Search

Displaying 121 - 135 of 147

Lesson
It is difficult to establish accurate cost estimates due to the long MFF implementation timelines and the value of flexibility that is inherent in the MFF modality.

Project Number: 32298-013, 32298-073
Project Name: Madhya Pradesh Power Sector Investment Program (Tranche 6 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
The economic value of existing water supplies, the critical factor in determining the project economic performance, was inadequately defined. At the very least, analysis should have been undertaken using realistic time savings resulting from reticulated water for women and children, with the basis for valuing time clearly outlined.

Project Number: 40364-013
Project Name: Central Region Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project
Report Date:
Lesson
It is essential to prepare meaningful monitoring frameworks measured by relevant indicators to assess project results objectively.

Project Number: 42039-035
Project Name: Power Transmission Investment Program – Tranche 2
Report Date:
Lesson
It is incorrect to value generated traffic in terms of vehicle operating cost savings.

Project Number: 37066-013, 37066-063
Project Name: Rural Roads Sector II Investment Program (Project 5 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
In assessing the economic benefits where road projects promote substantial economic development such as rural roads, the level of generated traffic needs to be explicitly considered, estimated, and valued accordingly in terms of consumers’ surplus.

Project Number: 37066-013, 37066-063
Project Name: Rural Roads Sector II Investment Program (Project 5 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
To better monitor the achievements under an MFF, any revisions in the targets of the MFF entail a revised DMF and should be clearly reported in the periodic financing requests of succeeding tranches.

Project Number: 37066-013, 37066-063
Project Name: Rural Roads Sector II Investment Program (Project 5 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
Sex-disaggregated key indicators should be incorporated in ongoing and future investment programs.

Project Number: 37066-013, 37066-063
Project Name: Rural Roads Sector II Investment Program (Project 5 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
As a development bank, identifying value addition to road infrastructure investments in the DMF will give more relevance to ADB interventions.

Project Number: 46145-001
Project Name: CAREC Corridor 3 (Shymkent–Tashkent Section) Road Improvement Project
Report Date:
Lesson
It is a good practice in future cluster programs to update and improve the DMF as the program evolves.

Project Number: 38421-013, 38421-023, 38421-072
Project Name: Promoting Economic Diversification Program
Report Date:
Lesson
In designing the desired outputs that are linked to higher-level results, it is important to be consistent within particular operations and across operations that form the program.

Project Number: 36172-063
Project Name: Strengthening Public Management Program
Report Date:
Lesson
The DMF for the Infrastructure Project Development Facility (IPDF) was not adequate to assess IPDF’s performance as an institution, with targets that were limited to the number of PPP projects. It should have included measures on the level of private sector investment in infrastructure in general, and specifically on PPP projects, together with some regional comparisons.

Project Number: 40009-013, 40009-023, 40009-33, 40009-43
Project Name: Infrastructure Reform Sector Development Program (Subprograms 1, 2, and 3, and an Infrastructure Project Development Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
When doing the design and monitoring framework (DMF) exercise, outcomes should describe the immediate and direct benefits of the project. Outcome statements articulate the change the project is expected to achieve—in this case, the management of in-migration. No separate outcome statement or concept was included in the DMF.

Project Number: 38049-013
Project Name: Urban Infrastructure Development Project
Report Date:
Lesson
The DMF targets need to be project related. It used a target for impact indicator that linked project output to government revenue. While it is possible to reasonably forecast results, the government revenue may change for reasons unrelated to the project or the sector, as seen in this case.

Project Number: 37399-013
Project Name: Green Power Development Project
Report Date:
Lesson
The original forecasts for traffic intensity on the road section may have not warranted a four-lane road improvement (para. 13). While the PCR listed an economic downturn in Uzbekistan for this, the validation notes that the methodology followed for the estimation of traffic intensity at initial appraisal, contract completion, and reappraisal was poorly structured. Estimating traffic based upon extremely short surveys is known to introduce significant potential inaccuracies. This appears to be a common issue, with insufficient emphasis being placed upon traffic surveys.

Project Number: 42107-033
Project Name: Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Corridor 2 Road Investment Program (Tranche 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
A number of the indicators in the DMF are framed inadequately. For example, the indicator related to road beneficiaries claimed that 4.5 million people would benefit. It was not clear how this was measured, as the area of the project itself is basically uninhabited. While it was also clear that some indicators were dropped during project implementation, such as the number of women expected to benefit from the project (para. 16).

Project Number: 42107-033
Project Name: Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation Corridor 2 Road Investment Program (Tranche 2)
Report Date: