Language : English Original : French

PROJECT : Rural Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Sub-Programme –

Phase II COUNTRY : Senegal PROJECT APPRAISAL REPORT Date: 30 September 2008

VOLUME 1/2: REPORT

Appraisal Team

Team Leader: Mohamed El Arkoubi, Water and Sanitation Engineer, OWAS1

Team Members:

Sylvie Bara, Gender Expert; Keba Ba, Financial Analyst; Patrice Horugavye, Socioeconomist; Elimon Attobra, Procurement Expert; Idrissa Samba, Consultant-Environmentalist; Georges Bohoussou, Portfolio Analyst.

Acting Division Manager S. WASSEL Sector Director: A. R. RAKOTOBE Acting Regional Director: I. KOUSSOUBE

Peer Reviewers

Jean Michel Ossete, Water Resource Expert, AWF Xavier Boulenger, Operations Officer, SNFO Jerôme Rihouey, Consultant, WSP/OWAS

Negotiations The project was negotiated on 6 and 7 January 2009.

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP

TABLE OF CONTENTS CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS ............................................................................................................................... i

FISCAL YEAR.......................................................................................................................................................... i

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ................................................................................................................................ i

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................ i

PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET ..................................................................................................................iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... iv

RESULTS-BASED LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................. v

I. STRATEGIC ORIENTATION AND JUSTIFICATION ......................................................................... 1

1.1 LINK OF PROJECT WITH COUNTRY STRATEGY AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................ 1 1.2 JUSTIFICATION FOR BANK INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................... 1 1.3 AID COORDINATION ..................................................................................................................................... 2

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 PROJECT COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 TECHNICAL OPTIONS CHOSEN ..................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 PROJECT TYPE .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.4 PROJECT COST AND FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS....................................................................................... 4 2.5 PROJECT AREA AND BENEFICIARIES ............................................................................................................ 6 2.6 PARTICIPATORY APPROACH TO PROJECT IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION ..................... 6 2.7 CONSIDERATION OF BANK GROUP EXPERIENCE IN PROJECT DESIGN ......................................................... 7 2.8 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ................................................................................................................ 7

III. PROJECT FEASIBILITY ....................................................................................................................... 8

3.1 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE................................................................................................ 8 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT....................................................................................................... 9

IV. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION.........................................................................................................10

4.1 IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... 10 4.2 MONITORING.............................................................................................................................................. 11 4.3 GOVERNANCE............................................................................................................................................. 12 4.4 SUSTAINABILITY ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.5 RISK MANAGEMENT................................................................................................................................... 13 4.6 KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT..................................................................................................................... 13

V. LEGAL FRAMEWORK............................................................................................................................. 13

5.1 LEGAL INSTRUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 13 5.2 CONDITIONS FOR BANK INVOLVEMENT..................................................................................................... 13 5.3 COMPLIANCE WITH BANK POLICIES........................................................................................................... 14

VI. RECOMMENDATION .......................................................................................................................... 14

Annexes Annex I. Comparative Socio-Economic Indicators Annex II. Table of ADB Portfolio in the Country Annex III. Major related projects financed by the Bank and other Development Partners of the Country Annex IV. Map of Project Area

Currency Equivalents (September 2008)

UA 1 = CFAF 714.167

Fiscal Year 1 January - 31 December

Weights and Measures

m = metre m² = square metre ml = metre of row m3 = cubic metre km = kilometre Mm3 = Million cubic metres km² = square kilometre m3/h = cubic metres per hour l/s = litres per second l/d/inh. = litres per day per inhabitant

Acronyms and Abbreviations ABEDA : Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa ADF : African Development Fund AFD : French Development Agency ASUFOR : Borehole Users Association CIB : Consolidated Investment Budget CBAO : Banking Company of West Africa CREPA : Regional Centre for Low-Cost Water Supply and Sanitation CV : Curriculum Vitae DAS : Department of Sanitation DCEF : Department of Economic and Financial Cooperation DDI : Debt and Investment Department DEEC : Department of Environment and Classified Establishments DEM : Department of Operations and Maintenance DGPRE : Department of Water Resource Management and Planning DHR : Department of Rural Water Supply DWS : Drinking Water Supply DWSS : Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation EA : Executing Agency EIB : European Investment Bank EIG : Economic Interest Grouping ESMP : Environmental and Social Management Plan EU : European Union GVT : Government ICB : International Competitive Bidding IDA : International Development Association IDB : Islamic Development Bank IEC : Information, Education and Communication IP : Individual service pipe IWRM : Integrated Water Resources Management KFAED : Kuwait Fund for Arab Economic Development KFW : Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufban NCB : National Competitive Bidding LDP : Local Development Plan LWMSP : Local Water Management and Sanitation Plan LWP : Long-term Water Project MDG : Millennium Development Goal MHRHN : Ministry for Rural Water Supply and National River System

ii

MP : Manual Pump MUHUHPA : Ministry of Town Planning, Housing, Urban Water Supply, Public Hygiene and

Sanitation MVWS : Multi-Village Water Supply NDF : Nordic Development Fund NGO : Non-Governmental Organization NPV : Net Present Value NRIP : National Rural Infrastructure Programme ONAS : National Sanitation Authority of Senegal PADMIR : Rural Development Support Programme PAQPUD : Autonomous Peri-Urban Sanitation Programme for Neighbourhoods of Dakar PARPEBA : Groundnut Basin Water Point Reinforcement Support Project PEPAM : Millennium Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Programme PEPTAC : Drinking Water for All and Community Support Project PLHA : Local Water Supply and Sanitation Plan PP : Power-operated pump PVC : Polyvinyl Chloride REGEFOR : Rural Power-operated Borehole Management Reform SCU : Sub-programme Coordination Unit SDE : Sénégalaise Des Eaux SDFA : Social Development Fund Agency SF : Standpipe SFD : Saudi Fund for Development SONES : Société Nationale des Eaux du Sénégal (Senegal Water Corporation) SSP : Sanitation Strategic Plan SVWS : Single-Village Water Supply SYSCOA : West African Accounting System TCM : Manual Flush Toilet UA : Unit of Account VIP(latrines) : Ventilated Improved Pit latrines WADB : West African Development Bank WB : World Bank WSP : Water Sector Project

iii

Project Information Sheet Client Information Sheet BORROWER : Government of the Republic of Senegal EXECUTING AGENCY : PEPAM Executing Agencies Financing Plan

Source of Finance Amount (UA) Instrument ADF

30 000 000

loan

Government 2 917 000 Beneficiaries 498 000

TOTAL COST 33 415 000

Important ADB Financial Information

Loan currency

Euro

Interest type * NA Interest rate margin* NA Commitment charge* 0.50% on undisbursed amount commencing 60 days after signature of

loan agreement Service charge 0.75% per annum on the loan amount disbursed and outstanding Maturity Every 6 months from the 11th year to the 50th year Grace period 10 years FRR, NPV (ASUFOR type) 6%, CFAF 1.31 million ERR, NPV 31%, CFAF 43 billion

*where applicable Duration – main stages (expected)

Approval of concept note

09/2008

Project approval 02/2009

Loan effectiveness 04/2009 Last disbursement 07/2013 Completion 07/2014 Last repayment 12/2059

iv

Executive Summary 1. The objective of the Rural Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Sub-programme - Phase II in Senegal is to improve the health conditions of the approximately 1 790 600 inhabitants of Kaffrine, Tambacounda, Kolda, Sédhiou and Ziguinchor regions. Its implementation will cover four years (from July 2009 to June 2013) and cost a total of UA 33.42 million, exclusive of taxes. The ADF will contribute UA 30.00 million in the form of a loan to the financing of the sub-programme, representing 89.78% of its total cost. 2. The implementation of this operation will help to meet the needs of about 800 000 people, including 162 000 who are directly concerned with the drinking water infrastructure, 150 000 with the sanitation infrastructure, and the entire population with the promotion of hygiene, support for the establishment of Borehole Water Users’ Associations (ASUFOR), and transfer of equipment maintenance to private operators. The major expected outcomes are the improvement of sustainable access to drinking water and sanitation, and positive change in the attitudes and behaviours of the population with respect to hygiene. The average rates of access to drinking water and sanitation in the sub-programme area will increase from 37% and 17% to 45% and 26% respectively between 2007 and 2013. 3. The project will improve the health conditions of the rural population by reducing waterborne diseases, particularly diarrhoea, which is the main cause of mortality, especially among children under five years old. Indeed, with a rate estimated at 160 per thousand live births, infant and child mortality in rural areas in Senegal is a cause for concern. Seventeen per cent of these deaths are caused by diarrhoea 89% of which is due to the consumption of unsafe water, lack of access to sanitation facilities, and poor hygiene practices. The participation of the beneficiary population in the financing of the project will consist in: (i) 5% of the cost of family sanitation facilities, (ii) 3% of the cost of drinking water structures, and (ii) 20% of the cost of individual connections. 4. This sub-programme is a component of the Millennium Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Programme (PEPAM) put in place by the Government of Senegal in 2005 to achieve the sector MDGs by 2015; it is an explicit component of the PRSP2 (2006-2010). It falls within the framework of the Bank’s Initiative in this sector and the CSP (2005-2009). It will strengthen the impacts of the Bank’s previous interventions and contribute to establishing its role as lead development partner in this sub-sector. Indeed, the Bank was the first development partner of Senegal to finance the implementation of the first PEPAM sub-programme whose outcomes are very satisfactory. In so doing, the Bank made a key contribution to the launching of PEPAM, which facilitated the mobilization of other donors around the programme. 5. The implementation of this sub-programme will strengthen and build on the experience of Senegalese and Bank implementation structures, particularly with regard to the construction and operation of multi-village drinking water supply structures that use power-operated boreholes, as well as the choice of adequate technology for family sanitation. The lessons and experience drawn from the project will inspire the design of other projects in the sector in the future. They will be shared within the Bank and with the various development partners of Senegal through information-exchange and consultation meetings, PEPAM annual review, the African Water Week, etc.

v

Results-Based Logical Framework Hierarchy of Objectives Expected Outcomes Scope Performance Indicators

Baseline Case, Indicative Targets and Timeline

Assumptions / Risks

Goal: The socio-economic and health conditions of the rural populations in Senegal are improved.

Impact: by 2015 Poverty is reduced The morbidity and mortality caused by waterborne diseases are reduced. The MDGs for rural drinking water supply and sanitation are achieved.

Beneficiaries: - The nearly 6.5 million rural population

of Senegal. - 2.3 million additional people in the

rural areas are provided with drinking water.

- 355 000 additional rural households are equipped with family sanitation facilities.

Poverty index Infant and child mortality rate Rate of access to drinking water in rural areas Rate of access to sanitation in rural areas Sources: PEPAM monitoring and evaluation system, poverty monitoring survey in Senegal, EDS

- The poverty index drops from 48.5% in 2007

to 30% in 2015. - The infant/child mortality rate is reduced

from 121‰ in 2005 to 50‰ in 2015 - The rate of access to drinking water in rural

areas increases from 72.4% in 2007 to 82% in 2015.

- The rate of access to sanitation in rural areas increases from 17.06% in 2007 to 59% in 2015.

The required funds are mobilized

Objective: The socio-economic and health conditions of the rural populations of Tambacounda, Kaffrine, Kolda, Sédhiou and Bignona Departments are improved.

Outcomes: The attitudes and behaviours of the populations have improved positively with regard to personal and household hygiene. Drinking water and sanitation infrastructures in Tambacounda, Kaffrine, Kolda, Sédhiou and Bignona Departments are reinforced and protected.

Beneficiaries:

- The entire population of the five Departments targeted by the sub-programme, that is 1.79 million, including 52% of women.

- 800 000 additional people benefit from ASUFOR, sensitization and education on hygiene.

- 162 000 additional people are provided with drinking water.

- 110 000 additional people are provided with family latrines.

- 40 000 additional people are provided with public toilets

Rate of access to drinking water in the five Departments Rate of access to sanitation in the five Departments Sources: PEPAM monitoring and evaluation system

- The rate of access to drinking water in the

five divisions increases from 37% in 2007 to 45% in 2013.

- The rate of access to sanitation in the five divisions increases from 17% in 2007 to 26% in 2013.

Operation and maintenance of facilities ensured.

Activities: (1) Drinking water

infrastructure works (2) Sanitation infrastructure

works

(3) Support for establishment of ASUFORs and transfer of maintenance to the private sector

Outcomes (1.1) New boreholes constructed (1.2) Existing boreholes renovated (1.3) Existing boreholes rehabilitated (1.4) New piezometers installed (1.5) Boreholes equipped (1.6) New DWS systems constructed (1.7) Existing DWS systems extended (1.8) Individual connections made (1.9) Control and monitoring of works assured

(2.1) Range closets built (2.2) Family latrines built (2.3) Control and monitoring of works ensured

(3.1)Trained ASUFORs set up (no less than 30% of representation of women will be assured) (3.2) Borehole operators trained and installed

Beneficiaries: Entire population of the five Departments Regional and local authorities Central structures: sub-programme executing agencies Women, youths, women’s and youth associations; primary school teachers and pupils, craftsmen, bricklayers, etc.¶

(1.1) Number of new boreholes constructed (1.2) Number of existing boreholes renovated (1.3) Number of existing boreholes rehabilitated (1.4) Number of new piezometers installed (1.5) Number of boreholes equipped (1.6) Number of new DWS systems constructed (1.7) Number of existing DWS systems extended (1.8) Number of individual connections made (1.9) Periodic works control and monitoring reports available and disseminated

(2.1) Number of range closets built (2.2) Number of family latrines built (2.3) Periodic works control and monitoring reports available and disseminated

By 2013 The number of power-operated boreholes rises from 373 in 2008 to 456 in 2013; The number of water tank rises from 378 in 2008 to 419 in 2013; The number of public fountains increases from 2 197 in 2008 to 2 566 in 2013; The number of individual connections increases from 8 582 in 2008 to 18 582 in 2013; The number of family latrines (improved + traditional) rises from 55 458 in 2008 to 66 458 in 2013; The number of public toilets rises from 1 270 in 2008 to 1 670 in 2013; The number of ASUFORs moves up from 111 in 2008 to 418 in 2013.

Loan Agreement Government counterpart funds put in place in time The contributions of the population are mobilized in time Absorptive capacity of national companies

vi

Hierarchy of Objectives Expected Outcomes Scope Performance Indicators Baseline Case, Indicative Targets and

Timeline Assumptions /

Risks (4) IEC on sanitation (5) Recruitment of companies and an IC firm for the execution of DWS works (6) Recruitment of companies and IC firm for the execution of sanitation works (7) Recruitment of a firm in charge of IEC activities (8) Capacity building for actors involved in the sector Resources: ADF loan: UA 30 000 000 Beneficiaries: UA 497 800 Government: UA 2 916 900 TOTAL: UA 33 415 000

(4.1) Craftsmen and bricklayers trained and involved in community works (4.2) School teachers trained and involved in IEC activities on sanitation (4.3) Female hygiene community workers trained and involved in IEC activities on sanitation (4.4) Technical community workers trained and involved in community work

(5.1) Companies responsible for the construction, renovation and rehabilitation of boreholes are recruited (5.2) Companies responsible for the equipment of boreholes are recruited (5.3) Companies responsible for the construction and extension of multi-village DWS systems are recruited (5.4) Companies and workers responsible for carrying out community DWS works are recruited (5.5)Suppliers of equipment are recruited (5.6) Consulting engineer responsible for the control and monitoring of DWS works is recruited

(6.1) Companies responsible for the construction of public latrines are recruited (6.2) Companies and workers responsible for community sanitation work are recruited (6.3) Suppliers of equipment are recruited (6.4) Consulting engineer responsible for the control and monitoring of sanitation works is recruited

(7.1) Firm in charge of providing support for the establishment ASUFORs and transfer of maintenance is recruited (7.2) Firm in charge of IEC activities on sanitation is recruited

Companies, suppliers, consulting firms, craftsmen, bricklayers, labourers, etc. Consulting firms, NGOs, etc.

(3.1) Number of trained ASUFORs set up (% of women occupying decision-making positions and % of female members)

(4.1) Number of craftsmen and bricklayers trained (4.2) Number of school teachers trained (4.3) Number of female hygiene workers trained

(5) Contracts signed (6) Contracts signed (7) Contracts signed Sources: PEPAM monitoring and evaluation system

The number of trained female workers increases from 561 in 2008 to 711 in 2013. The number of trained bricklayers rises from 426 in 2008 to 576 in 2013. The number of school teachers trained increases from 484 in 2008 to 609 in 2013. 30 new boreholes constructed 5 boreholes renovated 21 boreholes rehabilitated 10 new piezometers installed 83 boreholes equipped 30 DWS systems constructed 28 DWS systems extended 10 000 individual connections carried out 11 000 family latrines built 400 range closets built 307 trained ASUFORs set up (no less than 30% representation of women will be assured) 307 trained borehole operators put in place 150 craftsmen and bricklayers trained 125 head teachers trained 150 female hygiene relays trained

Supervision and completion missions

vii

Project Implementation Schedule

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION BY BANK GROUP MANAGEMENT TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONCERNING A PROPOSAL FOR AN ADF LOAN TO

SENEGAL TO FINANCE THE SECOND SUB-PROGRAMME OF THE RURAL DRINKING WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION INITIATIVE

Management hereby submits this report and its recommendation concerning a proposal for an ADF loan of UA 30 million to the Government of Senegal to finance the Second Sub-programme of the Rural Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Initiative in Senegal.

I. Strategic Orientation and Justification

1.1 Link of Project with Country Strategy and Objectives 1.1.1 The priorities of PRSP2 over the 2006 - 2010 period are: (i) reduction of the incidence of poverty in the population to below 30% by 2015 through accelerated, strong, balanced and better distributed growth; (ii) acceleration of access to basic social services and enhancement of the food security of the population; (iii) protection of the population, especially the most vulnerable, against social risks and disasters; (iv) reduction of inequalities and eradication of all forms of exclusion, notably by instituting gender equality in all areas; and (v) promotion of good governance and the rule of law. 1.1.2 The Bank’s strategy for the 2005-2009 period addresses the Government’s concerns and priorities. The 2005-2009 RBCSP therefore seeks to: (i) improve the business environment with a view to promoting accelerated growth; and (ii) increase access to basic infrastructures. These two pillars were confirmed by the RBCSP mid-term review which took place in April 2008. 1.1.3 The aim of this project is to strengthen drinking water supply and sanitation infrastructures. It is therefore in keeping with the Second Pillar of the RBCSP and the Bank’s Initiative in the rural water supply and sanitation sector. It also addresses the priorities of the Senegalese Government targeted by the second thrust of PRSP2. 1.2 Justification for Bank Involvement 1.2.1 The main development problem targeted by the project is the reduction of waterborne diseases, which is the main cause of mortality, particularly among children under five years old. Indeed, with a rate of 160 per thousand, infant and child mortality in rural areas in Senegal is a cause for concern. More than 17% of such mortality is due to diarrhoea, a waterborne disease caused by the consumption of contaminated water, as well as to lack of sanitation and hygiene. The prevalence of diarrhoea in children under five years old is 22%. In view of the gravity of the situation, the Government has given priority to drinking water supply, sanitation and promotion of hygiene in its efforts to improve the health conditions of the population. 1.2.2 The Bank’s intervention is justified by the fact that the new sub-programme: (i) addresses this major preoccupation of the Government and its desire to ensure the equitable development of the various regions of the country by correcting the weaknesses and disparities identified, in accordance with the policy of decentralization and regional balance, and (ii) is in line with the Bank’s Initiative in the rural drinking water supply and sanitation

2

sector. The mid-term review of the Bank Group’s assistance strategy in Senegal in February 2008 and the strategic orientations of ADF XI show that the Bank will pursue its actions in the drinking water supply and sanitation sector through the appraisal of a second sub-programme for rural areas. 1.3 Aid Coordination

Table 1.3

Aid Coordination Volume of Sector GDP Exports Workforce

Water supply and sanitation 0.8% - - Stakeholders – Public expenditure in 2007

Government Donors UA Million % Donors UA Million %

IDA 22.44 36.8% ADB 10.51 17.3% ADF 2.98 4.9% KFW 0.82 1.4% NDF 4.40 7.2% Luxembourg 0.88 1.4% Belgium 2.70 4.4% SFD 0.85 1.4% ABEDA 0.50 0.8% IsDB 1.31 2.1% EU 1.07 1.7%

12.44 20.4%

Total 48.46 79.6% Level of aid coordination

Existence of thematic working groups Yes Existence of a comprehensive sectoral programme Yes (PEPAM) Role of the ADB in aid coordination Member

1.3.1 The interventions of development partners in the drinking water supply and sanitation sector are implemented under the PEPAM which is an overall unified programme framework for achievement of the MDGs of the drinking water supply and sanitation sector. The expected outcomes in 2015 in rural areas are: (i) 82% access rate as against 72.4% in 2007 for drinking water supply, and (ii) 59% access rate as against 17.06% in 2007 for sanitation. The PEPAM coordination unit, set up by the Government with the support of partners, ensures proper coordination of development aid in this sector. Sector review meetings are organized on a yearly basis and help to assess the implementation status of the national programme and ensure synergy of the actions of the various technical and financial partners. This coordination has been strengthened by the formation of the Donor Consultative Group with an urban and rural platform to facilitate internal dialogue and better articulate interventions in the sector. The rural sub-group is steered by Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, while the urban sub-group is led by the EU and AFD.

3

II. Project Description

2.1 Project Components

Table 2.1 Project Components

Component Name

Cost Estimate including

Contingencies (UA Million)

Component description

A- Development of infrastructures, access to drinking water and sanitation

26.16

Drinking water supply: (i) Construction of 35 boreholes including 30 on new MVWS sites and 5 on existing MVWS sites; (ii) Rehabilitation of 21 existing boreholes; (iii) Installation of 10 new piezometers; (iv) Construction of 41 water tanks, comprising 30 on new MVWS sites and 11 on existing MVWS sites; (v) Extension of networks on 58 sites, comprising 30 on new MVWS sites and 28 on existing ones; (vi) Supply and installation of 83 water-pumping devices, including 30 on new MVWS sites, 4 on sites of boreholes to be renovated, 11 on existing MVWS sites equipped with new water tanks, 21 on boreholes to be rehabilitated, and 17 on existing MVWS sites; (vii) 10 000 individual water connections; and (viii) Supply and installation of 290 production and 2 035 distribution metres. Sanitation: (i) Construction of 400 public toilets in schools, health centres, etc.; and (ii) Construction of 11 000 facilities for new family latrines equipped with washbasins.

B- Development of IEC programmes, studies, control and monitoring of works

4.55

(i) Control of works for the “drinking water supply” component (drilling, civil engineering, ducts and pumping equipment); (ii) Control of works for the sanitation component; (iii) Support for training and establishment of ASUFORs, as well as transfer of equipment maintenance to private operators; (iv) IEC (hygiene education, training of teachers, bricklayers and female community workers, etc); (v) LWMSP study, (vi) Rural sanitation strategy study.

C- Institutional support 1.48

(i) Support for programme executing agencies (DHR, DEM, DGPRE, and DAS); (ii) Support for deconcentration within the framework of the organizational development of technical water supply and sanitation services; (iii) Support for building the capacities of players.

D- Management of sub-programme 1.23

(i) Funding the operation of the SCU over the 2010-2012 period; (ii) Support for coordination of IEC activities by the SCU; and (iii) Support for monitoring-evaluation in the project area.

2.2 Technical Options Chosen 2.2.1 Like the first sub-programme, the technical design of this sub-programme is based on: (i) baseline technical options for water supply adopted for PEPAM; (ii) basic planning carried out at national level to prepare the PEPAM investment plan in order to achieve the MDGs; and (iii) programming of works, which entails the request by and participation of users and elected local representatives, in consultation with Government technical services. 2.2.2 As regards drinking water, the technical option adopted consists in constructing standpipes, hydrants for carts used for transportation purposes, individual connections and drinking troughs for cattle, when necessary, in each village that expresses this need and connecting these facilities to an existing multi-village water supply system (MVWS) or one

4

to be constructed. An MVWS includes a borehole, a mechanized pumping system, a water tank, a main inter-village piping system, secondary ducts for water distribution in villages and distribution points.

Table 2.2.1 Summary of proposed facilities for the drinking water supply component

Departments New boreholes

Renovated boreholes

Rehabilitated boreholes

Water tanks Networks Pumping

devices Standpipes Individual connections

Kaffrine 8 1 3 9 12 16 85 3 000 Tambacounda 13 3 4 14 18 25 127 3 500 Sédhiou 6 6 8 12 20 85 1 500 Kolda 3 4 6 12 14 63 1 000 Bignona 1 4 4 4 8 9 1 000 TOTAL 30 5 21 41 58 83 369 10 000

2.2.3 With regard to sanitation, the technical option retained consists in constructing VIP or TCM latrines equipped with a washbasin in each household that expresses the need, and public toilets in schools, health centres, etc.

Table 2.2.2 Summary of proposed facilities for the sanitation component

Departments Kaffrine Tambacounda Sédhiou Bignona Total Family sanitation facilities 4 400 2 200 4 400 11 000 Public toilets 120 140 120 20 400

2.3 Project Type 2.3.1 This sub-programme is an autonomous component of the country’s PEPAM sector programme. All donor interventions are implemented in the form of independent sub-programmes coordinated within the overall unified framework of PEPAM and in accordance with the strategic option of the Government of Senegal. 2.4 Project Cost and Financing Arrangements 2.4.1 The total cost of the project, exclusive of taxes, is UA 33.42 million, comprising UA 6.86 million in foreign exchange (20.5%) and UA 26.56 million in local currency (79.5%). ADF contribution to the financing of the project in the form of a loan amounts to UA 30.00 million, representing 89.8% of its total cost. The Government’s contribution amounts to UA 2.92 million. The project beneficiaries will contribute UA 0.5 million. These costs include a 10% provision for physical contingencies and a provision of 3% per annum for price escalation.

Table 2.3 Project Cost Estimate by Component (in UA million)

Component Local Currency

Foreign Exchange

Total % foreign exchange

A. Development of basic infrastructures 17.55 5.12 22.67 22.6% B. IEC, studies, control and monitoring of works 3.35 0.71 4.05 17.4% C. Institutional support 1.15 0.17 1.32 13.2% D. Management of sub-programme 1.05 0.09 1.13 7.7% Total base cost 23.09 6.09 29.18 20.9% Provision for physical contingencies 2.04 0.53 2.57 20.6% Provision for price escalation 1.43 0.24 1.67 14.6% Total project cost 26.56 6.86 33.42 20.5% N.B.: The exchange rates used are indicated in the introduction of the report (page (i))

5

Table 2.4

Sources of Finance (in UA million) Sources of Finance Local

Currency Foreign

Exchange Total % total

ADF loan 23.14 6.86 30.00 89.8% Beneficiaries 0.50 0.50 1.5% Government 2.92 2.92 8.8% Total project cost 26.56 6.86 33.42

Table 2.5

Project Cost by Expenditure Category (in UA million) Expenditure Category Local

Currency Foreign

Exchange Total % foreign

exchange A. Goods 0.48 1.52 2.00 76.0% B. Works 17.23 3.87 21.10 18.3% C. Services 3.40 0.71 4.10 17.2% D. Operating costs 1.98 1.98 0.0%

Total base cost 23.09 6.09 29.18 20.9% Provision for physical contingencies

2.04 0.53 2.57

Provision for price escalation 1.43 0.24 1.67 Total project cost 33.42

Table 2.6

Expenditure Schedule by Component (Amount in UA million) Component 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total

A. Development of basic infrastructures 4.51 13.76 4.39 22.67 B. IEC, studies, control and monitoring of works

0.95 1.06 1.10 0.95 4.06

C. Institutional support 0.12 0.57 0.26 0.25 0.12 1.32 D. Management of sub-programme 0.13 0.37 0.26 0.26 0.13 1.13

Total base cost 0.25 6.40 15.34 6.00 1.20 29.18 2.4.2 Government financing will focus on: (i) 10% of DWS works and 5% of public sanitation works; (ii) 15% of studies and services; and (iii) 11% of institutional support. 2.4.3 The population will contribute 5% for family sanitation works and 20% for individual connections to the drinking water supply system. Furthermore, in line with the national DWS strategy in rural areas, a 3% contribution to the cost of DWS facilities will be used as working capital for maintenance and repair operations. This contribution by beneficiaries, which is estimated at CFAF 250 million, will be paid as requests for corresponding facilities are submitted and managed by ASUFORs. This seed fund will be held until facilities are set up and replenished with revenue from water sale by volume. 2.4.4 Rural communities will contribute from their budgets 10% of the cost of construction of public toilets so as to provide revolving funds to the management committees of these community facilities for maintenance and repair purposes. 2.4.5 Bank financing will concern: (i) 90% of DWS facilities; (ii) 95% of public and family sanitation facilities; (iii) 89% of institutional support to the sub-programme executing agencies; (iv) 85% of IEC services, support for the establishment of ASUFORs and transfer

6

of maintenance operations to private operators, and monitoring and control of works; (v) 100% of funds for assistance and studies; and (VI) 100% of sub-programme coordination, as well as financial auditing. 2.5 Project Area and Beneficiaries 2.5.1 The second sub-programme will be implemented in the Kaffrine, Tambacounda, Kolda, Sedhiou and Bignona (Ziguinchor) regions with a total population of about 1 790 600 inhabitants. The implementation of these operations will help to meet the needs of about 800,000 people, including 162 000 directly concerned with drinking water infrastructures, 150,000 with sanitation infrastructures, and the entire population with the promotion of hygiene and support for the establishment of ASUFORs and transfer of equipment maintenance to private operators. The major expected outcomes are sustainable improvement of access to drinking water and sanitation, and positive change in the attitudes and behaviours of the population with respect to hygiene.

Table 2.7 Project Beneficiaries

Beneficiaries Hygiene promotion (IEC), support for ASUFORs and transfer of maintenance Departments

Total Population

Sanitation

Infrastructures

Drinking water Supply

Infrastructures ASUFOR Population Tambacounda 352 020 36 000 38 880 152 352 020 Kaffrine 528 430 56 000 34 540 8 34 540 Kolda 317 190 - 21 930 65 183 000 Sédhiou 360 360 56 000 45 860 42 120 000 Bignona 232 600 2 000 20 700 40 110 440 TOTAL 1 790 600 150 000 161.910 307 800 000

Table 2.8

Major Expected Outcomes Rate of access to drinking water Rate of access to sanitation Departments 2007 2013 2007 2013

Tambacounda 34% 42% 17% 34% Kaffrine 62% 64% 17% 20% Kolda 12% 19% - - Sédhiou 27% 37% 17% 27% Bignona 33% 52% 17% 18% TOTAL 37% 45% 17% 26%

2.5.2 The sub-programme will increase the rate of access to DWS by eight percentage points and to sanitation by nine points in the project area by 2013. This effort will supplement other ongoing and future operations (SFD sub-programme, WAEMU sub-programme and NGO project Eau Vive–EU, PNDL and IDA Water Facility) so as to significantly narrow the gap in this area.

2.6 Participatory Approach to Project Identification, Design and Implementation 2.6.1 The project was designed using Local Water Management and Sanitation Plans (LWMSP) prepared by rural communities and participatory regional reviews. Through this approach, the investment priorities of the population and local communities were taken into account. With regard to implementation, ASUFORs will be the cornerstone of the construction and management of the structures.

7

2.7 Consideration of Bank Group Experience in Project Design 2.7.1 The Bank was the first development partner of Senegal to finance the implementation of the first PEPAM sub-programme which spanned four years from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2009. This second sub-programme was designed on the basis of the achievements and performance of the first operation, particularly in terms of technical design and efficiency in procurement, disbursement and IEC. It takes into account the lessons learnt and field results which are enriched by exchanges and coordination. Lessons learnt from the first experience were taken into account during appraisal with regard notably to: (i) the separation of IEC activities from those of works monitoring and control; (ii) the technical design and conditions of construction of individual sanitation facilities; and (iii) the breakdown of national counterpart funds in the financing of the sub-programme. 2.8 Key Performance Indicators 2.8.1 A PEPAM monitoring-evaluation system has been put in place with the support of the World Bank. The system will be strengthened by a database which can be accessed through the Internet to track information concerning construction, operation and management. The system will define a set of criteria for assessing the performance of the various sub-programmes implemented at any time. It will thus be used in preparing reports, presenting specific and general outcomes, and making adjustments, where necessary, on the basis of analysis of the information provided. The sub-programme coordination unit will be responsible for this exercise. 2.8.2 The main monitoring-evaluation indicators of the sub-programme are:

(i) Impact indicators: The project will contribute to the achievement of the MDGs of Senegal, notably as regards access to drinking water and sanitation, health and poverty reduction whose indicators are as follows:

− The poverty index drops from 48.5% in 2007 to 30% in 2015; − The infant and child mortality rate is reduced from 121‰ in 2005 to 50‰

in 2015; − The rate of access to drinking water in rural areas rises from 72.4% in 2007

to 82% in 2015; − The rate of access to sanitation in rural areas increases from 17.06% in

2007 to 59% in 2015.

(ii) Outcome indicators: The results linked directly to the implementation of the project are an increase in the rate of access to drinking water and sanitation in the five departments of the programme. The outcome indicators are as follows:

− The rate of access to drinking water in the five departments increases from

37% in 2007 to 45% in 2013;

8

− The rate of access to sanitation in the five departments rises from 17% in 2007 to 26% in 2013.

(iii) Output indicators: The main indicators of outputs ensuing from project

activities in the programme area are as follows:

− The number of power-operated boreholes increases from 373 in 2008 to 456 in 2013;

− The number of water tanks rises from 378 in 2008 to 419 in 2013; − The number of standpipes increases from 2 197 in 2008 to 2 566 in 2013; − The number of individual connections increases from 8 582 in 2008 to 18

582 in 2013; − The number of (improved + traditional) family latrines goes up from 55

458 in 2008 to 66 458 in 2013; − The number of public toilets increases from 1 270 in 2008 to 1 670 in

2013; − The number of ASUFORs rises from 111 in 2008 to 418 in 2013.

III. Project Feasibility

3.1 Economic and Financial Performance

Table 3.1 Key Economic and Financial Data

ERR: 31% Economic analysis NPV: CFAF 43 billion FRR: 6% Financial analysis (ASUFOR type) NPV: CFAF 1.3 billion

NB : Detailed calculations are provided in Annex B7. The improvement of access to drinking water and sanitation, together with a positive change in the attitudes and behaviours of the population to hygiene, will generate significant economic benefits: (i) health benefits resulting from increased life expectancy and savings on medical expenses owing to a reduction in diarrhoea-related mortality and morbidity; indeed, in the programme area, the number of diarrhoea cases is estimated at about 350 000 resulting in the death of about 1 250 children under 5 per year; (ii) economic benefits for education brought about by a 10% drop in the number of pupil-year lost due to absenteeism, school repeating and dropout, the cost of pupil-year is 14% of GDP/inhabitant; (iii) improvement in the female literacy rate due to an increase in school attendance in establishments equipped with adequate sanitary facilities; and (iv) opportunity benefits resulting from time saved by the beneficiaries following the construction of drinking water supply systems near households. Without the project it would take an hour on average to fetch a 25-litre basin of water.

9

3.2 Environmental and Social Impact 3.2.1 Environment. The sub-programme has been classified under environmental and social category 2 in line with Bank guidelines because it is a rural water supply and sanitation project, and also a small-scale water supply and sanitation project in each project site. Negative impacts will be minimal and easily mitigated, while positive impacts on the environment and health will be considerable. Potential negative impacts on each site are minimal (see 1.3 of Annex B8). Since a specific environmental and social impact assessment was not conducted for the programme, a diagnostic and environmental and social management sheet has been prepared and will be used to identify the impacts of the programme on each site and to propose mitigation measures. It will also form part of the programme throughout its implementation and serve as a detailed ESMP specific to each site of the DWS and sanitation system (see 1.2 of Annex B8).

3.2.2 Climate change. The water deficit noted since the early 1970s has, as a result of a drop in the water level of aquifers, led to the early depletion of traditional surface (ponds and rivers) and ground (wells and ceanes) water points. Deep aquifers have also been affected as their static level is decreasing regularly. Consequently, it was necessary to include in the programme a mechanism for monitoring and protecting the deep ground water of Maestrichtien, concerned with the drilling of boreholes, piezometer and measurement networks, identification and protection of aquifer refill zones by elevating them to the status of classified zones and by reinforcing the vegetation cover. 3.2.3 Gender. The implementation of this sub-programme will help to: (i) improve the representation of women and build their leadership capacities through their no less than 30% participation in the management of ASUFORs, and increase their incomes as a result of the recruitment, training and monitoring of 150 female workers in charge of IEC activities and no less than 50% of women out of 369 standpipe managers; (ii) reduce maternal mortality (401 deaths per 100 000 live births during the 1998-2005 period) through the improvement of hygiene; and (iii) improve many aspects of the living conditions of women and girls, particularly personal and social well-being in daily life (intimacy, usability, proximity and safety). In order to ensure better monitoring, the programme will strengthen IEC activities and involve the Ministry in charge of women’s affairs and gender. 3.2.4 Social. Apart from improving the well-being of the population through increased access to drinking water and sanitation, the sub-programme offers an opportunity to create temporary and long-term jobs during its implementation. Indeed, more than 1 000 long-term jobs will be created in ASUFORs: 307 borehole operators and 307 ASUFOR managers, 41 drinking trough managers and 369 standpipe managers. About CFAF 1 billion will be paid in the form of wages to the thousand long-term employees, while a similar amount (CFAF 1 billion) would be paid to temporary workers every year during the implementation of the sub-programme. To take into account the level of poverty of the rural population targeted, this sub-programme has adopted a huge amount of grants. This option addresses the concern to share national wealth among the rural population who still have limited access to various public services. 3.2.5 Forced resettlement. The programme’s structure and the possibility of choosing from many sites for the installation of infrastructure help to avoid affecting the population and their property. Thus, there is no problem of displacement and compensation of populations at the level of the sites of infrastructure to be constructed.

10

IV. Project Implementation

4.1 Implementation Arrangements 4.1.1 Implementation arrangements. The different components of this sub-programme will, like the first, be implemented by the existing PEPAM executing agencies. Thus, the Department of Rural Water Supply (DHR) and the Department of Operations and Maintenance (DEM) will be responsible for supervising the implementation of the drinking water component. The Department of Sanitation (DAS) will supervise the sanitation component. The Department of Water Resources Management and Planning (DGPRE) will monitor water resources. The SCU will ensure the coordination and administrative and financial management of the project. The implementation of the first sub-programme showed the proven capacity of various technical departments to efficiently execute all PEPAM activities. 4.1.2 Procurement arrangements. All procurements of goods, works and consultancy services financed with Bank resources shall be in accordance with the Bank’s Rules of Procedure for Procurement of Goods and Works or, as appropriate, Rules of Procedure for the Use of Consultants, using the appropriate Bank standard bidding documents. The executing agencies (SCU, DHR, DAS and DEM) will be responsible for the procurement of goods/works/services, consultancy services, training and others (where applicable) as described in detail in Annex B5. The resources, capacities, expertise and experience of these executing agencies are presented in detail in Annex B5. The procurement plan is presented in Annex B5. 4.1.3 Disbursement arrangements. There will be three methods of disbursement: (i) special account, (ii) direct payment and (iii) reimbursement, as necessary. The special account which will be opened by the DDI in a commercial bank acceptable to the ADF will receive ADF loan resources earmarked for operating expenses, support for structures involved in the sub-programme, family sanitation works, individual connections and part of studies included in the technical assistance and audit fund. It will receive an initial deposit on the basis of a six-month activity expenditure programme approved beforehand by the Bank. and replenished periodically upon the presentation of a request and justification of the use of at least 50% of previous funds transferred, in accordance with the Bank’s procedures. The Bank will use the direct payment method for major contracts relating to: (i) borehole drilling works, construction of structures and DWS networks, supply and laying of pumping equipment, and building of public latrines, (ii) consultancy services for the control and supervision of works and for promotion/sensitization (IEC campaigns for drinking water and sanitation), and (iii) part of studies included in the technical assistance and audit fund. 4.1.4 Financial management. The evaluation of the financial management of SCU shows that the provisions adopted in this area for the implementation of the project meet the minimum requirements of the Bank. The SCU already has a private commitment accounting system in line with the OHADA system and adapted to the specificities of the project. It has an accounting software that facilitates the processing of accounting operations and preparation of financial statements in accordance with approved comprehensive TOR. The administrative, financial and accounting procedures manual was prepared during the implementation of the first sub-programme and defines the powers and responsibilities of each stakeholder in the project, and particularly the internal audit mechanism. The SCU already has the necessary data-processing equipment and an efficient financial and accounting service.

11

4.1.5 Audit arrangements. An audit firm will be recruited to conduct the annual audit of the accounts of the sub-programme. The audit reports and audited financial statements will be submitted to the Bank not later than six months following the close of each financial year. 4.2 Monitoring 4.2.1 The physical implementation of the project will cover 48 months, from July 2009 to June 2013. This schedule is deemed to be reasonable given the traditional nature of the works and the experience acquired by PEPAM in the execution of similar works. The various structures that will be constructed under the project will be commissioned as they are completed. PEPAM executing agencies, placed under the coordination of the SCU, will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the project. The SCU will produce quarterly reports on the implementation status of the project, in line with the method of presentation recommended by the Bank. These reports will evaluate notably the status of the project, expenditure, commitments and disbursements by component and source of finance, major problems as well as proposed solutions. They will also highlight the outcomes and impacts obtained progressively. 4.2.2 Environmental and social monitoring is an integral part of the environmental and social diagnostic sheet. This will be carried out during the implementation of the programme on each site. It comprises several types of measures: (a) monitoring of the effective implementation of the mitigation measures recommended for the programme and recommendations of the initial diagnosis; (b) monitoring of the effectiveness of mitigation measures implemented; (c) identification and management of unforeseen negative impacts and implementation of adequate solutions; (d) decisions relating to the adjustment/reorientation of mitigation measures or proposal of new measures. 4.2.3 The project implementation will be monitored by the Bank through Bank supervision missions in close collaboration with the Senegal Regional Office (SNFO), and on the basis of PEPAM progress reports and financial statements. At the end of the project, the SCU will prepare a project completion report. Subsequently, the Bank will prepare the project completion report and performance evaluation report. 4.2.4 The detailed project implementation schedule is presented at the beginning of the report. The completion of the project is scheduled for June 2013. The provisional project implementation schedule is summarized as follows:

12

Duration Phases Monitoring activities

Early 2009 2009 2009 2010 2010/2012 2013 2014

Approval of loan Preparation and launching of invitations to bid Evaluation of bids Award of contracts Execution of activities PEPAM completion report ADB completion report

Board of Directors of the Bank Preparation by PEPAM executing agencies and verification by the Bank (as appropriate) Preparation by PEPAM executing agencies and verification by the Bank (as appropriate) Preparation by PEPAM executing agencies and verification by the Bank (as appropriate) Carried out by companies and verified by PEPAM executing agencies and the control bureau Preparation by PEPAM Preparation by the Bank

4.3 Governance 4.3.1 The experience of the first sub-programme shows that there are no governance problems. Moreover, the SCU has an efficient accounting system. However, all measures have been taken to ensure compliance with Bank procurement and disbursement rules and procedures to guarantee rapidity and transparency. The use of an administrative and financial procedures manual from the start-up of the project, as well as supervision and monitoring by the Senegal Regional Office (SNFO) could strengthen good governance in the management of the project. 4.4 Sustainability 4.4.1 The sustainability of the benefits of the project’s drinking water sub-component is based on sound facility and equipment management and maintenance. To mitigate this risk, the project is responsible for the training and setting up of associations of borehole users (ASUFOR), and seeks to ensure sustainable maintenance by supporting the transfer of the maintenance of rural power-operated boreholes to private operators under the responsibility of DEM and ASUFORs. It should be noted that the second sub-programme will help to significantly strengthen ASUFORs and the gradual involvement of private operators throughout the southern part of Senegal. This will contribute to the overall effort made by all partners in this domain. Furthermore, the environmental and social assessment and implementation of mitigation measures also seek to enhance the sustainability and maximization of project outcomes. 4.4.2 With regard to the sanitation component, the attitudes and behaviours of the population with regard to proper hygiene will ensure the sustainability of the benefits of family sanitation systems and their generalization. Plans have also been made to conduct a study on a sanitation strategy so as to select, in particular, the technology for family latrines that is best adapted to the socio-economic context of the Senegalese rural areas in order to promote their sustainability and generalization.

13

4.4.3 To mitigate the risk of abandonment of project facilities by the population and a return to the consumption of water from wells and non-protected sources despite the high risks of diseases, the project will conduct IEC campaigns to raise awareness and promote ownership of the aforesaid facilities by the population. 4.5 Risk Management 4.5.1 To mitigate the risk related to limited capacities of local enterprises noted during the implementation of the first sub-programme, it is recommended that dialogue between the Government and the national private sector should be reinforced to enable the latter to better assume its responsibilities when submitting its bids so as to better meet time limits and quality requirements. Furthermore, better allocation, increased requirements with regard to the financial and technical capacities of enterprises in bidding documents, a sound contract execution monitoring mechanism and keen attention to good governance should help to mitigate such risk during the second sub-programme. 4.5.2 As regards the risk related to real constraints on the mobilization of Government counterpart funds noted during the first sub-programme, the Government will undertake during the signing of agreements related to this sub-programme, to settle, no later than 31 December 2009, all arrears of payment owed enterprises as the counterpart funds of the first sub-programme. 4.6 Knowledge Development 4.6.1 The implementation of this sub-programme will strengthen and build on the experience of Senegalese and Bank executing agencies, particularly with regard to the construction and operation of multi-village drinking water supply structures that use power-operated boreholes, as well as the choice of appropriate technology for family sanitation. The lessons and experience drawn from the project will inspire the design of other projects in the sector in the future. They will be shared within the Bank and with the various development partners of Senegal through information-exchange and consultation meetings, annual PEPAM review, the African Water Week, etc.

V. Legal Framework 5.1 Legal Instrument An ADF loan will be used to finance this sub-programme. 5.2 Conditions for Bank Involvement 5.2.1 Commitments. (i) Undertake to clear, no later than 31 December 2009, all arrears of payment owed to enterprises as counterpart funds of the first phase; (ii) Provide the Fund with the commitment to reappoint and maintain the senior staff of the existing Coordination Unit. 5.2.2 Conditions precedent to loan effectiveness. The effectiveness of the loan agreement shall be subject to fulfilment by the Borrower of the conditions specified in Section 5.0.1 of the General Conditions (in particular the provision of a legal opinion issued by the competent authority).

14

5.2.3 Conditions precedent to the first disbursement. The Fund shall make the first disbursement of loan resources only if the Borrower, in addition to effectiveness of the loan agreement, fulfils, to the satisfaction of the Fund, the following conditions: (i) Provide the Fund with evidence of the opening by the Debt and Investment Department (DDI) of a special account in a commercial bank acceptable to the Fund to receive the resources of the loan intended for community works, institutional support, sub-programme audit, operation of the Sub-programme Coordination Unit and for part of studies included in the technical assistance fund; (ii) Provide the Fund with evidence of the appointment of the national and regional counterparts (DHR, DGPRE, DAS and DEM) including their respective CVs. 5.2.4 Other conditions. (i) Provide evidence of the implementation, no later than 31 December 2010, of the conclusions of the study on the rural sanitation strategy; (ii) Provide evidence of the settlement, no later than 31 December 2009, of all arrears of payment owed enterprises as the counterpart funds of the first phase; (iii) Provide the Fund, no later than 31 July 2009, with evidence of alignment of the manual of administrative and financial management procedures, already operational during the first phase, with the new provisions agreed upon, notably for the implementation of the “family sanitation” component. 5.3 Compliance with Bank Policies This project is in line with all of the Bank’s applicable policies.

VI. RECOMMENDATION

Management recommends that the Board of Directors should approve the proposal for an ADF loan of UA 30 million to the Government of Senegal for the purpose and in accordance with the conditions set out in this report.

Annex I

Annex II Table of ADB Portfolio in the Country

Ongoing Operations of the Bank Group in Senegal as at 31/12/2008 No. Operations Sector Amount (UA) Approv. Date Closing Date Amount Disbur. Disb. Rate Co-financing

► Rural Sector 1 Livestock Support Project - Phase II (PAPEL II) Livestock 10 000 000 17/05/2000 30/12/2008 9 796 198 97.96 2 Anambé Rural Development Project (PADERBA) Agriculture 7 180 000 25/04/2001 31/12/2008 4 856 820 67.64 3 Community Roads Project (PPC/PNIR) Rural roads 11 852 000 03/04/2002 30/12/2008 11 134 949 93.95 OPEC 4 Local Small-scale Irrigation Project (PAPIL) Irrigation 14 310 000 22/10/2003 31/12/2010 4 240 913 29.64 5 Casamance Rural Development Project (PADERCA) Agriculture 20 000 000 19/10/2005 21/12/2012 1 629 669 8.15 Total Rural Sector 63 342 000 31 658 549 49.98 ► Social Sector 6 Health Project II (loan) Health 10 000 000 18/06/2003 31/12/2009 4 336 781 43.37 Health Project II (grant) Health 1 350 000 18/06/2003 31/12/2009 759 675 56.27 7 Education Project IV (loan) Education 13 840 000 25/06/2003 31/12/2009 4 510 637 32.59 Education Project IV (grant) Education 1 000 000 25/06/2003 31/12/2009 443 060 44.31 Total Social Sector 26 190 000 10 050 152 38.37 ► Water and Sanitation Sector 8 Dakar City Sanitation Project (PAVD) Sanitation. 11 930 000 12/07/2001 30/12/2008 11 141 760 93.39 9 1st DWSS Sub-Programme Initiative DWS / Sanitat. 25 000 000 21/09/2005 31/12/2011 16 267 721 65.07 10 Ziguinchor Sanitation Study (fin. FAE) Sanitation 844 816 22/12/2006 31/05/2009 421 023 49.84 11 Implementation of PAGIRE in Senegal (fin. FAE) Water 1 427 603 31/08/2007 30/11/2009 885 475 62.03 Total Water and Sanitation 39 202 419 28 715 980 73.25 ► Infrastructure Sector

12 Rural Electrification Project Energy 9 580 000 13/10/2004 31/12/2010 59 169 0.62 Concess. 13 Road Maintenance Project (RMP) Transportation 29 000 000 29/06/2005 31/12/2009 11 630 009 40.10 Total Infrastructures 38 580 000 11 689 178 30.30 ► Multi-sector Governance

14 Department of Statistics Support Project (grant) Multi-sector 1 550 000,00 12/12/2002 31/12/2008 828 165,49 53.43 15 Cadastral Survey Modernization Project (grant) Multi-sector 2 500 000 22/04/2005 31/12/2009 1 852 386 74.10 16 Poverty Reduction Strategy Support Project Multi-sector 30 000 000 22/12/2008 31/12/2010 20 000 000 66.67

Total Multi-sector Governance 34 050 000 22 680 552 66.61 16 ► ► Total Portfolio in Senegal 201 364 419 104 794 411 52.04

Annex III Major Related Projects Financed by the Bank

and other Development Partners of the Country RURAL PEPAM

Operations Donors CFAF M Category Status % totalLouga/Kolda/Ziguinchor Sub-programme ADB Phase I 20 000 Loan Implement 20,0%

Kaffrine/Tamba/Kolda/Sédhiou/Ziguinchor Sub-prog ADB Phase II 23 000 Loan Preparation 23,0%Kaolack/Tambacounda Sub-programme Saudi Fund 2 500 Grant Implement 2,5%AEP Touba Sub-programme IsDB 6 380 Loan Implement 6,4%Kaolack/Fatick/Diourbel Sub-programme Belgium 7 800 Grant Implement 7,8%Thiès/Louga Sub-programme Luxembourg 9 800 Grant Implement 9,8%Thiès/Saint-Louis/Matam Sub-programme IDA 18 273 Loan Preparation 18,3%WAEMU Sub-programme WAEMU 2 700 Grant Implement 2,7%SEN012 - Rallonge 2 Sub-programme Luxembourg 2 200 Grant Implement 2,2%BIDC India 6 916 Loan Preparation 6,9%Spanish Fund Spain 525 plement 0,5%

Total CFAF M 100,0%

Water Supply and Sanitation Water

100 094

PEPAM URBAN WATER SUPPLY

Operations Donors CFAF M Category Status % totalWADB 8 500 Loan Implement 20,4%AFD 13 120 Grant Implemnt 31,4%EIB 9 840 Loan Implement 23,6%FUE 5 707 Grant Implement 13,7%SONES 1 000 RP* Implement 2,4%

PEPAM-IDA Sub-programme IDA 3 600 Loan Preparation 8,6%Total CFAF M 41 767 100,0%

Investment Plan

PEPAM URBAN SANITATION

Operations Donors CFAF M Category Status % totalCompletion of PLT projects PAQPUD, Social connections, Extension of STEP of Camberene, Drainage of plots, Drainage of the village of Camberene

World Bank 9 800 Implementatio 9%

Completion of drainage works in the village of IsDB 1 600 Implement 1%Autonomous Sanitation Programme IDA 2 700 Implement 2%Drainage of the city of Diourbel ABEDA 3 658 Implement 3%Drainage of Darou neighbourhood in Saint Louis Belgium 2 626 implement 2%drainage of wastewater in the city of Touba Internal BCI 13 000 Implement 12%Construction of a new drainage channel in EU 4 600 Implement 4%Second phase of drainage of the city of Louga ABEDA 2 000 implement 2%

Drainage of the Bite of Hann and drainage of Canal 6

AFD/EIB 32 800 Preparation 30%

Drainage of wastewater in Tivaouane, Mbour, Mbacké, Richard Toll and Diourbel EU

27 000 Preparation24%

Drainage of wastewater of the city of Tambacounda

ABEDA 5 000 Preparation 5%

Drainage of Louga Phase 2 Component 2B WADB 2 000 Preparation 2%Drainage of Joal Fadiouth IDA 4 253 Preparation 4%

Total CFAF M 111 037 100%

Annex IV Map of Project Area