Stakeholder engagement

The TA results demonstrate the need for close coordination among development partners and with local civil society organizations not only during implementation but also at the project preparatory phase.

The designation of the Workforce Development Center as focal agency for the SFK was appropriate. However, its participation in the TA was delayed because of lengthy procedures. For future similar TA projects, ADB should carefully assess government counterpartss readiness, ownership, and capacity to deliver planned outputs and also request toassign properly authorized representatives in the TA implementation units.

It is important to build awareness on the SFK in the rural areas to increase their uptake and benefits from the initiative.

Regular meetings with management teams allow the timely identification of project needs and monitoring of TA implementation. Close collaboration with development enhances TA implementation, e.g., the generation of inputs from the United Nations Development Programme to consultants’ terms of reference in this TA helped promote the efficacious delivery of outputs .

TA implementation could be more challenging due to the involvement of different stakeholders. For future similar TA projects, it is recommended that ADB consider direct financing and independent administration. This will put implementation and consultants’ recruitment under project team control.

Proactive consultations and policy dialogue with development partners enable the identification and avoidance of potential duplications in technical assistance and other projects. The project team designed the TA based on a request from the Ministry of National Economy to support the government’s effort in fighting COVID-19 impacts. However, the project team observed potential duplications between the scope of the Solidarity Fund for Kazakhstan (SFK) and support measures taken by the government and development partners.

Strong central coordination is necessary to ensure consistent monitoring and reporting and more effective lessons-sharing among multiple implementing agencies. The Ministry of Planning and Investment was designated as the coordinating agency for the entire MFF-financed investment program, while project 3 activities—procurement and recruitment, construction supervision, financial management, safeguards compliance, monitoring, and reporting—were implemented by the participating water supply coompanies (WSCs).

Close executing agency (EA) involvement is essential throughout the implementation phase. But this was lacking in this project, which saw the provincial people's committees, the project EAs, having limited involvement in project implementation. This strengthen the case for stronger central coordination by a line ministry to facilitate timely decision-making and approvals, provide closer supervision, ensure more consistent monitoring and reporting, and promote lessons sharing to improve performance.

It will be advisable to nominate alternate participants to training activities in the future. One of the TA’s capacity building activities created an opportunity for two representatives from Kazakhstan to participate in the road maintenance training organized by the Japan International Cooperation Agency. Unfortunately, only one of the nominees was able to participate because personal circumstances prevented the other nominee to travel. The unoptimal use of future opportunities may be prevented by naming alternate participants to future training activities.

More frequent and direct in-person contact with the executing agency is advisable for future similar endeavors. Despite the adverse work circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the performance of the consulting firm and its experts was satisfactory. The project team als administered the TA satisfactorily. Nonetheless more frequent, person-to-person interaction is advised in future similar TA.