UnSatisfactory

8. Community Development Component. This component focuses on social mobilization and


community empowerment. The entry point is to support, enhance and stimulate economic
activities through micro projects undertaken by community interest groups to increase farm and
off-farm production and sales, identify as well as mainstream the poor and vulnerable in social
and economic development activities with emphasis on women, youth and the vulnerable.
9. A total of 136 Interest Groups (IGs) have been established and are benefitting from micro
projects. This number represents 27% achievement of the planned 500 IGs. This component is
therefore rated as moderately unsatisfactory. It is recommended that to increase outreach, the
PMU should discuss with the NGO service providers the assimilation capacity of supporting
additional IGs and micro projects. In addition the resources previously allocated for Pibor will be
transferred to Bor County.
10. The Rural infrastructure and marketing facilities component. This component addresses
poverty by promoting and strengthening access to local markets for community products, goods
and services. It was planned to enhance the targeted counties’ capacities to plan, budget and
supervise the sustainable implementation of economic infrastructure and improve community
access to potable water for human and domestic animal uses.
11. A total of 56 km of road (Captain Cook Road) have been rehabilitated (spot improvement) out of
248 km in the Project design document. Only 10% of the 52 Km road (Terekeka Moni Tombek)
has been achieved from the 136 km targeted at MTR. The construction of 3 offices (out of 6)
and 9 residential buildings (out of 18) is totally completed and occupied by the CCU staffs. For
technical assistance/support to the Project, 3 Supervision Contracts/Agreements have been
signed with two ministries (roads and bridges and housing). 17 boreholes have been
successfully drilled and handed over to the communities since MTR, giving a total of 39 water
points completed. Unfortunately some of the boreholes visited have limited functionality.

2
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Training of water user committees in management of infrastructure has been carried out for 29
committees (57%), but the contents and duration of this training are not uniform amongst
contractors. The achievements are far below targets and therefore the component is rated
moderately unsatisfactory.
12. Project management and coordination component. This component aims at facilitating
project implementation through establishing a structure with a high level of autonomy that will
rapidly and effectively channel support to communities and government partners. The mission
commends the PMU for having followed up on most past missions recommendations.
Nevertheless, the disbursement level remains critically low and there is a wide gap between
achievements and targets. Therefore the component is rated moderately unsatisfactory. The
mission therefore recommends the project to prepare an addendum to the current AWPB and
subsequently submit a reallocation request (i) to accommodate the measures to increase
targets; (ii) to include the construction of bridges to significantly increase small farmers’ access
to the market in Kajo Keji from Juba; (iii) to competitively recruit a field officer that will support
PMU and implementing partners in planning and monitoring the project activities until the end of
the project closure. Particular attention of the field officer will be provided to Juba County as
they had a late kick off. IFAD will provide additional technical assistance to closely follow the
implementation of the road constructions and backstopping on M&E.
Agreed action Responsibility Agreed date
1. Submit addendum to current AWPB and PMU 15 November 2013
submit request for reallocation to
accommodate increased nr of targeted groups
(Bor) and the additional road (Juba- Kajo Keji)
2. Competitive recruitment of field officer to PMU with IFAD support for ToR 31 December 2013
support counties with planning
and monitoring of project activities

C. Outputs and outcomes


13. Community Development Component. The number of Interest Groups to date is 136 out of
500 MTR target (27% achievement). This achievement is considered moderately unsatisfactory.
Nevertheless the mission is of the opinion that in the last phase of the project additional
resources should be made available to close the wide gap between current outreach and
targets.
14. There was evidence of mobilised groups in all the visited counties. However the groups are at
different stages of development. There is evidence of increased production in several Interest
Groups. The achieved yields are helping households close the hunger gap and achieve food
surpluses. On the other hand several groups are still struggling with droughts, floods and pests
infestation inhibiting increased yields.
15. Subcomponent 1.1. Community Capacity Building. The mission noted discrepancy among the
service providers in backstopping the BDCs, training of IGs and monitoring the performance of
BDCs and IGs. In Terekeka IGs were visited by the service provider on average once a month.
In Bor County the service provider holds monthly meetings with BDCs as a platform to share
knowledge, introduce innovations and monitor activities and outcome of the respective IGs.
16. Subcomponent 1.2. Support to Micro-Projects. The mission observed variation in approach
among service providers under this subcomponent: varying from more relief oriented activities
like seeds and tools distribution and introduction of exotic breeds to more sustainable
interventions and adapted to suit the local practices and environment.
17. The mission generally noted a poor integration of crop and livestock systems at farm level. This
includes the use of supplementary feeding through crop residues and organic fertilizers like
manure. This however involves coordination and sensitization efforts to overcome cultural

3
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

barriers. In addition the project is giving limited attention to animal production and nutrition,
while the mission is of the opinion that supplementary feeding can have a considerable impact.
18. Subcomponent 1.3. Service Delivery The three competitively selected NGO service providers
are fulfilling their role to (i) backstop the BDC, (ii) train the interest groups on technical and
managerial skills, and (iii) monitor the performance of the BDC and interest groups.
19. Subcomponent 1.4. Establishment of Conflict Resolution Platform. Based on MTR
recommendation, this subcomponent was transferred from component 2 to component 1.
Efforts in this regard have been undertaken by service providers but they are not yielding yet.
Conflict resolution is for example addressed as a cross cutting issue during trainings. There are
also innovative ideas about language courses so that tribes can learn languages of other tribes
to increase understanding among communities.
20. The Rural infrastructure and marketing facilities component. All recommendations made
by the last MTR mission in relation with road infrastructures and building activities have been
implemented. However, the Project has not substantially achieved its targets set by the on-
going AWPB.
Subcomponent 2.1: Water Facilities, Roads and Marketing Facilities development
21. Water facilities. The project envisages the construction or rehabilitation of 55 water points (51
boreholes and 4 hafirs; 11 points per county) to increase access to improved water sources,
reducing the burden of fetching potable water, especially on women. 17 boreholes have been
successfully drilled and handed over to the communities since MTR, giving a total of 39 water
points completed. In Terekeka and Magwi counties all 11 boreholes have been completed. For
both Lafon-Lopa and Juba counties, 5 boreholes have been successfully drilled with the
remaining 6 for each county to be finished before June 2014. In Bor county, 7 boreholes have
been drilled while rehabilitation of 4 hafirs is pending further technical assessment of required
works, which has been delayed due to security concerns in the region.
22. Training and sensitization of communities on their ownership of the water infrastructure, and
strengthening county officials in their role on this, remains a challenge. Training of water user
committees in management of infrastructure has been carried out for 29 committees (57% of
revised appraisal target), but the contents and duration of this training are not uniform amongst
contractors and focus on technical management, with too little attention given to social and
financial management. Recommended linkage with project components on community
development has not yet materialized. The Mission has also noted that some of the boreholes
visited have limited functionality resulting from low yields and/or too heavy pump action.
23. It is recommended that the project continues to strengthen capacity for technical, social and
financial management of water points at county and community level. Specifically, while
recognizing that the completed boreholes have already been handed over to the communities,
the Mission recommends to initiate a collaborative assessment at county level of all completed
sites and to follow up on boreholes with limited functionality, committees lacking capacity and
the linkage of water user committees with BDCs. If required and feasible, the project would fund
additional technical works and/or training. Furthermore, it is recommended that the project
establishes a partnership with the WASH cluster group for mainstreaming both the contents of
water user committee training and the approach to spare parts provision, and to ensure
sustainability and continuity after project completion. In addition, the mission suggested the
registration of water points in the national water information system.
24. Road infrastructures. Of the three roads (136km) targeted by the MTR for rehabilitation,
construction works are on-going only for the Terekeka – Muni –Tombek road (52,2km), with a
less than 10% level of physical implementation. An overall assessment of administrative and
technical management aspects of the contract was done, with a conclusion that the contract

2
The Captain Cook road (56km) was rehabilitated in 2012 on its phase 1. Works to be carried out during this 2nd phase should
contribute to strengthen effort made during the previous phase 1.

4
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

doesn’t meet the acceptable requirements of rules of the art. After meeting the contractor and
discussing with the Project, it was agreed to subcontract remaining activities to a company
designated by the Project. That one should meet a minimum of capacity required to complete
the work (cf technical paper). An MoU was signed with WFP for the rehabilitation (spot
improvement) of the Terekeka junction – Tendere road (28km), the formation/training of road
maintenance committees and the maintenance of the rehabilitated road during 6 months.
Designs and BOQs are being finalised, after which the bidding process will start. The bidding
nd
process for the 2 phase of Captain Cook road rehabilitation is at its final stage, and a qualified
company (cf technical paper for more details) will be awarded the contract.
25. Actual funds availed for each of these rehabilitation works will not be enough to meet the quality
of work expected by technical standards set in the BOQs, hence additional funds (20 to 50%
more for each) will be required. Reasons for this include among others: additional damages
since initial road assessment was done, difficult access to sites, etc. . In order to facilitate and
accelerate the implementation of all planned roads within the remaining short lifespan of the
project, the mission has spelled out requirements and measures (including activities schedule)
to which the project should strictly abide. Only upcoming dry season is available to
constructions works. Therefore completion of the works can only be achieved in case of early
start (latest December). IFAD will provide the project with additional technical assistance during
the coming year.
26. Buildings. Construction works of Project staff buildings (offices, residential, sanitation facilities
and iron grilled fences) are on-going at all county levels, except for Pibor County where
insecurity is a serious matter. Physical implementation levels are 40% and around 90% for Juba
and Lofan/Lopa respectively. It is expected the buildings be occupied by the Project staff in few
months ahead. Some of the locations (Juba and Bor) have been chosen far from other
government offices and far from facilities. The mission is concerned about the future utilization
of these buildings and further consultations between the PMU and the ministry to take place to
resolve this issue.
27. Partnership with technical ministries. As recommended by the MTR, the Project has committed
staff of technical ministries (2 with Engineers of the ministry of housing and 1 with another of
the ministry in charge of road and bridges) at county level for on-site technical support during
construction works. This was done through signed result-based Supervision Agreement
Contracts. Based on an assessment of this performance-based collaboration, there are
concerns regarding the performance of the Engineer in Terekeka County and close supervision
from the PMU should be provided and corrective measures to be implemented.
28. Subcomponent 2.2: Establishment of County Coordination Units. The performance of the CCUs
varies among the counties but their role mainly consists of monitoring progress and
coordinating activities (Terekeka County). A first step in the right direction was made with the
participatory development of current AWPB although remaining implementation period is short
to make this institution autonomous and fully take all the responsibilities as originally envisaged.
The mission is concerned about the performance of some of the CCUs. The PMU should
address this issue urgently.
Subcomponent 2.3: County Capacity Development. Despite investments and training to
facilitate the County Offices, there is little evidence of synergies between County and Project
activities.

5
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Agreed action Responsibility Agreed date


3. Carry out collaborative assessment of completed PMU Engineer May 2014
sites with CCU, county WASH responsible(s) and
water user committees; and follow up on repairs and
additional training where required and feasible.
4. Establish partnership with WASH cluster group to PMU Coordinator Nov 2013
streamline water user committee training and
approach to spare parts provision, and to register
boreholes in national water information system
5. Subcontract the residual works of the Terekeka – PMU, Contractor November 2013
Muni – Tombek to a well-known and competent
company
6. Start all road rehabilitation works in due time at the PMU, contractor December 2013
beginning of next dry season

D. SSLDP implementation progress


29. Project Management. During the field visit, the Mission was very pleased to meet and interact
with skilled and motivated young people, who are currently engaged as community facilitators;
they represent an important resource for project implementation at large and, specifically, for
the monitoring of the group activities. However the mission also noted that communication and
funds flow along the PMU/CCU/NGO SP and vice versa are not smooth and are a reason for
delay in project activities. Furthermore, the mission further noted that National and State Project
steering committee meetings planned had not been carried out which affected critical project
policy decisions. The project also noted that there has been little exchange between the
different counties although this has recently started to change. This is needed as in different
counties there are good practices in different aspect of the project that can be easily replicated.
Overall project Management is considered moderately unsatisfactory.
30. The Mission is concerned about the current staffing capacity of Service Providers in some
payams (i.e. Magwi and Lafon/Lopa) where one field facilitator is employed to cover the
functions of technical support to groups (farming, livestock and fishery) and
monitoring/reporting of program implementation. This arrangement might not be adequate to
ensure a continuous program monitoring, especially in the context of a possible (or planned)
scaling up of program activities. In Terekeka however there was evidence of monthly or bi-
monthly coordination meetings between CCU, service providers and the various desk officers.
31. The mission noted that service providers are not aware of project planned targets and there
seems to be no clarity on county targets. It is therefore recommended to set targets in a
participatory way and then all service providers should be kept accountable for delivering based
on these targets. On the other hand the PMU should avail the necessary resources and create
and enabling environment to ensure flow of funds.
32. Monitoring and Evaluation. The performance of the monitoring and evaluation functions is
rated “Moderately Unsatisfactory”. Although several MTR recommendations were followed, the
project is still not able to report on desired outcome and income indicators. Most importantly,
the project reporting system currently does not link physical and financial progress.
Nevertheless, at county level the mission observed examples of good data collection and
analysis (Bor county).
33. The Mission noted that the M&E system currently in use captures only partly relevant
indicators. Though service providers are following the suggested reporting format, a lack of
training in this format results in inconsistent progress updates and inaccurate assessment of
achievements compared to appraisal targets. As a consequence, the Mission has not been able
to confirm most of the results of the last RIMS report (June 2013) due to the lack of adequate
supporting documentation at the PMU.
34. During field visits to the project area the Mission noted that results of relevant outcome
indicators would not be difficult to capture from beneficiaries or the community-based field

6
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

facilitators through rapid assessment exercises in the field. As part of the M&E strengthening
actions, the Mission proposed training, introduction of data collection tools and reporting
templates that are standardized across the different levels of the reporting chain from
community facilitators to Service Providers and CCU/PMU. After validation and adaptation with
implementing partners, these templates will support the PMU and CCU in analysing the data
and feed into planning and/or decision making.
35. Coherence between AWPB and project implementation. A detailed AWPB for the period
January 2013 to June 2014 was prepared through means of participatory planning
methodology. The implementation of the project however is still lying behind compared to the
targets of the AWPB. In addition, there is still lack of clarity about the targets and budget
allocations. Therefore the coherence between AWPB and project implementation has been
rated as moderately unsatisfactory. IFAD has committed to support the project to further
improve the AWPB to (i) include a physical progress table with appraisal targets, current AWP
achievement, cumulative achievements and comments section; (ii) to bring the project
achievements closer to the project targets; and (iii) set clear targets for all implementing
partners.
36. Targeting approach. This project’s focus is to reach out to the poor and vulnerable in social
and economic development activities with more emphasis on women, youth and the vulnerable
internally displaced people (IDP). The project must be commended in that it is working well with
all men, women and youths. In Bor the membership of new agriculture groups was open since
there is a motivation to generally increase the areas cultivated. The selection of 44 interest
groups in Terekeka was not clear and the mission could not verify the criteria that were used for
selection. All the two fishery groups visited seemed to have closed membership. The targeting
approach is rated moderately satisfactory.
37. Gender focus. The mission noted that women (including-the widows, female headed
households), men and youths are all well represented in community groups and freely express
their needs. In Bor, women have been empowered through benefiting from Adult literacy
representing 63% of the participants. It is difficult to accurately assess the number of women
holding leadership positions due to lack of uniform reporting across counties. However, the
mission estimates from four counties that female participation in group leadership is as follows:
Terekeka 22%, Magwi: 65%, Lafon/Lopa: 30%, Bor 50%. In this last county it was noted that
women in leadership position in BDCs went up from 0% to 28%.
38. Innovation and learning. Some key innovations include the way implementing partners have
proactively been linking farmers to markets. In Magwi, groups that had a good harvest were
linked to those groups which wanted to buy the produce and thus obtain a good price. Some of
the groups have been supported to register as cooperatives, and others are evolving to provide
savings and credit services to their members. In Bor, CHF has created several dynamic
partnerships with several ministries and other NGOs. They have also used FAO manuals to
establish farmer field schools and introduce fish drying ovens (that enable the fish to be dried
even in the long rainy season).
39. Knowledge Management. The mission noted that the PMU has been investing considerable
efforts into writing reports but so far these have not been shared with stakeholders The mission
recommends storing all reports on a dedicated computer or external drive to serve as backup of
all key documents, and as a central place where documents can easily be accessed for internal
and external use. It is also suggested to assign a focal point within the project in charge of
knowledge management and communication that manages the filing and has an overview of
available documents.
40. Communications. The PMU has made an effort to create communications materials since the
mid-term review in 2012, such as handouts, picture brochures, t-shirts and radio spot
messages for mobilizing interest groups and information sharing. The mission recommends
more emphasis to be put on improving the quality and variety of information materials.

7
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

41. Integrating KM/Comm in the AWPBs and Reports. The mission has worked with the PMU to
highlight key Knowledge Management (KM) and Communications activities to be explicitly
included in the AWPB for easy follow up during implementation of the work plan. .
Agreed action Responsibility Agreed date
7. The M&E system should be further developed in a PMU with substantial technical February 2014
participatory way to feed into project management assistance
8. Addendum to AWPB to include activities and budget PMU with IFAD support 15 November 2013
to produce a number of knowledge product
especially in view of the end the project

E. Fiduciary aspects
42. Financial Management. Overall, the performance of the project financial management is rated
“Moderately Satisfactory”. The Mission found that the current system in place at the PMU and
CCU ensures an adequate financial management of the project. The Mission did not find issues
of serious concern with regard to internal control systems, capacities at project implementation
levels to carry out FMS functions, and spot checks of expenditures presented in the SoE did not
disclose ineligible expenditures. The audit report for the last financial year is unqualified and no
serious contravention of the loan covenants was identified. However, the Mission is very
concerned about the low fund absorption capacity of the project both at PMU/CCUs and
Service Providers which is considered unsatisfactory at this stage of project implementation.
43. The Mission noted that SoEs are not prepared timely by the PMU for replenishment of the
project SA. In this regard, the Mission recommends the following actions should be taken
immediately at the PMU level: a) Preparation and submission of WA’s for replenishment should
be carried out immediately upon reaching the minimum threshold of 30% of the USD 1.5 million
SPA allocation or USD 450,000; b) The reconciliation of the Special Account should be
prepared at the end of each month (as opposed to only for support of WA submission).
44. The Mission also recommends that the PMU should prepare quarterly budgetary review report
on all activities implemented during the quarter ended with comparison between actual costs
and budgetary provisions and explanation of any significant variances.
45. 2013 Budget Performance and Execution. The AWPB has been aligned with the Government
financial year (July to June). For the period under review, the project has developed an AWPB
of 18 months from January 2013 to June 2014. During the 9 months implementation period to
30 September 2013 the project fund absorption has been below the approved budgetary
provisions. The total amount of expenditures as at 30 September 2013 was USD 2,822,640
which accounts for 22% of the 18 months budget. However, the project has raised
commitments of USD 5,945,600 mostly under civil works cost category (contract with WFP and
road rehabilitation in Terekeka). This raised the total amount of expenditures and committed
amount to 69.9% of the 18 months budget.
Table 1: 2013 Budget Execution Review 30 September 2013

Budget
Budget
18 months 9 months Execution
Execution
Total including
commitments
In USD
Categories Budget Actual % %
I Civil Work 6,910,057 934,872 14% 87.6%
II Vehicle, Equipment & Others 639,550 89,126 14% 58.6%
III Studies and Training 1,541,837 313,430 20% 20%
IV Contractual Services (NGO) 1,386,249 462,035 33% 72.6%
Grants and Beneficiaries
V Contribution 803,333 349,985 44% 44%
VI Recurrent Costs: 1,266,593 673,191 53% 53%

8
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

Grant Total 12,547,619 2,822,640 22% 69.9%

46. SoEs Spot checks: The mission carried out tests for eligibility for 17 SOEs items supporting the
WAs no. 43 and 46. The value of these items amounted to USD 687,416 or 42% of the total
value of the two WAs totalling USD 1.63 millions. The expenditures represented in the items
selected were validated with the supporting documents and were found to be eligible for claim
from IFAD.
47. Review of the SPAs and other Bank Accounts: The mission reviewed the status of the Special
Account and the balances of other accounts. The SPA allocation of USD 1.5 million is fairly
accounted for. The combined balance of SPA, operational and petty cash accounts at both
PMU and the Counties amount to USD 99,696. The reconciling items include proceeds of WA
46 for USD 967,039, which has since been paid in July 2013. The expenditures in the process
of submission of WA 49 claim, amount to USD 472,477. The mission is satisfied with this
reconciliation.
48. Disbursement. The Cumulative disbursement of the IFAD Grant to date is SDR 3,508,847
representing 40.8% of the loan amount. The Cumulative disbursement to date of the Dutch
Grant is USD 3,600,192 representing 40% of the total Grant; the projected Dutch Grant balance
th st
as at 30 October 2013 is USD 5,399,807. As the Dutch grant is ending on 31 December
2014, IFAD should start recovering the initial deposit starting from January 2014. The proposed
initial recovery rate is 20% and this should be monitored throughout the year. It is also noted
that the project raised commitments for a total amount of USD 5,945,600. This would bring the
total amount of funds disbursed to 65% for both donors.
49. Procurement. Procurement Plan Review: The plan for 2013 is estimated at a cost of USD 8.7
million (including on-going contracts from 2012 financial year), and includes acquisition of motor
Vehicles and motorcycles, computers and office equipment. However, there are considerable
delays in procurement that require continuous and close follow up by the PMU
Agreed action Responsibility Agreed date
9. Timely submission of WAs; FM/PD 30.11.2013
10. Quarterly budgetary review to feed into project
PD/FM 31.12.2013
management.

F. Sustainability
50. The mission noted that there are a number of groups that have been operational for several
years undertaking profitable activities. Therefore these organisations are the basis of
sustainability of project activities after project closure. Sustainability is largely dependent on the
capacity of the grass roots organizations. It is therefore essential to continue the empowerment
process, develop exit strategies with the BDCs by ensuring linkages with other actors and
private sector.
51. Institution building (organizations, etc.). The projects works with grass root level
organizations that, when closely followed and linked with several institutions, are empowered to
participate in local policy dialogue to secure control over the resources available to them. Plans
to register he groups will further enhance the capacity of these local institutions providing them
with broader access of services, including access to finance. This is especially relevant in a
new nation where public services are still developing. Institution building rated as moderately
satisfactory.
52. Empowerment The mission appreciates that there are trainings going on in all the counties on
skills and knowledge of food production, animal husbandry and group development, thus
contributing towards empowerment at community levels. Empowerment is rated as moderately
satisfactory.

9
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013

53. Quality of beneficiary participation. The mission commends groups in Bor whose community
contribution was very encouraging reaching 65% or more. This is a positive sign for ownership
of the enterprises by the groups hence sustainability. In a meeting with all project implementing
partners it was agreed to start recording community contribution across all counties. Quality of
beneficiary participation is rated as moderately satisfactory.
54. Responsiveness of service providers. The mission is of the opinion that there are different
degrees of responsiveness of the service providers. However examples like monthly meetings
between the service provider and BDCs (as practiced in Bor) is a promising practice that
provides an opportunity for feedback and monitoring of the services provided. Responsiveness
of service providers is rated as moderately satisfactory.
55. Exit strategy (readiness and quality). A workshop was held with implementing partners in
which exit strategies were presented. There are plans to register IGs in Bor and link them to
other service providers. The service provider is also looking into options of linking IGs with
private tractor providers as there are concerns regarding the sustainability of the state owned
tractors. Some groups in Magwi expressed a desire to access improved land preparation
technologies such as the ox plough. They have started saving to acquire the ploughs and only
need support to purchase oxen. Exit strategy .is rated as moderately satisfactory.
56. Potential for scaling up and replication. Despite limited access to community due to floods
and insecurity, displacements caused by insecurity and cultural barriers, there is growing
evidence that in certain project locations the project has achieved considerable achievements
in terms of community empowerment, considerable community contribution, increased food
security and gender participation. The experience in Bor has been shared in a partner
coordination group and has been recognized by several government representatives (Governor,
Commissioners and several State Ministers) who have visited project sites. There is some
evidence that surrounding villages are replicating technologies and there is widespread interest
in project services. The mission is of the opinion that the approach adopted can be replicated
within the county to other payams and can be scaled up to other programmes in the country.
Potential for scaling up and replication is rated as moderately satisfactory.
Agreed action Responsibility Agreed date
11. Exit strategy to be developed at BDC level NGO SPs June 2014

G. Conclusion
The project is currently rated as a problem project. However, the mission notes that this
Country became independent in 2011 and thus only has had two years post-independence
implementation period which was heavenly affected by the prevailing post-independence
political, economic and institutional environment. Therefore this rating has to be interpreted
against this background. More so because of the notable progress during these two years of
infrastructure development (water points), agricultural activities and community organisations in
some counties like Bor that have challenging environments (lack of roads, floods and
insecurity). Furthermore the mission recognizes that prior to independence IFAD experience
has been limited in the country. Therefore the acknowledged progress towards achieving the
development objectives is recognised to be promising steps towards moving the project out of
problem status.
57. The Mission would like to express its appreciation for hospitalities and courtesies extended by
the Government of the Republic of South Sudan in the conduct of its work. The Mission also
thanks the PMU, CCU staff and the NGO Service Providers for the assistance provided to the
Mission, including their contributions to this Aide Memoire.

10
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 1: Summary of project status and ratings

Appendix 1: Summary of project status and ratings


Basic Facts

Country South Sudan Project ID 1453 Loan/DSF Grant No. 8022


Top-up Loan/DSF
Project Southern Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Grant
Date of Update 30-Oct-2013
Supervising Inst. IFAD/IFAD
No. of
No. of Implementation
2 5
Supervisions Support/Follow-up
missions
Last
26-
Last Implementation
Oct- 28-May-2013
Supervision Support/Follow-up
2011
mission
USD million Disb. rate %
Approval 11-Sep-2008 Total financing 25.93
Agreement 05-Feb-2009 Effectiveness lag 4.9 IFAD Total 13.54
Entry into force 05-Feb-2009 PAR value -------- IFAD loan
First disbursement 07-Dec-2009 DSF grant 13.54 34
MTR 07-Sep-2012 Last amendment 08-Jan-2013 IFAD grant
Original completion 31-Mar-2015 Last audit 26-Jun-2013 Domestic Total 3.37
Current completion 31-Mar-2015 Beneficiaries 0.55 0
Government
Original closing 30-Sep-2015 2.82 0
(National)
External
Current closing 30-Sep-2015 9.03
Cofinancing Total
No. of extensions 0 Netherlands 9.03 18

Project Performance Ratings


B.1 Fiduciary Aspects Last Current B.2 Project implementation progress Last Current
1. Quality of financial management 4 5 1. Quality of project management 3 3
2. Acceptable disbursement rate 3 3 2. Performance of M&E 3 3
3. Counterpart funds 3 3 3. Coherence between AWPB & implementation 3 3
4. Compliance with financing covenants 4 5 4. Gender focus 4 4
5. Compliance with procurement 4 4 5. Poverty focus 4 4
6. Quality and timeliness of audits 4 5 6. Effectiveness of targeting approach 4 4
7. Innovation and learning 4 4
8. Climate and environment focus

B.3 Outputs and outcomes Last Current B.4 Sustainability Last Current
1. Project Management and Coordination 3 3 1. Institution building (organizations, etc.) 4 4
2. Rural Infrastructure and Market Facilities 3 3 2. Empowerment 4 4
3. Community Development 3 3 3. Quality of beneficiary participation 4 4
4. Responsiveness of service providers 4 4
5. Exit strategy (readiness and quality) 3 4
6. Potential for scaling up and replication 4 4

11
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 1: Summary of project status and ratings

B.5 Justification of ratings


This is a project that is on track to evolve out of problem project-status. The current financial management system in place at
the PMU and CCUs ensures an adequate financial management of the project. There are no issues of serious concern with
regard to internal control systems, capacities at project implementation levels to carry out FMS functions, and spot checks of
expenditures presented in the SoE did not disclose ineligible expenditures. The audit report for the last financial year is
unqualified and no contravention of the loan covenants was identified. Exit strategies have been developed by all service
providers.

Overall Assessment and Risk Profile


Last Current
C.1 Physical/financial assets 3 3
C.2 Food security 3 3
C.3 Quality of natural asset improvement and climate resilience
C.4 Overall <b>implementation progress</b> (Sections B1 and B2) 3 3.5
Rationale for implementation progress rating
Overall implementation progress improved especially in one of the Counties (Bor County) however reaching the intended target
is still below target. The mission suggested increasing the number of Interest Groups to close the gap with the target.
C.5 Likelihood of achieving the development objectives (section B3 and B4) 3 3.5
Rationale for development objectives rating
Although the results are below targets, there is increasing evidence of the project achieving its objectives: (i) communities in
some of the targeted counties (esp Bor) are organized and empowered with equal participation of women and vulnerable
people; (ii) the micro projects undertaken by community interest groups increase farm and off-farm production and sales (Bor
and Magwi) and (iii) the poor and vulnerable groups are the primary beneficiaries of the project
Risks Short description of major risks for each section and their impact on achievement of development objectives and
C.6
sustainability
This has continued to significantly improve and thus risks are minimal. Procurement documentation is
Fiduciary aspects often of insufficient quality. Workshop on procurement management is planned in Addis beginning of
2014
Project Lack of implementation capacity is still major issue and threat to implementation progress. Having
implementation subcontracted most of the work with the IGS to service providers and providing high implementation
progress support (especially on infrastructure) from IFAD side, the risk is minimized.
Risk: Just as indicated in last review, conflict over natural resources principally in Bor and Pibor
Outputs and counties continues though at a lower scale. Project is yet to fully engage in supporting the conflict
outcomes resolution platform. Escalation of these conflicts may seriously disrupt project activities and impact in
the 2 areas.
Sustainability Exit strategies are being developed by service providers and now need to go down to the Boma level.

Proposed Follow-up
Issue / Problem Recommended Action Timing Status
Accelerated IFAD to continue with intensive implementation support to the project immediate Ongoing
implementation progress
Contract management Continued on-the-job training on contract management and supervision by immediate Ongoing
capacity IFAD
Monitoring and Evaluation Continue to strengthen in M&E capacity within the project immediate Ongoing
Low achievement of Project to submit a plan to increase number of Interest Groups 15 Ongoing
beneficiary targets November
2013
Low procurement capacity IFAD to organise a procurement workshop March DONE
2014
Low implementation Competitive recruitment of field officer to support counties with planning and 31 Ongoing
progress monitoring of project activities December
2013
Low disbursement Project to study the option of improving Juba-Kajo-Keji Road to finish funds 15 Ongoing
before the end of the project November
2013
Additional observations
Overall, the Project continued to improve in performance and will be soon out of project status if the security situation will not
suddenly deteriorate. However close follow up and strong implementation support from IFAD side is needed.

12
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October -1 November 2013
Appendix 2: Updated logical framework: Progress against objectives, outcomes and outputs

Appendix 2: Updated logical framework: Progress against objectives, outcomes and outputs
Narrative Summary Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions/Risks
Goal  Reduction in the prevalence of chronic malnutrition in children under 5 from 48% • RIMS baseline and impact surveys Continued stability and economic growth
To reduce poverty and hunger in to 24% by project end. • MTR and completion survey
the project area  Rate of food deprivation or food insecurity is reduced by 50% by the end of the • CCU and NGO Service Providers Reports
project. • Field visits
 The mean value of HH asset ownership index for the six counties increase from
SSP 1,007 to SSP 3,000 for 4,200 HHds by Project end.
Objectives  Number of meals consumed by type of HHs. (mean value of 1.6 increases to 2.5 • NBS reports The situation is favourable for community
Increased food security and meals by project end • ANLA resilience to droughts and floods
incomes through improved  The 36% of HHds with Dietary Diversity Score of less than 4 reduce by over 5o%. • RSS/UNICEF Household Health Survey
agricultural productivity and 3 • CFSAM reports
 Increase HH incomes to SSP 4 000/HH/annum from the SSP 3,168 by end of
marketing • FIVIMS of FAO
project.
• Food Consumption Score of WFP
 Increase in Agricultural yields to at least 25% by the end of the project. • Baseline survey, MTR and project
assessments
• End of Project Impact evaluation
Component 1: Community Development
Output 1.1  500 community groups formed, are operational, have regular book-keeping, • Project Quarterly Reports Service providers adopt empowering
The communities in the target registered and self-reliant at project end. • NGO Service Providers Reports approaches
counties are organized and  A total number of 500 PDCs/BDCs have capacity to mobilise, plan, screen, award • CCU Monitoring Reports
empowered with equal and monitor micro-projects based on poverty and gender related criteria in their • Annual Beneficiary Assessment Reports
participation of women and communities. • PSC /PMU/ CCU Monitoring Reports
vulnerable people.  At least 60% of women members are in community groups. • Scheduled Field Visit Reports
 At least 40% of women hold leadership positions in the community groups.
 The project targets 60 – 70% people ranked poor and vulnerable in their
respective communities.
 At least 45 staff from the State and County structures are able to plan coordinate
and supervise project activities.
Strategic Actions:  At least 4,800 community members are sensitised on community development • NGO Service Providers Quarterly Reports
1.1.1 Community mobilisation issues. • Community Action Plans Documents Continued stability and absence of conflicts
and participatory planning  At least 12 Community Action Plans (CAPs) are developed per years. • Project Training Reports Communities are receptive to new approaches
 At least 30 new trainers receive TOTs in PRA • Project Management Unit Reports
1.1.2 Capacity building for  The 30 trainees are able to train 60 other individuals in PRA skills. • Special Monitoring Visit Reports
group, community and local  At least 3,000 IG group leaders trained in organisational and management skills.
government leaders  At least 500 PDCs, BDCs and CFFs are trained.

Output 1. 2:  At least 12,500 IG members are applying good agronomical practices/ • NGO Service Providers Quarterly Reports Communities are willing to engage in
Micro projects undertaken by technologies on their group/individual on and off farm activities. • Special Assessment Reports agriculture
community interest groups  At least 50% of the formed groups(IGs) expand their production and income by • County Coordination Unit Reports
increase farm and off-farm at least 45% (data to be collected) • Project Management Unit Annual Reports
production and sales  At least 70% of IGs graduating from project support per year and are able to • Scheduled Field Visit and Monitoring Reports

3
Source: Southern Sudan Centre for Census, Statistics and Evaluation (SSCCSE) - SSP 88 per person assuming 3 able-bodied persons per HH, this translates to
3,168 SSP per HH/annum
13
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 2: Updated logical framework: Progress against objectives, outcomes and outputs

Narrative Summary Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions/Risks


continue group activities.

 At least 60% of IGs have developed business and sustainability plans.


 At least 10% of IGs have youth (below the age of 50) engaged in agronomic,
agro-pastoral, pastoral activities.

 At least 50% of IGs are working or linking up with other service providers in their
locations to enhance their group enterprises.

 At least 50% of IGs are able to access services/training by self-financing.

Strategic Action:  At least 12,000 Interest Groups (IGs) participants attend technical training • NGO Service Providers Quarterly Reports Technical skills given to IGs are utilised and
1.2.1 Capacity building for IG disaggregated by gender. • Project Management Unit Reports adopted
members in technical skills  At least 30 TOTs are conducted in farmer field school extension approaches. • Project Management Unit Monitoring Reports IGs accept innovations and new ideas
relevant to specific enterprises  At least 50% of the agricultural groups are introduced to and have adopting • County C coordination Unit Monitoring
farmer school extension methodology. Reports
1.2.2 Micro-project investments  At least 30 young graduates are actively participating in the project alongside • Interest Groups (IGs) Reports
NGOs. • Scheduled Monitoring Reports
 At least 12,200 people are accessing grants for micro-projects disaggregated by
gender and type of activity.
 At least 3 private service providers are supported to offer services to farmers.

14
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 3: Summary of key actions to be taken within agreed timeframes

Appendix 3: Summary of key actions to be taken within agreed timeframes


Action Area Action Agreed Date Whom

Project Implementation Submit addendum to current AWPB and submit request for 15 November 2013 PMU
reallocation to accommodate increased nr of targeted groups (Bor)
and the additional road (Juba- Kajo Keji)
PMU with IFAD support for ToR
Competitive recruitment of field officer to support counties with 31 December 2013 PMU
planning and monitoring of project activities
The M&E system should be further developed in a participatory way February 2014 PMU with substantial
to feed into project management technical assistance
Addendum to AWPB to include activities and budget to produce a 15 November 2013 PMU with IFAD support
number of knowledge product especially in view of the end the
project

Outputs Carry out collaborative assessment of completed sites with CCU, May 2014 PMU Engineer
county WASH responsible(s) and water user committees; and follow
up on repairs and additional training where required and feasible.
Establish partnership with WASH cluster group to streamline water Nov 2013 PMU Coordinator
user committee training and approach to spare parts provision, and
to register boreholes in national water information system
Subcontract the residual works of the Terekeka – Muni – Tombek to November 2013 PMU, Contractor
a well-known and competent company
Start all road rehabilitation works in due time at the beginning of next December 2013 PMU, contractor
dry season

Sustainability Exit strategy to be developed at BDC level June 2014 NGO SPs

Fiduciary Aspects Timely submission of WA’s; 30 November 2013 FM/PD


Quarterly budgetary review to feed into project management. 31 December 2013 PD/FM

15
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 4: Physical progress measured against AWP&B, including RIMS indicators

Appendix 4: Physical progress measured against AWP&B, including RIMS indicators


Component/ Cumulative Appraisal
Sub-component or Output Indicator Unit Actual Target % Comments
Component 1 Community Development
Community groups formed/strengthened Number 136 500 27%
Community groups with women in leadership Number 90 200 45% The current % of women in leadership position over the actual number of
positions groups formed is 90/136 = 66%
People accessing development funds (men) Number 2,744 4,880 56%
People accessing development funds (women) Number 3,739 7,320 51%
People accessing development funds Number 6,483 12,200 53% The current % of women accessing development funds over the
(men/women) total actual number of people is 3,739/6,483 = 58%
People in community groups formed/strengthened Number 1,535 4,800 32%
(men)
People in community groups formed/strengthened Number 1,910 7,200 27% The current % of women in community development groups
(women) formed is 1,910/3,448 = 55%
People in community groups formed/ Number 3,448 12,000 29%
strengthened (men/women)
People trained in community management topics Number 492 1,400 35%
(men)
People trained in community management topics Number 211 2,100 10% the current % of women trained in community management
(women) topics is 211/703 = 30%
People trained in community management Number 703 3,500 20%
topics (men/women)
Number of groups operational/functional Number 136 500 27% According to the definition of this indicator "This is the assessment of the
extent to which the IGA groups that were formed or strengthened by the
project are likely to be operational or functional after the end of project
assistance". This indicator shall be measured at the last year of program
implementation.
Component 2 Rural Infrastructure
Drilling water system Number 39 55 71% This includes 51 Borehols and 4 Hafirs.
constructed/rehabilitated
Groups managing social infrastructure Number 29 51 57% "The Groups will be formed for 47 borehols (excluding 4 at CCU)
formed/strengthened and 4 hafirs.
Groups formed are as follows: Juba (2); Terekeka (10); Magwi
(10); Lafon/Lopa (0); Bor (7). "
People in groups managing social infrastructure Number n.a. 143 n.a The breakdown by gender is not available
(men) - water only
People in groups managing social infrastructure Number n.a 214 n.a The breakdown by gender is not available
(women) - water only

17
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 4: Physical progress measured against AWP&B, including RIMS indicators

People in groups managed social Number 203 357 57%


infrastructure (men/women) - water only
Roads constructed/rehabilitated KM 56 136 41% "The original length of the 4 roads targets for the project was Km
248 and it has been revised to Km 136 at MTR.
The report of the PMU is Km 71 but Km 15 cannot be
considered as rehabilitated yet (the work was done by the
constructor but the road is not yet functional as planned). "

18
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 5: Financial: Actual financial performance by financier; by component and disbursements by category

Appendix 5: Financial: Actual financial performance by financier; by component and disbursements by


category

Table 5A: Financial performance by financier


MTR Disbursements Per cent
Financier (USD ‘000) (USD ‘000) disbursed
IFAD grant* 12,990 5,254 39%
Co-financier (EKN)* 9,000 3,502 39%
Government 790 151 5%
Beneficiaries 183 n.a. 0%
Total 22,963 8,907 34%

**Includes proceeds of USD 900,000 of Initial Deposit, of the SPA and those of WA s up no.47
***Includes proceeds of USD 600,000 of Initial Deposit, of the SPA and those of WA s up no.47.

Table 5B: Financial performance by financier by component (USD ‘000)


Government IFAD grant Co-financier EKN BENEFICIARIES Total
Component Appraisal Actual % Appraisal Actual % Appraisal Actual % Appraisal Actual % Appraisal Actual %
Community
Development 52 2 3% 3,513 2,034 58% 2,387 1,355 57% 161 0 0.0% 6,113 3,390 55%
Rural
Infrastructure
and Market
Facilities 483 57 12% 7,012 2,338 33% 4,851 1,558 32% 22 0 0.0% 12,368 3,953 32%
Project
Management 255 93 36% 2,465 882 36% 1,762 597 34% - 0.0% 4,482 1,572 35%
Total
PROJECT
COSTS 790 151 19% 12,990 5,254 40% 9,000 3,510 39% 183 0 0.0% 22,963 8,915 39%

19
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 5: Financial: Actual financial performance by financier; by component and disbursements by category

Table 5C: IFAD loan disbursements (SDR, as at 30 September 2013)


Original Revised Per cent
Category Category description
Allocation Allocation
Disbursement W/A pending Balance
disbursed
I Civil Works 1,100 3,950 817 840 3,110 21%
II Vehicles Equipment and Materials 600 480 257 258 222 54%
III Studies and Training 1,500 1,380 324 370 1,010 27%
IV Contractual Services 2,600 1,280 467 545 735 43%
V Grants and beneficiaries Contributions 1,300 620 257 329 291 53%
VI Recurrent Costs 700 790 712 770 20 98%
VII Unallocated 800 100 - 100 0%
Subtotal 8,600 8,600 2,833 3,113 5,487 36%
Initial deposit 579 579 - 579
Total 8,600 8,600 3,412 3,691 4,909 43%

20
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 6: Compliance with legal covenants: Status of implementation

Appendix 6: Compliance with legal covenants: Status of implementation

Section Covenant Target/Action Due Date Compliance Remarks


Status/Date

Section 2.03 Special account Compliance


Section 2.04 Project account Compliance
Section 2.05 Use of grant proceeds Compliance
Section 3.02 AWPBs Prior to disbursement and Compliance
annually thereafter
Section 3.03 Additional resources Partial compliance Taxes not fully captured
Section 4.01 Monitoring 180 days after effective Partial compliance Baseline completed but further
date disaggregated data required.
Section 4.02 Progress reports Semi-annual Compliance
Section 4.03 Mid Term Review 24 months after effective compliance
date
Section 4.04 Completion report 6th project year N/A

Section 5.01 Financial statements Six-monthly Compliance


Section 5.02 Audit report submitted to IFAD. Annually Compliance Audited accounts for 2012 validated
Schedule 1 Project description Compliance
Schedule 2 Allocation and withdrawal of loan proceeds Compliance Schedule 2 amended to facilitate
charging between IFAD and EKN, 60%
and 40% resp. across all categories
Schedule 3 Project implementation 90 days after effective date compliance
Schedule 4 Procurement compliance

21
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 7: Knowledge management: Learning and Innovation

Appendix 7: Knowledge management: Learning and Innovation


Learning
Knowledge Management: Learning and Innovation
The project has a number of good practices and experiences emerging from implementation of the
various components over time. This period towards project closure should be seen as an opportunity
to capture, document, package and share lessons learned, key innovations and good experiences.
This is especially important to inform implementation during the remaining period, policy, future
designs and to showcase impact and results.
Creating an information repository. A key step towards knowledge management for the project is
ensuring proper record keeping, organized archiving and easy accessibility of relevant documents
such as reports. The project has information but with the staff turnover, it’s difficult to access some
historical documents, for example. The key lesson from this is that going forward, the PMU will be
supported to better manage their data/information so that it is not only easy to access but also usable
by all. The PMU will create a central information repository for all key documents and make it
accessible to key staff in the project. To ensure uniformity of reports for instance, and that detailed
data is collected at field level, a usable M&E template has been developed by the consultants. As
such the reports in the future will be more harmonized and stored in an easily accessible way.
Strengthening the Reporting aspects. The aspect of writing detailed reports right from CCU to the
PMU requires strengthening, to ensure that important information is available and accessible
whenever needed. Whereas the Payam staff will write reports for instance, these are hand written and
sent to the CCU. The Payam then remains without a copy of their own report which makes their follow
up of the interest groups not as focused as it should be since they may not remember everything they
wrote down. A good practice for the remaining project period is to ensure that files are opened at
Payam level where copies of their own reports will be kept. Proper record keeping at all levels,
including at farmer/Interest Group level should also be encouraged to ensure readily available data.
Lessons Learned opportunities for scaling up, good practices and Innovations
Monitoring and Evaluation. Since there are various SPs, it would have been helpful to provide a
uniform reporting template for SSLDP at the start to ensure harmonized reporting on project progress
and results.
Implementation Arrangements
Ensuring close linkages and knowledge sharing among implementing partners for greater
synergies. Implementation of SSLDP has been done with three different partners in the three
counties, as well as the available government structures. However, these have not had adequate
opportunities for sharing experiences, learning from each other, and thus ensuring harmonized
support packages to the Interest Groups. For instance, the SPs who could provide Functional Adult
Literacy did so, while those whose forte it was not didn’t.
Creating useful linkages to other services for interest groups. In the counties, there are no
readily available micro finance institutions to avail easy access to financial services for the
communities. In Magwi and Bor counties, interest groups have innovatively started providing credit
and savings services to their own members. Furthermore groups are encouraging personal savings
amongst themselves within groups. One of the ways to ensure that such groups grow stronger and
are not derailed would be to link them to appropriate and accessible financial services for the security
of their savings. For instance, information on how to open and manage a bank account, in addition to
the book keeping trainings would position the groups to grow stronger.

Innovation: Describe any interesting innovation noted during supervision


Innovations
Linking farmers to markets. SNV, the SP in Eastern Equatorial State innovatively linked the formers
groups to good markets by enabling them to sell their produce to the groups that wanted to buy it. The
groups that had bumper harvest were thus able to make a good income.

Supporting interest groups to register as cooperatives. In Magwi and Bor, some Interest Groups
have been supported by the project and the implementing partners to formally register their groups as
cooperatives at the county level. The IGs have also been innovative in utilizing their groups for credit

23
South Sudan
South Sudan Livelihoods Development Project
Supervision report - Mission dates: 21 October – 1 November 2013
Appendix 7: Knowledge management: Learning and Innovation

and savings services.


Creating dynamic partnerships. CHF in Bor is working in close partnership with the Ministry of
Education to develop Functional Adult Literacy messages which are shared through radio, as well as
materials for the FAL classes. An MOU has been developed with WFP a UN agency leading activities
on the construction and development of roads and implementing partners have used FAO manuals to
develop farmer field schools and local fish drying technologies.

24

S-ar putea să vă placă și