Search

Displaying 1 - 15 of 15

Lesson
Strong linkages between indicators across the different levels of the project result chain need to underpin project design and monitoring frameworks, The linkage between the project impact performance indicators of increased marine passengers and increased domestic and international freight volume was not a strong measure of success in this project; it should have been revised during project implementation.

Project Number: 44375-013
Project Name: Maritime and Waterways Safety Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Executing and implementing agencies need to find ways to sustain data collection and analysis throughout the project implementation phase to ensure high-quality M&E systems. Monitoring and evaluation was not completed before project closing because, at the critical late stage of implementation, the pandemic brought consultant services to a stop before they can be completed. Some baseline data were collected in 2015, but the function was not completed because of early implementation delays.

Project Number: 44375-013
Project Name: Maritime and Waterways Safety Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Given the flexibility of the multitranche financing facility, if necessary, regular updating and revisions of project design and monitoring frameworks, including baseline data, are expected; thus, proper documentation of these changes can help improve assessment at completion. In addition, assessment of project impacts critically depends on the collection and analysis of project and other data. The establishment of a project performance management system is crucial in this regard.

Project Number: 40173-044
Project Name: Highlands Region Road Improvement Investment Program - MFF and Project 3
Report Date:
Lesson
Project impacts on vulnerable groups need focused attention. . The IEE had some shortcomings in identifying the project’s impacts on vulnerable groups in the project areas. Visually impaired people living in the area were to be affected by noise generated from the road layout. As a result, the project required a new round of consultations with visually impaired affected persons whose specific vulnerabilities and needs had not been factored into project design. In addition, more precise measurement of vibration impact on buildings occupied by affected persons needed to be developed.

Project Number: 42414-043
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 3
Report Date:
Lesson
The design and monitoring framework (DMF) needs to be carefully formulated to adequately measure project achievements. The DMF contained indicators that were not entirely attributable to the project. The assumptions and data source behind the quantitative baselines and targets for several indicators were also not clearly explained. These weaknesses need to be addressed in future projects.

Project Number: 42414-043
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 3
Report Date:
Lesson
A project specific DMF is key to reliably assessing the implementation progress and overall performance of each tranche project. The DMF for this project contained indicators that pertained to investments under other tranches of the multitranche financing facility (MFF). This made monitoring and evaluation of project progress and performance difficult, with results that hid the real picture and so prevented corrective measures from being undertaken during implementation.

Project Number: 42414-023
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 1
Report Date:
Lesson
Robust project baseline data is needed to adequately assess complex projects with significant potential environmental and social impacts. In this project, baseline data on noise, vibration, vulnerable affected people, and river ecology were collected in accordance with contracts, applicable laws, regulations, and policies. This proved insufficient and led to questionable results particularly with the regard to the impact of vibration in several project-affected buildings. For future projects, more detailed studies and additional assessments need to be carried out.

Project Number: 42414-043
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 3
Report Date:
Lesson
Projects could fail because of faulty impact assessments. The initial environmental examination (IEE) approved by ADB had to be revised as road vibration and noise impacts needed to be studied further. While public consultations were conducted, these did not generate enough buy-in from some of the stakeholders who raised formal complaints. Local people outside the project’s original area of influence opposed project implementation as well as the proposed remedial action plan (RAP), due to which the project could not be carried out within the original timeframe.

Project Number: 42414-043
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 3
Report Date:
Lesson
Weaknesses in the design and monitoring framework (DMF) can lead to an inaccurate assessment of project achievements. The project DMF contained indicators that measured benefits that were not entirely attributable to the project, such as the number of tourist nights in Georgia rather than in the Batumi area. Some dimensions of the project’s outcome were omitted, such as the increased protection of coastal infrastructure assets. The reduction of storm-related damage should have been considered as part of project’s outcome performance indicators.

Project Number: 42414-044
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 4
Report Date:
Lesson
A separate DMF for each tranche can help ensure that their objectives and targets are aligned with the overall objectives and targets of the facility.

Project Number: 32234-013, 32234-053
Project Name: Railway Sector Investment Program (Multitranche Financing Facility and Tranche 3)
Report Date:
Lesson
Given the flexibility of the MFF, if necessary, regular updating and revisions of the DMFs, including its baseline data, are expected, thus, proper documentation of these changes should be available at completion.

Project Number: 32234-013, 32234-053
Project Name: Railway Sector Investment Program (Multitranche Financing Facility and Tranche 3)
Report Date:
Lesson
Poorly designed DMF indicators and targets, and the lack of timely data collection have undermined ADB’s ability to correctly document the impact of this project.

Project Number: 40075-023
Project Name: National Trade Corridor Highway Investment Program (Tranche 1)
Report Date:
Lesson
Ambitious targets create potential issues and expose the project to higher implementation risks as the executing and implementing agencies must spread their meager resources to more outputs.

Project Number: 38357-013
Project Name: National Highways Sector Project
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
It was inappropriate to change the original DMF targets because the progress was inadequate (para. 20). Instead, the reasons for the slow progress could have been mentioned and draw lessons from them.

Project Number: 41171-022
Project Name: Transport Sector Development Project
Report Date: