Document of The World Bank Report No: ICR2385 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (IDA-39900 IDA-H1280 IDA-H5990) ON A CREDIT AND GRANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 42.1 MILLION (US$62.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF BENIN FOR THE NATIONAL COMMUNITY-DRIVEN DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT PROJECT (PNDCC) October 25, 2012 Social Protection Sector Unit – West and Central (AFTSW) Country Department AFCF2 Africa Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective July 10, 2012) Currency Unit = CFA Franc US$1.00 = CFA 533 FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACCA Agents Communautaires de Communication et d’Animation (Community Representatives for Communication and Coordination) ADV Association de Développement Villageoises (Village Development Association) AGeFIB Agence de Gestion et de Financement des Initiatives de Base (Agency for the Management and Financing of Grassroots Initiatives) AGETIP Agence d’Exécution des Travaux d’Intérêt Public (Agency for the Implementation of Public Works) AGETUR Agence d’Exécution des Travaux Urbains (Agency for the Implementation of Urban Works) APDC Acteurs Porteurs de Développement Communautaire (Community Development Advocate) APL Adaptable Programmatic Lending BIM Bureau d’Ingénierie et de Management (Engineering and Management Firm) CAS Country Assistance Strategy CDD Community-Driven Development CEM Comité d’Entretien et de Maintenance (Maintenance Committee) CMA Contract Management Agency CNDCC Comité National de Développement Conduit par les Communautés (National Committee for Community-Driven Development) CNDLP Commission Nationale pour le Développement et la Lutte contre la Pauvreté (National Commission for Development and the Fight against Poverty) CPAR Country Procurement Assessment Report CTFC Comité Technique de Fourniture de Conseil (Technical Committee for Advisory Support) CTMO Comité Technique de Mise en Œuvre (Technical Committee for Implementation) FA Fiduciary Agency FADEC Fonds d'Appui au Développement des Communes (Commune Development Fund) FGB Formation en gestion à la base (Grassroots Management Training) FTI Fast Track Initiative GMT Grassroots Management Training IDA International Development Association ICR Implementation Completion Report IEC Information, Education and Communication IGA Income Generating Activity IREEP Institut de Recherche Empirique en Economie Politique (Institute for the Empirical Research of Political Economy ) KPIs Key Performance Indicators MAEP Ministère de l'Agriculture, de l'Elevage et de la Pêche (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries) MDGLAAT Ministère de la Décentralisation, de la Gouvernance Locale, de l’Administration et de l’Aménagement du Territoire (Ministry of Decentralization, Local Governance, and Administration and Development of the Territory) MCAT Ministère de la Culture, de l'Artisanat et du Tourisme (Ministry of Culture, Artisanship and Tourism) MCPPD Ministère Chargé du Plan, de la Prospective et du Développement (Ministry of Plan and Development) MDGs Millennium Development Goals MEF Ministère des Finances et de l'Economie (Ministry of Finance and Economy) MEHU Ministre de l’Environnement, de l’Habitat et de l’Urbanisme (Ministry of Environment, Habitat, and Urbanism) MEPS Ministère des Enseignements Primaire et Secondaire (Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education) MEMP Ministère des Enseignements Maternel et Primaire (Ministry of Maternal and Primary Education) MERPMEDER Ministère de l’Energie, des Recherches Pétrolières et Minières, de l’Eau et du Développement des Energies Renouvelables (Ministry of Energy, Oil and Mineral Research, Water, and Development of Renewable Energy) MFI Microfinance Institution MIS Management and Information System MS Ministère de Santé (Ministry of Health) MSP Ministère de la Santé Publique (Ministry of Public Health) MCL Maison des collectivités locales (Local Government House) MCMEJF Ministère Chargé de la Microfinance, de l’Emploi des Jeunes et des Femmes (Ministry of Microfinance and Employment of Youth and Women) M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTPT Ministre des Travaux Publics et des Transports (Ministry of Public Works and Transport) MTR Mid-Term Review NCCDD National Committee on Community-Driven Development NGO Non-Governmental Organization OED Operations Evaluations Division PAD Project Appraisal Document PDC Plan de Développement Communal (Communal Development Plant) PDOs Project Development Objectives PHRD Policy and Human Resources Development Fund (Japan) PIM Project Implementation Manual PMC Project Management Committee PNDCC Projet National d'Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés (National Community Development Support Project) PPF Project Preparation Facility PPA Participatory Poverty Assessment PPAR Project Performance Assessment Report PRSC Poverty Reduction Support Credit PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper SCRP Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction SEP Secrétariat Exécutif du Projet National d'Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés (Executive Secretariat for the National Community- Driven Development Support Project) SIL Sector Investment Loan SDR Special Drawing Right SLA Saving and Loans Association UMOA Union Monétaire Ouest Africaine (Monetary Union of West African States) UNDP United Nation Development Program UNFPA United Nations Population Fund UNICEF United National Children's Fund USAID United States Agency for International Development WHO World Health Organization Vice President: Makhtar Diop Country Director: Madani M. Tall Sector Manager: Stefano Paternostro Project Team Leader: John Van Dyck ICR Primary Author: Julie Van Domelen BENIN National Community-Driven Development Support Project (PNDCC) CONTENTS Data Sheet.............................................................................................................................. i A. Basic Information ........................................................................................................... i B. Key Dates ........................................................................................................................i C. Ratings Summary ............................................................................................................ i D. Sector and Theme Codes .................................................................................................ii E. Bank Staff ...................................................................................................................... ii F. Results Framework Analysis .......................................................................................... iii G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs ........................................................................ viii H. Restructuring (if any) .................................................................................................. viii I. Disbursement Profile ..................................................................................................... ix 1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design ....................................................... 1 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes ....................................................... 6 3. Assessment of Outcomes ............................................................................................... 11 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome ................................................................ 20 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance ............................................................. 20 6. Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................... 23 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners ...................... 24 List of Annexes Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing ................................................................................ 25 Annex 2. Outputs by Component ....................................................................................... 26 Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis ........................................................................ 36 Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes ........................ 39 Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results ................................................................................. 41 Annex 6. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR ............................... 43 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents ............................................................................. 48 Annex 8: Results Framework: Original and Additional Financing Performance Indicators..... 51 Data Sheet A. Basic Information BN-National Country: Benin Project Name: Community Driven Development Project IDA-39900,IDA- Project ID: P081484 L/C/TF Number(s): H1280,IDA-H5990 ICR Date: 10/26/2012 ICR Type: Core ICR GOVERNMENT OF Lending Instrument: SIL Borrower: BENIN Original Total XDR 34.10M Disbursed Amount: XDR 41.73M Commitment: Revised Amount: XDR 42.08M Environmental Category: B Implementing Agencies: Executive Secretariat of the PNDCC Cofinanciers and Other External Partners: B. Key Dates Revised / Actual Process Date Process Original Date Date(s) Concept Review: 12/09/2003 Effectiveness: 05/02/2005 05/02/2005 Appraisal: 03/22/2004 Restructuring(s): 07/06/2010 Approval: 10/07/2004 Mid-term Review: 04/30/2008 04/30/2008 Closing: 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 C. Ratings Summary C.1 Performance Rating by ICR Outcomes: Satisfactory Risk to Development Outcome: Low or Negligible Bank Performance: Satisfactory Borrower Performance: Satisfactory C.2 Detailed Ratings of Bank and Borrower Performance (by ICR) Bank Ratings Borrower Ratings Quality at Entry: Satisfactory Government: Satisfactory Implementing Quality of Supervision: Satisfactory Satisfactory Agency/Agencies: Overall Bank Overall Borrower Satisfactory Satisfactory Performance: Performance: i C.3 Quality at Entry and Implementation Performance Indicators Implementation QAG Assessments Indicators Rating Performance (if any) Potential Problem Project Quality at Entry No None at any time (Yes/No): (QEA): Problem Project at any Quality of No None time (Yes/No): Supervision (QSA): DO rating before Satisfactory Closing/Inactive status: D. Sector and Theme Codes Original Actual Sector Code (as % of total Bank financing) Health 26 26 Micro- and SME finance 9 9 Other social services 26 26 Primary education 26 26 Sub-national government administration 13 13 Theme Code (as % of total Bank financing) Decentralization 33 33 Education for all 17 17 Other human development 17 17 Other social protection and risk management 16 16 Participation and civic engagement 17 17 E. Bank Staff Positions At ICR At Approval Vice President: Makhtar Diop Callisto E. Madavo Country Director: Madani M. Tall Pedro Alba Sector Manager: Stefano Paternostro Alexandre V. Abrantes Project Team Leader: John Van Dyck Serge Theunynck ICR Team Leader: John Van Dyck ICR Primary Author: Julia Van Domelen ii F. Results Framework Analysis Project Development Objectives (from Project Appraisal Document) The objective of the Project was to promote the use of the community-driven development approach by line ministries, decentralized local governments and local communities to improve the access of the poorest communities to basic social and financial services, so that the line ministries and decentralized local governments will be ready for further implementation of community-driven development activities through programmatic support. Revised Project Development Objectives (as approved by original approving authority) An Additional Financing Project grant of US$12 million equivalent was approved June 17, 2010. The new PDO was stated as: "to increase the utilization of the CDD approach and to improve access for the poorest communities to basic social and financial services." PDO indicators were revised during the approval of the Additional Financing Project and are displayed below. Annex 10 includes both the original and the revised key performance indicators. (a) PDO Indicator(s) Original Target Formally Actual Value Values (from Revised Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value approval Target Completion or documents) Values Target Years Public capital expenditures on basis services that are implemented by Indicator 1 : communities through the CDD approach (% of total public capital expenditures on basis services, three-year rolling average) Value quantitative or 0% N.A. 20% 38.3% Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 2 : Direct project beneficiaries (number); of which female (%) Value quantitative or 0 N.A. 450,000 (40%) 747,071 (42%) Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % Includes grassroots management trainees. achievement) iii Students enrolled in schools constructed/rehabilitated through the CDD approach Indicator 3 : (number) Value quantitative or 0 N.A. 100,000 158,500 Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 4 : People with access to an improved water source in rural areas (number) Value quantitative or 0 N.A. 10,000 23,250 Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 5 : People with access to micro-finance services (number) Value quantitative or 0 N.A. 10,000 14,087 Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 6 : Beneficiaries satisfied with the results of the sub-projects (%) Value quantitative or N.A. 70% 80% 96% Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) (b) Intermediate Outcome Indicator(s) Original Target Actual Value Formally Values (from Achieved at Indicator Baseline Value Revised approval Completion or Target Values documents) Target Years Indicator 1 : Line ministries having adopted CDD strategies (number) Value (quantitative 0 N.A. 5 5 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) iv Line ministries having developed and utilized tool-kits on service delivery Indicator 2 : through CDD (number) Value (quantitative 0 N.A. 4 5 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 3 : Targeted poor communities that have received Grassroots Management Training Value 100% (1,400 (quantitative 0 100% targeted 108% (1,518) or Qualitative) communities) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 4 : The M&E system is in place and functioning (YES/NO) Value (quantitative No Yes Yes Yes or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Participating communes having executed at least one multi-village sub-project Indicator 5 : (%) Value 100% (out of (quantitative 0 100% (of 74) 95% 74) or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Community sub-projects for basic services and infrastructure completed Indicator 6 : (number) Value (quantitative 0 1,400 1,400 1,535 completed or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) v Indicator 7 : Community sub-projects that comply with eligibility criteria (%) Value (quantitative N.A. 100% 100% 100% or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 8 : Additional classrooms built/rehabilitated (number) Value (quantitative 0 N.A. 2,500 3,170 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 9 : Health facilities constructed, renovated, and/or equipped (number) Value (quantitative 0 N.A. 120 144 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Improved community water points constructed or rehabilitated under the project Indicator 10 : (number) Value (quantitative 0 N.A. 50 101 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Previously unserved communities in which MFIs supported by the project have Indicator 11 : extended their operations (number) Value (quantitative 0 500 500 512 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) vi Communities that have received technical advisory services on microfinance Indicator 12 : (number) Value (quantitative 0 1,400 1,400 1,006 or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Annual Work Plans and Budgets that have been prepared on a timely basis by the Indicator 13 : SEP and found satisfactory by IDA (%) Value (quantitative 0% 100% 100% 100% or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Requests for financing from line ministries, communes, communities, and MFIs Indicator 14 : that have been addressed in a timely manner by the SEP according to the time- schedule spelled-out in the PIM (%) Value (quantitative 0% 80% 80% 100% or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 05/30/2010 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Indicator 15 : Completion of Social Safety Net Review and Feasibility Analysis (YES/NO) Value (quantitative No N.A. Yes Yes or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) Completion of implementation guidelines for a pilot safety net program Indicator 16 : (YES/NO) Value (quantitative No N.A. Yes Yes or Qualitative) Date achieved 10/07/2004 N.A. 04/30/2012 04/30/2012 Comments (incl. % achievement) vii G. Ratings of Project Performance in ISRs Actual Date ISR No. DO IP Disbursements Archived (USD millions) 1 11/30/2004 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.00 2 05/27/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.48 3 12/14/2005 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.47 4 06/30/2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 5.67 5 03/29/2007 Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory 11.52 6 11/14/2007 Satisfactory Satisfactory 18.54 7 06/12/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 25.36 8 09/22/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 27.03 9 12/04/2008 Satisfactory Satisfactory 27.53 10 06/11/2009 Satisfactory Satisfactory 34.79 11 12/16/2009 Satisfactory Satisfactory 41.72 12 06/30/2010 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 43.84 13 02/12/2011 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 54.01 14 07/30/2011 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 62.77 15 01/17/2012 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 63.87 16 05/28/2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 64.27 H. Restructuring (if any) ISR Ratings at Amount Board Restructuring Disbursed at Restructuring Reason for Restructuring & Approved Restructuring Date(s) Key Changes Made PDO Change DO IP in USD millions The PDO was revised to more clearly state the Project's focus on both the CDD approach and improvements to basic services. The project's original results framework was also modified to 07/06/2010 Y S MS 43.84 include outcome indicators more closely aligned with the PDO, to decrease complexity and improve phrasing, to include IDA core results indicators and to incorporate the safety net component. viii If PDO and/or Key Outcome Targets were formally revised (approved by the original approving body) enter ratings below: Outcome Ratings Against Original PDO/Targets Satisfactory Against Formally Revised PDO/Targets Satisfactory Overall (weighted) rating Satisfactory I. Disbursement Profile ix 1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design 1.1 Context at Appraisal At the time of identification in late 2003, Benin had experienced an average annual economic growth rate of 5 percent in the preceding seven years, but poverty remained entrenched, with significant regional imbalances. The national poverty rate was 39 percent, with 22 percent in extreme poverty. Poverty was more widespread in rural areas. The poor lacked access to basic services, particularly education, health and water. In addition, malnutrition affected one-quarter of rural children and 18 percent of children living in urban areas. And, the majority of the population had no access to financial services like savings and credit. The Government’s strategy to improve services for the poor relied on increasing local control through decentralization, deconcentration and community participation in the management of services. This was built on the nascent decentralization process which in 1999 structured the country into 12 departments, 77 communes (municipalities), 544 arrondissements (wards) and about 5,000 villages and quartiers de ville (urban sectors or neighborhoods). Communes were responsible for the preparation and implementation of local development plans and the provision of basic services and infrastructure. Municipal elections were held at the end of 2002. Implementation of the decentralization policy faced several challenges. Fiscal decentralization was lagging and communes and they lacked experience and skilled personnel in planning and management. The realignment of roles with sectoral ministries had not been fully defined. There was a lack of clarity on relations between the community-level villages and neighborhoods and communal governments. Villages were not recognized legally and had no recognized territorial authority. The positive experience with community-based and community-driven development at the village and neighborhood level had not been formally integrated into decentralization policy. Community-driven development (CDD) is defined as the transfer of control over decisions and resources to the community level based on the principle of subsidiarity. Benin’s 2002 national poverty reduction strategy prioritized: (i) macro-economic stability through accelerated private-sector-led growth and good public finance management; (ii) improving the access of the poor to basic social services; (iii) strengthening governance and institutional reforms; and (iv) promoting employment and income-generating opportunities for the poor and community empowerment. The PNDCC directly supported the second, third and fourth PRSP pillars. The World Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Benin approved July 16, 2003 was fully aligned with the PRSP. The PNDCC was a core part of the CAS and built on the experience of three successful World Bank-funded community-level operations as well as the Bank’s international experience in CDD. CDD had been adopted as a corporate priority for the Bank and the 2004 Bank’s Strategic Framework for Assistance to Africa sought to have CDD approaches integrated into country strategies. During project implementation, the global economic crisis starting in 2009 created a significant shift in the country context. The economic slowdown led to growing fiscal deficits. In response, an additional financing project was processed in 2010. This supported the Country Assistance 1 Strategy for Benin for FY09-12 (Report No 46485 - BJ) discussed by the Board on February 26, 2009, which was aligned with Benin’s Second Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper. The additional grant supported the PRSP goals of improving access to basic services through basic community infrastructure and income generating opportunities, while devising a safety net for the poor. 1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators (as approved) The original project objective (before revision) in the Legal Agreement was to promote the use of the community-driven development approach by line ministries, decentralized local governments and local communities to improve the access of the poorest communities to basic social and financial services, so that the line ministries and decentralized local governments will be ready for further implementation of community-driven development activities through programmatic support 1. 1 This PDO statement is in both the PAD and Legal Agreement and thus can be considered the official PDO statement. The PAD summary sheet contains a paraphrased version of the PDO statement, which substitutes the wording “to test, through a learning-by-doing approach, the implementation of� (the community-driven development approach) instead of “promote the use of� (the community-driven development approach). While this ICR does not analyze performance in regard to the paraphrased PDO statement from the PAD summary sheet, it is clear that the project could also be judged to be satisfactory in terms of testing the CDD approach through learning-by-doing, as it supported over 1,500 communities in learning to execute sub-projects by taking responsibility for key aspects of implementation. The positive outcome of the test is evidenced by the completed infrastructure, cost-effectiveness of sub-project construction, and the continuation of the approach under a successor project. 2 Thirteen key performance indicators were specified in the Legal Agreement: PDO Indicators 1. At least 90 percent of the project funds to be managed by targeted communities have been actually managed by targeted communities in accordance with the PIM. 2. By the end of each fiscal year, 100 percent of the Government Financing allocated to finance commune and community sub-projects has been disbursed. 3. By the end of the project, the execution time of community sub-projects (from submission to completion) financed with Government Financing, is not superior to the execution time of community sub-projects financed with IDA funds. Intermediate outcome indicators 4. The legal and administrative texts to implement the national CDD policy have been adopted by mid-term review, and are thereafter applied. 5. Participating line ministries have developed toolkits for the provision o f technical support to communes and communities by mid-term review, and the three partners (i.e., line ministries, communes and communities) thereafter utilize them. 6. 70 percent of the Communes participating in the project have improved their capacity to implement the CDD approach, and comply with at least ten CDD capacity indicators (identified in the PAD Annex 16). 7. 100 percent of 1,400 targeted communities have received Grassroots Management Training (GMT) and support from NGOs and find them both satisfactory. 8. The M&E system is in place by MTR, and is thereafter functioning and transparently providing reliable information to all stakeholders. 9. 100 percent of participating Communes (about 46) have implemented at least one multi-village sub-project, for basic services and infrastructure which comply with eligibility criteria; and at least 70 percent of the targeted communities benefiting from these sub-projects are satisfied with them. 10. At least 80 percent of the 1,400 targeted communities have implemented a sub-project for basic services and infrastructure; and at least 80 percent of these sub-projects comply with eligibility criteria; and 80 percent of vulnerable groups within the concerned communities are satisfied with these sub-projects. 11. At least five MFIs have signed a Partnership Agreement with the Project, and each of them has extended its clientele in at least 100 targeted communities (villages) previously out of their reach. 12. By the end of Project, at least 1,400 groups in as many communities have received technical advisory services for setting up or making more profitable an Income Generating Activity (IGA) and have entered into a credit agreement with a MFI; and 95% o f these groups have better revenues as a result. 13. 100 percent of the Annual Work Plan and Budgets have been timely prepared by the SEP, reviewed with, and found satisfactory by IDA. 1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification The Additional Financing (AF) Project grant of US$12.0 million equivalent was approved June 17, 2010 under the Crisis Response Window (CRW). The AF was an urgent response to the global financial crisis which aimed to cover a financing gap in the program and support technical assistance on the development of social safety nets. The approval of the AF included approval of a revised PDO, and revised set of project indicators. The development objective was streamlined to emphasize the Project’s focus on both the CDD approach and improvements to basic services. The revised objective is “to increase the utilization of the CDD approach and to improve access for the poorest communities to basic social and financial services.� With project restructuring, the project’s original results framework was also modified to include outcome indicators more closely aligned with the PDO, to decrease complexity and improve phrasing, to include IDA core results indicators and to incorporate the safety net component. A 3 fifth component to support development of social safety nets was added to address the difficulty in scaling up existing safety nets to respond to the global food, fuel and financial crisis. PDO Indicators 1. Public capital expenditures on basic services that are implemented by communities through the CDD approach (% of total public capital expenditures on basic services, three year rolling average) 2. Direct project beneficiaries (number); of which female (%) 3. Students enrolled in schools constructed/rehabilitated through the CDD approach (number) 4. People with access to an improved water source in rural areas (number) 5. People with access to microfinance services (number) 6. Beneficiaries satisfied with the results of the sub-projects (%) Intermediate outcome indicators 7. Line ministries having adopted CDD strategies (number) 8. Line ministries having developed and utilized tool-kits on service delivery through CDD (number) 9. Targeted poor communities that have received Grassroots Management Training (number) 10. The M&E system is in place and functioning (yes/no) 11. Participating communes having executed at least one multi-village sub-project (%) 12. Community sub-projects for basic services and infrastructure completed (number) 13. Additional classrooms built/rehabilitated (number)’ 14. Health facilities constructed, renovated, and/or equipped (number) 15. Improved community water points constructed or rehabilitated under the project (number) 16. Community sub-projects that comply with eligibility criteria (%) 17. Time taken for the execution of community sub-projects financed with Government Financing 18. relative to the time taken for IDA-financed community subprojects (ratio) 19. Previously un-served communities in which MFIs supported by the project have extended their operations (number) 20. Communities that have received technical advisory services on microfinance (number) 21. Annual Work Plans and Budgets that have been prepared on a timely basis by the SEP and found satisfactory by IDA (%) 22. Requests for financing from line ministries, communes, communities, and MFIs that have been addressed in a timely manner by the SEP according to the time-schedule spelled out in the PIM (%) 23. Completion of Social Safety Net Review and Feasibility Analysis (yes/no) 24. Completion of implementation guidelines for a pilot safety net program (yes/no) 1.4 Main Beneficiaries The primary target groups were: (i) the country’s institutions involved in local development, including community-level associations, elected local governments and line ministries, all of whom were to see their operations improve in terms of relevance, impact and harmonization through adoption of CDD approaches; and (ii) approximately 1,400 of the poorest communities in the country benefitting from small-scale basic service subprojects and increased access to microfinance opportunities. The additional financing grant did not alter the primary target group. 4 1.5 Original Components (as approved) The original project had four main components: Component 1: Strengthening the capacity of the ministries, communes and communities to implement community-driven development CDD (Original project US$9.44 million plus additional financing of US$0.3 million). The main activities were: (i) development of the legal, policy and operational framework to support mainstreaming CDD and building the capacity of line ministries to realign their roles; (ii) strengthening the capacity of communes to integrate the CDD approach by into their local planning and implementation of small-scale investments; (iii) strengthening the capacity of grassroots communities through provision of Grassroots Management Training (GMT); (iv) participatory poverty assessments and identification of priorities in target communities; and (v) monitoring and evaluation and communication. Component 2: Improving access by the poor to basic services and infrastructure. (Original project US$44.29 million plus additional financing of US$9.90 million). Sub-projects implemented by communes included, inter alia, education activities other than construction, health centers, water networks, inter-village rural roads and market infrastructure. Each commune received a US$240,000 allocation with no individual sub-project limit, though national procurement rules limited municipalities to contracts no larger than US$60,000. Single village or neighborhood sub-projects at a maximum cost of US$30,000 were implemented by communities themselves through village development associations. Eligible sub-projects included, inter alia, nursery and primary school facilities, village health posts, small-scale water projects, and local roads. Component 3: Improving access of the poor to financial services for income-generating activities (Original project US$5.43 million plus additional financing of US$0.27 million). Objectives were to be achieved through: (i) strengthening MFI’s capacity to supply microfinance products and services in targeted communities by financing of the organizational costs to extend services; and (ii) Income Generating Activities (IGAs) to provide technical assistance and training in productive activities identified by community groups. Component 4: Support for the management of community-driven development (Original project US$6.05 million of which IDA US$4.85 million, plus Additional Financing of US$1.02 million). The project was based in the Ministère Chargé du Plan, de la Prospective et du Développement (Ministry of Planning and Development) and managed by an Executive Secretariat (SEP). This component supported: (i) the SEP in its efforts to coordinate the day-to- day operations; (ii) the contracting of a fiduciary agent, AGeFIB (Agence de Financement des Initiatives de Base); (iii) tools and capacity for screening sub-projects for environmental and social impacts, and (iv) financial and technical audits. 1.6 Revised Components The Additional Financing and the concurrent restructuring added financing to the original components, as shown in the brackets in section 1.5 above. The restructuring also created a fifth component: 5 Component 5: Technical assistance in safety nets (IDA Grant US$500,000). Key activities included analysis of existing safety net programs and a feasibility study to develop a cash transfer pilot program. 2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes 2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry Project design was appropriate for the country context, with the key challenges facing Benin being a combination of (i) lack of access to services for the poor and (ii) the need for effectively implementing the new decentralization framework while ensuring that it reflects the lessons learned in community-driven development. The project was explicitly integrated into the country’s poverty reduction strategy and the Bank’s CAS. Project design drew from previous experience in the country with community-driven approaches, including three Bank-financed projects that had recently closed (Borgou Pilot Rural Support Project, the Local Food Security Intervention Project, and the Social Fund Project) as well as an inventory of 28 other experiences with community-based approaches in Benin. This experience highlighted that when projects were identified by the community using participatory mechanisms, they tended to reflect priority needs. Communities were generally capable of realizing their village development plans with a basic level of support. And, when communities managed directly the procurement of small-scale contracts, local competition increased and costs lowered. Drawbacks of previous programs to be addressed in project design were identified as: (i) a multiplicity of approaches due to a large number of small programs without harmonization, (ii) different rules of game such as the levels of community counterpart funding required between donors or projects without internal coherence with sectoral strategies, (iii) difficulty in mobilizing community counterpart funding in the poorest communities, and (iv) frequent exclusion of women and vulnerable groups from local development processes. The rationale for Bank involvement in the project was consistent with the Bank’s previous support for community-driven approaches in Benin as well as from its leadership position worldwide in CDD approaches. Bank experience in the Region was incorporated, for example in terms of integration of CDD with the decentralization process and the utilization of grassroots management training modules. The project’s design looked beyond immediate impacts of investments in poor communities to seek more lasting institutional effects on line ministries, local governments and communities. In particular, the project sought to harmonize decentralization in Benin with the CDD approach, so that CDD would become increasingly mainstreamed within decentralization, and so that line ministries and decentralized governments would be ready for programmatic support for CDD by the end of the project. In this regard, the project aimed to build the capacity of local governments to integrate CDD in the development and implementation of their local development plans, and to learn that empowering their communities is mutually beneficial, as a precursor to transitioning CDD into the broader decentralization framework. 6 Overall, risks were deemed substantial and several main risks identified. Possible wavering of Government policy commitments in terms of realignment of roles within a CDD approach was addressed through the formation of a multi-sectoral coordination committee to ensure policy buy-in from the beginning. There was concern that Government co-financing might not be committed or disbursed in a timely fashion, a systemic risk in Benin. Priority was given to disbursing Government financing for sub-projects first each year. To further support effective financial management, fiduciary functions were contracted to AGeFIB, an autonomous agency with experience and capacity from managing the Bank projects. The risk that local governments might not have sufficient competent staff was addressed through training and capacity building to communes as well as the possibility for communes to hire contract management agencies. 2.2 Implementation The project was approved by the Bank’s Board of Directors on October 7, 2004 and effectiveness declared on May 2, 2005. The original closing date was May 30, 2010, which was extended to September 30, 2011 with the additional financing project. A second extension to April 30, 2012 allowed for completion of the final works and studies. The project was originally under the Ministry of Development, Coordination and Government Action. Following a ministerial reshuffling, the PNDCC was placed under the Ministry of Micro-Finance, Youth and Women’s Employment. Creation of the National Committee on Community-Driven Development (NCCDD) in 2004 provided continuity to policy guidance and supervision despite these ministerial rearrangements. During the first three years of implementation, the achievement of development objectives and implementation progress rating remained satisfactory although certain components were downgraded until corrective actions were taken. The Government performance was considered highly satisfactory in the provision of counterpart funds plus an additional US$2.0 million to fund more local investments using Government financial channels. Main implementation issues raised were: (i) delays in implementation of activities under the financial services component; (ii) weaknesses in the timely reporting on operations through the MIS; and (iii) selected social infrastructure sub-projects were found to lack the necessary equipment, furniture and sanitary facilities to meet sectoral norms. A Mid-Term Review was held in May 2008 and noted significant achievements. Grassroots management training covered three-quarters of the targeted 1,500 communities. CDD training was being carried out in the 74 participating communes, 12 prefectures, and the core sectoral ministries. Half of all targeted communes and communities had implemented at least one small- scale investment and two MFIs began implementing a business-plan to expand services to poor communities. One-quarter of communities had contracted technical advisory services to improve their income-generating activities. The PNDCC became a participant in the Ministry of Education’s Fast Track Initiative to construct classrooms, extending the CDD approach to meeting the goal of universal primary education. The M&E system was providing useful feedback to improve project management. Several issues were raised during the Mid-Term Review. The expected rate of communes passing on sub-project financing coming from the Government counterpart for direct 7 management by the village or neighborhood level was lower than expected, prompting corrective action to alert this to the communes. Operating budgets were revised to reflect an eroding exchange rate which reduced resources to the Project, while retaining original project objectives. Exchange rate fluctuations, a shift in the composition of types of sub-projects, and price increases for construction materials 2 caused a financing gap in the program that threatened the completion of 295 approved community sub-projects and other project activities. At first, Government committed to cover this gap by contributing additional resources of FCFA 4.69 billion (US$9.6 million) to the project in addition to the co-financing that it provided in full. However, in October 2009, the Government notified the Bank that due to the impact of the global financial crisis on its revenues, it would not be able to meet this commitment. To address this, a US$12 million Additional Financing grant through the Pilot Crisis Response Window was approved on July 17, 2010. The amount reflected a revised estimate of the resources required to complete the 295 sub-project and other outstanding activities, as well as the new component to provide technical support on social safety nets. 2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Design, Implementation and Utilization The M&E system was designed to capture the outputs and outcomes of increased access to services as well as the institutional impacts of the project. The M&E system relied on three main components: (i) a management information system that allowed of tracking of activities and expenditures, (ii) participatory monitoring and evaluation done at the community, commune and prefectural level to track PNDCC progress; and (iii) a series of evaluations of quality and results, including two technical audits, two beneficiary assessments, an ex-post evaluation of the Grassroots Management Training (GMT), and evaluations of the activities involving community radio and microfinance. Extensive training was carried out at all levels underlining the importance of M&E and empowering local communities to engage in monitoring activities. The core management information system was already in place through the AGeFIB agency that had managed the previous Benin Social Fund Project. Despite this base, supervision missions often identified inconsistencies and weaknesses in reporting. The evaluation efforts, while comprehensive in design, suffered from weak technical capacity for evaluation, a general problem in Benin. Evaluation was stronger in regard to the access to basic services component (which accounted for the majority of the financing) and the grassroots management training, with weak to non- existent final evaluations of the component supporting micro-finance and income generating activities. The final impact evaluation suffered from methodological limitations where baselines 2 Since its inception, the project had suffered significant losses in available resources due to the rise of the CFA Franc (pegged to the Euro) against the Special Drawing Right (SDR), in which IDA support is denominated. At the time of project negotiations in July 2004, the exchange rate stood at FCFA 792 per SDR. However, the CFA Franc rose substantially against the SDR during project implementation, and project disbursements through 2010 were effected at an average rate of FCFA 734 per SDR, resulting in a net loss in local currency of about FCFA 2 billion (US$4.0 million equivalent). In addition, inflation led to substantial increases in the cost of primary inputs for construction (such as cement and other building materials, transportation fuel, and equipment), which had a negative impact on the total program budget. For instance, at project appraisal, the average contribution of IDA for sub-project implementation was estimated at FCFA 11.5 million. However, prices rose to such an extent that the ceiling for IDA contributions (FCFA 15 million) became the necessary contribution for many sub-projects. 8 and control groups were not sufficiently robust to permit conclusive results. Key performance indicators were reported with regularity and all revised KPIs were available at end of Project. 2.4 Safeguard and Fiduciary Compliance Safeguards: The Project triggered safeguard policies OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, OP 4.09 Pest Management; OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement; and OP 4.37 Safety of Dams due to the eligible types of sub-projects, with a safeguard screening category of S2 and an environmental screening category of B. During implementation, simple environmental screening mechanisms for sub-projects were developed and training sessions were carried out in all 74 communes. The Mid-Term Review confirmed that in all cases the environmental screening checklists were completed, but the quality was mixed. An Environmental and Social Audit carried out in early 2011 found that over 95 percent of community representatives were aware of the project’s environmental guidelines. Eighty-five percent of community-level respondents confirmed that environmental criteria were taken into account in the implementation of sub- projects. Audits found that environmental screening sheets were attached to project documentation in 83 percent of the files reviewed. Few environmental problems were found in field-based evaluations. In some cases there was a lack of complementary components (e.g. no latrines in urban markets) but these deficiencies were not systematic. The 2008 beneficiary assessment found that 92 percent of beneficiaries felt there were no harmful impacts of the projects implemented in their communities. The final technical audit found positive environmental impacts, like improved hygiene conditions from latrines and water projects and improved security from better road access, but there were some isolated cases of erosion around buildings and lack of latrines in some schools. Fiduciary Compliance: The Project contracted out fiduciary management to AGeFiB based on objective performance criteria. The Agency had a good financial management track record from the past Bank-financed projects and properly managed the PPF and the PHRD grants during preparation. Financial management systems were well in place at project effectiveness and financial management during the first three years of implementation performed well. In late 2009, financial management was downgraded to moderately satisfactory due to weakened performance of AGeFIB following the departure of their principal accountant, which resulted in delays in disbursement requests and difficulties managing disbursement categories. Reinforcement of internal audit functions and recruitment of personnel were carried out in response. Towards the end of the Project, weak management of the recovery of the special accounts caused cash flow constraints, slowing implementation. AGeFIB had sufficient experience in Bank-financed procurement, including community-based procurement requirements. A procurement plan was developed during project preparation. A community-based procurement module was implemented as part of the grassroots management training to support village development associations. Procurement activities were rated as satisfactory throughout project implementation until mid-2010. Thereafter, the main issues experienced in procurement were delays, particularly in obtaining approvals and signatures from the National Public Contracting Office which could take up to six months, and delays towards the end of the project due to financial constraints and turnover in personnel in AGeFIB. 9 2.5 Post-completion Operation/Next Phase Post-completion operations and maintenance of the PNDCC investments: In terms of infrastructure built, operations and maintenance responsibilities for subprojects varies by type between sectoral ministries and local governments. The bulk of the sub-projects financed were classrooms. As part of the Fast Track Initiative, the Government has systematically provided additional teachers to the classrooms where needed. These were typically additional classrooms in existing schools and so come under the existing maintenance arrangements at school and ministry levels. Health projects were to be staffed by the Ministry of Health. Although there is some anecdotal evidence of delays in this regards, there is no indication of systemic problems. The PNDCC sought to reinforce community engagement in maintaining infrastructures by creating community maintenance committees and providing training and orientation to communities on how to identify and carry out a basic level of maintenance. Infrastructure constructed by communes centered on market infrastructure, with market fees available to fund future maintenance needs. For access to financial services, as of project completion, loans in the new service windows supported by PNDCC had an average reimbursement rate of 93 percent. For the income generating sub-projects, the PNDCC financed a first round of technical assistance to community members, with no additional operations and maintenance required. Sustainability of reforms and institutional capacity: Sustainability of institutional reforms and capacity is likely due to the attention placed on structural reforms versus project-specific institutional arrangements. The PNDCC sought to structurally integrate community-driven development into the decentralization process. The national legal framework has changed, for example by allowing delegation to communities and including participatory planning mechanisms in the guidelines for local governments. Sectoral ministries now also have produced guidelines for implementing small-scale investments in their sector through the CDD approach (with execution by communities under the supervision of local governments). Sustainability of the capacity created at the local level through the GMT training is likely, as evidenced by the ex- post level of understanding of training content and the experience of learning-by-doing in managing sub-projects. Village development associations typically continue to engage in activities beyond the scope of the PNDCC. Follow-up operation: On May 3, 2012 the World Bank approved the US$46 million Decentralized Community-Driven Services Project (PSDCC), Phase I of an APL, as a direct follow-on of the PNDCC project. The project has three main components: support for construction of small-scale basic infrastructure, a pilot safety net program, and capacity building, including grassroots management training. The microfinance and income generating activities are outside of the current mandate of local governments and so not included in this operation. PSDCC incorporates innovations which build on the PNDCC experience. The PSDCC supports Benin's evolving decentralization strategy by channeling funds through the Fonds d'Appui au Développement des Communes (FADEC), the nascent intra-governmental fiscal transfer system. The project supports the mainstreaming of the CDD approach, not just for project resources, but for all funds channeled through FADEC. The PSDCC also includes a pilot safety net program. The design of the pilot, which will support cash transfers and labor-intensive public works, draws on the analysis supported by the PNDCC additional financing. 10 3. Assessment of Outcomes 3.1 Relevance of Objectives, Design and Implementation Rating: Substantial Relevance of Objectives. The project’s development objectives, both in the original and revised versions, are highly relevant to Benin’s development priorities and directly contributed to the national goal of increasing access to basic services by the poor while building local capacity. Benin’s second PRSP, the Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction (SCRP-2) covering 2007- 2009, confirmed the relevance and central role of local development in general and the PDNCC in particular in developing human capital and improving basic services. The third Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction (SCRP-3) covering 2011-2015 retained the same pillars as SCRP-2, and singles out the CDD approach as a recommended implementation mechanism for achieving the goals of the strategy. SCRP-3 also gives social protection a more prominent role in developing human capital and calls for increased social safety net measures to address vulnerable populations. The Bank’s most recent Country Assistance Strategy for Benin (2009- 2012), approved on January 30, 2009 identified the PNDCC and its follow-on operation as part of its core lending, contributing to two of the CAS strategic objectives: improved service delivery and the improved governance objective. Relevance of Design. Program design was relevant given that it built on extensive experience in community-driven development in Benin. It also reflected best practice in the evolving regional and global experience in these types of programs, particularly in PNDCC’s attention to integration with decentralization, its emphasis on grassroots management training and its focus beyond the project level to reforms of national legislative and institutional frameworks to have a more structural impact. Relevance of Implementation. As the project was implemented, it remained relevant to the country and was flexible enough to accommodate new priorities (such as safety nets) as they emerged. All stakeholders remain committed to the PNDCC’s decentralization reform goals which seek to integrate an active and relevant community level within an evolving decentralization/deconcentration framework. 3.2 Achievement of Project Development Objectives Rating: High The project’s development objective and outcome indicators were restructured in the Additional Financing package that was approved by the Board on July 6, 2010. According to the August 2006 ICR Guidelines (revised Oct 5, 2011), the project outcome should be assessed against both the original and revised project objectives. In both the original 3 and revised 4 PDO, the project 3 Original PDO: “To promote the use of the community-driven development approach by line ministries, decentralized local governments and local communities to improve the access of the poorest communities to basic social and financial services, so that the line ministries and decentralized local governments will be ready for further implementation of community-driven development activities through programmatic support.� 4 Revised PDO: “To increase the utilization of the CDD approach and to improve access for the poorest communities to basic social and financial services.� 11 had dual objectives: (i) an institutional objective - to increase the use of the CDD approach within public policies and strategies, and in turn, in public capital expenditures; and (ii) a direct service delivery objective - to improve the access of the poorest communities to basic social and financial services. The performance on these two key dimensions is examined below. A. Increasing the use of the CDD approach Overall, the project succeeded in increasing the use of the CDD approach. The main outcome indicators in measuring the increase in the use of the CDD approach were exceeded, as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Outcome Indicators Related to Increasing the Use of the CDD Approach End of Project End of Project % of with Additional with Additional Outcome Indicators Baseline Target Financing - Financing - Achieved Target Actual Percentage of the Credit funds expected to be 0% 90% 100% 111% managed by Local Community Beneficiaries that have been managed by Local Community Beneficiaries [original outcome indicator] Public capital expenditures on basic services that 0% 20% 38.3% 192% are implemented by communities through the CDD approach (% of total public capital expenditures on basic services, three year rolling average) [revised outcome indicator] This achievement was due to the significant capacity building and technical assistance effort that PNDCC supported at the national/sectoral level, the commune level and the community level: At the national and sectoral level, the project brought a structural approach to integrating the community-driven development into national policies and sectoral strategies. This was achieved through developing a legal framework, elaboration of technical tool-kits and designation of CDD focal points in the main sectoral ministries. Extensive training was carried out to reinforce capacity, reaching 3,360 central-level and deconcentrated staff from 11 ministries. These sectoral staff were integrated into project execution through their participation in parts of the sub-project cycle, including technical appraisal and periodic monitoring of implementation. These activities translated into institutional impacts at the national level, as evidenced by: • The approval of national Law 2001-07 on la maîtrise d’ouvrage public and its application degrees creating the legal ability for local governments to sub-contract with communities for the implementation of basic infrastructure and services. • Creation of a National CDD Coordination Commission which serves as a high-level policy defining and coordinating body. • The explicit inclusion of the CDD approach, including participatory planning, the subsidiary principle, and the role of communities in the national guidelines for Commune Development Plans issued by the Ministry of Decentralization in 2008, and in SCRP-3. • A national decree in 2009 allowing for the transfer of funds from local government to community accounts. • Adoption of a new National Procurement Code in 2009 which was more conducive to community-managed procurement practices. 12 • The adoption of a national Operational Directive on CDD in Sectoral Policies on October 5, 2011 to provide consistent guidance for all sectoral ministries on how to integrate CDD approaches. • Adoption of strategies by five key ministries incorporating CDD into their operational processes (Ministries of Health, Primary Education, Finance, Water, and Agriculture) • Development and dissemination of tool-kits on service delivery through CDD by five key Ministries (Primary Education, Finance, Water, Agriculture, and Development). At the commune level, over 8,800 staff in 74 local governments were trained in general CDD principles, participatory budgeting, integration of community-driven projects into communal development plans, participatory monitoring and evaluation, and management of the implementation of small-scale infrastructure. Capacity building to communes included computer equipment and MIS systems. Practical skills were built both through the direct management of commune sub-projects as well as the supervision of sub-projects carried out by communities. According to the 2011 Beneficiary Assessment, 97 percent of commune staff were satisfied or very satisfied with the training received. In terms of outcomes, commune capacity was measured at the outset using a composite score based on 15 performance indicators, with 31 percent ranked in the weakest category (A), 64 percent in the middle category (B), and only 3 percent in the highest category (C). End of Project targets were at least 70 percent of the communes would be in category C and the remaining 30 percent in category B. Actual results found 87 percent of communes now in category C surpassing targets, with the remainder in B and no communes in Category A. In terms of attribution, although communes received support from other decentralization programs, the most growth was in participatory local development indicators directly supported by the Project. At the community level, the project supported capacity to engage in development activities and take on responsibilities for making decisions and managing resources – a cornerstone of the CDD approach. The grassroots management training program was the main vehicle for building organization capacity, reinforced by the practical experience in managing small-scale investments directly. GMT training was carried out in all target communities, with 2,491 training sessions involving 144,495 participants, with over 29,000 people trained. As those trained carried out informational sessions within their communities, the number of people receiving GMT orientation rose to almost 750,000. Toolkits and guides were distributed in all target communities. An ex-post evaluation of GMT was carried out, including a test on GMT content. Tests scores of basic competencies averaged 84 percent with no notable differences between genders. Satisfaction was almost universal among participants queried, with 98 percent of women and 95 percent of men stating they were satisfied with the GMT training. This was further reinforced by a communication strategy that included interactive programs on the PNDCC and its community management aspects through 30 community radio stations in the country. The project supported the production of 1,428 broadcasts in 27 different local languages, many of these broadcasts being re-broadcast multiple times. The radio communications program led to very high levels of familiarity with the project among villagers, as shown by the 2011 Beneficiary Assessment that showed that 98% of people in areas targeted by the project had heard of it. An ex-post evaluation of the impacts of the radio emission program found that 91 percent of villagers confirmed listening to the emissions. The radio broadcasts have been retained and can be re-broadcast as needed in future CDD interventions. 13 The impact of the capacity development at the community level was a large number of informed citizens, operational structures of village development associations and related technical committees created in each of the target communities, and participatory community development plans developed for all target communities. B. Improved access of the poorest communities to basic social and financial services The project sought to increase access to both (i) basic social services and (ii) financial services. Per Table 2, the performance of PNDCC in increasing access to basic services was outstanding. Table 2: Outcomes Indicators Related to Improved Access to Services End of Project End of Project % of with Additional with Additional Target Outcome Indicators Baseline Financing: Financing: Achieve Target Actual d Direct project beneficiaries (#); of which female (%) 450,000 747,071 0 166% [revised outcome indicator] (40% women) (42% women) Students enrolled in schools constructed/rehabilitated with 0 100,000 158,500 159% CDD approach (#)[revised outcome indicator] People with access to improved water source in rural areas 0 10,000 25,250 253% (#)[revised outcome indicator] People with access to micro-finance services (number) 0 10,000 14,087 141% [revised outcome indicator] Beneficiaries satisfied with the results of the sub-projects n/a 80% 96% 120% (%)[revised outcome indicator] Percentage of the Borrower’s Financing disbursed to finance Subprojects by the end of each Fiscal Year of the 0% 100% 100% 100% Project [original outcome indicator] Basic social services. The PNDCC implemented 1,535 community-managed investments and 113 commune-managed investments targeted to the poorest 1,518 communities in the country (40 percent of communities in Benin). Community-managed infrastructure focused on education (71 percent of sub-projects), health (9 percent), commerce (9 percent) and water supply (4 percent). Commune-managed investments focused mainly on commerce, in particular communal markets, (80 percent of sub-projects) and other infrastructure with local economic impacts. Technical audits designed to assess the quality and value-for-money of the infrastructure built have shown satisfactory results, with 100 percent of the infrastructure supported under the project aligned with sectoral quality standards and 90 percent classified as functional. Technical audits found only 4 percent of projects as being of poor quality, though in almost half of these cases these were non-structural issues that did not threaten the useful life of the infrastructure. In comparative studies, the PNDCC classrooms were of as good or better quality than the other Fast Track Initiative classrooms. Overall, community members were well aware of the program and highly satisfied with the relevance, implementation and impact of the sub-projects carried out in their community, as reported in the 2008 beneficiary assessment, summarized below. 14 Table 3: Beneficiary Assessment (2008) Objectives of Satisfied with Satisfied Unsatisfied Well-Satisfied Heard of Project in Line Project with with Impact with Impact PNDCC with Community Selection Management of Project of the Project Needs process of Project Men 95% 79% 78% 77% 2% 80% Women 91% 72% 77% 70% 1% 82% Total 94% 77%* 78% 76% 2% 80% * 20 percent had no opinion either way. Similar results were found in the 2011 beneficiary assessment (satisfaction rate of 94 percent), and the ex-post evaluation on grassroots management training (which included the final measurement of overall beneficiary satisfaction with the project and found 96 percent of beneficiaries to be globally satisfied with the impact of the project) (see Annex 5). In terms of impacts on access of households in poor communities to basic social services: Schools built created 158,500 primary school spaces in the 3,170 classrooms constructed, representing about 10 percent of total primary school enrollment in the country. This included a combination of better buildings for existing students that were in make-shift or outdoor ‘classrooms’ as well as creating space for enrollment increases. The PNDCC constructed one- third of the classroom built under the Fast Track Initiative in Benin. Health posts were built in 147 poor communities, expanding local access to services in the surrounding areas. Rural water projects benefitted 25,250 people living in poor communities through over one hundred projects. While this is a very small percentage of the overall population, over the last ten years expansion in access to improved water sources by rural populations in Benin increased on average about 1 percent per year, or about 50,000 additional people served each year. Over the life of the PNDCC, the project contributed about 8 percent of the annual expansion observed in the access of rural populations to improved water concentrated among the poorest populations. Financial services and income generation. Performance in supporting micro-finance institutions to expand services to underserved communities was strong, but the objectives for the sub-component on income generating activities were not achieved: (a) support to micro-finance institutions to expand services to underserved communities. Under this component, 6 MFIs (exceeding the target of 5) received financing to help them expand their services to target communities. The PNDCC funded training, equipment and the fixed costs of opening up new windows, but did not fund the credit itself. The MFIs were able to extend their services to 512 new communities out of a target of 500, surpassing project goals. Fourteen new branches and 40 new service windows were opened as a result of the project. Figures on new members are available for five of the six MFIs showing 38,000 new individual and 1,000 group members. Women make up 77 percent of the new members. Also for MFIs reporting the data, these branches have issued over US$5.3 million in credits, typically between US$50-US$100, and currently have almost US$800,000 in deposits generated from local savers. 15 (b) support to local communities in terms of technical advisory services to help establish income generating activities (IGAs). This component was largely implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture under a partnership agreement with the Secrétariat Exécutif du Projet (SEP). Progress moved more slowly than expected. For example, near the end of 2008, only 427 income generation sub-projects had been completed, compared to the target of 600 for end- 2008. The major reasons for the slower than expected pace of implementation included delays in preparation of training materials, receipt of applications from communities, approval of proposals, and contracting of experts to provide technical advice to communities. Successive supervision missions called for the Ministry of Agriculture and the SEP to accelerate the pace of implementation. Evaluations of end-of-subproject reports showed many cases of promising results; however, measurement of the increase in incomes of beneficiaries proved impossible due to reluctance to report actual amounts earned, possibly due to cultural and tax reasons. By May 2011, the number of completed projects had reached 1,006, against the target of 1,400. The SEP became concerned that even with the resources from the Additional Financing, there would not be sufficient funds to complete all activities under the project, and decided to freeze implementation of the income generating activities sub-component until it was clear that sufficient resources would be available. In the end, it became clear that indeed there were not enough resources in the project to finance the FCFA 670 million (US$1.34 million) required for the remaining income-generation sub-projects. The project did close with US$540,000 remaining undisbursed, but by the time the SEP was certain of the availability of these funds, it was too late to re-start implementation of the income-generation sub-component. In the end, 1,006 IGA sub-projects were implemented which reached only 72 percent of project goals. Half of the IGA sub-projects were for value- added processing mainly of food stuffs, 23 percent for livestock, 19 percent for vegetable production and 6 percent for commerce. C. Other Outcomes The original PDO also aimed to ensure that “line ministries and decentralized local governments will be ready for further implementation of community-driven development activities through programmatic support�, and the restructured project aimed to support the analytical underpinnings of a future social safety net, though this was only implicitly included in the PDO as a means of improving access in the future to safety nets, as a social service. • Readiness for further implementation of community-driven development activities through programmatic support, and mainstreaming of CDD into decentralization. Line ministries and decentralized local governments are much more ready for future use of the CDD approach due to the changes in the country’s legal framework; the ministries’ adoption of strategies for incorporating CDD into their normal operational processes and their development of tool-kits on service delivery through CDD; and the capacity building carried out at commune level. This readiness to continue use of the CDD approach is expected to be translated into reality with the financing available for decentralized governments for CDD- implemented investment projects under the new Decentralized Community Driven Service Delivery project (PSDCC in French). 16 • Development of a social safety net to improve future crisis response. The Additional Financing Project supported the analytical underpinnings of a future social safety net, including a safety net assessment to identify the coverage, targeting and effectiveness of the existing safety net and a feasibility study to help design more effective interventions. The studies were validated by the National Social Protection Committee and the results integrated into the National Social Protection Policy. Beninese officials participated in a South-South exchange on safety nets in Ethiopia in 2012. These activities informed decision-makers of the opportunities in safety nets, many of whom may have been initially skeptical of, for example, the productivity and impact of cash transfers. As a result, a $5.0 million pilot cash transfer/labor intensive public works program has been included in the follow-on IDA operation, the PSDCC. This pilot aims to establish a scalable community-driven safety net that can rapidly scale up during shocks. 3.3 Efficiency Rating: Substantial Cost effectiveness of infrastructure: The independent PNDCC technical audit found that for primary schools, which accounted for the bulk of the PNDCC portfolio, the CDD approach delivered results faster and at lower cost and similar quality levels than conventional methods. To make this comparison, the technical audit took advantage of a ‘natural experiment’ in which primary schools built under PNDCC could be compared with identical schools constructed under the Bank’s Fast Track Initiative (FTI) Education project by three different entities—the contract management agencies AGETIP and AGETUR, and the PNDCC itself. As detailed in Annex 3, unit costs for classrooms constructed by the two delegated contract management agencies were between 40 and 57 percent higher than those built through the CDD approach in the PNDCC. Similar levels of cost effectiveness were also found in the provision of school furniture (desks and benches), with the most efficient agency was 22 to 25 percent more expensive than the PNDCC. The technical audit noted that the quality of school construction was about the same under the PNDCC as for the schools built by AGETIP and AGETUR. Cost effectiveness of the community training model: The PNDCC was able to develop an efficient model for delivering grassroots management training to a large number of people in a short period of time. Unit costs decreased 43 percent, from $1,500 per community to $855, by using community agents as trainers. Economic analysis of the financial services and income generation component. MFIs had to prepare full business plans for their expansion into underserved areas. While the time frame is too short (one year) to determine longer-range profitability, economic analysis of the changes in MFI portfolios found increases in savings base and expansion of lending activities. Reimbursement rates of credits in the areas to which MFIs extended services average 93 percent, showing that the loans made by MFIs were financially sustainable. MFIs have continued operations in these areas following the project. The picture is less clear for the income generating activities sub-component, which funded technical assistance rather than the investment itself. As data is not available on economic outcomes, economic analysis cannot be carried out for this sub-component. 17 3.4 Justification of Overall Outcome Rating Rating: Satisfactory The relevance of the PNDCC was substantial, as reflected in both the Government and the Bank’s core policy documents, and it addressed top priorities for the country’s development. The PNDCC was highly effective in achieving its core project development objectives in both the original and revised versions, supporting an overall satisfactory rating (see table 6). The overall legal and policy framework of the country evolved to better integrate the community-driven development experience in the country within the decentralization process. Capacity building was successful at all levels, including central and sectoral ministries, communes and local development associations. Poor communities and communes experienced an increase in their access to social and financial services through investments that were identified and implemented by them. The only area where targets were not surpassed was the income generating sub- component. Efficiency was substantial, as the PNDCC approach has been shown to deliver community infrastructure more rapidly, at a lower cost and with similar or higher quality than alternative methods. Table 6: Weighting of Outcome Ratings Against Original and Revised Project Objectives 5 Against Against Overall Comments Original PDOs Revised PDOs 1. Rating Satisfactory Satisfactory - 2. Rating value 5 5 - 3. Weight (% disbursed 68.6 % 31.4 % 100 % before/after PDO change) 4. Weighted value (2 x 3) 3.43 1.57 5 5. Final rating (rounded) - - Satisfactory 3.5 Overarching Themes, Other Outcomes and Impacts (a) Poverty Impacts, Gender Aspects, and Social Development Poverty impacts. Project design included a targeting strategy to ensure the poorest communities benefitted. The first phase of targeting identified the 40 percent of the poorest villages in Benin, with an adjustment to make sure that each commune had at least 5 target communities to reach national coverage of communes. The second phase of targeting was community-based, allowing communes to use a participatory process to make any adjustments based on updated information provided by the communes with the caveat that at least 70 percent of the communities selected should be those classified in the first round of targeting. Direct impacts on the poor included the development of capacity and skills through the CDD approach itself, as well as tangible improvement in access to basic social and financial services discussed in Section 3.2 above. 5 Table follows OPCS Guidelines for Implementation Completion and Results Reports, Appendix B: Attachment to the Guidelines for Outcome Rating of Projects with Formally Revised Project Objectives (p. 44) 18 Gender aspects. Gender issues were mainstreamed into the CDD approach. The Grassroots Management Training program insisted on the representation of women and women’s groups in the preparation and implementation of sub-projects. Half of village development association officials were women. At project outset, the national participation rate for women in community training activities was about 25 percent. The Grassroots Management Training achieved a 42 percent participation rate by women. Women typically accounted for 70 percent of MFI beneficiaries. Inclusion of vulnerable groups. The PAD noted that previous CDD projects in Benin had a limited impact on vulnerable groups. The PNDCC aimed to reverse this trend and aimed to actively encourage the involvement of vulnerable groups, particularly women, youth, the disabled, and the other members of the community who were not members of management institutions and who often felt excluded from the community development process. In this regard, the PNDCC was quite successful. The Grassroots Management Training modules on community dynamics and community organization, participatory poverty assessment, and participatory needs assessment included the mandatory participation of groups of women, disabled people, and other groups identified as vulnerable in a particular community. Vulnerable groups were encouraged to become candidates for positions of leadership within the village development committees. Examples of the project’s results include: a) The use of positive imaging of vulnerable groups, for example the disabled and elderly, in all of the GMT modules and guidelines prepared. b) Involvement of over 10,000 disabled and over 30,000 widowed community members in the GMT training sessions. c) Presence of 1,080 disabled in the management organizations of the village development committees, including 23 ADV presidents. d) 841 widows in the position of Treasurer of the village development associations. (b) Institutional Change/Strengthening The PNDCC had a substantial institutional impact (as described in detail above in 3.2). Changes to the national legal and institutional framework included, for example, legislation permitting delegation of contract management to communities and community-based procurement, among others. The institutional impact also included development of national policies to incorporate CDD approaches into sectoral deconcentration in all relevant sectors and participatory planning guidelines for communes. Creation of the National Community-Driven Development Committee helped improve cross-sectoral coordination. At the local level, capacity building for communes and grassroots management training for communities resulted in a high level of knowledge created and overall satisfaction with the quality of training. For communes, performance on the overall composite capacity scores developed under PNDCC improved significantly as a result of the project. The training was reinforced through a learning-by-doing approach of direct management of basic infrastructure investments by communes and communities. It is worth noting that in many of the other decentralization programs supporting communes, procurement and financial management are handled by other parties (project implementation units or delegated contract management agencies) and not directly by communes. PNDCC built the capacity of both communes and village level associations to manage funds and procure civil works efficiently and transparently. 19 The project has helped cultivate increased interaction between communes and communities and renewed interest on the part of local stakeholders in taking charge of local development. As such, both communes and communities have provided cash and in-kind contributions to partake in all stages of implementation- even in a resource constrained environment. (c) Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts (positive or negative) There were no significant unintended outcomes. 4. Assessment of Risk to Development Outcome Rating: Negligible to low The risk to development outcomes in terms of sustainability of the project’s approach and its investments is rated as negligible to low. Stakeholder commitment to PNDCC remains high. The CDD approach remains a core part of the Government poverty reduction and growth strategy and has a high degree of institutional engagement at all levels. The achievements of PNDCC are fully supported through the approval of PSDCC. The new project further integrates the CDD approach into decentralization by shifting more project resources through the newly created fiscal decentralization financial channels. The assessment of sustainability of the infrastructure investments is largely positive. The continued presence of PNDCC (through the PSDCC) in all communes as well as the poorest committees will reinforce operations and maintenance issues, including training for local staff and communities. 5. Assessment of Bank and Borrower Performance 5.1 Bank Performance (a) Bank Performance in Ensuring Quality at Entry Rating: Satisfactory The operation was relevant to the country context and was highly responsive to Government priorities and strategies. The World Bank’s role in bringing international expertise on community-driven development was instrumental in building on the strong country experience in this area and integrating it into nascent decentralization in the country. A thorough review of on- going community-based programs and lessons learned was carried out in preparation of PNDCC. Regular meetings with all main donors were carried out during preparation in an effort to harmonize approaches and programs. Sufficient technical expertise carried out the technical, financial, social and economic appraisal. Risks were adequately assessed and mitigation measures identified. The monitoring and evaluation system as designed was satisfactory. (b) Quality of Supervision Rating: Satisfactory Overall, World Bank supervision was well-organized and focused and made efforts to bring in cross-sectoral experience, as well as integrate staff based in Benin. Local fiduciary staff systematically carried out ex-post reviews and assessments of performance, often including visits to AGeFIB field offices in the review process. Despite having three task team leaders over the 20 life of the project, there was team consistency as the original TTL remained on the team as a consultant after retirement. Key performance indicators were routinely collected and discussed. The Task Team developed a score-card of project performance that was reviewed at each mission. The team made great efforts to help the SEP to manage underperformed local consultants charged with certain evaluations and to assist the project team to locate high quality international consultants where local capacity was not developed. The Bank also was proactive in processing an additional financing request using the pilot rapid response grant window. During the ICR mission, both Government and donors noted the importance of the Bank in the policy dialogue on CDD and decentralization in Benin. Some shortcomings were noted. Infrequent delays in responding to no-objection requests were cited by the Government. Supervision of the financial services (MFI and IGA) component was insufficient, focusing only on disbursements and outputs, with no ex-post assessments of outcomes. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Bank Performance Rating: Satisfactory The project preparation and quality-at-entry aspects are assessed as adequate and relevant. The modest shortcomings in supervision of the financial services were balanced overall by the strong implementation support and coherent supervision of the institutional development aspects of the project. Therefore the overall Bank performance is assessed as Satisfactory. 5.2 Borrower Performance (a) Government Performance Rating: Satisfactory Government commitment to the PNDCC was strong throughout design and implementation, from the President on down to department directors and field personnel. As evidence, the Government provided money above and beyond the counterpart requirements for the Project in order to fund with national resources more community-driven sub-projects. The national legal framework was altered to integrate community-driven development and overall operational directives to incorporate community-driven approaches in all main sectors were issued from the highest levels. And, the CDD approach was integrated into the Fast Track Initiative to expand access to primary education, supported through the Council of Ministers. Performance was affected by the various Government reshuffling and ministerial rearrangements, although engagement remained high even through these changes. Delays were observed in the national procurement and audit functions carried out by Government agencies. And, towards the end of the implementation new Government administrative controls imposed on the project's flow of funds caused delays in completing sub-projects, especially at the commune level. 21 (b) Implementing Agency Performance Rating: Satisfactory The main actors responsible for implementation were the executive secretariat of the PNDCC (SEP) and, for fiduciary functions, AGeFIB. From effectiveness until 2010, implementation progress was consistently rated as satisfactory for the project. Implementation progress dropped to Moderately Satisfactory for a period after June 2010 due to slower than expected progress in Component 1, 2, and 3, and then returned to Satisfactory by project closing as the SEP managed to make up for these delays and complete the bulk of project activities, exceeding the targets for all PDO indicators and most intermediate indicators. In large measure due to the contracting of AGEFIB, which had prior experience implementing Bank projects, the PNDCC could hit the ground running. While ex-post procurement review and financial audits pointed out some weaknesses, they were not serious and usually were addressed in a timely fashion. The SEP provided overall supervision and was successful at navigating the various policy and sectoral interests to develop laws, directives and operational tools to systematize CDD approaches across the public sector. The overall success of the project in exceeding all PDO indicator targets argues for a Satisfactory rating of implementing agency performance, since the implementing agency was the main driving force behind achieving these results on the ground. Still, there were some shortcomings worth noting. Towards the end of the project, key personnel left AGeFIB and the quality of performance weakened, with delays in implementation and in response to issues raised in procurement and financial management reviews. Throughout the project, monitoring and evaluation was mixed. Sufficient information was available for routine monitoring functions, though the division between SEP and AGeFIB created certain obstacles to information flows. In the end, all monitoring data was available, though extra efforts were needed to collect fully some data that should have been routinely available in the project M&E system. While some consultants produced high quality reports, other evaluations, especially those performed by national consultants, were uneven in quality. Although open bidding procedures were followed, one lesson is that more recourse needs to be made to international bidding for more complex consultant assignments, despite the desire of Government to support learning by doing of national consultants. There were no final evaluations of the financial services and income generation component. (c) Justification of Rating for Overall Borrower Performance Rating: Satisfactory Despite some minor shortcomings, all of the targets for the project’s development objective indicators were exceeded, both in terms of access to services by poor communities as well as policy and institutional outcomes. This accomplishment could only have been achieved with strong performance on the part of the borrower, particularly the implementing agency (SEP) which had the main responsibility for achieving results on the ground. The project was considered one of the strongest performers in the Benin portfolio and had high levels of Government commitment throughout. 22 6. Lessons Learned The project generated a number of lessons for similar future projects: On operational aspects: A national coordinating committee can help in setting overall policy directives and getting cross- sectoral buy-in, but it is challenging to get Ministries to internalize new ideas even if they are well represented in such a committee. However, when the CNDCC took a position, this did not necessarily get immediately internalized in ministry operations. The use of focal points created a permanent responsibility in the sectoral ministries and integration was further strengthened with involvement of the technical department heads. The use of fiduciary agents has short-term advantages, but can pose inconsistencies and coordination difficulties over the longer-term. There are several delegated contract management agencies in Benin being used as fiduciary agents (FAs) in donor-supported projects. The PNDCC’s fiduciary services were contracted to AGeFIB, which allowed for ease of project start- up. However, over the years of implementation, coordination difficulties arose between the FA and the executive secretariat for the project, for example in terms of design and utilization of the MIS system. Also, the contracting of a fiduciary agent did not insulate the PNDCC from difficulties when there were personnel turnover in the FA. On community-driven development: Poor communities can effectively engage in their own development, if given control over decisions and resources, by constructing relevant social infrastructure at cheaper cost and acceptable quality as compared to alternative delivery modes. While this concept is not new, the PNDCC experience reconfirmed the earlier lessons learned and added to the growing body of evidence in Benin, and in the Africa Region more generally. The achievements of the project relied on a participatory planning and needs identification process, grassroots management training to enable the local level to be effective, sufficient technical supervision, and ensuring consistency with overall sectoral policies. The CDD approach can be structurally integrated into decentralization policies, but this must be explicit. Benin has a rich history of community-based efforts. The decentralization process that was begun in early 2000s created opportunities to have more resources and decisions at the local level through representational democracy. However, this also presented the risk that associative efforts and the development potential of the community level could be lost if decentralization and CDD were seen as incompatible. The PNDCC experience is one of the few in Africa that addressed this tension explicitly, with the Government of Benin crafting a policy and legal framework that recognizes the ability of the community level to engage in development within the growing level of responsibility and action of the commune governments. Success of CDD and decentralization projects depends critically on securing the cooperation and building capacity of deconcentrated sector staff. The sectoral angle is often the weakest link in CDD and decentralization projects which work most directly with local actors, be they 23 communities or local Governments. The PNDCC design sought to build the CDD approach within sectoral policies. This is often an area that lags in decentralization policies in general, with the sectoral ministries retaining a great deal of de facto if not de jure power and control. The transfer of responsibilities for areas like school construction to local government and communities has been furthered by the PNDCC, which included a significant level of responsibility of deconcentrated sectoral personnel in supervision. A CDD project like the PNDCC should reflect the state of the decentralization process in the country. At the outset, commune governments were very new and fiscal decentralization channels non-existent. The PNDCC worked directly with communes and communities to build their capacity and experience in managing resources and contracting infrastructure, but the financial architecture was largely project-based. As fiscal transfer channels are becoming more effective, the follow-on operation with begin to transfer resources through these nascent government systems. CDD can produce superior results compared to other modalities, but only if training of communities produces a critical mass of capacity to execute projects. The cornerstone of making the CDD approach effective in the PNDCC was the grassroots management training program. The PNDCC used a well-seasoned method of training with specific modules that had been developed and tested elsewhere in Africa. An ex-post evaluation of the community training under PNDCC showed a significant gain in knowledge of how to implement development sub- projects among people attending grassroots management training. Any CDD program should invest in building this basic knowledge base as an essential part of creating sufficient capacity in communities to manage project resources. Beyond the local level and CDD issues, a country needs an integrated macro-level dialogue on decentralization to encompass fiscal decentralization and sectoral deconcentration, as these two aspects will largely define the context in which local governments and communities can operate. For instance, less than 6 percent of the national budget in Benin is channeled through fiscal decentralization (3.5 percent) or deconcentrated spending of sectoral ministries (2 percent). 7. Comments on Issues Raised by Borrower/Implementing Agencies/Partners (a) Borrower/implementing agencies The borrower and implementing agency raised no major areas of disagreement in discussions of the ICR. (b) Cofinanciers None. (c) Other partners and stakeholders N/A 24 Annex 1. Project Costs and Financing (a) Project Cost by Component (in US$ Million equivalent) Original Project Additional Total Appraisal Actual/Latest Appraisal Financing Estimate Percentage of Components Estimate Estimate Appraisal (US$ million) Appraisal (US$ million) (US$ million) Estimate Component 1: Strengthening the capacity of the ministries, communes 8.92 .30 9.22 9.64 104.56% and communities to implement CDD Component 2: Improving access by the poor to basic services and 44.29 9.90 54.19 57.02 105.22% infrastructure Component 3: Improving access of the poor to financial services and to 5.43 0.27 5.70 2.95 51.68% IGA Component 4: Support for the 5.61 1.023 6.63 9.75 147.03% management of CDD Component 5: Safety Nets 0.50 0.50 0.25 49.80% PPF 0.67 -- 0.67 0.30 44.63% Total Baseline Cost 64.92 11.99 76.91 79.90 103.89% Physical Contingencies 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.00% Price Contingencies 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00% Total Project Costs 65.87 11.99 77.86 79.90 104.56% (b) Financing Appraisal Actual/Latest Type of Co- Percentage of Source of Funds Estimate Estimate Financing Appraisal (US$ million) (US$ million) Borrower 12.85 12.49 97.20% Local Communities 3.02 2.98 98.68% International Development Association (IDA) – 37.70 39.05 103.59% Credit 3990 IDA GRANT FOR POOREST COUNTRY – 12.30 13.07 106.26% Grant H128 Additional Financing grant – Pilot Crisis Response 12.00 12.31 102.58% Window – Grant H599 Total 77.87 79.90 102.61% 25 Annex 2. Outputs by Component Component 1: Strengthening the capacity of the ministries, communes, and communities to implement CDD Sub-component 1.1 Strengthening the institutional capacity of the public sector at the central and local levels to develop and implement CDD strategy, policy, and programs Key outputs at central level: a) The Law 2001-07 on la maîtrise d’ouvrage public was approved as well as the accompanying application decrees b) Operational directive on CDD in sectoral policies published October 5, 2011 c) Decree allowing transfer of funds to community accounts in 2009 d) 5 central ministries (MEMP, MS, MERPMEDER, MAEP, MFE) elaborated documents on the implementation of CDD in their respective areas. e) 5 sectoral tool kits were prepared for the implementation of CDD approaches in their sectors by the Ministry of Water (MERPMEDER), the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MEF), the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MAEP), the Ministry of Education (MEMP) and the Ministry of Health. f) Sectoral tool kit training carried out with deconcentrated sectoral staff in all prefectures. g) 240 central staff participated in 3 training sessions (could be the same or different people depending on topic); 1080 deconcentrated level staff (*3 sessions = 3240 total). h) Practical application – learning by doing. Deconcentrated staff participated in all stages of sub-project cycle, including ex-ante reviews and supervision visits. Table A.1: Central Level Staff Trained and Number of Sessions Sectoral Ministry National Level Deconcentrated Level South Center North Total MAEP 20 30 30 30 110 MEMP 20 30 30 30 110 MS 20 30 30 30 110 MERPMEDER 20 30 30 30 110 MDGLAAT 20 30 30 30 110 MCAT 20 30 30 30 110 MEF 20 30 30 30 110 MFE 20 30 30 30 110 MCMEJF 20 30 30 30 110 MTPT 20 30 30 30 110 MEHU 20 30 30 30 110 TOTAL 240 360 360 360 1,320 # sessions 3 3 3 3 3,960 26 Sub-component 1.2: Strengthening the capacities of communes to implement CDD at the level of communes and villages All 74 communes received capacity strengthening/training on the following modules of CDD developed with technical support from the Association of Local Governments (Maison des Collectivités Locales - MCL): 1) The CDD approach and the role of the CNDCC in the PNDCC 2) Management of commune sub-projects 3) Management of community sub-projects 4) Integration of CDD into Commune Development Plans 5) Community Budgets including CDD 6) Monitoring and evaluation of Community Development Plans including CDD Table A.2: Capacity Building of Communes – Number of People Trained Communes Training Modules Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 74 30 15 15 15 15 30 Total 2,220 1,110 1,110 1,110 1,110 2,220 8,880 Sub-component 1.3: Strengthening the capacity of grassroots communities to plan and implement village and neighborhood sub-projects within their Communal Development Plans (PDCs). Grassroots Management Training was a structured program containing 10 modules: Table A.3: Grassroots Management Training Subject Duration Target Group Community organization and 4 days Associations de Développement Villageoises dynamics (ADV) Information and communication 3 days President of ADV and 2 ACCA with communities Participatory poverty assessment 6 days L’ADV (Président, Secrétaire et ACCA and community needs identification Participatory operational planning 4 days Aux membres du bureau de l’ADV (Président, for a sub-project Secrétaire et ACCA) Participatory monitoring and 3 days Président ADV, Président CTMO et evaluation Secrétaire CTMO Community-based procurement 5 days Président ADV, au Président et au Secrétaire CTMO. Financial management of sub- 5 days Président du bureau ADV, au Secrétaire projects bureau ADV et au Trésorier bureau ADV Financial management if Income 5 days Président bureau ADV, au Secrétaire du Generating Activities bureau ADV et au Trésorier bureau ADV 27 Marketing 3 days Président CTFC, Secrétaire CTFC et Trésorier CTFC) Maintenance of Socio-economic 3 days Comité d’Entretien et de Maintenance infrastructure and equipment (CEM). Key outputs as reported in the summary tables below include: a) Establishment of a pool of 36 senior and junior trainers b) Emergence of 3,000 community focal points (relais communautaires – APDC) c) 2 workshops during first year of implementation and one annually thereafter in each department on GMT approaches for sectoral and local government staff. d) 2,491 sessions of GMT training e) 144,495 direct participants in GMT training with 747,071 beneficiaries of replication sessions in the communities Table A.4: GMT Number of Trainers Number of Number of Number of Number of Phase Communities Senior Trainers Junior Trainers APDC Trainers (Cumulative) Employed Employed Employed 2005 + 143 (143) +7 (07) +11 (11) 0 2006 + 459 (602) +6 (13) +12 (23) +72 (72) 2007 + 507 (1 109) +0 (13) +0 (23) +0 (72) 2008 + 0 (1 109) +0 (13) +0 (23) +0 (72) 2009 + 409 (1 518) -7 (6) -11 (12) +116 (188) 2010 +0 (1 518) -6 (0) +6 (18) +0 (188) 2011 +0 (1 518) +0 (0) -18 (0) +0 (188) Table A.5: GMT Training Participants People Training Training Restitution Participation Villages % Trained % Phase Sessions Attendance Sessions in Restitution (#) Women in GMT Women (#) (#) (#) Sessions (#) (#) 2005 143 144 3 421 25% 1 001 1 030 36 036 ND 2006-1 * 149 132 3 415 24% 1 043 1 061 37 131 ND 2006-2 310 311 7 725 24% 2 528 2 149 85 952 ND 2007 507 454 7 632 37% 4 056 3 650 127 764 ND 2009- 409 1 450 122 302 42% 20 494 6 027 460 188 42% 2010** Total 1 518*** 2 491 144 495 29 122 13 917 747 017 *2006 was executed in two phases. ** Cash flow constraints delayed the 2008 phase which was combined in the 2009-2010 phase. *** The figure includes 3 pilot villages. 28 Sub-component 1.4: Strengthening the capacity at all levels to provide M&E and communication at all levels on project related issues to all stakeholders. Key outputs in terms of communication include: a) Radio: contracts with 20 community radio stations plus one regional radio (Radio Parakou) resulting in 480 emissions in 27 local languages and 540 re-emissions. 1,530 hours of radio emissions recorded per year. b) Quarterly PNDCC newsletter – 5,000 copies distributed to all village development associations, sectoral ministries, international partners and national assembly. c) Television: 4 information programs developed (what is PNDCC, local infrastructure, income generating activities, overview of results), each presented twice on national television channel d) PNDCC website developed and maintained (www.pndcc.org) Key outputs in M&E include: A.6: List of Evaluation Studies Carried Out by PNDCC Topic Consultant Technical Audit of Infrastructure Daniel Dupety Ex-post Evaluation of the Grassroots Management Binta Rassouloula Aw Sall Training (GMT) Assessment of Social Safety Nets in Benin Andrea Borgarello and Damien Mededji Feasibility Study of a Cash Transfer Program for Benin Damien Mededji and Christophe Ribes Ros Impact Evaluation of PNDCC IREEP Evaluation of the Cost Structure of MFIs SERFI - Afrique Beneficiary Assessment Surveys (2) BIM Environmental Audit Liner environnement Impact of the PNDCC local radio program CILCOM 2. Improving access by the poor to basic services and infrastructure Sub-component 2.1. Improving access of the poor to basic services and infrastructures through multi-villages sub-projects implemented by communes PNDCC financed 107 multisectoral infrastructure of a complexity or scale to best be addressed at communal level: 29 A.7: Results Indicators for PNDCC Communal Sub-Projects Indicator Value Number of targeted communes 74 Number of communes financed 73 Number of communal sub-projects approved 113 Number of communal subprojects completed 107 Number of communes having completed at least one sub-project 70 Amount committed FCFA 4,144,338 389 Amount disbursed FCFA 4,144,338 389 Rate of coverage of communes 99% A.8: Regional and Sectoral Distribution of Communal Sub-Projects Sector Department Total Sanitation Commerce Health Transport Alibori 2 1 4 7 Atacora 14 1 1 16 Atlantique 11 2 13 Borgou 11 11 Collines 6 1 7 Couffo 7 1 8 Donga 6 6 Mono 2 6 1 9 Ouémé 1 7 1 1 10 Plateau 6 6 Zou 1 10 3 14 Total 4 86 6 11 107 Sub-component 2.2. Improving access of the poor to basic services and infrastructures through single-villages or neighborhood sub-projects implemented by communities themselves Eligibility criteria for these sub-projects included : (i) included or to be included in its respective Communal Development Plan; (ii) approved by Communal Technical Committee, (iii) the sub- project involves a problem that can be resolved at the village level; (iv) results from an inclusive participatory planning process; and (v) within the maximum amount of US$30,000. 30 A.9: Community-Level (Village or Neighborhood) Sub-Projects Indicators Value Number of Targeted Communities 1,517 Number of Communities Financed 1,517 Number of Sub-Projects Financed 1,556 Number of Sub-Projects Completed 1,535 Amount Committed FCFA 22,198,988,950 Amount Disbursed 22,198,646,950 Disbursement Rate 100% Completion Rate 99% These sub-projects covered six sectors and 21 types of infrastructure: A.10: Distribution of Community Sub-Projects by Sector and Region (# of Sub-Projects) % of Regions Sanitation Commerce Water Education Health Transport Total total Abomey 27 16 4 257 17 2 323 20.8% Cotonou 0 6 12 132 12 10 172 11.1% Lokossa 16 4 10 204 17 15 266 17.1% Natitingou 2 36 28 241 19 16 342 22.0% Parakou 1 50 11 142 42 1 247 15.9% Porto Novo 8 23 0 135 34 6 206 13.2% 6 Total 54 135 65 1111 141 50 1556 100.0% % of total 3.5% 8.7% 4.2% 71.4% 9.1% 3.2% 100% A.11 Distribution of Funding by Sector and Region (million FCFA) % of Sector Abomey Cotonou Lokossa Natitingou Parakou Porto Novo Total total Sanitation 113.1 0.0 242.3 3.5 14.4 23.0 396.4 1.7% Commerce 223.6 89.8 57.6 483.6 738.2 358.8 1 951.6 8.3% Water 6.4 188.3 149.0 427.4 155.1 0.0 926.1 3.9% Education 3 970.2 2 098.7 3 252.6 3 762.9 2 314.9 2 163.3 17 562.7 73.4% Health 263.2 201.6 277.4 301.5 717.6 538.7 2 300.0 9.6% Transport 31.6 154.6 243.0 227.6 12.1 107.5 776.4 3.3% Total 4 608.1 2 733.0 4 221.9 5 206.5 3 952.4 3 191.3 23 913.2 100.0% % of total 19.3% 11.4% 17.7% 21.8% 16.5% 13.4% 100% 6 The 65 sub-projects in the area of water included 101 water points, since some sub-projects supported construction of multiple water points. 31 A.12 Average cost of sub-projects by sector (FCFA) Sector Abomey Cotonou Lokossa Natitingou Parakou Porto Novo Average Sanitation 3,935,766* 0 14,064,250 13,711,920 3,156,255* 7,273,377 Commerce 13,279,126 14,008,686 13,650,300 12,747,018 13,862,390 14,141,025 13,614,757 Water 1,513,600* 14,682,827 14,039,576 14,463,896 13,189,735 0 11,577,927 Education 14,610,458 14,650,078 14,756,662 14,762,422 14,957,359 14,580,191 14,719,528 Health 14,325,429 14,889,256 14,920,148 14,350,289 14,945,720 14,476,312 14,651,192 Transport 15,000,000 14,651,500 14,714,876 13,993,930 * These values include sanitation and water sub-projects of a different size relative to the majority of sub-projects A.13 Unit cost of sub-projects by sector (FCFA) Porto Sector Units Abomey Cotonou Lokossa Natitingou Parakou Average Novo 2 Commerce m 47 613 48 517 51 906 39 125 55 163 46 160 50 478 Education m2 45 010 45 338 45 768 44 116 47 274 45 910 45 541 Health m2 118 623 116 009 136 501 107 536 99 095 129 106 116 021 Transport m 400 000 4 053 7 868 35 605 Component 3: Improving access of the poor to financial services for Income Generating Activities Sub-component 3.1. Strengthening capacity of MFIs to supply microfinance products and services that better match the needs of targeted Communities with a special attention to financing IGA. A.14: MFIs - Region and Amount of Contract MFI Geographic zone Amount of contract COOPECDI Mono -- Couffo 49,990,000 ALIDE Ouémé – Plateau - Atlantique 99,010,400 MDB Zou - Atlantique 99,720,000 RENACA Zou - Collines 50,000,000 CPEC Borgou - Alibori 49,650,000 CCIF Atacora - Donga 49,991,000 32 A.15: End of Project Data on MFIs COOPECDI MDB CCIF RENACA ALIDE CPEC Total Number of Windows Opened/Reinforced 12 3 9 11 4 1 40 # of Members 2,526 6,594 17,135 11,721 37,976 of which Men 502 2,659 3,893 692 7,746 of which Women 2,024 2,963 13,242 11,029 29,258 of which Organizations 972 Total Deposits 44,499,200 78,426,675 96,715,475 147,790,265 18,089,294 385,520,909 Outstanding Credit (encours) 126,072,125 n.a 308,052,906 134,009,220 42,372,164 610,506,415 Total Credits Issued (Octroyés) 126,072,125 915,234,000 523,025,000 212,171,000 881,705,000 2,658,207,125 No of Credits Issued 1,583 7,753 17,135 Reimbursement Rate 97.0% 85.7% 98.0% 99.0% 92.0% 93.0% 94.1% Sub-component 3.2. Advisory Services for the development and management of IGAs A.16 Results Indicators for PNDCC Communal Sub-Projects Number of target communities 1,400 Number of communities financed 1,006 Number of community IGA sub-projects approved 1,006 Number of community IGA sub-projects completed 1,006 Amount committed 1,675,869,620 Amount disbursed 1,009,987,462 Disbursement rate 60% Completion rate 100% Coverage rate of communities 72% 33 A.17: IGA Sub-Projects by Region and Sector Vegetable/fruit Value added Region Commerce Livestock Total production processing Alibori 3 2 48 40 92 Atacora 1 39 33 75 148 Atlantique 14 4 5 72 95 Borgou 0 1 10 79 90 Colline 5 23 20 34 83 Couffo 20 51 3 33 107 Donga 0 10 12 23 45 Mono 10 18 36 20 84 Ouemé 0 48 17 27 92 Plateau 0 5 9 53 67 Zou 27 31 3 43 103 Total 80 231 195 499 1006 Component 4 : Appui au Secrétariat Exécutif du projet Sub-Component 4.1. Support to project management A.18: Personnel of SEP and AGeFIB Professional Support Unit Staff Junior Staff Assistants Staff Total % SEP/ PNDCC 7 3 7 4 21 39% AGeFIB 10 15 0 8 33 61% of which: Head office and Cotonou branch 5 5 0 3 13 24% Abomey branch (Bohicon) 1 2 0 1 4 7% Lokossa branch 1 2 0 1 4 7% Natitingou branch 7% (Djougou) 1 2 0 1 4 Parakou branch (Kandi) 1 2 0 1 4 7% Porto Novo branch 1 2 0 1 4 7% Total 17 18 7 12 54 100.00 34 A.19 Component 5: Safety Net Products include: • Assessment of Social Safety Nets in Benin • Feasibility Study of a Cash Transfer Program for Benin 35 Annex 3. Economic and Financial Analysis (including assumptions in the analysis) 1. Cost efficiency of infrastructure investments: Cost-benefit analysis, including rates of return, is not applicable to such community-level public sector investments where benefits are difficult to quantify and have positive externalities. Sub- projects were screened against a set of technical and economic criteria to ensure soundness with sectoral norms and cost efficiency. The facilitated identification of community priorities ensured allocative efficiency. Cost efficiency can be analyzed in terms of unit costs of PNDCC infrastructure constructed versus similar infrastructure created by other approaches and agencies in Benin. The independent PNDCC technical audit found that for primary schools, which accounted for 71 percent of community investments, the CDD approach delivered results faster and at lower cost and similar quality levels than conventional methods. To make this comparison, the technical audit took advantage of a ‘natural experiment’ in which primary schools built under PNDCC could be compared with identical schools constructed with financing from the Bank’s Fast Track Initiative (FTI) Education project by three different entities—the contract management agencies AGETIP and AGETUR, and the PNDCC itself. As shown in the following two tables, unit costs for classrooms constructed by the two delegated contract management agencies were between 40 and 57 percent higher than those built through the CDD approach in the PNDCC. Similar levels of cost effectiveness were also found in the provision of school furniture (desks and benches), though the most efficient agency was only 22 to 25 percent more expensive than the PNDCC. The technical audit noted that the quality of school construction was about the same under the PNDCC as for the schools built by AGETIP and AGETUR. Comparison of Unit Costs for School Construction between PNDCC and the Three FTI Approaches (PNDCC = 100) AGETIP AGETUR PNDCC PNDCC (FTI) (FTI) (FTI) Three classroom school 100 151.75 140.13 107.43 Three classroom school with office and 100 156.93 146.28 109.72 storeroom Two classroom school 100 156.97 142.62 97.95 Two classroom school with office and 100 157.49 146.64 104.81 storeroom Source: PNDCC technical audit (2012). 36 Comparison of Unit Costs for School Furniture between PNDCC and the Three FTI Approaches (PNDCC = 100) PNDCC PNDCC AGETIP AGETUR (FTI) Furniture - Three classroom school 100 150.19 125.14 112.01 Furniture - Three classroom school with 100 143.36 121.80 108.97 office and storeroom Furniture - Two classroom school with 100 144.43 122.15 91.06 office and storeroom Source: PNDCC technical audit (2012) Similarly, comparative reviews carried out during Bank supervision missions of classroom construction under the FTI found that for primary schools, the CDD approach delivered results faster and at lower cost and similar quality levels than conventional methods. Comparator programs working within the FTI framework included PNDCC using the CDD approach and AGETUR and AGETIP, two delegated contract management agencies. Specifically, the review carried out in October 2011 found: Faster results for PNDCC: Of the three programs, PNDCC delivered infrastructure with fewer delays in execution. All three programs were contracted to deliver a packet of classrooms during the same time period. As of October 2011, the vast majority of PNDCC classrooms were more than 75 percent advanced (and most were completed), versus the other two programs where most classrooms were still less than half way completed: Comparison of Pace of Implementation under FTI program +75% 75-50% 50-25% <25% # Sites Advanced Advanced Advanced Advanced AGETIP 72 0 25% 75% AGETUR 80 4% 31% 69% PNDCC 113 88% 8% 4% (FTI) Lower unit costs : Unit costs for the two delegated contract management implemented classroom construction programs were 45 and 29 percent higher than those constructed using community-management through the PNDCC Cost per Square Meter of Construction (Excluding Tax) AGETIP 71,400 FCFA/m2 AGETUR 80,100 FCFA/m2 PNDCC (FTI) 55,500 FCFA/m2 37 Average or better quality : The quality of construction was found to be similar between the 3 programs : The June 2010 field review of the three programs concluded that PNDCC construction quality was at least as good as the other two approaches, although there was room for improvement in all three programs. This was the same conclusion reached in the 2011 field review of the FTI: Some Good Average Poor/Unacceptable Observations AGETIP 40% 20% 20% 20% AGETUR 29% 14% 57% PNDCC (FTI) 43% 21% 29% 7% Other effects on the local economy : The PNDCC tended to work with smaller, more locally-based construction firms. Field observations noted that this reinforced local small businesses, who acquired additional competency and experience. By initiating a large number of sub-projects at the local level, PNDCC created temporary employment and increased competitiveness in the construction and public works sector in these zones. 2. Economic analysis of the financial services and income generation component MFIs had to prepare full business plans for their expansion into underserved areas. While the time frame is too short (one year) to determine longer-range profitability, economic analysis of the changes in MFI portfolios found increases in savings base and expansion of lending activities. Reimbursement rates of credits in the areas to which MFIs extended services average 93 percent, showing that the loans made by MFIs were financially sustainable. MFIs have continued operations in these areas following the project. The picture is less clear for the income generating grants, which funded technical assistance rather than the investment itself. As data is not available on economic outcomes, economic analysis cannot be carried out for this sub- component. 3. Cost-efficiency of the community training model By adopting a train the trainers approach, the PNDCC was able to develop an efficient model for delivering grassroots management training to such a large number of people in a relatively short period of time. The initial unit cost of a team of one senior and one junior trainer coming from outside the community was about US$1,500, dropping to US$1,280 with one professional trainer and one trained community agent, and eventually to US$855 when two trained community agents carried out the GMT supervised by a professional trainer. The represents a 43 percent increase in the cost efficiency of the grassroots management training. 38 Annex 4. Bank Lending and Implementation Support/Supervision Processes (a) Task Team Members Responsibility/ Names Title Unit Specialty Lending Hugues Agossou Sr Auditor IADVP Midou Ibrahima Country Manager AFMCF Daniele A-G. P. Jaekel Operations Analyst AFTHE Serge Theunynck Consultant AFTED Maurizia Tovo Lead Social Development Specia ECSS4 Ramanatou Zime Disbursement Asst. AFMBJ Supervision/ICR Sylvain Adokpo Migan Water & Sanitation Specialist TWIAF Hugues Agossou Sr Auditor IADVP Nicolas Ahouissoussi Senior Agriculture Economist ECSS1 Itchi Gnon Ayindo Senior Procurement Specialist AFTPC Gbetoho Joachim Boko Consultant AFTSP Ayite-Fily D'Almeida Senior Operations Officer AFTHE Nadiath Allake Dende Public Information Assistant AFRSC Sylvie Charlotte Ida do Rego Program Assistant AFMBJ Mathias Gogohounga Procurement Specialist AFTPC Alain Hinkati Financial Management Specialis AFTFM Nouridine Kane Dia Economist AFTP4 Josiane Luchmun Program Assistant AFTSP Sylvie Nenonene Communications Officer AFRSC F. Alain Onibon Agric. Economist AFTAR Korotoumou Ouattara Sr Financial Economist AFTFW Mirey Ovadiya Sr Social Protection Specialis HDNSP TTL Nina Rosas Raffo ET Consultant AFTSP Abdoul-Wahab Seyni Senior Social Development Spec AFTCS Tshiya A. Subayi Operations Officer AFTHE Serge Theunynck Consultant AFTED TTL John Van Dyck Senior Operations Officer AFTSP TTL (b) Staff Time and Cost Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only) Stage of Project Cycle US$ Thousands (including No. of staff weeks travel and consultant costs) Lending FY03 0.69 FY04 249.93 FY05 123.01 39 FY06 0.00 FY07 0.00 FY08 0.00 Total: 373.63 Supervision/ICR FY03 0.00 FY04 0.00 FY05 1.85 FY06 84.78 FY07 80.23 FY08 192.67 FY09 84.39 FY10 136.32 FY11 95.67 FY12 127.82 Total: 803.73 40 Annex 5. Beneficiary Survey Results The first Beneficiary Impact Assessment (BIA), conducted in 2008, was based on a survey of a representative sample of 1,684 people in all regions of the country. The BIA found that 94 percent of people in PNDCC villages were familiar with the project. Between 76 and 80 percent of beneficiaries were satisfied with the project’s alignment with their needs, selection process, management, and impact. Only 2 percent of beneficiaries were unsatisfied with the project’s impact, with the remainder expressing no opinion. Beneficiary assessment (2008) Objectives of Satisfied with Satisfied with Unsatisfied Well-Satisfied Heard of Project in Line Project Selection Management with Impact with Impact of PNDCC with Community Process of Project of Project the Project Needs Men 95% 79% 78% 77% 2% 80% Women 91% 72% 77% 70% 1% 82% Total 94% 77%* 78% 76% 2% 80% *20 percent had no opinion either way. Ninety-two percent of beneficiaries felt that the project had no negative impact on the environment, though five percent did note some environmental impact. The BIA found that the principal recommendations of beneficiaries for improving the project were: improving the speed of availability of funds, improving targeting so that neighboring communities are not selected (in order to spread the benefit of the project more broadly); providing more flexibility for communities who had difficulty mobilizing their contributions to sub-projects; providing more training and strengthening the role of community actors relative to local governments; and providing self-evaluation tools to communities. The second BIA (2011), based on a survey of a representative sample of 1,195 people by the same consulting firm that conducted the first survey, was only partially completed by the consultant due to data problems. Still the exploitable portion of the Assessment found levels of satisfaction that were higher than the first survey, and showed that awareness of the project, already high, had increased slightly over time. The principal suggestions of beneficiaries interviewed were for higher levels of resources and an expansion of the types of interventions financed by the project. Beneficiary Assessment (2011) Heard of “Very Satisfied� or “Satisfied� PNDCC with Impact of the Project Men 98% NA Women 97% NA Total 98% 94% Given the incompleteness of the second BIA, the SEP and the Bank developed a plan to augment the availability of data on beneficiary satisfaction by including a beneficiary satisfaction module in the ex-post evaluation of grassroots management training. This was possible with little 41 additional cost, since the consultant charged with preparing the ex-post evaluation had to survey a broad range of beneficiaries anyway to assess their retention of knowledge imparted during the grassroots management training. The satisfaction module covered a representative sample of 1,000 beneficiaries in all departments of the country, selected from different categories of beneficiaries ranging from indirect beneficiaries living in selected villages but not directly involved in the project, to those in leadership roles, and also included local government officials. The survey found that vulnerable people, including disabled people, felt useful and respected in their roles in sub- project implementation. The highest levels of satisfaction were found with those beneficiaries who had the highest degree of involvement with the project, and also those who retained higher levels of knowledge from the project-supported training. The survey found that among the minority expressing lower levels of satisfaction, the main concerns were related to delays in availability of funds and the need for greater involvement of deconcentrated sectoral staff. Satisfaction Module of Ex-Post Evaluation of Grassroots Management Training (2012) Globally Satisfied with Impact of the Project Men 95% Women 98% Total 96% 42 Annex 6. Summary of Borrower's ICR and/or Comments on Draft ICR Completion report: National Community-Driven Development Support Project SUMMARY April 2012 Parcelle C Lot 324 Quartier SCOA-GBETO Cotonou (Bénin Rep.) 02 BP 838 GBEGAMEY – COTONOU Tel. (229) 21.31.80.88 43 Summary One of the major challenges facing Benin is to offer a better standard of living to its poor people. In view of this, it is necessary to pursue the implementation of different development strategies (MDG, NLTPS, PRSP, OSD), and specifically the expansion of the community-driven development approach (CDD) which promotes the financing of grassroots development. In this context, the Republic of Benin signed on November 4th 2004 with the International Development Agency the Credit Agreement no 3990 which was put into effect on May 2nd 2005 for the financing of the National Community Driven support Project (Projet National d’appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés (PNDCC)). The PNDCC, which actually began its activities after the July 2005 launching workshop, essentially supports the decentralization process and the fight against poverty in Benin. Its main objective is to promote the use of the CDD approach by the line ministries, local governments of communes and village communities to improve the access of poor communities to basic social and financial services. The PNDCC is implemented through five components, as follows : Component 1 : Strengthen the capacity of sectoral ministries, Communes and communities to implement the PNDCC Component 2 : Improve access to basic social services and infrastructure by the poor Component 3 : Improve access of the poor to financial services for income generating activities Component 4 : Support to the management of a community-driven development Component 5 : Technical assistance on social safety nets After seven years of implementation, the main results are as follows: In the case of Component 1 : a. 05 (MEMP, MS, MEE, MAEP, MFE) departments have developed their CDD implementation documents , as expected; b. 05 departments have developed their tool kits and trained officers to use these tools, against 04 expected; c. 87% of the Communes are classified in category C, against 5% in 2006 ; d. Basic Management training (Formation en gestion à la base (FGB)) have reached a total of 747,071 persons (of which 42% were women and more than 10,000 people living with a disability) in 1.517 communities; e. The completion of several studies subcontracted to firms or individual consultants. These include a satisfaction survey, an environmental audit, a study of the impact of local radio station’s broadcasts, a review of the need for social nets in Benin, a feasibility study for a social safety nets program in Benin, the PNDCC impact analysis and an evaluation of the achievements of the FGB training; 44 In the case of Component 2 : a. the project funded one hundred and thirteen (113) sub-projects which benefited to 73 out of the74 communes targeted, this with a committed amount of 4.144,338,389 CFAF fully disbursed; b. 94,7% of the communal level sub-projects were completed and 94.6% of the communes that received a grant were able to complete at least one sub-project ; c. One thousand five hundred fifty six (1,556) community sub-projects were implemented by one thousand five hundred and seventeen (1,517) villages for a total estimated grant amount of 22 billion CFAF. These sub-projects were implemented in the following sectors: education, health, water, sanitation, transportation and commercial activities. 71.2% of the financing went to the education sector, which thus received a large part of the funding, followed by the health and commercial sectors which respectively benefited from 9.3% and 8.5% of the total amount allocated. At the end of the project, 99% of the one thousand five hundred fifty six (1,556) sub-projects were completed. In the case of Component 3 : a. six (06) MFI benefited from subsidies totaling 398,361,400 CFAF. Through this financing, the MFIs were able to expand their services and reach 512 new communities that were not previously serviced, out of the 500 expected at the beginning of implementation, an achievement rate of 102%; b. 1,006 community income-generating activities sub-projects (fully completed at the end of the project) were funded, for a total amount of 1,009,987,462 CFAF, and implemented in 1,006 communities out of the 1,400 expected; which represents a coverage rate of 72%. In the case of Component 4 : a. The sub-component facilitated the management of the IDA funding, of the Benin counterpart and of the sub-projects beneficiary co-financing. Through these sources, a total of 39,483,839,644 CFAF were made available to the project, out of which 38,385 794,500 CFAF were disbursed, a figure that establishes the budget implementation rate at 97 %; b. Concerning environmental management aspects, the project facilitated, through the community sub-projects, the implementation of more than a thousand latrine cabins and one hundred and fifty (150) incinerators In the case of Component 5: Two studies have been conducted through this component: i) a review of needs and social safety nets in Benin and ii) a feasibility study for a social security nets program in Benin. The first confirmed that non-conditional cash transfers and labor intensive works were the types of intervention that appeared to be the most appropriate in response of the poor population 45 expectations. The second study suggested a pilot implementation of these two types of safety-net interventions in fifteen (15) villages. Lessons learned The problems that occurred during the project implementation were mainly of administrative, communication and technical nature. They are in part due to the institutional set-up of the project. Indeed, while the institutional set-up design offered undeniable potential to ensure the project success, it must be mentioned that its management was quite complex for the Humans involved. However the liaison of the CDD approach with the country’s local government management tools helped to mitigate this complexity. Upon completion of this project, it seems very important to mention here that the different actors involved have learned that "when the communes delegate tasks to the villages through the CDD approach, they add to their own forces those of the villages and in turn increase their chance of an effective and efficient success ". To consolidate the results of the project and to ensure the presence of the levers essential to their sustainability, we recommend that, during the next phase : i) each line ministry develops and approves its specific CDD implementation document, ii) all technical documents, M&E and site supervision systems are improved, iii) the number of staff in charge of the project coordination is sufficient and corresponds to the national coverage of the project and, (iv) the coordination team is less solicited by day-to-day management activities related to its line ministry operations. Conclusion The National Community-Driven Development Support Project has managed a budget of around 40 billion CFAF through five (05) sub-components over a period of seven (7) years, including an extension of two (2) years. At the completion of its implementation, it has, upon the results mentioned above, achieved the highly praised results that contributed to the improvement of the poorest people’s living conditions and, consequently, to poverty reduction in Benin. Among its contribution to poverty reduction, we can mention : a. The implementation of 1556 community sub-projects, respectively in the education sector, mainly for the construction of classrooms, in the health sector, for the implementation of village-level health centers and maternity clinics, in the environmental sector for the construction of latrine units, in the transportation sector for the refection of rural roads and drainage facilities and in the commercial sector for the construction of market sheds and storage units; b. The implementation of 113 communal subprojects that, as the community sub-projects, concerned several sectors, including the commercial sector with the construction of market facilities and shops; c. The implementation of 1,006 community income-generating activities sub-projects that enabled the implementation of livestock, agricultural and commodity related activities, for example the processing of gari, red oil and peanut, tapioca etc. d. Basic management capacity building of 747.071 people in the 1517 villages reached. 46 Ex post (normative) training assessments showed that the skills of the poor people were actually strengthened. The average score obtained by those evaluated was as high as 83.61 %. it should also be mentioned that the assessment evaluated that 95.6% of the population were satisfied with the sub-projects implemented. This certainly results from i) the high relevance of the sub- projects to their needs, ii) their involvement and effective accountability in the management of their sub- project, iii) the satisfactory quality of the works despite the few defects that have been found; (iv) the rate of completion of the community sub-projects, which is estimated at 97%. It should be noted that the technical audit report mentions an average rate of completion of 98%. 47 Annex 7. List of Supporting Documents World Bank Documents Consulted: Benin Country Assistance Strategy. Report No. 26054-BJ, Africa Region July 16, 2003. Country Assistance Strategy for Benin for FY09-12 (Report No 46485 - BJ) Africa Region, February 26, 2009. PNDCC Environmental and Social Assessment. PNDCC Resettlement Framework. PNDCC Development Financing Agreement, November 2004. Project Appraisal Document. “National Community-Driven Development Support Project�, Report No. 29165-BJ. September 2004. Emergency Project Paper. « National Community-Driven Development Support Project� Report No. 54657, June 17, 2010. WB Supervision Documents: • Aide Mémoires • ISRs 1 - 16 PNDCC Documents consulted: Agoundote, D. and G. Tomavo. “Atelier de Recyclage des CMPC en Categorisation des Communes�. MCMEJF/PNDCC, June 2011. Bathy Consult. « Rapport d’audit Technique et Financier des Sous-Projets Finances par le PNDCC ». December 2007. Bureau d’Ingénierie et de Management (BIM). « Réalisation de la Première Enquête de Satisfaction des Bénéficiaires du PNDCC ». Final Report, January 2008. Bureau d’Ingénierie et de Management (BIM). « Réalisation de la Deuxième Enquête de Satisfaction des Bénéficiaires du PNDCC ». Final Report, July 2011. CILCOM. « Rapport d’Etude de l’Effet des Emissions Radiophoniques sur les Populations Bénéficiaires », Ministère de la Micro-Finance, de l’Emploi des Jeunes et des Femmes (MCMEJF), March 2010. Dupety, Daniel. « Audit Technique Final des Infrastructures – 2012 », April 2012. La Radio Locale La Voix de la Vallée. « Implications des Radios de Proximité dans les Activités du PNDCC ». Contract No 8227/PNDCC/2007. 48 IREEP. « Etude d’Impact des Actions du PNDCC ». April 2012. Liner Environment. « Audit Environnemental et Social du Projet National d’Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés (PNDCC) ». Final Report, February 2011. Ministère du Développement, d’Analyse Economique et de la Prospective (MDAEP). « Directives Opérationnelles à l’Intention des Ministères Sectoriels pour la Mise en Œuvre de Développement Conduit par les Communautés (DCC) dans le Cadre de la Décentralisation et du Développement Local », 2011. Ministère du Développement, d’Analyse Economique et de la Prospective (MDAEP). « Les Filets Sociaux de Benin ». May 2011. Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Elevage et de la Pêche (MAEP). «Fiches et Conseils Techniques ». Cellule Focale PNDCC MAEP ». 46 technical brochures oriented to the community level on different production topics. Ministère de l’Economie et des Finances/PNDCC. « Manuel de Procédures de Transfert et de Gestion des Ressources Financières de l’Etat aux Communes et aux Communautés Villageoises, dans le cadre de PNDCC », June 2009. Ministère des Mines, de l’Énergie et de l’Eau/PNDCC. CDD Toolkit : • « Etude sur les Couts Estimatifs Standards de Construction des Ouvrages d’Eau ». • « Normes Standards et Règles en Matières de Réalisation des Ouvrages d’Eau Potable au Profit des Communautés » • « Passation des Marches par les Communes et Contrôle des Travaux d’Ouvrages Hydrauliques Simples et Complexe ». June 2011. • « Passation des Marches par les Communautés et Contrôle des Travaux d’Ouvrages Hydrauliques Simples et Complexe ». June 2011. • « Cycle de Réalisation des Ouvrages Hydrauliques Simples et Complexes » • « Suivi-Evaluation et Entretien des Ouvrages Hydrauliques » • « Réalisation des Ouvrages d’Eau Potable au Profit des Communautés ». Ministère de la Micro-Finance, de l’Emploi des Jeunes et des Femmes (MCMEJF)/PNDCC. « Guides Illustrés sur les Modules de Formation de Gestion de la Base (FGB) » : 1. Organisation et Dynamique Communautaire (ODC) 2. Planification Participative Opérationnelle d’un Sous Project (PPOSP) 3. Passation des Marchés Communautaires (PMC) 4. Suivi-Evaluation Participatif avec les Communautés (SEP) 5. Evaluation Participative de la Pauvreté (EPP) et Evaluation Participative des Besoins (EPB) 6. Entretien et Maintenance des Infrastructures Communautaires 7. Gestion Financière et Comptable d’un Sous-Projet Communautaire (GF/SPC) 8. Marketing : Comment s’Organiser pour Mieux Vendre nos Produits ? 49 9. Gestion Financière et Comptable d’un Sous-Projet de Conseils Techniques et d’une Activité Génératrice de Revenus. Ministère de la Micro-Finance, de l’Emploi des Jeunes et des Femmes (MCMEJF)/PNDCC. PNDCC Info – Quarterly Bulletin. Numbers 1 – 8. Sall, B. Rassouloula Aw. « Rapport d’Evaluation Ex-post du Programme de Renforcement des Capacités des Communautés (FGB) », April, 2012. Serfi Afrique. « Etude sur les Couts des Services Financiers et la Problematique de la Cohabitation du MCPP avec d’autres Produits Financiers des IMF ». Ministère de la Micro- Finance, de l’Emploi des Jeunes et des Femmes (MCMEJF)-PNDCC. World Bank. Theunynck, S. « Note technique sur le programme de construction d’écoles réalisé par le PNDCC pour le compte du MEMP dans le Programme Fast-Track (financement FCB) ». PNDCC-World Bank Aide Mémoire, June 2010 and « Programme Fast-Track Initiative – Fonds Commun (FTI-FC) : Note technique sur la revue du programme de constructions scolaires » October, 2011. Other Government Documents : Ministère de la Décentralisation. 2008 PDC guidelines. Ministère de l’Economie et Finances – Inspection General des Finances. « Audit de Project National d’Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés –PNDCC ». November 2007. Ministère de l’Economie et Finances – Inspection General des Finances. « Audit de Project National d’Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés –PNDCC ». June 2008. Ministère de l’Economie et Finances – Inspection General des Finances. « Audit de Project National d’Appui au Développement Conduit par les Communautés –PNDCC ». June 2009. 50 Annex 8: Results Framework: Original and Additional Financing Performance Indicators Actual Status at End of End of End of Restructuring % of Project with Project with % of Original Original Outcome Indicators - Additional Baseline (as of July 6, Target Baseline Additional Additional Target Outcome Indicators (from DCA) Project - Financing 2010 unless Achieved Financing - Financing - Achieved Target noted) Target Actual 1. Percentage of the Credit funds 0% 90% 100% 111% Rephrased: 0% 20% 38.3% 192% expected to be managed by Local 1. Public capital expenditures on Community Beneficiaries that have been basic services that are implemented by managed by Local Community communities through the CDD Beneficiaries approach (% of total public capital expenditures on basic services, three year rolling average) 2. Percentage of the Borrower’s 0% 100% 100% 100% Dropped (note: Measurement of Financing disbursed to finance Subprojects disbursements is not a suitable outcome under Part B of the Project by the end of indicator) each Fiscal Year during the implementation of the Project 3. The ratio of : (a) the average n/a 1.0 1.09 92% Moved to intermediate level and n.a 1.0 1.1 90% number of days between the date of (as of 10/2009) rephrased submission of a proposal for a Subproject 17. Time taken for the execution and the date of completion of the of community sub-projects financed with Subproject where such Subproject shall be Government Financing relative to the financed with the Borrower’s Financing; time taken for IDA-financed community and (b) the average number of days sub-projects (ratio) between the date of submission of a proposal for a Subproject and the date of completion of the Subproject where such Subproject shall be financed under a Local Community Grant (a/b) Outcome indicators added: 2. Direct project beneficiaries 0 450,000 747,071 (42%) 166% (number); of which female (%) (40%) (GMT trainees) 3. Students enrolled in schools 0 100,000 158,500 159% constructed/rehabilitated through the CDD approach (number) 51 Actual Status at End of End of End of Restructuring % of Project with Project with % of Original Original Outcome Indicators - Additional Baseline (as of July 6, Target Baseline Additional Additional Target Outcome Indicators (from DCA) Project - Financing 2010 unless Achieved Financing - Financing - Achieved Target noted) Target Actual 4. People with access to improved 0 10,000 25,250 253% water source in rural areas (#) 5. People with access to micro- 0 10,000 14,087 141% finance services (number) 70% 80% 6. Beneficiaries satisfied with n/a 80% 96% 121% the results of the sub-projects (%) Original Intermediate Outcome Proposed change to indicators Indicators Component 1 4. Legislation, in form and No Yes No 0 – in Rephrased 0 5 5 100% substance satisfactory to the Association, (achieved as of terms of 7. Line ministries having regarding community-driven development end 2011 – had timing, adopted CDD strategies (number) and policies shall have been adopted into draft sectoral but law by the Borrower by Mid Term Review. policies as of eventually MTR. Delayed achieved to harmonize) 5. The relevant selected ministries No Yes yes 100% Rephrased 0 4 5 125% shall have developed their tool-kit, and 8. Line ministries having thereafter, such ministries shall have used developed and utilized tool-kits on such tool-kits during their activities with service delivery through CDD (number) Communes and local communities. 6. Percentage of the targeted 0% 100% 108% 108% Rephrased. The sub-indicator on 0 100% 108% 108% poorest local communities having received (1,400) (1,518) satisfaction has been dropped to (1,400 (1,518) grassroots management training and streamline monitoring. targeted support from Technical Support Agencies, 96% satisfied 9. Targeted poor communities communities) and finding them satisfactory. that have received Grassroots Management Training (number) 7. The monitoring and evaluation No Yes Yes 100% Rephrased No Yes Yes 100% system for the Project shall be in place, 10. The M&E system is in place functioning and transparently providing and functioning (yes/no) reliable information to all stakeholders. Component 2 8. (a) Percentage of the targeted 0% 100% 85% (under 85% Rephrased. The sub-indicator on 0 100% 95% 95% Communes having implemented at least (of 74) implementation) satisfaction was eliminated in favor of (out of 74) one Subproject addressing multi-village 54% (already the overall outcome indicator on issues under part B.1 of the Project, and (b) completed) beneficiary satisfaction. The indicator 52 Actual Status at End of End of End of Restructuring % of Project with Project with % of Original Original Outcome Indicators - Additional Baseline (as of July 6, Target Baseline Additional Additional Target Outcome Indicators (from DCA) Project - Financing 2010 unless Achieved Financing - Financing - Achieved Target noted) Target Actual percentage of the local communities was rephrased to clarify that it will benefiting from such Subprojects that are measure completed rather than satisfied with such Subprojects financed sub-projects. 11. Participating communes having executed at least one multi- village sub-project (%) 9. (a) Number of Subprojects 0 1,400 1,526 approved 109% Rephrased and divided into two addressing local community issues under Of which 1,231 approved indicators. The sub-indicator on Part B.2 of the Project implemented by under 88% satisfaction has been eliminated in targeted Local Community Beneficiaries; implementation completed favor of the overall outcome indicator (b) percentage of such Subprojects that or completed or on beneficiary satisfaction. The comply with applicable criteria; and (c) (481 under underway indicator is rephrased to clarify that it percentage of vulnerable groups in such implementation, will measure completed rather than targeted local communities that are 750 completed) financed sub-projects. satisfied with such Subprojects. 12. Community sub-projects for MTR basic services and infrastructure 0 1,400 1,535 110% beneficiary completed (number) completed completed assessment – 13. Community sub-projects that 84% satisfied comply with eligibility criteria (%) n.a 100% 100% 100% Core indicators added: 14. Additional classrooms 0 2,500 3,170 127% built/rehabilitated (number) – reported under “Decline in shortfall of classrooms at primary level� 15. Health facilities constructed, 0 120 144 120% renovated, and/or equipped (number) 16. Improved community water 0 50 101 202% points constructed or rehabilitated under the project (number) Component 3 10. Number of Microfinance 0 5 (MFIs) 6 (MFIs) 120% Rephrased 0 500 512 102% Beneficiaries (Institutions) that have signed 500 409 (MFIs) 18.Previously unserved communities in Financing Agreements with PES, and have (commun- (communities) 82% which MFIs supported by the project expanded their clientele to at least 100 ities) (commun- have extended their operations (number) targeted local communities. ities) 53 Actual Status at End of End of End of Restructuring % of Project with Project with % of Original Original Outcome Indicators - Additional Baseline (as of July 6, Target Baseline Additional Additional Target Outcome Indicators (from DCA) Project - Financing 2010 unless Achieved Financing - Financing - Achieved Target noted) Target Actual 11. (a) Number of local communities 0 1,400 1,005 TA 72% Rephrased. 0 1,400 1,006 72% that have received technical advisory projects 19.Communities that have received services; (b) number of groups within such approved; 52% technical advisory services on local communities that have entered into a 725 completed; completed microfinance (number) loan agreement with a Microfinance 280 underway Beneficiary to develop an income- generating activity; and (c) percentage of these income-generating activities that have improved the revenues of such groups. Component 4 12. Percentage of annual work plans 0% 100% 100% 100% Rephrased 0% 100% 100% 100% and budgets for the Project shall have been 20. Annual Work Plans and Budgets that prepared on a timely basis by PES, have been prepared on a timely basis by reviewed by PES with the Association and the SEP and found satisfactory by IDA found satisfactory by the Association. (%) 13. Percentage of the requests for 0% 80% 70% 88% Rephrased 0% 80% 100% 125% financing received by PES from the 21. Requests for financing from line relevant ministries, Microfinance ministries, communes, communities, and Institutions, Communes and local MFIs that have been addressed in a communities have been timely answered timely manner by the SEP according to by PES according to the time-schedule the time-schedule spelled out in the PIM provided in the Project Implementation (%) Manual. Component 5 (new) Added new indicators: No Yes Yes 100% 22. Completion of Social Safety Net Review and Feasibility Analysis (yes/no) 23. Completion of implementation No Yes Yes 100% guidelines for a pilot safety net program (yes/no) 54