Search

Displaying 106 - 112 of 112

Lesson
Project implementation often faces multiple risks. Identifying and implementing risk mitigation measures and providing adequate early-stage support are crucial in minimizing initial delays and addressing emerging project needs. Adequate due diligence at appraisal should emphasize strong assessment of borrower's and executing agency's capacity across institutional, financial, and operational aspects.

Project Number: 42051-023
Project Name: Energy Efficiency Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Targets need to be specific and evidence-based and indicators well-defined and measurable to enable a reliable assessment of implementation progress and project accomplishments and performance at completion. This project suffered from weaknesses in indicators and the results chain. Examples were inadequate links between intended outputs and outcome, lack of specific targets (output 1 and outcome), and poorly defined target (output 3). One impact target was misplaced (project staffing) and another was deemed unachievable (number of WUCSs confirming receipt of water services).

Project Number: 43253-023
Project Name: Karnataka Integrated and Sustainable Water Resources Management Investment Program - Project 1
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
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
The design and monitoring framework (DMF) should be reviewed and updated as necessary during implementation to ensure continued alignment with other aspects of the program. The outcome and output indicators in the program DMF had been developed at appraisal for achievement over a relatively short period of 24 months. However, when program implementation was extended by 23 months to November 2019, an opportunity was missed to update the targeted dates for the indicators, which were measured about 1 year after the extended program completion date.

Project Number: 45253-002
Project Name: Third Capital Market Development Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Program design and implementation in least developed (and fragile) countries need to take account of the limited administrative capacity of the government. While ADB designed a program which supported the government in undertaking reforms and sufficient consulting services resources to help bridge capacity gaps, the timeframe for the program was too ambitious and ADB did not provide adequate continuity in the staff providing project supervision. These deficiencies contributed to the underperformance in program outcomes.

Project Number: 46059-001, 46059-002
Project Name: Governance and Capacity Development in Public Sector Management Program - Subprogram 2
Report Date:
Lesson
Indicators to measure project outcomes should be carefully selected to ensure that they are sufficient, achievable, and aligned with the planned outputs.

Project Number: 43490-013
Project Name: Capital Market and Infrastructure Capacity Support Project
Report Date: