Reducing or avoiding implementation delays would require, among others: (i) ensuring that project and/or subproject implementation is a high priority for local governments and counterpart funds are provided in government annual budgets, and (ii) starting resettlement activities as early as possible and providing adequate funds for these activities.
Incorporating utility shifting as part of the item-rate contract has proven effective for timely project completion in some Indian states. Utility shifting is usually contracted
out to a third-party entity specialized in utility shifting. Contractors often abuse this arrangement, however, taking it as an excuse to delay civil works. To prevent this, the utility shifting should be included as an item in the bill of quantity to be carried out directly by the contractor.
As larger contracts experienced more delays compared to shorter contracts, in future projects, shorter-length contracts may be considered. The termination of contractors was observed to be due to their non-proactive approach while working in discontinuous encumbrance-free stretches of road, poor planning, and inadequate financial capability. Instead of terminating contracts, it would be more desirable to make encumbrance-free land available upfront, release retention money, and create escrow accounts—which were approaches that were successfully implemented.
Shortage of qualified national consultants could delay implementation and increase project costs . The intention at design was to work with the support of national consultants. However, the lack of national consultants with technical qualifications and TVET experience as required by the project hampered timely recruitment and mobilization of these technical experts. Consequently, some national positions had to be converted to international positions or contracts of qualified national consultants extended to enable them to complete the tasks.
It is important to include individual startup consultants in the project design to assist and help avoid delays during the early implementation stages. The project experienced some startup delays, particularly in procurement and capacity building. The experience demonstrates the importance of including individual startup consultants in the project design to assist the executing and implementing agencies and avoid delays during early-stage implementation.
Significant implementation delays under both tranches underscore three important points: (i) weather conditions stop works during winter months and even interrupt work during other months, (ii) proper planning is essential so that issues such as inadequate access infrastructure can be taken care of sufficiently in advance, and (iii) extensive geological surveys and testing are crucial in the Himalayan region prior to the detailed project report stage.
Procurement of works and recruitment of consultants followed due process and were completed on time. The contract award was synchronized with loan effectiveness and civil works commenced on time. Payment of small amounts to affected persons was a challenging task that is still ongoing. The prompt establishment of the project
implementation unit and lessons from tranche 1, particularly regarding LARP implementation, contributed to the smooth startup of construction activities.
Enhanced project readiness filters need to be applied to future projects to minimize or avoid the challenges encountered in this project, which commonly occur in
infrastructure projects. These challenges included (i) insufficient construction equipment at the work sites; (ii) contractors’ chronic working capital shortages; (iii) non-payment of local contractors and/or suppliers, resulting in shortages (e.g., of materials and fuel); and (iv) a lack of capacity for efficient project management
ADB should help the executing agency strengthen its capacity in procurement planning, bid evaluation, and contract award in accordance with ADB’s procurement guideline. Because of the disagreement between the executing agency and ADB regarding bid evaluation results, the procurement of civil works for Project 2 was significantly delayed. The divergent views centered on particular restriction provisions, including abnormally low bids, collusions, and conflicts of interest.
Project readiness challenges could result in sequential delays of the different tranches in an MFF, leaving insufficient time for implementation within the MFF term and making MFF less relevant. Prior to the approval of each tranche, the initial design for each project was prepared to varying degrees.