For Official Use Only CASCR Review 75063 Independent Evaluation Group 1. CAS Data Country: Senegal CAS Year: FY07 CAS Period: FY07 - FY10 st CASCR Review Period: FY07 - FY11 (1 half) Date of this review: January 16, 2013 2. Executive Summary i. This review examines the implementation of the FY07-FY10 Senegal Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) of FY07 and the CAS Progress Report (CASPR) of FY09, and assesses the CAS Completion Report (CASCR). The strategy was jointly implemented by IDA and IFC, and this review covers the joint program of the two institutions. ii. The broad objective of the WBG strategy was to address the challenges facing the country by maximizing synergies with the Government’s PRSP and the Bank’s Africa Action Plan. The CAS objectives were organized under three pillars, supported by a governance filter. On governance, the CAS sought to improve efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources, to increase the accountability of government, and to strengthen and modernize the judicial system and mechanisms for private sector governance. The three main pillars included: (i) promoting growth and wealth creation through creating a competitive investment climate, improving basic infrastructure for growth, facilitating SME access to finance, diversifying agriculture, promoting sustainable use of natural resources, and developing skilled labor and use of technology; (ii) protecting human development through improving quality of and access to basic education, improving health services provision for women and children, and protecting targeted vulnerable groups; and (iii) maximizing urban/rural synergies through improving urban mobility and access in and out of Dakar, promoting regional centers, reducing vulnerability of immigrant and emigrant groups, and improving quality of life through better management of natural resources and access to water and sanitation. iii. IEG rates the overall outcome of the CAS as moderately unsatisfactory, concurring with the CASCR rating. In all four pillars, although some objectives were achieved, a majority of them were only partially achieved and some were not achieved. Under the Governance Filter, some improvement was achieved in the budget process and in the transparency of budget execution, mostly associated with prior actions for IDA adjustment credits, but the overall progress toward improving governance was weak. Under the Growth Pillar, little progress was made toward removing key bottlenecks in the transport and energy sectors, while the overall business environment deteriorated despite encouraging regulatory reforms in some areas. Gains in agricultural diversification at the project level are yet to have a significant impact at the national level as the share of agriculture in exports and GDP declined. Good progress was achieved in managing fishing and forest resources, but little was done to reverse land degradation. Under the Human Development Pillar, good progress was achieved in broadening access to education and closing the gender gap, but there is no indication of improvement in the quality of education. In health and nutrition, there is a large disconnect between the positive results at the project level and the disappointing outcomes at the national level. Similarly, although a child-focused social cash transfer project is achieving good results, there is no information on the welfare of street children in Dakar, a target vulnerable group that the CAS aimed to protect. Finally, under the Urban-Rural Synergy Pillar, there is no evidence of improved access in and out of Dakar and congestion worsened in the city. The rehabilitation of Casamance has broadly achieved the intended outcomes, but there is no information on whether it has led to greater balance in regional development. Good progress was achieved in improving access to water and sanitation services. CASCR Reviewed by: Peer Reviewed by: CASCR Review Coordinator: Marcelo Selowsky Luis Alvaro Sanchez Consultant, IEGCC Consultant, IEGCC Xiaolun Sun, Amitava Banerjee Surajit Goswami Senior Evaluation Officer, IEGCC Consultant, IEGCC Consultant, IEGCC For Official Use Only CASCR Review 2 Independent Evaluation Group iv. The CASCR identifies four lessons: long-term engagement in any given area for lasting development impact; realism in assessing what needs to be done and what can be done; a combination of different instruments in strategic sectors; and attention to the relevance and measurability of outcome indicators. IEG concurs with these and underscores three key points. First, strong commitments and follow-up actions by the Government are critical for a WBG-supported intervention to lead to broader development impact than the intervention itself. During the CAS period, many successful interventions failed to produce the desired higher-level impact due to lack of follow-up. Second, there is a need for stronger synergy between budget support operations and other WBG instruments such as AAA, TA, and investment projects. Several sectoral IDA projects would have had greater impact if better supported by the PRSC series. Third, a coordinated approach between IDA, IFC and MIGA, while relevant, needs significant effort at the working level to build synergies and mutually reinforcing support. The clear intentions of the CAS to maximize WBG synergies were not matched by close collaboration among the three institutions during CAS implementation. 3. Assessment of WBG Strategy Overview of CAS Relevance: Country Context 1. Given the favorable macroeconomic conditions, low debt levels, and the beginning of a new political cycle, Senegal entered the CAS period with high hopes despite emerging signs of distress. The global food and oil price shocks hit Senegal particularly hard as fuels and food products accounted for nearly half of total imports, while the global economic crisis led to the decline of remittances and tourism revenue. Poor weather conditions and weak policy performance, especially in fiscal management, contributed to the slowdown in GDP growth from 4.4 during 2000-05 to 3.4 percent during the 2006-10. Against the expectations of GDP growth in the range of 7 percent, the economic performance during the CAS period was especially disappointing. The poverty rate declined slightly from 48.5 to 46.7 percent during 2006-11. The prospects for reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are mixed, with a number of the goals off track. Senegal continued to enjoyed political stability during the CAS period, although with President Wade losing control of Dakar in 2009 it became more difficult to gather broad consensus to advance reforms needed to address the short- term challenges while maintaining a focus on long-term development objectives. 2. The Senegalese Government articulated its medium-term vision in the second generation Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP-II) around four pillars: (i) wealth creation; (ii) access to basic social services; (iii) protection of vulnerable groups; and (iv) greater transparency and participatory processes. An Accelerated Growth Strategy was formulated at the same time as the PRSP-II and further developed the first pillar with a focus on improving the overall investment climate and promoting the development of five clusters with good export and job-creation potential: agribusiness, tourism, telecommunications and new technologies, textile and fisheries. A National Protection Strategy finalized in 2007 unbundled the third pillar. In addition, the Government relied on a number of guiding principles that included: preserving macroeconomic stability and reducing vulnerability to external shocks; promoting equity and protecting vulnerable groups; and balancing growth between rural and urban regions. Objectives of the WBG Strategy 3. The broad objective of the WBG strategy was to address the challenges facing the country by maximizing synergies with the Government’s PRSP and the Bank’s Africa Action Plan. The CAS objectives were organized under three pillars, supported by a governance filter. On governance, the CAS sought to improve the efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources, to increase the accountability of government, and to strengthen and modernize the judicial system and mechanisms For Official Use Only CASCR Review 3 Independent Evaluation Group for private sector governance. The three main pillars included: (i) promoting growth and wealth creation through creating a competitive investment climate, improving basic infrastructure for growth, facilitating SME access to finance, diversifying agriculture, promoting sustainable use of natural resources, and developing skilled labor and use of technology; (ii) protecting human development through improving quality of and access to basic education, improving health services provision for women and children, and protecting targeted vulnerable groups; and (iii) maximizing urban/rural synergies through improving urban mobility and access in and out of Dakar, promoting regional centers, reducing vulnerability of immigrant and emigrant groups, and improving quality of life through better management of natural resources and access to water and sanitation. 4. No major discrepancies existed between the text of the strategy and the supporting results framework. However, the highly selective nature of the results framework meant that it did not fully capture the scope of the strategy. The CASPR reaffirmed the relevance of the CAS, but adjusted the program to ensure effective use of enlarged IDA funds. In addition to major revisions to the results matrix, where 12 out of 26 outcome indicators were modified, the objective of developing skilled labor and use of technology under Pillar I was removed, from both the text of the CASPR and its results matrix, without any explanation. Relevance of the WBG Strategy: 5. Congruence with Country Context and Country Program: The CAS was relevant to the country context by focusing on the key challenges facing Senegal for accelerating economic growth, closing the gaps in the delivery of social services, and in protecting the most vulnerable people. The strategy was closely aligned with the PRSP II and the complementary Accelerated Growth Strategy and National Protection Strategy. The third pillar of the CAS was aligned with the guiding principle of pursuing balanced growth between rural and urban regions, although it is not clear from the CAS how the guiding principles relate to the other strategies. Seeking to maximize synergies with other development partners, the CAS program selectively left out some key aspects of the PRSP agenda where assistance was expected from other sources. 6. Relevance of Design. The selection of three areas of engagement supplemented by the cross-cutting governance agenda was grounded in previous and on-going analytical work. However, the wide scope and ambitious objectives of the strategy relied on the political and technical capacity of the Government to advance policy reforms. A more focused approach would have facilitated achieving results in some critical areas. The strategy tested the Bank’s capacity to deliver the expected results given the instruments available. Specifically, although the Bank appropriately used different lending operations and analytical work to pursue CAS objectives, the achievement of key policy reform objectives called for a strong technical assistance (TA) program to complement the budget support through policy lending. Such a TA program was not in place. More importantly, delivering on the CAS objectives relied critically on the ownership and follow-up of the Government in the reform areas and on the Bank instruments to have a significant catalytic effect on the policy efforts. Consideration was not given to the factors that could affect the ability of the Government to deliver on its commitments and to a clear pathway that could translate and replicate project level outcomes into country-wide results. Finally, the third pillar of the strategy lacked coherence – urban and inter-city transport was an important part of the basic infrastructure for growth; street children made up a major vulnerable group for targeted protection; water and sanitation provisions were key components of social services; while natural resource management was pursued under the first pillar despite being mentioned here. It is not clear what rural-urban synergies would be achieved through the WBG program. 7. Strength of the Results Framework. The CAS had a strong focus on results and articulated a reasonable results chain linking IDA interventions to desired outcomes to higher-level country goals. Nevertheless, the CAS results framework had several major shortcomings that significantly reduced its usefulness as a management tool for guiding program implementation. The results matrix demonstrated certain confusion between CAS outcomes (objectives that the Bank aimed to achieve during the CAS period) and outcome indicators (measurements to be used to gauge achievement of the objectives). Consequently, all the CAS outcomes were narrowly defined as numeric targets that For Official Use Only CASCR Review 4 Independent Evaluation Group did not always show a clear link with the country goals. For example, the link between CAS outcome of “75 percent of surveyed children showing adequate weight gain” and the country goal of “improving protection of targeted vulnerable groups” was indirect and tenuous. Furthermore, the results matrix captured only a sub-set of the CAS program, but there was no explanation on why some (important) issues were left out. For example, very ambitious goals and activities were described in the area of governance, but then were not followed up in the results matrix. Similarly, although the strategy emphasized the improvement in the quality of basic education, all the outcomes in the results matrix sought to measure progress in terms of enrollment and repetition rates. Finally, a major shortcoming was that most of the outcomes (de facto outcome indicators) were specific to individual IDA lending operations and did not reflect the aggregate contribution of the WBG. In particular, IFC interventions were poorly captured by the indicators, to the extent that apart from three projects already on-going at the start of the CAS period, the expected outcomes could very well be achieved had the CAS been an IDA-only strategy. The IFC program, which was described in Annex 3 of the CAS instead of the main text of the CAS, was largely excluded from the results matrix. 8. Risk Identification and Mitigation. The CAS identified three categories of risks: (i) governance and resistance to policy reforms from vested interests; (ii) vulnerability to shocks and volatility of donor support; and (iii) insufficient institutional capacity. However, it did not propose specific mitigation remedies to deal with these risks. The CASPR reconfirmed the validity of these risks, all of which did materialize to some extent, and highlighted the overriding risks associated with external shocks. Nevertheless, no real mitigation measures were discussed beyond continued monitoring through close engagement with the Government and donor partners. Overview of CAS Implementation: Lending and Investments 9. At the inception of the CAS period, IDA had a portfolio of 15 projects totaling $631 million. During the CAS period, total new IDA lending amounted to $692.3 million in 20 operations, compared to the planned lending program of 13 projects totaling $420 million in the CAS and 17 projects totaling $593 million in the CASPR. The additional finance was in part a response to new financing needs arisen from a succession of shocks experienced by Senegal, and in part an adjustment to the original program with increased IDA allocation. A trust fund portfolio of 28 operations provided $144.8 million, of which 62 percent has gone for education. Agriculture, fisheries and the environment received 23 percent. 10. IDA’s portfolio quality compared favorably to the Africa Region average, but was volatile, with the proportion of projects at risk going from 23.5 percent in 2007 down to zero in 2009, then up to 20 percent in 2010 before coming down again to 15.8 percent in 2011. IEG reviewed the completion report of 11 projects completed during the CAS period and rated the development outcome as satisfactory in 4 projects, moderately satisfactory in 4 projects, moderately unsatisfactory in 2 projects and unsatisfactory in 1 projects. This result indicates a higher success rate (72.7 percent) than the regional average (65.3 percent). The Implementation Status Reports rate 82 percent of the 17 projects under implementation as satisfactory as of November 28, 2012. The disbursement ratio improved from 12.2 percent in 2008 to 21.1 percent in 2011. As of November 2012, it stood at 16.7 percent. 11. At the inception of the CAS period, the IFC had 6 active investments totaling $36.7 million; during the CAS period, IFC committed $94.1 million in 10 new projects, of which 96.5 percent were in loans. This commitment volume is about four times the amount of US$23.8 million committed in the previous CAS cycle, and the 10 projects represent a five-fold increase over the previous period’s 2 projects. A third of the IFC’s investment was in a toll road ($30.5 million); followed by a trade finance project ($17.4 million), and a hotel ($10.5 million). IFC also invested in 2 microfinance operations, 2 rural electrification projects, 2 agribusiness companies, and a cement project. In spite of the commitment volumes, as of June 30, 2010, IFC’s disbursed and outstanding portfolio in Senegal was For Official Use Only CASCR Review 5 Independent Evaluation Group $54.6 million, compared to $80.7 million on June 30, 2007 and $92.3 million on June 30, 2008. The drop reflects, in part, the relatively shorter term nature of IFC’s investments in the country and the rise in cancellations and prepayments in the portfolio. 12. There were no IEG-reviewed XPSRs during the CAS period. IFC’s own assessment through the Development Outcome Tracking System (DOTS) indicates that all six projects that were under implementation at the start of the CAS period were either highly unsuccessful or mostly unsuccessful in terms of their development outcomes. Among the 10 new commitments, 7 were categorized as “Too Early to Tell”, one project in Trade Finance cannot be rated, and of the balance 2 projects, one (in agribusiness) was cancelled before disbursement and the other (a cement project) was prepaid, although its portfolio supervision reports suggested a mostly successful outcome. Analytic and Advisory Activities and Services 13. Most of the planned Economic and Sector Work (ESW) tasks were delivered, albeit with some important delays. Of the 24 tasks delivered, three were unplanned activities related to disaster need assessment and coastal erosion protection. The delays in delivery were particularly important in FY08, where only two of the seven planned activities were delivered. The AAA program supported the main priority areas of the CAS and the lending program. One weakness of the program was the constant postponement of a multi-sector Public Expenditure Review (PER); in the end it covered only health, education, and transport sectors. Given the Bank’s important role in coordinating donor support and the key objective of improving efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources, an early PER would have been more consistent with the overall strategy. 14. IFC implemented 2 pre-existing and 7 new advisory services (AS) projects, compared to 3 projects in the previous CAS cycle. These projects included capacity building to MSMEs via the rollout of the Business Edge and SME Toolkit products and increased access to finance for MSMEs via support to IFC investment clients in banking and microfinance institutions. Access to finance for MSMEs has also benefited from the Africa Leasing Facility to promote leasing as an alternative financing mechanism. A project in Corporate Governance was carried out to prepare Senegal's first Corporate Governance Code. All but one project were closed at the end of the CAS period, of which three were rated by the IFC team as successful/ mostly successful for their development effectiveness, two were rated as unsuccessful/ mostly unsuccessful, two thought development effectiveness “not applicable”, and two were terminated after approval. Overall, the projects delivered did not resemble what was laid out in the CAS, namely interventions in agribusiness, education, tourism, telecom, or the development of the domestic bond market. Partnerships and Development Partner Coordination 15. Most bilateral and multilateral agencies were active in Senegal and the PRSP process helped the overall coordination. The CAS consultation process promoted selectivity and division of labor, but also complementarities. Key areas such as support to the livestock sector, banking and telecommunications became major areas of emphasis by donors. Joint activities were planned in water and roads. Complementarities in lending vehicles were also planned - the Bank focusing on budgetary support while donors focusing in supportive investment projects. During the food crisis multi donor trust funds became particularly important, providing additional financing for a rapid response child focused social cash transfer and Nutrition Security interventions. Safeguards and Fiduciary Issues 16. In the period FY08-FY12, INT recorded 13 allegations of fraud and corruption, and found sufficient basis to open 7 cases. None of these was substantiated. For Official Use Only CASCR Review 6 Independent Evaluation Group Overview of Achievement by Objective: Filter: Mainstreaming governance 17. Under the governance filter, the CAS supported an ambitious agenda that included (i) improving the efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources; (ii) increasing the accountability of government through decentralization, stronger institutions, and better information; and (iii) strengthening and modernizing the judicial system and mechanisms for private sector governance. The CASPR revised 6 out of the 7 outcome indicators in the CAS by considerably reducing the scope of the progress sought after and linking them closely to IDA projects, indeed, to the prior actions under IDA credits. 18. Improving efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources. The CASCR reports that the three outcome targets, all of which drew on the prior actions under IDA’s Public Financial Support Credit (PFSC), were met. However, these targets focused on budget preparation and disclosure, and did not capture changes in the efficiency in government resource utilization. The CASCR highlights as a major achievement the introduction of the Medium-Term Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) in 2009, which was discarded as an intermediate outcome target in the CASPR. By 2011, 21 line ministries have developed a sector MTEF and a new Public Finance Management (PFM) law had been approved in line with regional commitments under West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU). Despite the adoption of MTEF, however, the link between sector policies and priorities and the budget remain weak, and the MTEFs are not fully disclosed on the documents sent to Parliament. The Government’s effort to clear budgetary arrears with the private sector was also met with mixed success as arrears returned and represented 10 percent of total expenditures in 2011. Senegal’s percentile ranking on the World Bank Institute’s (WBI) Government Effectiveness indicator deteriorated from 44.9 to 39.8 percent during 2006-11; its score on Global Competitiveness Report’s (CGR) Wastefulness of Government Spending indicator deteriorated from 2.9 to 2.5 (out of 7) between 2007/08 and 2011/12; and its CPIA score on Quality of Budgetary and Financial Management remained at 3.5 during 2007-11. 19. IDA supported this objective through the Poverty Reduction Support Credit series (PRSC III-V, FY07, FY10 and FY11), the PFSC (FY09), which was an emergency operation during the crises to assist the authorities in addressing key fiscal concerns that emerged, and the Public Expenditure Financial Assessment (PEFA, FY08). 20. Increase public sector accountability through decentralization, stronger institutions and better information. The CASCR reports that all three outcome targets, two of which were linked to prior actions of IDA credits, were achieved. Nevertheless, the CASCR notes that while the capacity of the municipalities and rural communities improved, transfer of resources to local governments remained far below the level estimated to adequately finance the decentralized responsibilities. Moreover, even though an audit of procurement transactions was carried out in 2009 with support from the IDA’s Private Investment Promotion Project (PIPP, FY03-FY12), it is not clear whether such independent audit was repeated on an annual basis (per CAS target). The information on budget outcomes is published within 30 days and available on the web. The progress at IDA project level is reflected in the improvement in Senegal’s CPIA score for Transparency, Accountability and Corruption in the Public Sector from 3.0 in 2007 to 3.5 in 2011. Senegal’s CGR score on Diversion of Public Funds and Favoritisms of Government Decisions also improved. On the other hand, Senegal’s percentile ranking on WBI’s Voice and Accountability and Control and Corruption indicators continued to decline during 2006-11, from 48.1 to 39.0 percent and from 39.5 to 31.8 percent, respectively. 21. In addition to the lending operations cited above, IDA support for this objective also included the Participatory Local Development Program (LDP, FY06-FY12), the Local Authorities Development Program (FY07), the PIPP, and AAA focusing on outreach. For Official Use Only CASCR Review 7 Independent Evaluation Group 22. Strengthening and modernizing the judicial system and mechanisms for private sector governance. The outcome target (the only one not revised in the CASPR) was not met. The time required for Enforcing Contract went up, rather than down, according to the 2011 Doing Business (DB) report, while its percentile ranking on WBI’s Rule of Law indicator declined from 48.8 to 40.8 percent between 2006 and 2011. IDA supported this objective through the PIPP and an Economic Governance Project approved in FY10. 23. IEG rates the outcome of the WBG assistance under the Governance Filter as moderately unsatisfactory. There is no indication that sufficient progress has been made in the three areas of engagement. While some improvement was achieved in the budget process as part of specific project outcomes, in particular prior actions, and some gains were made in the transparency of budget execution, there is no evidence of appreciable improvement in the efficiency of public resource utilization, public sector accountability and the judicial system for private sector governance. Pillar I: Promoting growth / wealth creation 24. The PRSP-II set the goal of reaching 7 percent of GDP growth rate in order to achieve the MDGs. To support the Government’s accelerated growth agenda, the CAS program focused on (i) promoting a competitive investment climate; (ii) building and maintaining basic infrastructure for growth; (iii) facilitating access to financial resources by SMEs; (iv) promoting a modern and diversified agriculture; and (v) promoting sustainable development and management of natural resources. 25. Promoting a competitive investment climate. In 2009, Senegal was recognized by the DB as the best reformer in Africa: the time and cost required to start a business were reduced by 86 and 32 percent, respectively; the number of documents and time required to trade were reduced by over 45 and over 30 percent, respectively, (although the cost to trade increased); and the time required to register a property was reduced by 14 percent. As a result, Senegal’s overall Ease of Doing Business ranking jumped from the 168th in 2008 to the 149th in 2009. However, the reform momentum was not maintained in the following years. With little further improvement (except for an additional reduction in the cost to obtain a construction permit and the time to trade), Senegal’s overall DB ranking declined between 2009 and 2013. Of the 42 Sub-Saharan African countries covered by the latest DB report, Senegal is in the 32nd position. The GCR confirms the lack of progress in Senegal’s Overall Competitiveness and its Goods Markets Efficiency - its scores improved marginally from 3.6 to 3.7 and from 4.0 to 4.1, respectively, during 2007/08-2011/12. The CASCR suggests that weaknesses in the monitoring of reform implementation have prevented achievement of concrete improvements on the ground. 26. The PIPP and the Private Sector Adjustment Credit (PSAC, FY04) were the main instruments of IDA support for this objective. Both projects had mixed success, were restructured and extended. The latest ISR rated the development outcome of PIPP as moderately unsatisfactory, while the IEG rated that of PSAC as unsatisfactory. PRSC IV also supported the creation of a one-stop shop for the issuance of building permits in Dakar, which reduced the time needed substantially. In addition, IDA delivered an Investment Climate Assessment in FY09. IFC conducted a review of OHADA uniform acts and their implementation, which fell far short of its commitment to work closely with IDA to improve the investment climate by using the DB methodology. The CASCR has little to comment on this subject. 27. Building and maintaining basic infrastructure for growth. Senegal was fortunate to have one of the best road networks in the region and one of the widest electricity coverage in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, little progress seems to have been made during the CAS period to keep up with increased demand. The GCR reports an overall deterioration in the Adequacy of Infrastructure from 2008 to 2012, with the corresponding score dropping from 3.0 to 2.5. 28. In the transport sector, as traffic increased, the need for proper and timely upkeep became critical. To respond to this need, a second generation road fund (FERA) became operational in 2009 and funding for road maintenance increased in part through improved collection of user charges. The For Official Use Only CASCR Review 8 Independent Evaluation Group GCR’s Quality of Roads indicator suggests an improvement as Senegal’s score increased from 2.6 to 3.2 during 2007/08-2012/13, although its ranking did not improve (from 96/131 to 97/144). However, the CAS target of improving the quality of the core road network was not met, and the 2009 PER suggests that the road maintenance implemented may not the most appropriate. A key Bank intervention in the transport sector was the large ($105 million) Dakar-Diamniadio Toll Highway (FY09), where IDA is financing urban restructuring and environment protection to complement the road construction undertaken by the Government and other donors. IFC committed $30 million in SENAC, the Senegalese special purpose company that won the concession. The PRSC series tracked progress in setting up and financing FERA; while a Western/Central African Air Transport Project (FY09) was added when additional financing became available. IDA analytical work included a PER on transport. In the energy sector, the sharp spike in oil prices in 2007 significantly impacted the financial situations of SENELEC, the state-owned supplier of electricity in the country. Since then, no progress has been made in improving SENELEC’s performance, and the outcome target on new electricity tariff structure was not achieved. Governance issues in the sector remain paramount. On the positive side, some progress was made in the development and use of Public Private Partnership (PPP) for power generation and rural electrification. This has led to increased access to electricity in rural Senegal, achieving the relevant outcome target. The Bank’s support in the energy sector included two unsuccessful interventions: the Electricity Sector Efficiency Enhancement Program Phase 1 APL (FY05-FY11) did not achieve two thirds of the project development objectives and closed with 62 percent of the credit cancelled; the Energy Sector Recovery Development Policy Financing (FY08) was a two tranche operation whose design up-fronted disbursements and back-loaded reforms in spite of the CAS explicitly stating that funding for this project was going to depend on strong performance in the sector. When intended reforms, including a new electricity tariff, were not delivered, the second tranche was cancelled. A parallel operation, the Electricity Services for the Rural Areas Project (FY05), has had limited impact on expanding rural services due to delays and governance issues of the Senegal Rural Electrification Agency. IFC committed an $18 million loan in an Independent Power Producer (Kounoune IPP) in FY07, although project has faced serious challenges and is performing below expectations; and $1.5 million in equity in a concessionaire for two rural electrification projects. A second IPP was initiated, but dropped after an AS technical review because there was no interest from investors. 29. Facilitating access to financial resources by SMEs. Although the GCR consistently identified access to finance as the biggest constraint to doing business in Senegal during 2008-11, it reported progress in the Ease of Access to Loans, with its score improving from 1.8 to 2.4 (0 to 7) and its ranking from 129/131 to 100/142. The CAS outcome target was not met when the IDA/IFC Partial Credit Guarantees to facilitate SME access to financial resources failed to materialize. The suspension of the PIPP project during 2008 due to fiduciary reason affected achievement of the outcome. However, two IFC microfinance projects (Microcred and Saint Louis Finance – Fides) helped facilitate MSME access to finance by investing in two Greenfield financial institutions which grew rapidly while keeping the NPLs within limits. Both investments were accompanied by IFC AS of $1 million each, which were the largest AS projects in Senegal during the CAS period. IFC also provided AS support to Ecobank, a big bank in Senegal that is part of one of the largest African financial services groups, through the AMSMETA program to expand its services to MSMEs; however, the average loan size was higher than $50,000, with loan growth falling short of target by 40 percent and unsustainable NPL ratios. Two initiatives, one for leasing and another targeted at women, were terminated, while the initiative for housing finance did not materialize. 30. Promoting a modern and diversified agriculture. Under the CAS, the outcome target of increasing non-traditional exports was met with the assistance of the Agriculture Markets and Agribusiness Development APL (PDMAS, FY06), whereby 26,000 tons of fruits and vegetables were exported in 2010. This project also helped increase irrigated land, although the expansion fell short of the CAS target. However, considerable scale-up is needed to translate the good project level outcomes into a modern and diversified agriculture sector in Senegal. Between 2001 and 2010, the contribution of agriculture to GDP declined from 18. 5 to 16.7 percent, while the share of merchandise For Official Use Only CASCR Review 9 Independent Evaluation Group exports accounted by agricultural raw exports and food products dropped sharply from 49 percent in 2006 to 30 percent in 2010. Agriculture production remains highly volatile and dependent on the weather. In addition to the PDMAS, IDA provided additional financing for the Food Security Project (FY10) and the Agricultural Services and Producer Organizations 2 APL (FY) to increase smallholder producer’s access to sustainable and diversified agricultural services and innovation. An IFC agribusiness investment was cancelled before disbursement. 31. Promoting sustainable development and management of natural resources. Managing Senegal’s declining fish stocks, reversing the land degradation in some regions and establishing community forest management to meet household wood fuel needs were the key sustainability objectives during the CAS period. In the fishery sector, with support from the Integrated Marine and Resource Management Project (FY05-FY12) the Sustainable Management of Fish Resources Project (FY09-FY12), and the West Africa Regional Fisheries Program APL (FY10), the CAS target of reducing fishing effort on targeted species in specific fishing communities was mostly reached. Good progress was also achieved in establishing sustainable community managed forests, which can now meet 100 percent of household wood fuels needs at the national level (vs. target of 75 percent). An important breakthrough in this area was the issuance of a Government decree eliminating the charcoal quota system. IDA supported these efforts with the Sustainable and Participatory Energy Management II (FY10) to increase the use of diversified household fuels while preserving forest ecosystems, and the PFSC which included the elimination of the charcoal quota system as a prior action. However, the target of expanding sustainably managed land in priority zones was not met as IDA’s Sustainable Land Management Project (GEF) became effective only mid-2010. Although project performance was rated satisfactory by the latest ISR, concrete results towards having large areas of land sustainably managed in sylvo-pastoral zones and the groundnut basin have yet to materialize. In addition to the lending operations, IDA also delivered the Country Environmental Assessment (FY08), and policy notes. 32. IEG rates the outcome of WBG assistance under Pillar I as moderately unsatisfactory. Although all the objectives were and continue to be highly relevant to the achievement of high and sustained economic growth, the massive CAS agenda seemed to have overwhelmed both the Bank and the client, limiting the delivery of results. In investment climate, the overall business environment deteriorated despite regulatory reforms in selected areas. In infrastructure, little progress was made toward removing the road and electricity bottlenecks - the critical reforms of the electricity tariff structure stalled as demand continued to rise faster than supply capacity; while limited road quality improvement is now raising questions on the road maintenance approach adopted. Some progress was made in easing access to credit for SMEs, increasing non-traditional agricultural export at project level, and promoting sustainable fishing and forest exploitation practices in targeted areas; however, considerable scaling-up is required to have an economy-wide impact. No appreciable progress was achieved in reversing land degradation. Pillar II: Protecting human development / shared growth 33. Under this pillar, IDA supported three objectives that were critical to the achievement of the MDG agenda: (i) improving the quality of and access to basic education; (ii) improving health services provision for women and children; and (iii) improving protection of targeted vulnerable groups. 34. Improving the quality of and access to basic education. Access to basic education improved considerably, but the progress may not be enough to meet the corresponding MDGs. The gross primary enrollment rose from 79.9 to 93.9 percent during 2004-12; the gender parity index reached 1.15 in 2012 (from 0.95 in 2005); and primary education completion rates increased from 48.7 percent in 2005 to 66.9 percent in June 2012, which missed the CAS target of 77 percent by 2009 even though it surpassed the project-level target of 65 percent. Other areas of improvement include lower dropout and repetition rates in primary education, and higher transition from primary to middle schools (from 46.3 to 88 percent between 2005 and 2011). No information is available regarding improvements in education quality. IDA supported this objective through the Quality Education for All APL (FY07), which, along with multiple trust funds, financed inputs intended to improve education For Official Use Only CASCR Review 10 Independent Evaluation Group quality; and the PRSC IV, which supported policy reforms in the education sector. 35. Improving health services provision for women and children. Of the three outcome targets, two (vitamin A supplements for children and households using insecticide treated nets) were met, while the third (percentage of assisted birth) was almost reached at the national level (66.9 percent vs. 70 percent), although there is no data on progress in the 5 poorest regions. At the aggregate level, the health results were mixed: while child mortality (MDG 4) decreased sharply from 121 per 1,000 live births to 72 between 2005 and 2010, maternal and neonatal mortalities declined only slowly from 430 per 100,000 live births to 370 and from 35 deaths per 1,000 births to 29, respectively, during the same period. Children’s malnutrition indicators did not improve, but the percentage of stunted children increased from 20 to 29 percent and those underweight from 14 to 19 percent between 2005 and 2009. Senegal has reached the MDG in the area of HIV/AIDS. The worsening health results for women and children could have reflected the impact of the global food crisis and the overall slow-down of the economy, but also suggest a disconnect between the local achievements through Bank interventions and the broader development outcomes. The CAS intended to develop this link through the PRSC and the budgetary allocations. However, the results matrix does not include indicators to measure progress in this regard. Consequently, the issue of sustainability of the project efforts and of scaling-up of local results remains. IDA supported this objective through several operations, including the PRSC IV, the Nutrition Enhancement Program I and II (FY02 and FY07), which directly supported two of the outcome targets, and the Rapid Response Child-Focused Social Cash Transfer and Nutrition Security Project (FY09), and the HIV/AIDS and Prevention Control Project (FY02-FY10). IDA also provided a TA on Health Sector Reform (FY11). 36. Improving protection of targeted vulnerable groups. As with most targets of the successful Rapid Response Child-Focused Social Cash Transfer and Nutrition Security Project, the CAS outcome target for this objective (weight gain for surveyed children) was exceeded. However, this indicator captures only a small subset of the issues related to the protection of vulnerable groups. Poverty incidence, which the CAS aimed to help reduce through targeted assistance to vulnerable groups, remained at around 47 percent throughout the CAS period, compared to the goal of reducing it to 42 percent by 2010. Although moderate reduction of poverty incidence was a notable achievement amid Senegal’s economic slow-down and the shocks affecting rural areas where the majority of the poor live, the country is not on track to meet this MDG. In addition to the Rapid Response project mentioned above, the PRSC IV supported the Government’s plan to scale up the Programme de Renforcement de la Nutrition (PRN). Specifically, the 2010 Finance Law was to include additional funds for the PRN. No information is given in the CASCR on the status of this measure. 37. IEG rates the outcome of the WBG assistance under Pillar II as moderately unsatisfactory. The Bank support has helped broaden access to education and close the gender gap. There is no information on the improvement of education quality. In health and nutrition, results have been positive at IDA project level, but not so at the country level. There is no evidence that the Government is allocating more resources beyond these projects in order to address the maternal and children’s health problems sustainably. There is no information on the progress toward improving overall protection of targeted vulnerable groups as IDA interventions focused on child nutrition. The target of reducing the vulnerability of children in urban areas under Pillar III cannot be considered met for lack of evidence. Pillar III: Maximizing urban / rural synergies 38. Under this pillar, IDA supported the Government’s efforts at (i) improving urban mobility and access in and out of Dakar and promoting regional centers; (ii) reducing vulnerability of immigrant and emigrant groups with a focus on street children in Dakar; and (iii) improving quality of life through better management of natural resources and access to water and sanitation. 39. Improving urban mobility and access in and out of Dakar and promoting regional centers. The outcome indicator, which measures the reduction in travel time for accessing Dakar, was not monitored. Therefore, although the relevant sections of a new toll road have been constructed, it is unclear whether the new road has led to the desired results. Available information suggests that For Official Use Only CASCR Review 11 Independent Evaluation Group within Dakar mobility has worsened with a major increase in vehicles and vehicle traffic, which was not identified ex ante as a key issue for improving urban mobility. The IDA projects targets for rehabilitating classrooms, health centers and roads in Casamance were met, although the CAS target was not tracked. No information is available regarding the developmental impact these efforts on the region, or the progress toward promoting regional centers in Senegal. IDA support for the urban mobility objective included the Urban Mobility Improvement Project (FY00-FY09), which sought, without success, to reduce travel times within Dakar; the Dakar-Diamniadio Toll Highway (FY09); and the Transport and Urban Mobility Project (FY10), which is seeking to reduce travel time in selected routes inside the Grandes Niayes area. Regarding regional development, IDA financed the rehabilitation of social infrastructure in conflict-affected Casamance with the Casamance Emergency Reconstruction Support Project (FY05-FY10). 40. Reducing vulnerability of immigrant and emigrant groups with a focus on street children in Dakar. There is no information on the CAS target of reducing working children in Dakar by half by the end of 2009, as the indicator was not tracked. The CASCR does not discuss any issues related to immigrant and emigrant groups, including their vulnerability. Moreover the issue of street children should have been part of the broader objective of protecting targeted vulnerable groups under Pillar II. Many IDA operations in education and health sectors, as well as PRSC III and IV, had a focus on improving children’s welfare. PRSC III also specified as a prior action the implementation of a project to fight the worst form of child labor. Several AAA work also focused on the vulnerability of children, including Street Kids (FY07), Bringing Vulnerability into Policy Focus – Vulnerable Youth and Children in Senegal (FY09), and work to track rural dropouts. Overall, there is no evidence of significant progress toward reducing the vulnerability of street children. 41. Improving quality of life through better management of natural resources and access to water and sanitation. Although the objective invoked better natural resource management, the focus of the efforts, as reflected in the CAS results matrix, was exclusively on improving access to water and sanitation. The CASCR reports that the outcome targets for improved access to water and sanitation services in rural areas were met (although WDI data show slower progress). IDA support for this objective included the successful Long-term Water Sector Project (FY01-09), which focused on Dakar and secondary cities; the Supporting Access to On-Site Sanitation through Output-Based Aid trust funds (FY08-FY12), which contributed to over 100,000 persons gaining access to sanitation services in the Dakar areas; and the Water and Sanitation Millennium Project (FY09), which aims to increase access to sustainable water and sanitation in selected rural and urban areas. IDA also delivered a Country Environment Assessment in FY08. 42. IEG rates the outcome of WBG assistance under Pillar III as moderately satisfactory. There is clear evidence of progress in access to water and sanitation services, and the Bank has contributed to these results. The objectives for the rehabilitation of Casamance have been broadly achieved, but there is no evidence of a more balanced regional development with Bank support. The Bank program did not contribute to reducing congestion in Dakar, which worsened during the CAS period, and data is not collected to measure improvement, if any, in accessing Dakar. The progress toward improving natural resource management is discussed under Pillar I while that toward protecting street children in Dakar is covered under Pillar II. Objectives CASCR Rating IEG Rating Moderately Filter: Mainstreaming governance Not rated unsatisfactory Moderately Pillar I: Promoting growth/wealth creation Not rated unsatisfactory Moderately Pillar II: Protecting human development/shared growth Not rated unsatisfactory Moderately Pillar III: Maximizing urban/rural synergies Not rated satisfactory For Official Use Only CASCR Review 12 Independent Evaluation Group 4. Overall IEG Assessment CASCR Rating IEG Rating Overall Outcome: Moderately unsatisfactory Moderately unsatisfactory IBRD/IDA Performance: Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory IFC Performance: Not rated Moderately satisfactory Overall outcome: 43. IEG rates the overall outcome of the CAS as moderately unsatisfactory, concurring with the CASCR rating. In all four pillars, although some objectives were achieved, a majority of them were only partially achieved; some were not achieved. 44. Under the Governance Filter, some improvement was achieved in the budget process and in the transparency of budget execution, mostly associated with prior actions for IDA adjustment credits, but the overall progress toward improving governance was weak. Under the Growth Pillar, little progress was made toward removing key bottlenecks in the transport and energy sectors, while the overall business environment deteriorated despite encouraging regulatory reforms in some areas. Gains in agricultural diversification at the project level are yet to have a significant impact at the national level as the share of agriculture in exports and GDP declined. Good progress was achieved in managing fishing and forest resources, but little was done to reverse land degradation. Under the Human Development Pillar, good progress was achieved in broadening access to education and closing the gender gap, but there is no indication of improvement in the quality of education. In health and nutrition, there is a large disconnect between the positive results at the project level and the disappointing outcomes at the national level. Similarly, although a child-focused social cash transfer project is achieving good results, there is no information on the welfare of street children in Dakar, a target vulnerable group that the CAS aimed to protect. Finally, under the Urban-Rural Synergy Pillar, there is no evidence of improved access in and out of Dakar and congestion worsened in the city. The rehabilitation of Casamance has broadly achieved the intended outcomes, but there is no information on whether it has led to greater balance in regional development. Good progress was achieved in improving access to water and sanitation services. IDA Performance: 45. IEG rates IDA performance as moderately satisfactory, below the CASCR rating of satisfactory. The CASCR rating centers on the rapid and flexible response of the IDA team to emerging challenges. IEG concurs with this aspect. IDA adapted its assistance in response to the successive external and internal shocks and leveraged donor resources in specific emergency operations. IDA managed its portfolio well, and collaborated with other partners to implement the Paris agenda. However, IEG considers that the shortcomings in program design and its results framework undermined IDA’s ability to achieve the CAS objectives. Although the CAS program was relevant and well aligned to the country’s own development program, its design was diffused and ambitious, over- stretching the political and technical capacity of the Government to advance policy reform, as well as the Bank’s capacity to deliver given the instruments available. A major issue is the gap between the ambitious CAS objectives and the narrowly-focused outcomes drawn from individual projects. Several specific projects have been successful, but the design of the strategy did not encourage catalytic effects and scale-up beyond the individual operations. A similar issue applies to the PRSC series – it is unclear how they encouraged reallocation of public resources to critical areas such as primary education, health and nutrition, where projects have been successful. As such, the strategy seems to have been more of a project strategy rather than one that sought replicability and transformational changes. There is limited evidence of joint IDA-IFC efforts in implementing the CAS. For Official Use Only CASCR Review 13 Independent Evaluation Group IFC Performance: 46. The CASCR does not discuss or rate IFC performance, with the two paragraphs on IFC focusing mainly on the number of investments and their dollar volumes committed, and a description of the AS work undertaken. IEG rates the overall IFC performance as moderately satisfactory. The CAS correctly identified a number of activities for IFC engagement, which focused on the objectives under Pillar I: improving investment climate, removing infrastructure bottleneck, expanding the range of and access to financial products, with a focus on SEMs, and promoting export growth. The design envisaged extensive collaboration between IDA, WBI and IFC. However, even though the role of the IFC was largely captured by the results framework, few of the outcome indicators reflected IFC activities. While most of the planned investments materialized and made important contributions to increasing power supply and improving access to credit for MSMEs, much of the ambitious AS program was not implemented. IFC did no specific TA work with WBI on development of the knowledge economy, nor on the regional housing finance market, and nor a review of the fiscal regime of financial operations in Senegal. There was also no TA by the Bank and IFC on the issue of land access that penalizes investors in specific sectors such as agriculture and tourism, nor any TA support in natural resources, the development of skilled labor, and the use of technology. 5. Assessment of CAS Completion Report 47. The CASCR is well prepared. It provides a good description of the challenges and the efforts of the Bank to manage the challenges during CAS implementation. There is adequate information on the results achieved and sufficient analysis to draw lessons. However, the CASCR does not consider the link between the CAS outcomes and the country’s development goals that they intended to support. This is largely due to the weakness of the results framework which focused overwhelmingly on project-specific outcome indicators. Indeed, a major shortcoming of the CASCR was the lack of acknowledgment that many outcome indicators, which started as broader measurement of sector progress in the original CAS, became increasingly narrowly-focused to reflect more project level outcomes in the CASPR. The CASCR follows primarily the CASPR results matrix, but switches back to the original CAS indicators from time to time. The CASCR covers the IFC program in two paragraphs, providing some information on projects undertaken. Some discussion of the adjustments to the programs necessitated by the changing external circumstances and the performance of IFC’s projects in the portfolio would have been useful. The CASCR could also have highlighted where IDA and IFC collaborated to deliver a coherent WBG program as there is no evidence for a close collaboration despite the intentions. 6. Findings and Lessons 48. The CASCR identifies four lessons: long-term engagement in any given area for lasting development impact; realism in assessing what needs to be done and what can be done; a combination of different instruments in strategic sectors; and attention to the relevance and measurability of outcome indicators. IEG concurs with these and underscores three key points. First, strong commitments and follow-up actions by the Government are critical for a WBG-supported intervention to lead to broader development impact than the intervention itself. During the CAS period, many successful interventions failed to produce the desired higher-level impact due to lack of follow- up. Second, there is a need for stronger synergy between budget support operations and other WBG instruments such as AAA, TA, and investment projects. Several sectoral IDA projects would have had greater impact if better supported by the PRSC series. Third, a coordinated approach between IDA, IFC and MIGA, while relevant, needs significant effort at the working level to build synergies and mutually reinforcing support. The clear intentions of the CAS to maximize WBG synergies were not matched by close collaboration among the three institutions during CAS implementation. Annexes CASCR Review 15 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 1: Summary of Achievements of the CAS Objectives Annex Table 2: Senegal Planned and Actual Lending, FY07-12 Annex Table 3: Grants and Trust Funds Active in FY07-12 (in US$ million) Annex Table 4: Planned and Actual Analytical and Advisory Work, FY07-12 Annex Table 5: IEG Project Ratings for Senegal, FY07-12 Annex Table 6: IEG Project Ratings for Senegal and Comparators, FY07-12 Annex Table 7: Portfolio Status for Senegal and Comparators, FY07-12 Annex Table 8: IDA Net Disbursements and Charges Summary Report for Senegal, FY07-12 (in US$ million) Annex Table 9: Total Development Assistance and Official Aid, 2006-2010 (in US$ million) Annex Table 10: Economic and Social Indicators for Senegal and Comparators, 2006 – 2011 Annex Table 11: Millennium Development Goals Annex Table 12: List of IFC’s investments in Senegal that were active during FY07-11 (US$’000) Annex Table 13. List of IFC’s Advisory Services in SENEGAL, FY07-11 Annexes CASCR Review 17 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 1: Summary of Achievements of the CAS Objectives CAS FY07-FY12: Actual Results Comments The governance filter (as of current month year) Major 1. Improving efficiency and transparency in the use of public resources. Outcome Carry-over (reports de crédit) from previous PFSC prior action included adoption of decree Source: CASCR Measures years equals 5 percent at end FY10 (as a on the budget-closing schedule that strictly percentage of total current year budget). limits carry-overs to no more than 5 percent of current year appropriations. Supplemental Budget adopted for FY 2009 reflecting new carry-over rules. Rule followed for FY2010. ASTER-based statements available 30 days Available within 7 days by end of 2010. Source: CASCR after the end of the month. PFSC prior actions included making the new accounting system (ASTER) functional in all the centralizing accounting stations, as evidenced by the production of a monthly balance of the Treasury on ASTER. Consolidated public accounts started to be prepared for February 2009. Reduce delays in submitting annual public By 2010, the Ministry of Finance had submitted Source: CASCR accounts to the Cour de Comptes by no more to the Audit Court the draft budget execution First, PFSC prior actions included Submission of than one year (following the end of fiscal year) law up to 2009 (PRSC V trigger). Public accounts prepared for 2006 submitted to the at end FY10. Audit Office (hampered until then by late filing by the Treasury). Thereafter, authorities continued to speed up transmission of budget execution laws and public accounts to Audit office. PRSCIV prior condition included Submission to the Audit Office of the execution laws up to 2008 and submission to the Parliament of the execution laws reviewed by the Audit office from 1999 to 2002. 2. Increase public sector accountability trough decentralization, stronger institutions and better information. Make sure that the longest delay in transferring PRSC III prior actions included Adoption of Source: CASCR FECL and FDD not exceed 3 months (from necessary texts for the rationalization of PDLP and LADP indicators show good progress beginning of fiscal year) in FY10. FDD/FECL transfers to Local Governments. achieved on the institutional front/ capacity building PFSC prior conditions included transfer of for local government (municipalities as well as rural budgetary appropriations for FDD/FECL to communities), but less on transfer of resources local communities for FY 09 by the MEF. The (amounts) to local government. Reform of local yearly act transferring FDD resources has been fiscality still lagging. notified before end of March 2010. Independent audit of all government Government had an audit of procurement Source: CASCR procurement transactions to be carried out by transactions in 2009 carried out with support of It uncovered a number of significant irregularities. ARMP on annual basis for preceding year. PIPP. ARMP cancelled over 20 procurement cases not in abeyance with procurement code. Publish monthly budget execution reports Consolidated public accounts (monthly Source: MEF website and CASCR (situation d’éxecution budgétaire) from SIGFIP execution tables) started to be prepared on the website of the Ministry of Economy and February 2009. They are now available within Finance (MEF) in less than 60 days by end 30 days in the MEF website. FY10. 3. Strengthening and modernizing the judicial system and mechanisms for private sector governance. Improve the Doing Business indicator on The Doing Business indicator on required days Source: CASCR enforcement of contracts from 485 days in for the enforcement of contracts remained Under the PIPP a sector expenditure program for 2005 to less than 300 days (or reduce number unchanged at 780 days from 2005 to 2013. justice had been prepared and a sector reform of procedures from 33 in 2005 to less than 25 The Doing Business indicator on required program (Programme Sectoriel Justice PSJ) in 2010). procedures for the enforcement of contracts adopted (2004). Activities financed under PIPP slightly decreased from 44 in 2005 to 43 in included the establishment of a Center for 2013. Arbitration, Mediation, and Conciliation, which, as of mid-2008, has arbitrated 26 commercial disputes, including a case of a commercial dispute worth over US$60 million in contracts. Annexes CASCR Review 18 Independent Evaluation Group CAS FY07-FY12: Pillar I Actual Results Comments Promoting Wealth Creating/Accelerated Growth (as of current month year) Major 1.Promoting a competitive investment climate Outcome Reduce by 30 percent the time and cost to Time to register a business: from 58 in 2006 Source: Doing Business Measures register a business and register a property to 5 in 2013, implying a decrease than more by FY10. than 30%. Cost (% of income per capita) to register a business: from 108.7% in 2006 to 64.4% in 2013, implying a decrease higher than 30%. Time to register a property: from 145 in 2006 to 122 in 2013, implying a decrease lower than 30%. Cost (% of property value) to register a property: increased from 19.5% in 2006 to 20.2%. 2.Building and maintaining basic infrastructure for growth Improve the quality of the core road network No data available. Source: CASCR (paved roads) in targeted areas by AGEROUTE data (in the absence of a increasing the proportion of roads rated bad comprehensive survey of the network since to fair by 40% and for fair condition to good 2006) indicates that between 2005 and 2009 the by 25%. percentage increased 55% to 61% for paved roads and 60% to 64% gravel roads. But according to new model of rehabilitation and development of road network used in the PER, the results would be lower: or 56% instead of 61% for paved roads and 19% instead of 64% for gravel roads, resulting in an aggregate value of approximately 30% compared with the African average of 70%. 2010 PER suggest that the strategy of road network maintenance implemented during the recent years may not have been the most appropriate. New electricity tariff structure prepared by CASCR reports that the outcome has not Source: CASCR CSRE. been achieved The financial restructuring of SENELEC was not achieved and its financial situation remains precarious. Its operational performance improved little. The gap between power demand and supply will remain significant until new generation capacity being built or planned (partly with IFC and other donors’ support) comes on stream. In the meantime, the population and economy at large are continuing to suffer from power cuts and load shedding. Increase number of households with No data available yet. Source: P085708 SN-Elec. Serv. for Rural Areas electricity by 30,000 in rural areas by FY10. (FY05) ISR and CASCR Number expected to exceed 16,000 in World Bank project concessions and at least as much in concessions financed by other donors (13,000 with the AfDB concession). 3.Facilitating access to financial resources by SME’s Increase number of IDA/IFC partial Credit CASCR reports that the outcome has not Source: CASCR Guarantees to SMEs by 20-25 percent by been achieved Very limited progress partly due to the fact that 2010. the PIPP project was suspended for a good part of 2008, due to fiduciary problems. With the restructuring of the project mid 2010 the legal covenant to finance a joint IDA/IFC risk-sharing facility was restated to enable financing the TA and for providing partial guarantee for a portfolio of loans to participating commercial banks Annexes CASCR Review 19 Independent Evaluation Group CAS FY07-FY12: Pillar I Actual Results Comments Promoting Wealth Creating/Accelerated Growth (as of current month year) meeting criteria of Risk-sharing Framework Agreement. New arrangements to work with matching grants for TA. Outcome indicators reformulated to 25 guarantees by end of PIPP project. 4.Promoting a modern and diversified agriculture Increase volume of non-traditional exports No data on non-traditional exports. Source: CASCR from 18,000 tons in 2005 to 25,000 tons by 24,000 tons of fruits/vegetables were exported in FY10. 2009; and the estimate for 2010 was 26,400 tons. Develop 2,500 hectares of irrigated land. CASCR reports that the outcome has not Source: CASCR been achieved But second related PDMAS outcome – 2500 ha under irrigation/improved - partly achieved: 1544 ha expected by end 2009. 5.Promoting sustainable development and management of natural resources Reducing the level of fishing effort on Source: CASCR targeted species in 12 central coastal fishing The fishing effort has been reduced on The fishing effort is on track to be reduced in 8 communities. targeted species in 4 central coastal fishing more communities through the GDRH communities as a result of the GIRMaC (Sustainable Management of Fish Resources (Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources FY09) .These 8 communities are currently Management Project FY12.) preparing their co-management initiatives, which will reduce the fishing effort on targeted species. Manage 100,000 ha of land sustainably in CASCR reports that the outcome indicator Source: CASCR priority areas (i.e. sylvo-pastoral zones and has not been achieved. SLM GEF became only effective mid 2010 and the groundnut basin). implementation barely starting. Meet 3 over 4 household wood fuels needs 267,000 hectares of sustainable community Source: CASCR at the national level through the managed forests have been established establishment of sustainable community between 2005 and 2007. These areas can managed forests. meet 100 percent of needs at national level. Annexes CASCR Review 20 Independent Evaluation Group CAS FY07-FY12: Pillar II Actual Results Comments Human Development/Shared growth (as of current month year) Major 1. Improving quality of and access to basic education Outcome Increase success rate in achieving primary The primary completion rate increased from Source: WDI Measures level from 53.1% in 2005 to 77.0% in 2009 50.7% in 2006 to 59.2% in 2010 (latest data (and from 51.5% to 73.0% for girls). available). The primary completion rate for females increased from 48.7% in 2006 to 60.6% in 2010 (latest data available). 2. Improving health services provision for women and children Increase the number of assisted births to The Government’s PRSP 2010 diagnosis Source: CASCR 70% at national level while assuring a progress report indicates that proportion minimum of 50% in the 5 poorest regions. increased from 59.0% in 2006 to 66.9% in 2009. No data available for the 5 poorest regions. At least 80% of children aged 6-59 months From 79% in Nov 2006 to 94% in June Source: P097181 Nutrition Enhancement in the intervention areas receive high 2012. Program II (FY07) ISR. preventive doses of vitamin A supplements twice yearly. 50% of targeted households use insecticide 70% in the targeted households in the Source: P097181 Nutrition Enhancement treated nets (ITN) by 2009. Nutrition project. Program II (FY07) ISR and CASCR 3.Improving protection of targeted vulnerable groups 75% of surveyed children between 0-24 From 50% in Nov 2006 to 81% in June Source: P097181 Nutrition Enhancement months showing adequate weight gain. 2012. Program II (FY07) ISR Annexes CASCR Review 21 Independent Evaluation Group CAS FY07-FY12: Pillar III Actual Results Comments Urban /rural synergies (as of current month year) Major 1.Improving urban mobility and access in and out Dakar and promote regional centers Outcome Reduce the travel time between Dakar CASCR reports that the outcome indicator is Source: CASCR Measures (Malik Sy) and Pikine to 20 minutes on the not yet measured. Not yet measured but with first 2 sections Toll Road. completed (Malick Sy-Patte d'Oie and Patte d'Oie Pikine - 12.6 km) it is likely it is achieved Rehabilitate 2/3 of social infrastructure CASCR reports that the outcome indicator Source: CASCR (health centers, classrooms, roads) affected has not been measured. Intermediate outcome essentially achieved by by the conflict in Casamance. 2009: 141 classrooms, 25 health centers and 26 maternity clinics were rehabilitated. In addition 251 km (10% total network) connecting about 90 towns, 8 bridges and 6 pontoon bridges were rehabilitated 2.Reducing the vulnerability of immigrant and emigrant groups, and especially of street children in Dakar Reduce by half the proportion of working CASCR reports that the outcome indicator Source: CASCR children in Dakar by en 2009. has not been measured. Government PRSP 2 ICDR diagnosis report indicates 22,377 children withdrawn from work during 2007- 2008. But it acknowledges that performance of the protection of vulnerable groups pillar has been weak. 3.Improving the quality of life through better management of natural resources and access to water and sanitation Increase access to rural areas to (i) water Access to water in rural areas: from 53% in Source: WDI from 65% in 2005 to 70% in 2009; and to (ii) 2006 to 56% in 2010 (latest data available). sanitation from 19%in 2005 to 28% in 2009. Access to sanitation in rural areas: from 35% in 2006 to 39% in 2010 (latest data available). Annexes CASCR Review 22 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 2. Planned and Actual Lending, FY07-FY12 Proposed Approved Outcome Project ID Project name Proposed FY Approval FY Amount Amount rating Planned (CAS FY07-10) P098964 PRSC III 2007 2007 20.0 20.0 IEG:MS P097181 Nutrition Enhancement Program II 2007 2007 15.0 15.0 LIR: HS P089254 Quality Education for All Project - Phase 2 2007 2007 30.0 30.0 LIR:S P084022 Local Authorities Development Program 2007 2007 80.0 80.0 LIR:MS P094917 Regional WAPP 2007 2007 5.0 15.0 LIR:S P105279 Senegal Energy Sector Recovery Development Policy Financing 2008 2008 50.0 80.0 IEG:U P087304 Dakar Diamniadio Toll Highway 2008 2009 50.0 105.0 LIR:MS P117273 Poverty Reduction Support Credit 4 2009 2010 60.0 43.0 NA P120629 Second Sustainable and Participatory Energy Management 2009 2010 15.0 LIR:S MTNSN/GM Integration Project 2009 Dropped P105881 Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 2009 2009 3.5 3.5 LIR:U Rapid Response Child-Focused Social Cash Transfer and P115938 Nutrition Security Project 2009 2009 10.0 10.0 LIR:HS P113801 SN - Economic Governance Project 2009 2010 10.0 8.0 LIR:MS P114935 Add Financing Felou Hydroelectric (Regional) 2010 2010 12.0 25.0 LIR:S P101415 Transport & Urban Mobility Project 2010 2010 50.0 55.0 LIR:S P121178 Poverty Reduction Support Credit 5 2010 2011 30.0 42.0 LIR:S P109986 Water and Sanitation Millennium Project 2010 2010 60.0 55.0 LIR:S P116301 Additional financing for food security (GFRP) 2010 2010 10 10.0 NA Electricity for Rural Areas I1 2010 Dropped 30.0 Regional Bio-safety Project 2010 Dropped Senegal River Multimodal Navigation 2010 Dropped Regional Fisheries 2010 5.0 15.0 Add Financing PDMAS (Food Crisis) 2010 10.0 10.0 Total planned projects CAS FY07-10 540.5 626.5 Non planned P108583 3A W/C Africa Air Transport Phase II-B 2009 2.3 LIR:MS P105881 Sustainable Management of Fish Resources 2009 3.5 LIR:U P107288 SN- DPO-Public Financial Support Credit 2009 60.0 IEG:S Total non-planned projects for the period FY07-10 65.8 Total projects CAS FY07-10 692.3 Senegal Tertiary Education Governance and Financing For P123673 Results 2011 101.3 LIR:S Public Financial Management Strengthening Technical Assistance P122476 Project 2011 15.0 LIR:S P129398 Additional Financing Nutrition Enhancement Project (PRN2) 2012 10.0 LIR: HS P122841 Stormwater Mgt. and Climate Change Adaptation Project 2012 55.6 NA Total projects FY11-12 181.9 Total projects FY07-12 874.2 Ongoing projects Approved Outcome Project ID Project name Approval FY Closed FY Amount rating P002366 Second Transport Sector Project 1999 2008 90 IEG:S P055472 Urban Mobility Improvement Project 2000 2009 70 IEG:MU P041528 Long Term Water Sector Project 2001 2009 125 IEG: S P074059 HIV/AIDS Prevention & Control Project 2002 2010 30 IEG:MS P070541 Nutrition Enhancement Program 2002 2007 15 IEG: S P051609 Private Investment Promotion Project 2003 2012 46 LIR:MU P080013 Private Sector Adjustment Credit 2004 2009 45 IEG: U P069207 Casamance Emergency Reconstruction Support Project - CERSP 2005 2010 20 IEG:MS P086480 Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources Management Project 2005 2012 10 LIR:MS P085708 SN-Elec. Serv. for Rural Areas (FY05) 2005 Active 30 LIR:MS P073477 SN - Electricity Sector Efficiency Enhancement - Phase 1, APL-1 2005 2011 16 LIR:U P088656 SN-Participatory Local Development Program 2006 2012 50 LIR:S P093622 Agricultural Services & Producer Organizations Project 2 2006 2011 20 LIR:MS P083609 Agricultural Markets and Agribusiness Development Project 2006 Active 35 LIR:S P091051 SN-PRSC 2 2006 2007 30 IEG: MS Total ongoing projects 631 Source: Senegal FY07-10 CAS/CASPR and WB Business Warehouse Table 2a.1, 2a.4 and 2a.7 as of 11/28/2012. LIR: Latest internal rating. U: Unsatisfactory. MU: Moderately Unsatisfactory. MS: Moderately Satisfactory. S: Satisfactory. HS: Highly Satisfactory Annexes CASCR Review 23 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 3. Trust Funds, FY07-FY12 (in US$ million) Approved Project ID Project name TF ID Approval FY Closing FY Amount P112627 Senegal PFM Reform Support Program TF 53018 3.42 2004 2010 P070530 SN-GEF Elec Srvc for Rural Areas (FY05) TF 53937 5.00 2005 Active Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources P058367 Management Project TF 54531 5.00 2005 2012 P093175 SENEGAL - Supreme Audit Institution TF 54288 0.29 2005 2008 P070530 SN-GEF Elec Srvc for Rural Areas (FY05) TF 53115 0.49 2005 Active P041566 Social Development Fund Project TF 54216 1.97 2005 2009 Agricultural Services & Producer Organizations P093622 Project 2 TF 55151 0.99 2006 2007 P096232 GDLN Program Monitoring and Evaluation System TF 56173 0.43 2006 2010 P041528 SN-Long Term Water Sec SIL (FY01) TF 54215 0.73 2006 2009 P099681 CA: Senegal National Cities Without Slum TF 57224 0.43 2007 2011 Agricultural Markets and Agribusiness Development P083609 Project TF 58319 14.10 2007 Active P103291 Support to the Accountancy Profession TF 57346 0.27 2007 2010 P108191 From Harmful Aquatic Plants to New Cooking Fuel TF 57209 0.10 2007 2008 P092062 Sustainable Management of Fish Resources TF 90576 0.26 2008 2009 Senegal Sanitation- Supporting Access to on-site P102478 sanitation services through OBA scheme in Senegal TF 90467 2.88 2008 2012 Senegal Sanitation- Supporting Access to on-site P102478 sanitation services through OBA scheme in Senegal TF 90466 2.88 2008 2012 Integrated Marine and Coastal Resources P086480 Management Project TF 90534 0.53 2008 2011 P092062 Sustainable Management of Fish Resources TF 93654 6.00 2009 2012 Rapid Response Child-Focused Social Cash P115938 Transfer and Nutrition Security Project TF 94372 8.00 2009 2013 P106862 TTR IS Fund Phase 2 TF 94175 0.01 2009 2010 P110948 Senegal Employment Capacity Building IDF TF 92636 0.45 2009 2012 P107167 SN-Rural Lighting Efficiency (FY08) TF 92714 1.80 2009 Active P108144 Sustainable Land Management Project TF 94263 4.80 2010 2012 Senegal Nutrition: Strengthening Operational P114573 Evaluation in Program implementation TF 95495 0.49 2010 Active P116783 Senegal EFA-FTI Catalytic Fund TF 94753 81.50 2010 Active Senegal Disaster Risk Management and Climate P128137 Change Adaptation Project TF 10853 1.10 2012 Active P126752 Senegal Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building TF 10238 0.40 2012 Active P124538 Senegal Min Sector Diagnostic & Cap Bldg TF 99837 0.48 2012 Active TF 99819 1.02 2012 2012 TF 96421 1.52 2011 Active P089254 Quality Education for All Project - Phase 2 TF 91830 1.71 2008 2013 TF 56897 4.00 2007 2012 Total FY07-12 144.8 Source: Senegal FY 07-May2012 CPS/CPSPR and WB Business Warehouse Table 2a.1, 2a.4 and 2a.7 as of 03/06/2012. Annexes CASCR Review 24 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 4. Planned and Actual Analytical and Advisory Work, FY07-12 Proposed Delivered to Project ID Economic and Sector Work Output Type FY Client FY Planned (CAS FY07-12) P093564 Senegal Country ROSC Assessment 2007 2006 Report Support ESSD TF (Sustainable Devt. Sector Dialogue) 2007 Dropped P078157 Senegal - Strategic Country Gender Assessment 2007 2006 Report P098120 Senegal Country Environment Assessment 2007 2008 Report P102228 Country Economic Memorandum 2007 2008 Report PER (civil service reform) 2008 P102244 Senegal Investment Climate Assessment 2008 2009 Report P107293 Poverty Assessment 2009 2008 Report Full PER 2009 2012 Report AGS mid-term assessment 2010 Dropped PEFA update 2010 Dropped Access to Finance 2010 Dropped Policy Notes 2010 Dropped Non-planned P102294 Managing risks in rural Senegal- Rural Livelihoods in the Groundnut Basin l: 2009 Report Dakar Bus Financing 2009 Report Rural Non-Farm Employment 2009 Report Bringing Vulnerability into Policy Focus -Vulnerable Youth and Children in P102612 Senegal 2009 Report P118457 DeMPA Assessment - Senegal 2010 Report Climate change and the changing role of children in household risk P115535 management strategies 2011 Report P125270 MTDS Senegal 2011 Report P107289 SN-First Programmatic Public Finance Review 2011 Report Delivered to AAA ID Technical Assistance Proposed FY Output Type Client FY Planned (CAS FY07-12) P102350 PEFA 2007 2008 "How-To" Guidance P102248 Street Kids 2007 2007 "How-To" Guidance Institutional P107490 Senegal Employment Strategy TA 2008 2009 Development Plan P107480 Health Sector Reform 2010 2011 "How-To" Guidance Non-planned Knowledge-Sharing P112222 Senegal: Outreach activity on Good Governance 2008 Forum P112276 Spatial Analysis of Natural Hazards 2009 "How-To" Guidance Client Document P119775 Post Disaster Need Assessment 2010 Review Source: Senegal CAS and WB Business Warehouse Tables 2a.1, 2a.4 and 2a.7 as of 11/21/2012       Annexes CASCR Review 25 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 5. IEG Project Ratings for Senegal, FY07-12 Total IEG Risk to Exit FY Proj ID Project Name Evaluated IEG Outcome Development (US$M) Outcome * 2007 P070541 SN-Nutrition Enhancement Prgm (FY02) 16.5 Satisfactory Moderate 2007 P091051 SN-PRSC 2 (FY06) 30.8 Moderately Satisfactory Significant 2008 P002366 SN-Transp SIL 2 (FY99) 87.0 Satisfactory Moderate 2008 P098964 SN-PRSC III DPL (FY07) 20.7 Moderately Satisfactory Significant 2009 P041528 SN-Long Term Water Sec SIL (FY01) 146.1 Satisfactory Moderate Moderately 2009 P055472 SN-Urb Mobility Improvement APL (FY00) 74.2 Significant Unsatisfactory 2009 P080013 SN-Priv Sec Adj Crdt (FY04) 24.8 Unsatisfactory Significant 2010 P069207 SN-Casamance Emerg Reconstr Supt (FY05) 18.8 Moderately Satisfactory Significant 2010 P074059 SN-HIV/AIDS Prevent & Control APL (FY02) 35.3 Moderately Satisfactory Negligible to Low 2010 P107288 SN-DPO fast-track-Public Fin. Support Cr 63.0 Satisfactory Significant 2011 P105279 SN-En. Sec. Recov. Dev Policy Financing 54.4 Unsatisfactory High Source: WB Business Warehouse Table 4a.5 and 4a.6 as of as of 11/28/2012. * With IEG new methodology for evaluating projects, institutional development impact and sustainability are no longer rated separately. Annex Table 6: IEG Project Ratings for Senegal and Comparators, FY07-12 Total Total RDO % RDO % Outcome Outcome Region Evaluated Evaluated Moderate or Moderate or % Sat ($) % Sat (No) ($M) (No) Lower ($) * Lower (No) * Senegal 571.5 11 73.2 72.7 49.9 36.4 AFR 14,249.3 270 73.4 65.3 41.2 41.8 World 81,117.6 1,101 83.0 73.1 68.6 57.8 Source: WB Business Warehouse Table 4a.5 and 4a.6 as of as of November 2012.   * With IEG new methodology for evaluating projects, institutional development impact and sustainability are no longer rated separately. Annexes CASCR Review 26 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 7. Portfolio Status for Senegal and Comparators, FY07-12 Fiscal year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 World # Proj 1,485 1,525 1,552 1,590 1,595 1,500 # Proj At Risk 243 276 344 366 337 333 % At Risk 16.4 18.1 22.2 23.0 21.1 22.2 Net Comm Amt 100,357.1 106,761.7 131,076.4 158,287.4 168,248.7 168,407.7 Comm At Risk 15,354.3 18,428.2 19,929.9 28,186.1 22,978.5 23,723.1 % Commit at Risk 15.3 17.3 15.2 17.8 13.7 14.1 Africa # Proj 393 419 440 454 470 452 # Proj At Risk 83 94 131 137 117 108 % At Risk 21.1 22.4 29.8 30.2 24.9 23.9 Net Comm Amt 21,093.2 23,306.8 28,177.8 34,188.5 37,466.4 38,962.9 Comm At Risk 3,926.1 5,890.2 6,950.5 9,494.2 7,949.7 6,299.8 % Commit at Risk 18.6 25.3 24.7 27.8 21.2 16.2 Senegal # Proj 17 16 17 20 19 14 # Proj At Risk 4 4 0 4 3 1 % At Risk 23.5 25.0 0.0 20.0 15.8 7.1 Net Comm Amt 741.7 711.7 656.2 737.0 736.6 609.6 Comm At Risk 166.0 176.0 0.0 151.2 95.4 34.9 % Commit at Risk 22.4 24.7 0.0 20.5 13.0 5.7 Source: WB Business Warehouse Table 3a.4 as of November 2012. Annexes CASCR Review 27 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 8. IDA Net Disbursements and Charges Summary Report for Senegal (in US$) FY Disb. Amt. Repay Amt. Net Amt. Charges Fees Net Transfer 2007 155,289,518.11 254,595.93 155,034,922.18 3,443,343.68 613,488.80 150,978,089.70 2008 100,671,750.74 989,419.39 99,682,331.35 2,156,169.18 3,354,289.14 94,171,873.03 2009 116,473,817.52 1,276,861.88 115,196,955.64 0.00 5,633,189.53 109,563,766.11 2010 139,529,260.29 3,273,542.24 136,255,718.05 0.00 6,280,714.95 129,975,003.10 2011 173,718,866.93 5,530,004.41 168,188,862.52 0.00 7,559,728.86 160,629,133.66 2012 137,192,439.68 8,955,305.52 128,237,134.16 0.00 8,593,424.26 119,643,709.90 Total (2007-2012) 822,875,653.27 20,279,729.37 802,595,923.90 5,599,512.86 32,034,835.54 764,961,575.50 Source: WB Loan Kiosk, Net Disbursement and Charges Report as of November 2012. Annexes CASCR Review 28 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 9. Total Development Assistance and Official Aid, 2006-2011 Development Partners 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2006-2011 Bilaterals Australia .. 0.06 .. 0.16 0.43 .. 0.65 Austria 3.77 2.94 3.21 3.26 0.93 1.16 15.27 Belgium 22.8 22.75 20.91 19.3 17.74 .. 103.5 Canada 17.08 47.91 73.31 54.49 56.71 .. 249.5 Denmark 0.91 0.26 0.28 -5.15 0.24 .. -3.46 Finland 0.65 0.32 0.47 0.52 0.99 .. 2.95 France 287.47 176.66 189.03 140.88 157.23 .. 951.27 Germany 34.84 27.14 27.78 22.16 23.06 .. 134.98 Greece 0.04 0.01 0.29 0.18 .. 0.01 0.53 Ireland 0.26 0.25 0.27 0.22 0.07 .. 1.07 Italy 1.75 6.26 8.62 19.08 7.19 .. 42.9 Japan 34.49 31.95 25.13 46.74 55.21 .. 193.52 Korea 0.85 2.43 10.25 5.92 14.85 .. 34.3 Luxembourg 14.63 15.65 21.84 22.89 18.84 .. 93.85 Netherlands 19.5 22.38 37.9 45.69 29.98 26.88 182.33 Norway 0.59 0.66 0.51 0.49 0.3 .. 2.55 Portugal 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.26 0.38 1.14 Spain 18.12 41.56 59.12 59.26 45.57 .. 223.63 Sweden 0.62 0.19 0.29 1.37 0.43 .. 2.9 Switzerland 3.68 2.85 2.45 2.6 1.98 .. 13.56 United Kingdom 10.1 11.53 0.97 6.52 0.93 .. 30.05 United States 37.72 39.24 71.63 67.67 101.42 .. 317.68 DAC Countries, Total 509.96 453.15 554.41 514.36 534.36 28.43 2594.67 Czech Republic 0.03 0.07 0.38 0.22 0.02 0.02 0.74 Israel 0.07 0.05 0.16 0.09 0.13 0.2 0.7 Kuwait (KFAED) 10.56 27.2 35.93 3.61 17.41 6.17 100.88 Poland 0.16 0.29 0.15 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.72 Romania .. .. .. .. 0.01 0.06 0.07 Slovenia .. .. 0.06 .. .. .. 0.06 Thailand 0.08 0.07 0.16 0.16 0.1 0.07 0.64 Turkey 0.02 0.93 1.36 1.6 2.01 1.91 7.83 United Arab Emirates 0.36 0.97 4.3 -1.14 -5.84 0.02 -1.33 Non-DAC Countries,Total 11.28 29.58 42.5 4.57 13.86 8.52 110.31 Multilaterals AfDB 6.47 .. .. .. .. .. 6.47 AfDF 89.48 56.23 85.96 40.4 63.57 .. 335.64 BADEA 4.63 7.05 2.74 6.41 8.25 .. 29.08 EU Institutions 33.71 95.25 141.19 134.45 84.05 .. 488.65 GAVI .. 7.26 5.78 4.19 4.98 4.36 26.57 GEF .. 7.65 7.7 3.23 6.1 .. 24.68 Global Fund 13.52 7.87 12.42 23.52 18.58 23.08 98.99 IAEA 0.47 0.66 0.33 0.44 0.79 0.42 3.11 IDA 125.07 132.7 133.48 134.33 110.44 .. 636.02 IFAD 7.93 5.56 4.88 2.51 3.29 .. 24.17 IMF (Concessional Trust Funds) 20.39 .. 38.35 99.8 48.84 -3.28 204.1 Isl.Dev Bank 14.46 23.67 15.62 30.04 14.65 .. 98.44 Nordic Dev.Fund 5.98 7.39 1.97 3.03 1.49 1.06 20.92 OFID 3.06 12.99 1.38 -1.93 -2.55 .. 12.95 UNAIDS 1.1 2.8 0.04 0.2 0.22 .. 4.36 UNDP 4.32 5.69 2.87 5.32 4.58 .. 22.78 UNFPA 3.1 1.64 2.07 1.41 2.08 2.63 12.93 UNHCR 0.26 0.7 2.97 2.62 2.9 .. 9.45 UNICEF 3.99 4.78 5.36 6.29 6.11 6.97 33.5 UNTA 1.98 2.48 1.34 .. .. .. 5.8 WFP 3.88 4.62 5.15 1.04 1.09 2.66 18.44 WHO .. .. .. .. .. 1.39 1.39 Multilateral Agencies, Total 343.8 386.99 471.6 497.3 379.46 39.29 2118.44 All Development Partners Total 865.04 869.72 1068.51 1016.23 927.68 76.24 4823.42 Source: OECD DAC Online database, Table 2a. Destination of Official Development Assistance and Official Aid - Disbursements, as of 11/30/2012. Annexes CASCR Review 29 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 10. Economic and Social Indicators for Senegal and Comparators, 2006 - 2011 Sub-Saharan Senegal Senegal Africa (all World Series Name income levels) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Average 2006-2011 Growth and Inflation GDP growth (annual %) 2.5 4.9 3.7 2.1 4.1 2.6 3.3 4.9 2.3 GDP per capita growth (annual %) -0.2 2.1 1.0 -0.6 1.4 -0.1 0.6 2.3 1.2 GNI per capita, PPP (current international $) 1,710.0 1,800.0 1,870.0 1,850.0 1,910.0 1,960.0 1,850.0 2,042.4 10,567.0 GNI, Atlas method (current US mil. $) 9,325.5 10,367.2 12,045.4 12,961.7 13,451.5 13,716.4 11,978.0 908,052.7 58,332,470.3 Inflation, consumer prices (annual %) 2.1 5.9 5.8 -1.1 1.3 3.4 2.9 6.9 5.0 Composition of GDP (%) Agriculture, value added (% of GDP) 14.8 13.4 15.6 17.2 17.4 17.8 16.0 13.4 2.8 Industry, value added (% of GDP) 23.0 23.6 22.2 21.7 22.4 23.7 22.8 31.1 26.8 Services, etc., value added (% of GDP) 62.2 63.0 62.3 61.0 60.2 58.4 61.2 55.6 70.4 Gross fixed capital formation (% of GDP) 28.2 30.9 30.2 27.9 29.0 30.7 29.5 20.7 20.8 Gross domestic savings (% of GDP) 10.7 8.6 3.9 9.3 10.8 11.8 9.2 16.3 21.0 External Accounts Exports of goods and services (% of GDP) 25.6 25.4 26.1 24.4 24.8 25.3 25.3 32.9 28.0 Imports of goods and services (% of GDP) 43.0 47.7 52.4 43.0 43.0 44.2 45.6 35.7 28.2 Current account balance (% of GDP) -9.2 -11.6 -14.1 -6.8 .. .. -10.4 .. .. External debt (% of GDP) 20.5 22.7 21.4 27.4 28.5 .. 24.1 .. .. Total debt service (% of GNI) 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.6 2.4 .. 1.8 1.9 .. Total reserves in months of imports 3.8 3.5 2.6 4.5 .. .. 3.6 6.7 12.6 Fiscal Accounts /1 Central government revenue (% of GDP) 21.4 23.6 22.8 23.5 23.9 24.4 .. .. .. Central government expenditure (% of GDP) 27.5 27.6 27.8 29 29.5 31.6 .. .. .. Central government balance (% of GDP) -5.8 -3.7 -5 -5.4 -5.7 -7.2 .. .. .. Net Public Debt (% of GDP) 22.1 24.5 24.6 32 33.6 32.7 .. .. .. Social Indicators Health Life expectancy at birth, total (years) 57.7 58.0 58.3 58.6 59.0 59.3 58.5 53.2 69.1 Immunization, DPT (% of children ages 12-23 months) 89.0 94.0 88.0 86.0 70.0 .. 85.4 71.9 83.1 Improved sanitation facilities (% of population with access) 49.0 50.0 50.0 51.0 52.0 .. 50.4 30.1 61.5 Improved water source (% of population with access) 69.0 70.0 70.0 71.0 72.0 .. 70.4 60.1 87.4 Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births) 54.5 52.7 50.9 49.3 48.0 46.7 50.4 74.5 39.9 Population Population, total (in million) 11.2 11.5 11.8 12.1 12.4 12.8 12.0 823.7 6,776.7 Population growth (annual %) 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.5 1.2 Urban population (% of total) 41.3 41.6 41.8 42.0 42.3 42.6 41.9 35.4 50.8 Education School enrollment, preprimary (% gross) 9.5 9.6 10.9 11.6 13.2 .. 11.0 17.0 44.9 School enrollment, primary (% gross) 82.7 86.5 87.0 86.8 86.8 .. 86.0 98.5 106.0 School enrollment, secondary (% gross) 25.2 28.6 31.4 .. 37.4 .. 30.7 35.9 68.2 1/ IMF. Senegal Article IV Consultations. Source: WB World Development Indicators as of November 2012 for all indicators excluding Fiscal Accounts data. Annexes CASCR Review 30 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 11. Senegal - Millennium Development Goals 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger Employment to population ratio, 15+, total (%) 68 68 68 69 69 Employment to population ratio, ages 15-24, total (%) 59 58 58 58 57 GDP per person employed (constant 1990 PPP $) 3,301 3,163 3,324 3,576 3,610 Income share held by lowest 20% 4 6 7 6 .. Malnutrition prevalence, weight for age (% of children under 5) 19 20 20 15 19 Poverty gap at $1.25 a day (PPP) (%) 34 19 14 11 .. Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day (PPP) (% of population) 66 54 44 34 .. Vulnerable employment, total (% of total employment) 83 .. 78 .. .. Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education Literacy rate, youth female (% of females ages 15-24) 28 .. 41 45 56 Literacy rate, youth male (% of males ages 15-24) 49 .. 58 58 74 Persistence to last grade of primary, total (% of cohort) 69 49 63 53 60 Primary completion rate, total (% of relevant age group) 43 42 40 54 59 Total enrollment, primary (% net) 46 52 60 76 78 Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women Proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments (%) 13 12 12 19 23 Ratio of female to male primary enrollment (%) 73 76 87 97 106 Ratio of female to male secondary enrollment (%) 51 61 65 75 88 Ratio of female to male tertiary enrollment (%) .. .. .. 46 60 Share of women employed in the nonagricultural sector (% of total nonagricultural .. .. 10.6 .. .. employment) Goal 4: Reduce child mortality Immunization, measles (% of children ages 12-23 months) 51 80 48 74 60 Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births) 69 71 67 57 48 Mortality rate, under-5 (per 1,000 live births) 136 142 130 97 69 Goal 5: Improve maternal health Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 women ages 15-19) .. 112 110 107 96 Births attended by skilled health staff (% of total) .. 47 58 52 .. Contraceptive prevalence (% of women ages 15-49) .. 13 11 12 .. Maternal mortality ratio (modeled estimate, per 100,000 live births) 670 590 500 430 370 Pregnant women receiving prenatal care (%) .. 82 79 87 .. Unmet need for contraception (% of married women ages 15-49) .. 35 .. 32 .. Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases Children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs (% of children under age 5 with fever) .. .. 36 27 9 Condom use, population ages 15-24, female (% of females ages 15-24) .. .. .. 5 .. Condom use, population ages 15-24, male (% of males ages 15-24) .. .. .. 48 .. Incidence of tuberculosis (per 100,000 people) 195 215 237 261 288 Prevalence of HIV, female (% ages 15-24) .. .. .. .. 0.7 Prevalence of HIV, male (% ages 15-24) .. .. .. .. 0.3 Prevalence of HIV, total (% of population ages 15-49) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 Tuberculosis case detection rate (%, all forms) 35 42 38 34 31 Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability CO2 emissions (kg per PPP $ of GDP) 0 0 0 0 0 CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita) 0 0 0 1 0 Forest area (% of land area) 48.6 .. 46.2 45.0 44.0 Improved sanitation facilities (% of population with access) 38 41 45 49 52 Improved water source (% of population with access) 61 63 66 68 72 Marine protected areas (% of territorial waters) 6 6 6 12 12 Net ODA received per capita (current US$) 112 78 45 64 75 Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development Debt service (PPG and IMF only, % of exports, excluding workers' remittances) 18 16 13 7 3 Internet users (per 100 people) 0.0 0.0 0.4 4.8 16.0 Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people) 0 0 3 16 67 Telephone lines (per 100 people) 1 1 2 2 3 Fertility rate, total (births per woman) 7 6 6 5 5 Other GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$) 740 580 530 800 1,080 GNI, Atlas method (current US$) (billions) 5.3 4.9 5.0 8.7 13.5 Gross capital formation (% of GDP) 9.1 13.6 20.5 29.6 29.0 Life expectancy at birth, total (years) 53 54 56 57 59 Literacy rate, adult total (% of people ages 15 and above) 27 .. 39 42 50 Population, total (billions) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Trade (% of GDP) 57.6 68.2 65.1 69.4 67.8 Source: World Development Indicators database as of November 2012 Annexes CASCR Review 31 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 12. List of IFC’s investments in Senegal that were active during FY07-11 (US$’000) Project Short Closure Project IFC Sector IFC Sector Total Net Project ID Cmt. FY Project Size Net Loans Net Equity Name FY Status Primary Explntry Commitment Investments approved pre-FY07, but active during FY07-11 Financial Housing 500 BHS-Banque Habit 1980 Active 460 -.-- 424.25 424.25 Markets Finance. Food & 7175 AEF SERT 1996 Active MAS 3,800 715.60 395.06 1,110.66 Beverage Electric 7821 GTI Dakar 1998 Active Infrastructure 71,854 12,871.69 1,769.76 14,641.45 Power AEF SERT Eq Food & 8086 1997 2008 Closed MAS 50 -.-- 45.13 45.13 Increase Beverage Electric 9141 GTI Dakar Increase 1998 Active Infrastructure 22,500.42 1,201.31 -.-- 1,201.31 Power 10034 SEF Royal Saly 2002 2008 Closed MAS Tourism 3,211 967.86 -.-- 967.86 Electric 22410 Kounoune IPP 2007 Active Infrastructure 81,568. 18,299.05 -.-- 18,299.05 Power Subtotal 183,443.42 34,055.51 2,634.20 36,689.71 Project Short Closure Project IFC Sector IFC Sector Total Net Project ID Cmt. FY Project Size Net Loans Net Equity Name FY Status Primary Explntry Commitment Investments approved in FY07-11 25363 Vicat-SOCOCIM 2007 2011 Closed MAS Cement 25,131 26,321 -.-- 26,321 25970 SEPAM 2007 2009 Closed MAS Agribusiness 8,827.57 -.-- -.-- -.-- 26071 Teylium Hotel 2008 Active MAS Tourism 59,500 10,527.30 10,527.30 Financial Micro- 26565 MC Senegal 2010 Active 6,400 4,530.63 1,316.76 5,847.39 Markets Finance Financial Micro- 27102 St. Louis Finances 2010 Active 472.12 -.-- 472.12 472.12 Markets Finance Financial Trade 27515 GTFP Ecobank 2009 Active 4,000 17,392.53 -.-- 17392.53 Markets Finance Electric 27790 COMASEL St Louis 2010 Active Infrastructure 750 -.-- 750 750 Power 29008 SENAC 2011 Active Infrastructure Highway 336,157.31 30,531.38 -.-- 30,531.38 Food & 29930 GRIMAS SN 2010 Active MAS 1,475.10 1,489.32 -.-- 1,489.32 Beverage Electric 30094 Comasel Louga 2011 Active Infrastructure 800 -.-- 800 800 Power Subtotal 443,513.10 90,792.16 3,338.88 94,131.04 Grand Total 626,956.52 124,847.67 5,973.08 130,820.75 Source: IFC, November 2012- The list does not cover the regional projects. MAS: Manufacturing, Agriculture, and Services; Annexes CASCR Review 32 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 13. List of IFC’s Advisory Services in SENEGAL, FY07-11 Project ID Start FY End FY Project Status Primary Business Line Total Funds, US$ Advisory Services operations approved pre-FY07, but active during FY07-11 29803 unknown unknown Closed PPP unknown 522760 2006 2008 Closed PPP 256,000 539566 2006 2008 Closed Investment Climate 100,000 539567 2006 2008 Investment Climate 100,000 Subtotal: 456,000 Advisory Services operations approved in FY07-11 538623 2007 2007 Closed Access to Finance -.-- 548265 2007 2010 Closed SBA 115,440 558205 2007 2009 Closed PPP (Infra. Adv.) 18,200 563727 2008 2011 Closed SBA 307,000 565010 2009 2011 Closed Access to Finance 827,062 567309 2010 2011 Closed Access to Finance 1,014,000 571287 2010 2011 Closed SBA 488,000 553405 2011 Active Access to Finance 1,000,000 581307 2011 Active Climate Business -.-- Subtotal: 3,769,702 Grand Total 4,225,702 Source: Source: IFC, November 2012 SBA: Sustainable Business Advisory