AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

PROJECT: ELECTRICITY TRANSPORT (MBARARA – NKENDA

& TORORO- LIRA POWER TRANSMISSION LINES)

COUNTRY: UGANDA

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

June 2019

PROGRAM

COMPLETION

TEAM

Task Manager: Alemayehu WUBESHET

ZEGEYE

Chief Regional Power Chief Systems

Officer, RDGE.1

Team Members:

Edith B. KAHUBIRE Social Development Officer, RDGE4

Kamu RUGUMIRE

KAREKAHO Power Sector Consultant, RDGE.1

Jason SEUNG-SOO JIN Financial Analyst, Consultant

RDGE.1

Sector Manager:

Country Manger:

Sector Director

Director General:

Humphrey N. RICHARD

Kennedy MBEKEANI

Batchi BALDEH

Gabriel NEGATU

RDGE.1

COUG

PESD

RDGE

PEER

REVIEWERS

Justin ECAAT, Lead Environmental Safeguards Officer, SNSC.0

Girma MEKURIA ABIYEHOY, Principal Power Engineer, RDGE.1

Arkins MWILA KABUNGO, Senior Investment Officer, PESR.2

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

UGANDA

ELECTRICITY TRANSPORT (MBARARA – NKENDA & TORORO- LIRA

POWER TRANSMISSION LINES

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

(PCR)

RDGE DEPARTMENT

September 2019

1

M,.ORG>

I BASIC DATA

A Report data

Report date Date of report: June 2019

Mission date (if field mission) From: 22nd April 2019 From: 1st May 2019

B Responsible Bank staff

Positions At approval At completion

Regional Director A. ORDU Gabriel NEGATU

Country Manager Kennedy MBEKEANI

Sector Director G. MBESHERUBUSA Batchi BALDEH

Sector Manager A. T. DIALLO Humphrey N. RICHARD

Task Manager V. ZONGO Alemayehu WUBESHET ZEGEYE

Alternate Task Manager

PCR Team Leader Alemayehu WUBESHET ZEGEYE

PCR Team Members Edith Kahubire

Jason Seung-soo Jin Kamu R. Karekaho

C Project data

Project name: ELECTRICITY TRANSPORT (Mbarara – Nkenda & Tororo – Lira Transmission Lines)

Project code: P-UG-FA0-004 Instrument number(s): ADF Loan 21001510019944

Project type: Public Investment Sector: Energy / Power

Country: UGANDA Environmental categorization (1-3) : 1

Processing milestones – Bank approved financing only (add/delete rows

depending on the number of financing sources)

Key Events (Bank approved financing only)

Disbursement and closing dates (Bank approved financing only)

Financing source/ instrument 1: ADF Loan 21001510019944

Approved : UA 52.51 million Financing source/ instrument 1:

Date approved: 16/12/2008 Cancelled amounts: UA 8,569,200 Original disbursement deadline: 31/12/2013

Date signed: 13/05/2009 Supplementary financing: N/A Original closing date: 31/12/2013

Date of entry into force: 18/02/2011 Restructuring (specify date & amount involved): N/A

Revised (if applicable) disbursement deadline: 31/08/2018

Date effective for 1st disbursement: 18-02/2011

Extensions (specify dates):

Revised (if applicable) closing date: 1st Extension : 31/08/2015

2nd Extension : 31/08/2016

3rd Extension : 31/08/2017

4th Extension : 28/02/2018

5th Extension : 31/08/2018

ELECTRICITY TRANSPORT

(Mbarara – Nkenda & Tororo – Lira Transmission Lines) Project – Project Completion Report (PCR)

AFRICAN

DEVELOPMENT

BANK GROUP

2

Date of actual 1st disbursement: 20/04/2011

Financing source/instrument (add/delete rows depending on the

number of financing sources):

Disbursed amount (amount, UA):

Percentage disbursed (%):

Undisbursed amount (UA):

Percentage undisbursed (%):

Financing source/ instrument 1:

ADF (Loan) : UA 52,510,000.00 43,940,800.00 83.68% 8,569,200.00 16.32%

Government: GOU/UETCL : UA 19,980,000

UA 16,038,706.12

= UGX 83,147,699,8761 80% 3,941,293.88 20%

TOTAL 59,979,506.12 82.7% 12,510,493.88 17.3%

Financing source/instrument (add/delete rows depending on the

number of financing sources):

Committed amount (UA):

Percentage committed (%):

Uncommitted amount (UA):

Percentage uncommitted

(%):

Financing source/ instrument 1: ADF (Loan) : UA 52.51 million

45,184,369.29 86.05% 7,325,630.71 13.95%

Government: GOU/UETCL : UA 19,980,000

19,980,000 100% 0% 0%

Other (e.g. co-financiers). Add rows as

needed. 0.00 0% 0.00 0%

TOTAL 65,164,369.29 89.9% 7,325,630.71 10.1%

Co-financiers and other external partners: N/A

Executing and implementing agency: Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited (UETCL)

D Management review and comments

Report reviewed by Name Date reviewed Comments

Country Manager Kennedy MBEKEANI

Sector Manager Humphrey N. RICHARD

Regional Director (as Chair of Country Team) Gabriel NEGATU

Sector Director Batchi BALDEH

1 1 UA = 5,184.19 UGX as of June 2019

3

II Project performance assessment

A Relevance

1. Relevance of project development objective

Rating* Narrative assessment (max 250 words)

4 The development objective of the project was to expand the national transmission grid to enable Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Ltd (UETCL) to transmit power from upcoming 85 MW plants (50 MW from Mupta and 35 MW from several mini-hydro plants in the Region), and improve access, reliability and quality of electricity supply in the country. The project involves the expansion and reinforcement of the power transmission network of Uganda, so as to enable UETCL evacuate the 85 MW power to be produced in the west and improve the coverage of the national grid to enable the connection of 20,000 new consumers per annum. With this objective, therefore, the project was designed through: (i) Replacement of the aged wooden-poled 132 kV Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line that was the source and cause for frequent power interruptions with a new transmission line, and (ii) construction of Mbarara-Nkenda 132 kV transmission line to form a 132 kV ring network in the south-west of the country to improve access to electricity and ensure reliability of supply. The proposed project, therefore, was in line with both the Government’s development strategy and the Bank's operational strategy in Uganda as articulated in the Country Joint Assistance Strategy Paper. The two strategies focus on support for infrastructure development in the energy sector. This is critical for enhancing the functioning of the economy. As a result, in June 2006, the Ugandan government adopted a plan for meeting the country’s electricity supply needs in the short, medium and long terms. The broad objective of the plan was to provide adequate and reliable power, with the specific objectives being to: (i) Enhance public-private partnerships in power generation and supply; (ii) improve the financial sustainability of the power sector in the light of high energy costs arising from escalating petroleum prices; (iii) increase inter-regional power trade; and (iv) address the declining Lake Victoria net basin supply by diversifying the sources of power generation. In view of the above, the relevance of project development objective is rated highly satisfactory.

* For all ratings in the PCR use the following scale: 4 (Highly satisfactory), 3 (Satisfactory), 2 (Unsatisfactory), 1 (Highly unsatisfactory.)

2. Relevance of project design

Rating* Narrative assessment (max 250 words)

3 The project was designed as a stand-alone initiative to connect the national grid with the proposed electricity generation at the Mputa oil sites near lake Albert and the mini hydro-plants, and enhance the reliability and quality of supply of power to distribution companies and final consumers. The project had five components:

i. Works on the 260 km 132 kV Tororo-Opuyo-Lira single circuit transmission line and 160 km 132 kV double circuit Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line;

ii. Construction of Mbarara North, Nkenda and Fort Portal substations; iii. Installation of Reactive Power Compensation at Opuyo and Nkenda; iv. Technical Assistance; and v. Project Supervision and Management.

The preparation and appraisal of the project incorporated lessons learnt from the Bank’s past interventions in Uganda. The specific measures included limitation of procurement packages to only three, the inclusion of establishment of an Escrow Account as a fulfilment of the requirement for first disbursement and comprehensive Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) studies in accordance with Bank requirements. During implementation, a number of adjustments to the scope and design were made and necessary technical solutions offered, such as the change of 132kV Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line from single to double circuit

4

and extension of Tororo, Opuyo and Lira substations to accommodate the second circuit. Moreover, the 50MW plant at Mputa was deferred due to delays in oil exploitation. Even though all these changes were made within the EPC contractual period to ensure achievement of the outcomes, they had affected the soundness and solidness of the original design at approval of the financing. The main factors that propelled changes in design that should have been foreseen by the Consultant and UETCL inculde: poor designs for the swampy areas that required special foundations, line routing leading to diversions and need to enhance reliability. Therefore, the relevance of project design is rated Satisfactory.

3. Lessons learned related to relevance

Key issues (max 5, add rows as

needed) Lessons learned

Target audience

Design changes A number of scope changes were introduced after project approval. They include the following:

Tororo – Opuyo- Lira line was initially 132 kV single circuit but was later changed to double circuit 132 kV line;

Fort Portal 132/33 kV substation that will later take its feed from a 220/132 KV substation to be constructed after the commissioning of the 220 kV transmission line from Hoima; the Mputa – Fort Portal line designed to operate at 220 kV will initially operate at 132 KV;

The extension of Opuyo Substation including 132 kV line bays and

Construction of 132 kV line bays at Tororo and Lira substations. The above design changes introduced time extension for EPC contracts completion date and increase of contract financial amounts.

UETCL, GoU

Project Implementation Unit

In the current setup, UETCL’s Project Implementation Unit manages all projects regardless of the source of funding. It therefore, faces a huge challenge to control, monitor, and supervise all the projects even with the support of an Engineering and Construction Supervision Consultant. In future, a separate PIU with necessary key staff should be created to run a specific project.

UETCL, AfDB

B Effectiveness

1. Progress towards the project’s development objective (project purpose)

Comments

Provide a brief description of the Project (components) and the context in which it was designed and implemented. State the project development objective (usually the project purpose as set out in the RLF) and assess progress. Unanticipated outcomes should also be accounted for, as well as specific reference of gender equality in the project. The consistency of the assumptions that link the different levels of the results chain in the RLF should also be considered. Indicative max length: 400 words.

The purpose of this project was to expand the national transmission grid to enable UETCL to transmit electricity from the upcoming 85 MW power plants, and improve electricity access, reliability, and quality of supply to consumers in the country. This was to be achieved through construction of 260 km single circuit 132 kV Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line and 160 km 132 kV double circuit Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line; construction of a new 2 x 32/40 MVA 132/33 kV Fort Portal Substation; 132 kV bay extensions at Mbarara and Nkenda substations; and Installation of 15 MVAr 132 kV reactors at Opuyo and Nkenda substations for power compensation and improvement of voltage stability.

The direct beneficiaries of the project output were economic actors and the population connected to the national power grid into which the project that is supplying power, as well as the people living along the line route, who were employed or provide services during construction. Increased availability of reliable and affordable electricity to rural consumers will foster an increase in economic activity (industrial, services, agricultural, commercial) and social wellbeing (households and social institutions) nationally. In addition, this will foster connections to new customers in line with the

5

Government efforts to increase electricity access that presently stands at about 20%. As per the objectives, the project’s benefits support: (i) Power utilities (UETCL and UMEME), as the project facilities enable UETCL to evacuate the electricity generated by the Mputa 50 MW Power station and the three mini hydros under completion in the western part of the country, to the distribution utility (UMEME) (ii) households, industrial and commercial electricity consumers connected to the national grid, as they will benefit from the increase in supply and improved reliability of service; (iii) potential electricity customers of UMEME and several service providers and as well as those to be connected through the Rural Electrification Agency (REA) projects. During construction, several direct jobs were created, including casual labour for construction as sourced directly from the project area as well as contracts for services such as security, bush cleaning, digging, catering, and waste disposal. Salaries, wages and fees paid to construction workers and local contractors provided a boost to the local economy. The completion of the Mbarara-Nkenda 132 kV transmission line has enabled Uganda to interconnect with Rwanda through 220 kV transmission line by stepping up the 132 kV level to 220 kV level at Mbarara substations. This may be considered as unanticipated outcome of the project. Finally, both the expected outcome and outputs have been partly met with the completion of the Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line. The progress of the uncompleted Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission stands at 60% completion. The Government has allocated the required resources and is committed to complete it despite several challenges related to the right-of-way and court injunctions.

2. Outcome reporting

Outcome indicators (as per RLF; add more

rows as needed)

Baseline value (Year)

Most recent value

(A)

End target (B) (expected value

at project completion)

Progress towards target

(% realized) (A/B)

Narrative assessment (indicative max length:

50 words per outcome)

Core Sector Indicator (Yes/No)

Outcome 1: New power plants connected to the national grid (Mputa 50 MW and the 35 MW from mini-hydros)

0 MW (2008)

47 MW (2018)2

85 MW additional

(2015)

55.3%

Mputa 50 MW Plant was deferred due to delays in oil exploitation.

Yes

Outcome 2: Increase in number of consumers connected to the grid (20,000 new customers annually connected)

300,000 (2008)

1,300,000 (2018)

580,000 (2018)

224% Connections have grown from about 300,000 in 2008 to about 1,300,000 in 2018 well surpassing the target; an increase of about 1,000,000, which translates to an average of yearly connection of 100,000

Yes

Outcome 3:

Approval by NEMA of ESIA and RAPs

Compliance of ESIA and RAPs with AfDB requirements (positive variance between the

0

6,070 PAPs3

6,486 PAPs

94%

Compensation of PAPs has been delayed by a number of factors that include:

PAPs seeking new assessments after accepting earlier ones;

Yes

2 ERA: Electricity Regulatory Authority 3 PAPs : Project Affected Person

6

number of affected persons compensated and numbers identified in ESIA reports).

Court injunctions denying UETCL access to make new valuations.

Rating* (see IPR methodology)

Narrative assessment

3 All the programmed outcome indicators were not met before the expiry of the loan disbursement deadline, which as explained earlier was due to the several challenges related to the right-of-way and court injunctions on Tororo – Opuyo - Lira transmission line. However, the Government of Uganda is committed to complete the remaining transmission line section and has allocated the required resources. In addition to this, the Government has put in place several corrective actions to settle the outstanding right-of-way issues, such as by implementing out of court settlement with the PAPs. In line with the objectives, the benefits to customers (existing and future customers) in the western part of the country include reliable power supply. The Independent Power Producers (IPPs) have also benefited from injecting the power into the national grid.

3. Output reporting

Output indicators (as specified in the

RLF; add more rows as needed)

Most recent value (A)

End target (B) (expected value

at project completion)

Progress towards target

(% realized) (A/B)

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 50

words per output)

Core Sector

Indicator (Yes/No)

Output 1: Length of 132 kV double circuit transmission line constructed

160 km double circuit line

completed & operational

72.8 km out of 260 km

completed and couldn’t be

operational unless the full 260 km

completed

260 km (2013)

60% The 160 km Mbarara-Nkenda line is completed and is operational. However, progress has been greatly hampered by right of way (ROW) issues on the Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line.

Yes

Output 2: Number of substations erected

6 (2018)

6 (2013)

100% New 2*32/40 MVA 132/33 kV Fort Portal Substation was commissioned in February 2018 and all the 132 kV bay extensions of Mbarara, Nkenda, Tororo, Opuyo and Lira Substations were completed during 2016 and 2017

Yes

Output 3: Environmental Mitigation measures implemented

5,8114 (2018)

6,485 (2013)

90% Partially done, a number of ROW issues have remained unresolved on Tororo – Opuyo - Lira line curtailing the implementation of the project.

Yes

Rating* (see IPR methodology)

Narrative assessment

3 The project has not delivered all the outputs as planned in the Appraisal Report. Of note is that there has been a significant delay in project implementation due to design changes introduced along the way by the Executing Agency (UETCL) and challenges relating to securing the right-of-way for the transmission lines. Both UETCL and GoU confirmed to the Bank that they would complete the project

4 Source : UETCL

7

as the Government had allocated resources for the remaining works and formulated strategies on how to resolve the ROW issues with the disputed PAPs.

4. Development Objective (DO) rating5

DO rating (derived from updated IPR)*

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words

3 The partial completion of the project has affected the full delivery of its development objective. However, the completed components together with the completion of other projects have enabled Uganda to interconnect with Rwanda; the IPPs for small hydropower plants to evacuate the power and the customers in the western part of the country to benefit from a more reliable power supply.

5. Beneficiaries (add rows as needed)

Actual (A) Planned (B) Progress towards

target (% realized) (A/B)

% of women

Category (eg. farmers, students)

IPPs that developed the

47 MW

85 MW (2015)

100% 55% The completion of the Mbarara-Nkenda 132 kV double circuit line has contributed to the successful completion and operation of small hydro plants in the western part of the country. They supply their power to the grid. On the other hand, the transmission line has relieved UETCL (the bulk power purchaser) from paying the deemed energy to the IPPs.

1,352,735 (2018)

500,000 with 20,000 new customers annually

connected (2018)

100% >100% From the total 1,352,735 customers in the country, there are several in the western part of Uganda, where the Mbarara – Nkenda project supplies power. Therefore, the households and the economic actors benefited by extending their working hours, creating new jobs. Learning institutions can now invest in high-end equipment for their laboratories thus producing better skilled students. All these will give rise to a stable economy. With a stable economy, the country will rid itself of vices caused by unemployment.

6. Gender Equality

Assessment on the performance of Gender Equality in the operation

Much of the impact on social life along the power lines occurred during resettlement and construction periods. Positive impacts included temporary markets for goods and services, including sale of food and sources of employment for certain tasks during construction. As at end of 2018, the number of domestic connections were 1,242,354, up from 636,359 households in 2014. First, given that women account for 52% of Uganda’s population, it can be deduced that out of the new 161,409 households connected to the grid in 2018, at least 83,932.68 women got access to electricity. The completed section of the project (Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line) has contributed to this achievement. In general, the project has enabled increased access to electricity by women and children, who can now perform their duties more efficiently. During the implementation of the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), a requirement for counter-signature by women and other adult household members for the proposed compensation package (compensation payment or resettlement) was introduced.

5 For operations using the old supervision report and rating system in SAP, the DO rating for the PCR shall be calculated using the IPR methodology.

8

7. Unanticipated or additional outcomes (add rows as needed)

Description Type (eg. gender, climate change,

social, other)

Positive or negative

Impact on project (High, Medium, Low)

The original purpose of the line was to expand the national transmission grid to enable UETCL to transmit electricity from upcoming 85 MW power plants, improve the electricity access, reliability, and quality of supply to consumers in the country.

Technical and Economic

Positive High

Vandalism that includes stealing of tower parts of the lattice steel towers has reached troubling levels and calls for urgent remedial action. This problem has contributed also to the delay in project completion and the cost overrun.

Technical Negative High

The exploitation of oil in the Albertine Region experienced delays. As a result, the 50 MW Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) plant in Mputa was not installed. However, large hydro plants have been developed. The Government is now planning to install about 150 MW gas turbines in addition

Technical and Economic

Negative Low

Following the loan cancellation by the Bank, it was required that UETCL and the Government of Uganda have to mobilise about US$ 6.0 million to complete the project.

Financial Negative High

3. Lessons learned related to effectiveness (add rows as needed)

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned Target audience

Delays in commencement

The Loan Agreement was signed on 13 May 2009 but only became effective on 22 May 2011; a period of about 2 years. There is need to review the criterion for assessing readiness by the borrower during appraisal.

Bank

Delay in settling the right-of-way issues

The right-of-way issues delayed the project’s completion and extended the Loan Disbursement deadline several times. The Bank subsequently decided to withdraw the balance of the loan before completion of the Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line. All these affected the completion of the project and achievement of the outcomes and outputs as designed. Therefore:

Most of the right of way issues could have been handled before escalating to worse levels if there was commitment by all stakeholders to promptly address the issues arising with committed resources and with consistency.

The grievance redress mechanism that was established could have been effective if there was constant engagement with committed funds, stakeholder buy in and prompt response from the professionals as well as the office of the Chief Government Valuer (CGV).

Land acquisition/access processes do not require lengthy and bureaucratic procedures. UETCL needs to engage policy makers to advance mechanisms of fast-tracking such procedures. The recommendation is to explore packaging this as art of overall project costing with inbuilt financial risk management checks.

RAP implementation processes need to operate in projectized environment; the process suffered from lengthy bureaucratic procedures. Decision gates and tolerance levels at each gate need to be established with customized and committed teams to enable instant decision making/taking, constant monitoring of activities and prompt resolution of emerging issues.

For UETCL and other agencies that form the group of “Borrowers” to fulfil the loan condition below, there needs to be a national change in the legal

Bank / GoU / UETCL

9

regime to facilitate this. There should be continued national dialogue on how land acquisition processes should be fast tracked while safeguarding the rights of affected persons.

Weak monitoring and evaluation system and inefficient Project Implementation Structure

Despite several reminders by the Bank to both the Borrower and the Executing Agency to closely monitor the project and addresses the challenges, at the end there was no monitoring and evaluation system established to complete the project at least within the extended loan disbursement deadline.

In the current setup, UETCL’s Project Implementation Unit is managing all projects regardless of the source of funding. Therefore, the unit faces a huge challenge to control, monitor, and supervise all the projects even with the support of an Engineering and Construction Supervision Consultant. In future, a separate PIU with key staff should be created to run a specific project.

GoU / UETCL

C Efficiency

1. Timeliness

Planned project duration – years (A) (as per PAR)

Actual implementation time – years (B) (from effectiveness for

1st disb.)

Ratio of planned and actual implementation time (A/B)

Rating*

48 months from the date of Loan effectiveness

84 months and partly not completed

0.57 1

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

The loan effectiveness date was 18 February 2011. As of this PCR preparation, except for the substations and the Mbarara-Nkenda 132 kV double circuit transmission line, the project is not fully completed. The construction works on Tororo-Lira transmission line is still ongoing with several challenges on the right-of-way. In conclusion, the project implementation period far exceeded the planned implementation schedule, mainly: (i) Delays in the procurement process, which resulted in the contract being signed with EPC contractors at the end of 2012; (ii) design changes introduced after signing of EPC contracts; (iii) very slow pace in resolving the ROW issues and compensation payment by UETCL; and (iv) no establishment and implementation of proper monitoring and evaluation system by UETCL’s Top Management, the Borrower and the Ministry of Energy. Therefore, the timeliness is rated Highly Unsatisfactory.

2. Resource use efficiency

Median % physical implementation of RLF outputs

financed by all financiers (A) (see II.B.3)

Commitment rate (%) (B) (See table 1.C – Total commitment

rate of all financiers)

Ratio of the median percentage physical implementation and

commitment rate (A/B)

Rating*

83.3% 86.05% 0.97 2

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

The actual disbursement of the Loan is about UA 43,940,800 against the original project cost of UA 52.51 million during the appraisal stage. A total 420 km 132 kV transmission line was planned with 260 km 132 kV Tororo-Lira via Opuyo single circuit transmission line; and 160 km 132 kV double circuit Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line. Mbarara-Nkenda transmission line started operating in February 2019. However, due to the ROW issues in the Tororo-Lira section, the transmission line is not yet completed. The total requirement for the completion of the project is UGX 33.4 billion (US$ 9 million), with a financing gap of UGX 21.7 billion (US$ 6 million). In addition, a number of ROW issues have remained unresolved on the Tororo-Opuyo-Lira line curtailing the implementation of the project. All planned 6 substations were completed. The new Fort Portal Substation was commissioned in February 2018 and all the 132 kV bay extensions of Mbarara, Nkenda, Tororo, Opuyo and Lira Substations were completed during 2016 and 2017. Due to the extended delay in completion of the project, the EPC contractor will raise several financial claims on the idle time relating to unresolved right-of-way issues. At final project completion, the project cost will exceed the initial estimate of UA 52.51 million. Mainly due to the uncompleted transmission line (Tororo – Opuyo - Lira), the efficiency on resource use is rated Unsatisfactory.

10

3. Cost benefit analysis

Economic Rate of Return (at appraisal) (A)

Updated Economic Rate of Return (at completion) (B)

Ratio of the Economic Rate of Return at completion and at appraisal (B/A)

Rating*

32.89% (NPV US$ 177.452 million @ 12% real)

19.54% (@12%, US$ 42.33 million@ 12% real)

0.59 1

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

The Mbarara-Nkenda and Tororo-Opuyo-Lira project was appraised in 2008. At the time of appraisal, the economic analysis was conducted by comparing the “without-” and “with-project” scenarios. In the incremental scenario, the analysis had demonstrated significant benefits from expanding the national transmission grid, because of improving the electricity access, reliability, and quality of supply to consumers in the country. At the time of review of the project, the electronic version of the model was not available. PCR findings indicated that the Tororo-Opuyo-Lira line was not complete after spending US$ 25 million. UETCL is still using the existing wooden pole line built in 1963, which is transferring an average 13 MW only and causing about 20 times faults every year. The Mbarara-Nkenda line started operation in February 2019. After the completion, one of the main economic benefits is that the transmission line could help evacuate the electricity from existing mini hydropower plants (48.3 MW) and upcoming new mini-hydropower plants (33 MW), and connecting them to the national grid. In addition, the project could reduce interruptions and increase reliability to supply the electricity in Nkenda area. However, due to the prolonged construction delay (5 years), in-completion of the Tororo-Opuyo-Lira transmission line, and the reduced transmission margin comparing to the original assumptions, the Economic Internal Rate of Return at the completion stage (B) is much lower than estimated at the appraisal stage (A). The value of the Economic opportunities foregone by the project delay are not estimated.

4. Implementation Progress (IP)

IP rating (derived from updated IPR) *

Narrative comments (commenting specifically on those IP items that were rated Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory, as per last IPR (indicative max length: 500 words)

3 The overall implementation rating over the years is an average of 3.05, which is equivalent to Satisfactory (see Annex-1). All project covenants have been complied with. However, procurement under the project was delayed, contributing to the extending of the initial loan disbursement deadline. The delay in releasing the counterpart fund for compensation payments and implementation of RAP has also contributed to delays in compensation payments and creating on-site implementation slippages. In terms of disbursement from the loan, there were no delays. However, there were several delays in certifying and releasing the invoices of EPC contractors and supervision consultant. Since the Bank has extended the loan disbursement deadline five times, finally the Bank closed the loan with undisbursed balance UA 8,569,200. The monitoring and evaluation mechanism by the Executing Agency (UETCL), the Borrower and the line ministry, i.e. Ministry of Energy and Minerals Development, was weak.

5. Lessons learned related to efficiency

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned Target

audience

Delayed payments Delayed payment of EPC contractors resulted in additional costs arising from interest on delayed payments and extensions of time for completion. Accordingly, payment procedures should be reviewed continuously to minimise delays.

ALL

Project delay At the appraisal stage, the project delay was not included in the sensitivity analysis. One of the main risk factors of the transmission project is the delay mainly due to the land acquisition issue. The risk of project implementation delay should be considered and evaluated in the sensitivity analysis, especially for the transmission project. The risk mitigation measure should be addressed in the appraisal report.

UETCL/AfDB

Separate cost-benefit analysis of the

The project includes the two separate transmission lines. Therefore, evaluation of the project viability could be consolidated after each system is separately

UETCL/AfDB

11

transmission lines evaluated. It could indicate the separate results as well. Then, at the completion stage, the actual economic impacts on the stakeholders could be compared with the expected benefits at the appraisal stage for each transmission system and as a whole. In particular, in case one or two of the transmission lines is not completed, the detailed analysis could be conducted at the completed system.

Due diligence on selection of project supervision consultant and EPC contractors

Due diligence should be carried out before final award is made especially in cases where the lowest evaluated consultant or bidder cost is far below the Engineer’s estimates. For example, the project supervision consultant had estimated very low person-month in proposal required during project implementation. However, its actual service contract amount had increased from EUR 909,393 to EUR 1,559,325, an increase to 71% due to the extension of the service contract with additional person-months. Therefore, it is recommended that project implementing agencies look seriously at the proposed person-months by the consultant to see if covers supervision of the whole activities of the project during the implementation period.

UETCL / GoU

D Sustainability

1. Financial sustainability

Rating*

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

1 At the appraisal stage, the financial sustainability of the project was assessed and a Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) of 17.07% was estimated based on two transmission projects operation (Mbarara-Nkenda & Tororo-Opuyo-Lira). The actual disbursement is about US$ 65 million against the original project cost was US$ 116 million at the appraisal stage. However, the Tororo-Lira line is not completed after spending US$ 25 million. Since the operation of the Mbarara-Nkenda in February 2019, the transferred energy through the line is estimated around 347 GWh/year. Due to the failure of the transmission line (Tororo-Lira) completion and tight transmission tariff, PCR assessment yielded a FIRR of 0.27%, and negative Financial Net Present Value (FNPV) of US$ 36 million. Therefore, the project could have a negative impact on the UETCL’s Balance sheet. Especially, it has contributed to increasing the gearing ratio without huge positive financial impacts, such as reducing Operation and Maintenance (O&M) cost on old lines and increasing reliable energy transfer as planned to generate revenues commensurate to the incremental costs of the project.

2. Institutional sustainability and strengthening of capacities

Rating* Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

2 The Executing Agency is the UETCL, which is the single electricity buyer/wholesaler and transmission system operator in Uganda’s power sector, UETCL’s financial indicators present a warning regarding its financial sustainability. In FYI 2018 (July 2017- June 2018), UETCL made a net loss (before tax) of UGX 107.22 billion (US$ 29 million), mainly due to the exchange losses of UGX 81.5 billion (US$ 21.8 million) caused by the fluctuation of the exchange rate to the dollar dominated borrowing payment. UETCL continues to pay high costs related to deemed energy purchase from IPPs. The deemed energy constituted 8.2% of the energy purchases in the Fiscal Year 2018. Although it was a reduction compared to the previous year where the cost was 34%, the deemed energy purchases constrains funds availability for working capital requirements and operations. The gearing ratio as of June 2018 increased to 83% from 69% in June 2017 due to the additional borrowing from the Export Import Bank of China for the Karuma and Isimba hydro power plants. In addition, given that over-supply is a main concern in the Uganda Power Sector, the deemed energy purchase and limited capacity to invest in the grid properly will remain huge risks for the financial sustainability of the UETCL. Therefore, proper implementation of the grid development plan (2018-2040) would be most important in encouraging the electricity demand for industry and households and absorbing the increased supply capacity. However, the technical indicators have improved, thanks to the strengthened capacity of high voltage transmission. The losses in transmission have improved to 3.64% in 2018 from 3.86% in 2016.

With respect to capacity building, UETCL staff benefitted from the on-job training programmes that were embedded in the EPC and Consultancy services’ contracts. This enhanced institutional capacity.

12

3. Ownership and sustainability of partnerships

Rating* Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

2 The ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the project rested with UETCL, supported by the Project Supervision Consultant. As noted earlier, the implementation of the Project was unsatisfactory mainly due to challenges associated with ROW issues. The Government has to deal with this challenge. The Executing Agency has not made enough effort to involve some of the key stakeholders like the CGV for timely approvals of the assets valuation reports in order to effect the compensation payments to the PAPs and the local communities to protect the towers from vandalism. A participatory approach was used throughout the preparation of the project. In conducting the studies, socioeconomic surveys were carried out in the communities and with the Government. These were followed by validation seminars that brought together all the stakeholders. Furthermore, during the identification, preparation and appraisal missions, workshops were organized with the relevant stakeholders as well as the donors interested in the sector. The key outcomes in terms of project design included: selection of line route, incorporation of safety and health campaigns as well as a number of other measures included in the ESMPs.

4. Environmental and social sustainability

Rating* Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

2 Approvals: The project complied with the environmental and social safeguard requirements of the Government of Uganda and the African Development Bank. The project obtained all the necessary approvals: Environmental and Social Assessment Approval from the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) in 2010; Wetlands Permit; Roads Permit; Park Entry Permit; and Forest Permits. The EPC Contractor prepared and submitted a Contractor-SEAP & assembled a Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) team. UETCL nominated HSE supervisors who supervised the Contractor’s HSE team and implementation of the Contractor-SEAP. Biodiversity Mitigation and Management: In addition to the preparation of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) studies and environmental and social management plans, the project through the application of the mitigation hierarchy avoided sensitive receptors like tropical high forests. Where avoidance it was not possible to avoid, UETCL paid Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) USD 1.050.000 for Offsets for benefits streams foregone for impact of the line on 54 kilometers of QENP. Another biodiversity measure was related to the payment for Offsets and Benefits Streams Foregone for impacts on the natural forests in Kalinzu and for the plantation forests section. The social sustainability triggers of the project included resettlement and compensation, gender and social inclusion aspects with necessary plans developed. In particular, 50 out of 50 houses were constructed for vulnerable persons and all houses were formally handed over to the beneficiaries. All site plans as built have been submitted by the consultant for RAP implementation Though not initially well coordinated, project community and stakeholder participation mechanisms, including grievance handling and feedback platforms, were in place. However, going forward, effective coordination of these platforms will help enhance management of social sustainability aspects. Regarding the capacity to implement ESMP considerations, although the UETCL had dedicated E&S staff to oversee the project, it is recommended that more E&S staff for more closer oversight this is based on the observation that the performance of the project supervision consultant was unsatisfactory due to its reluctant approach on time anticipating the challenges on site construction works and timely advising the project-executing agency to resolve the challenges ahead of time. Delays in ROW issues vis-à-vis loan extensions required additional analysis on the required resources to fast track land acquisition issues while taking into account the sensitivities and rights of project-affected persons

13

5. Lessons learned related to sustainability

Key issues (max 5, add rows as

needed) Lessons learned

Target audience

Vandalism Vandalism of tower parts is on the increase. This should be handled through a multi-pronged approach that includes:

Mass sensitization aimed at enhancing vigilance among citizens;

Usage of monopole structures especially in areas where there is little human settlement.

Use of anti-vandal bolts and welding of towers

Failure to handle the vandalism of the transmission line tower will result into towers collapse and related power interruptions in addition to posing a danger to the public, which will question one of the objectives of the project: “Provision of reliable power supply”.

UETCL / GoU

Feed in Tariff Under the current Feed-in Tariff, the PPA price for mini-hydropower plant is about 8 cents/kwh, with a capacity between 9 and 20 MW. The price is relatively higher compared to the current bulk supply tariff, which is about 7 cents/kwh (UGX 245/kWh). Given the difficulties to attract the private sector for rural mini hydropower plants, the auction system or financial bidding procurement procedure could be considered to reduce the PPA price.

GOU, UETCL

Liquidity management

The UETCL has managed the liquidity risk through financial support from the Government of Uganda. There is a negative net liquidity gap in the short-term forecast (after 4 months period), especially to finance future investment. Given the investment in network capacity is largely needed in the near future, the demand-supply plan will be well monitored to make a proper network system investment plan while avoiding the oversupply of generation, which could make a substantial negative financial impact on UETCL’s financial sustainability.

GOU, UETCL

III Performance of stakeholders

1. Bank performance

Rating* Narrative assessment by the Borrower on the Bank’s performance, as well as any other aspects of the project (both quantitative and qualitative). See guidance note on issues to cover. (Indicative max length: 250 words).

3 The Bank has always been receptive to UETCL’s and GoU’s queries and requests for information and explanation. Requests for disbursements were treated within the timeframe allocated in the contracts by UETCL, consultant and Contractors to meet deadlines. Although on some occasions UETCL had to intervene more persuasively through repeated mails and letters and the local Bank’s office to have a response from the Bank on some issues like extension of loan disbursement deadlines and no-objection for procurement related issues, it is noted that generally, the services offered by the Bank were of good standard and the officers had a good grasp of their relative obligations.

Comments to be inserted by the Bank on its own performance (both quantitative and qualitative). See guidance note on issues to cover. (Indicative max length: 250 words).

The Bank provided close and extensive project supervision and review missions throughout the implementation of the project. The Bank supervised the project twice a year and provided advice to the Executing Agency and the Government to address the critical challenges (the ROW issues, compensation payment and timely allocation of counterpart fund). In each of the missions, field inspections were conducted, followed by an analysis and discussion of observations, including debriefing sessions held with the GoU officials, the results of which were co-signed in the respective Aide Memoires of the missions. The bank’s country office in Uganda also played a major role in facilitating implementation of project activities and ensuring that the process was compliant with the Bank’s Rules of Procedures and GoU to addresses those persistent challenges. The Bank also, throughout implementation, provided prompt response to GoU requests and was proactive in its monitoring. Overall, the Bank has shown good support throughout the project, starting from the appraisal

14

phase. The Bank approved the Government’s request for extension of the loan disbursement deadline five times. However, the Bank was not so strong on enforcing the safeguard requirements where construction works were carried out prior the full acquisition of the right of way and compensation payments.

Key issues (related to Bank performance, max 5, add rows as needed).

Lessons learned

No-objection to Borrower’s project documents

Documents from the Borrower for the Bank’s no-objection should be prepared in accordance with the Bank’s guidelines for faster processing

Implementation of Bank’s safeguard requirements

When the Bank’s safeguard requirements are violated, the Bank should immediately enforce the required measures, including the suspension of fund’s disbursement until the Borrower and Executing Agency fulfils the requirements.

2. Borrower performance

Rating* Narrative assessment on the Borrower performance to be inserted by the Bank (both quantitative and qualitative, depending on available information). See guidance note. (Indicative max length: 250 words).

2 The performance of the Government of Uganda, through MoFPED and UETCL as the project implementing agency, has been unsatisfactory in ensuring overall project implementation and achievement of the results indicated in this report. When the 24-months EPC contracts are not fully completed even by 70 months due to the right-of-way issues and compensation payments, the government and the executing agency’s seriousness to tackle the challenges became questionable. During implementation of the project, there was a delay in releasing the counterpart fund for compensation payment. There are still unresolved compensation payments to the PAPs, caused by disagreements on the determined values and court cases. However, based on the outcome/decision of the court, the Government is settling the issues with the PAPs and trying to resolve some cases through out of court settlement.

Key issues (related to Borrower performance, max 5, add rows as

needed). Lessons learned

Delayed payments of Contractor’s EPC, Consultant’s fees and Compensation to PAPS

The delay on timely certifying Contractor’s invoices and submission of disbursement application to the Bank requires no over emphasis, as this greatly undermines capacity to deliver and gives rise to claims of costs and time extensions. The Government and UETCL should therefore review their payment processing mechanisms and procedures to ensure timely settlement and enforce accountability. The delay in releasing the counterpart fund for compensation payments and implementation of RAP has also continuously observed during the implementation of the project, which contributed to delays to project completion and implementation slippages.

Covenants of Loan Agreement The Government took long in meeting loan conditions, causing delays in project implementation and delivery of objectives. The Government should therefore ensure that the loan conditions once accepted, should be met as soon as possible.

Institutional capacity As the capacity of UETCL to implement further infrastructure investment is inadequate due to its current structure and lack of monitoring and evaluation mechanism by UETCL top Management. Therefore, proper attention shall be given to address these issues by adequately staffing, establishing a dedicated PIU for each project and creating proper monitoring and evaluation mechanism to evaluate progress of project and address the challenges on time.

3. Performance of other stakeholders

Rating* Narrative assessment on the performance of other stakeholders, including co-financiers, contractors and service providers. See guidance note on issues to cover. (indicative max length: 250 words)

2

The performance of the project supervision consultant was unsatisfactory due to a general reluctance to act on time in advising the project-executing agency on construction site challenges so that they may be resolved promptly.

15

The performance of the EPC contractor was satisfactory as evidenced by commitment to complete the project despite the challenges related to the acquisition of the right of way. In addition, the contractor demonstrated possession of financial and technical capacity to execute the project and deliver quality work. The performance of the Chief Government Valuer was not satisfactory as there was a delay in approving the assets valuation reports submitted by UETCL.

Key issues (related to performance of other

stakeholders, max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned (max 5) Target audience

(for lessons learned)

National systems The country has to intensify its efforts in conducting a national dialogue to deal with land speculations and ensure that country systems are oriented towards efficient delivery of resettlement and compensatory mitigation measures.

UETCL / GoU

Close collaboration between UETCL and CGV

The compensation rates and assets valuation conducted by the executing agency (UETCL) contributed to high payments and demands of exorbitant amounts by the landowners. Adequate staffing of the CGV could expedite the review and approval of compensation rates and assets valuation conducted by the government’s project executing agencies, and minimise compensation delays and disagreements with landowners.

CGV / GoU / UETCL

IV Summary of key lessons learned and recommendations

1. Key lessons learned

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed)

Key lessons learned Target audience Deadline

Occupational Health and Safety

Based on the reports, site Health and Safety issues were poorly addressed. This is unacceptable. Strong deterrent measures should be instituted to guard against such malpractices.

All Continuous

ROW issues ROW acquisition poses a real threat to infrastructure development and, as a lesson learned, construction should only commence after the country the ROW has been secured.

GOU Continuous

Changes in design The design changes introduced during implementation increased the Project cost by about 21%. It is recommended that in future, UETCL should subject project designs to technical audits by Independent Consultants before procurement of works. This will allow for rectification of any deficiencies in the design and tender documentation and help avoid amendments during project implementation, as this leads to cost/time overruns that result in skewed outcomes of the anticipated economic viability of projects.

UETCL Continuous

Monitoring and evaluation system

During the implementation of this project, the delay on procurement process, compensation payments and implementation of RAP were persisting for several years. No remedial actions were taken on time and the Borrower and the Ministry of Energy and Minerals Development were disconnected from tracking the progress of the project due to unavailability of well established monitoring and evaluation system at each Government level.

Borrower. UETCL/MoEMD

Continuous

16

2. Key recommendations (with particular emphasis on ensuring sustainability of project benefits)

Key issue (max 10, add rows as needed)

Key recommendation Responsible

Level of preparedness The Bank should assess the level of preparedness of both the country and implementing agencies during project appraisals. A delay of 2 years between loan signing and first disbursement is to a large extent a clear indication of a low level of readiness.

Bank

ROW acquisition ROW acquisition is posing a serious challenge to projects implementation. Key recommendations are:

Government should set up special courts to expeditiously deal with ROW issues;

ROW should be secured before construction works begin;

Capacity of district land boards in updating compensation rates should be enhanced;

Resettlement Action Plans should be reviewed and where possible special courts to deal with land issues set up;

Continuous mass sensitization should be carried out in project areas to address the unrealistic expectations among PAPs.

UETCL should develop different strategies with respect to ROW acquisition; for example does UETCL have to own that ROW land, or can a middle ground be found where both parties can co-exist?

UETCL / GoU

Extensions of Loan disbursement deadline

Loan disbursement deadline extensions should include very clear, realistic observable measures that address the key issues that led to the delays.

GoU/Bank

Delayed payments Delayed payments of invoices results in unnecessary additional costs due to interest on claims and extensions of time for their completion. It is recommended that payment processes to be critically reviewed to reduce the payment timeline and establish accountability mechanism for those who delay the payments.

UETCL

Human capacity Human capacity, both in numbers and competencies, appears to be insufficient. It is recommended that the Bank makes adequate assessment during project appraisal.

UETCL/ Bank

Financial literacy of PAPs Monetary compensation should be preceded by well-designed appropriate financial literacy so that the affected PAPs can optimise the utilisation of the funds.

UETCL

Build Uganda Buy Uganda (BUBU)

In line with the Government policy on local content, UETCL should ensure that each Contract (Consultant or Contractor) has an element to enhance local content. UETCL may take lessons from UNRA that has already embarked on this.

UETCL

Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanism

The Borrower and the project Executing Agency, including the line/sector Ministry (Ministry of Energy and Minerals Development), shall design and put in place proper monitoring and evaluation mechanism to monitor progress on implementation, address the challenges on timely manner and enforce accountability.

Borrower/UETCL/MoEMD

17

V Overall PCR rating

Dimensions and criteria Rating*

DIMENSION A: RELEVANCE 3.5

Relevance of project development objective (II.A.1) 4

Relevance of project design (II.A.2) 3

DIMENSION B: EFFECTIVENESS 3

Development Objective (DO) (II.B.4) 3

DIMENSION C: EFFICIENCY 1.75

Timeliness (II.C.1) 1

Resource use efficiency (II.C.2) 2

Cost-benefit analysis (II.C.3) 1

Implementation Progress (IP) (II.C.4) 3

DIMENSION D: SUSTAINABILITY 1.75

Financial sustainability (II.D.1) 1

Institutional sustainability and strengthening of capacities (II.D.2) 2

Ownership and sustainability of partnerships (II.D.3) 2

Environmental and social sustainability (II.D.4) 2

AVERAGE OF THE FOUR DIMENSION RATINGS 2.5

OVERALL PROJECT COMPLETION RATING 3

(Satisfactory)

OVERALL PCR RATING: This will be calculated as the average of the Dimension ratings. The following scale will apply:

1.00-1.49 (Highly Unsatisfactory), 1.50-2.49 (Unsatisfactory), 2.50-3.49 (Satisfactory), 3.50-4.00 (Highly Satisfactory)

18

VI Acronyms and abbreviations

Acronym (add rows as needed) Full name

ADF African Development Fund

AfDB African Development Bank

CGV Chief Government Valuer

EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return

EPC Engineering, Procurement and Construction

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan

GOU Government of Uganda

HSE Health, Safety and Environment

IPPs Independent Power Producers

kV Kilo-volt

kWh Kilo-watt-hour

MW Megawatt

NEMA National Environment Management Authority

NPV Net Present Value

O&M Operation and Maintenance

PAPs Project Affected Persons

PAR Project Appraisal Report

PCR Project Completion Report

PIU Project Implementation Unit

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

RDGE Eastern Africa Regional Development and Business Delivery Office

RLF Result-based Logical Framework

ROW Right of way

UA Unit of Account

UETCL Ugandan Electricity Transmission Company Ltd

UGX Ugandan Shilling

US$ United States Dollar

19

Annex -1 PROJECT PERFORMANCE

INDICATORS

RATINGS

Field Supervision Mission Dates This

Report

12

.04

.20

10

18

.11

.20

10

01

.04

.20

11

6.1

1.2

01

1

28

.05

.20

12

17

.10

.20

12

8.0

3.2

01

3

9.1

0.2

01

3

31

.03

.20

14

25

.09

.20

14

25

.03

.20

15

22

.09

.20

15

29

.03

.20

16

26

.09

.20

16

18

.04

.20

17

06

.11

.20

17

19

.02

.20

18

01

.05

.20

19

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

Compliance with loan condition conditions precedent to entry into force 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Compliance with General Conditions 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Compliance with Other Conditions 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

PROCUREMENT PERFORMANCE

Procurement of Consultancy Services 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Procurement of Goods and Works 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

Availability of Foreign Exchange 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Availability of Local Currency 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

Disbursement Flows 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

Cost Management 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Performance of Co-Financiers 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

ACTIVITIES AND WORKS

Adherence to implementation schedules 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1

Performance of Consultants or Technical Assistance 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 1

Performance of Contractors 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Performance of Project Management 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1

IMPACT ON DEVELOPMENT

Likelihood of achieving development Objectives 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Likelihood that benefits will be realized and sustained beyond 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2

Likely contribution of the project towards an increase in impact 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

Current Rate of Return 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3

OVERALL PROJECT ASSESSMENT

Implementation Progress (IP) 1.91 2 2 1.69 2 2.21 2.5 2.79 2.86 2.86 2.71 2.64 2.64 2.64 2.57 2.57 2.57 2.29

Development Objectives (DO) 3 3 3 3 3 2.67 2.67 2.5 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 3 3 3 3 3 2.75

Implementation Progress (IP)6 (Converted into new Rating of 1 to 4) 2.55 2.67 2.67 2.25 2.67 2.95 3.33 3.72 3.81 3.81 3.61 3.52 3.52 3.52 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.05

Development Objectives (DO) (Converted into new Rating of 1 to 4) 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.56 3.56 3.33 3.67 3.67 3.67 3.67 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.67

6 The overall IP and DO ratings during Supervision Missions has been adjusted to reflect new 1-4 rating scale. (RATINGS: 4 = Highly Satisfactory, 3 = Satisfactory, 2 = Unsatisfactory, 1 = Highly Unsatisfactory)