Search

Displaying 1 - 7 of 7

CSV
Lesson
No new lessons

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
Lesson
No new lessons

Project Number: 29603-013
Project Name: Malakand Rural Development Project
Report Date:
Lesson
ADB should have restructured its technical assistance (TA) loan much earlier, taking into account two events: (i) the approval of new multitranche financing facilities (MFFs) with project-preparation components that duplicated some of the TA's work, and (ii) dramatic changes in the economy that made some subprojects irrelevant and/or unfundable. The review missions reported on consultant services and their performance, and they did propose a major restructuring of the TA over time.

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
Lesson
The Planning and Development Division's (PDD lack of capacity to assist the implementing agencies delayed the issuance of consultant mandates, thus slowing down work on some priority subprojects. The choice of the PDD as the executing agency was a mistake. The PDD lacked qualified staff,, access, and a track record. The setting up of new units to manage consultancy contracts does not work and should not have been proposed in the first place.

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
Lesson
Where a large capacity-building component precedes project preparation, reviews by ADB should be more frequent. The consultants should also produce verifiable and detailed reports on progress and staff training. This will allow a more timely response to problems by both ADB and the Borrower.

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
Lesson
When projects cross ministerial boundaries�as was the case with the national and provincial stakeholders in the water resources sector�there must be a clear commitment at the design stage to avoid disputes. Otherwise, such projects should be avoided altogether.

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
Lesson
While the project-preparation facilities made sense, the TA loan itself was spread too thinly. The funds were dispersed across three sectors, and were handled by numerous agencies managing subprojects in many locations. This made coordination a challenge right from the outset, especially given the absence of an experienced and capable local coordination team. It did not work. In retrospect, the multi-sector design of the TA was wrong, and approval should not be given for similar TA loans in the future. The important lesson learned here is to restrict loans to one sector at a time.

Project Number: 38458-013
Project Name: Infrastructure Development
Report Date:
CSV