AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP

SIERRA LEONE

MANO RIVER UNION

REHABILITATION OF BO-BANDAJUMA ROAD PROJECT

OITC DEPARTMENT

December 2015

Pu

bli

c D

iscl

osu

re A

uth

ori

zed

Pu

bli

c D

iscl

osu

re A

uth

ori

zed

Contents 1. STRATEGIC THRUST & RATIONALE ...................................................................... 1

1.1. Project linkages with country strategy and objectives .................................................... 1

1.2. Rationale for Bank’s involvement .................................................................................. 2 1.3. Donor Coordination ........................................................................................................ 3

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 3 2.1. Development Objectives ................................................................................................. 3

2.2 Project components ......................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Technical solution retained and other alternatives explored ........................................... 4 2.4 Project type ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.5 Project cost and financing arrangements ........................................................................ 6 2.6 Project’s target area and population ................................................................................ 7

2.7 Participatory process for project identification, design and implementation ................. 7

2.8 Bank Group experience, lessons reflected in project design .......................................... 8 2.9 Key performance indicators ............................................................................................ 9

3. ROJECT FEASIBILITY ................................................................................................. 9 3.1. Economic performance ................................................................................................... 9

3.2. Environmental and Social impacts................................................................................ 10 Climate Change ............................................................................................................. 10

Gender ........................................................................................................................... 10

Social ............................................................................................................................. 11 Inclusive Growth ........................................................................................................... 13

Involuntary resettlement ................................................................................................ 13

4. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................... 13

4.1. Implementation arrangements ....................................................................................... 13

4.2. Monitoring .................................................................................................................... 15 4.3. Governance ................................................................................................................... 16 4.4. Risk management .......................................................................................................... 16 4.5. Knowledge building ...................................................................................................... 18

5. LEGAL INSTRUMENTS AND AUTHORITY .......................................................... 19 5.1. Legal instrument ........................................................................................................... 19 5.2. Conditions associated with Bank’s intervention ........................................................... 19 5.3. Compliance with Bank Policies .................................................................................... 20

6. RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................................ 20

Appendix I : Country’s comparative socio-economic indicators .............................................I

Appendix II : Table of ADB’s portfolio in the countries .......................................................... II Appendix III: Key related projects financed by the Bank and other development partners in

the country ............................................................................................................................... III

Appendix IV: Map of the Project Area ................................................................................... IV

i

Currency Equivalents As of 31 October 2015

1 Unit of Account = 7,7429.42731 Sierra Leone_Leone

1 Unit of Account = 1.40374 United States Dollars

1 USD = 5,292.595 Sierra Leone_Leone

Fiscal Year

1st January – 31st December

Weights and Measures

1 metric tonne = 2204 pounds (lbs)

1 kilogramme (kg) = 2.200 lbs

1 metre (m) = 3.28 feet (ft)

1 millimetre (mm) = 0.03937 inch (“)

1 kilometre (km) = 0.62 mile

1 hectare (ha) = 2.471 acres

ii

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic MRU

NGO

Mano River Union

Non-Governmental Organization

ADF African Development Fund

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome OFID OPEC Fund For International Development

A4P Agenda for Prosperity NPV Net Present Value

AfDB African Development Bank PAP

PAR

Project Affected People

Project Appraisal Report

BADEA Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa PBA Performance-based Allocation

CPIA

CPR

CSP

Country Political and Institutional Assessment

Country Strategy Paper

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States PDO Project Development Objectives

EDF European Development Fund PCN Project Concept Note

EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return PFMU Project Financial Management Unit

PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment OFID OPEC Fund for International Development

ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan QCBS Quality and Cost Based Selection

EU The Commission of European Union QPR Quarterly Progress Report

EVD Ebola Virus Diseases RAP Resettlement Action Plan

FS Feasibility Study RED Road Economic Decision Model

GDP Gross Domestic Product RISP Regional Integration Strategy Paper

GoSL Government of Sierra Leone ROW Right of Way

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus RMFA Road Management Fund Administration

IDB Islamic Development Bank SLRA Sierra Leone Roads Authority

ICB International Competitive Bidding SLRSA Sierra Leone Roads Safety Authority

ITPSIS Integrated Transport Policy, Strategy and

Investment Strategy

SDF Saudi Fund for Development

STI Sexually Transmitted Infection

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency TAH Trans-African Highway

KFAED Kuwait Fund for Arab Economic Development TSF Transition Support Facility

LCS Least Cost Selection method TOR Terms of Reference

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation TA Technical Assistance

MOFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development UA Unit of Account

MoWHI Ministry of Works Housing & Infrastructure VOC Vehicle Operating Costs

WB World Bank

iii

Loan Information

Client’s information

BORROWER: GOVERNMENT OF SIERRA LEONE

EXECUTING AGENCY: SIERRA LEONE ROADS AUTHORITY

Financing plan

Source Amount (UA) Instrument

ADF – TSF 3.71 Loan

ADF - PBA 3.23 Loan

OPEC Fund For International Development (OFID) 14.24 Loan

Sierra Leone Government (GoSL) 2.66 Counterpart Funds

Total Cost 23.84

ADF key financing information

Loan currency Units of account

Interest type* Not Applicable

Interest rate spread* Not Applicable

Commitment fee* 0.5% per annum on the un-disbursed loan

balance

Service Charge 0.75% on the amount disbursed and outstanding

Other fees* Not Applicable

Tenor 50 years

Grace period 10 years

EIRR, NPV (base case) 21.5%, USD 15.744 million

*if applicable

OFID key financing information

Maturity 20 years

Grace Period 5 years

Interest Rate 1% p.a ***

Service Charge 1% p.a ***

*** on amounts withdrawn and outstanding

Timeframe - Main Milestones (expected)

ADF OFID

Concept Note approval September, 2015

Project approval December 2015 December 2015

Effectiveness March 2016

Last Disbursement December, 2019

Completion December, 2018

Last repayment March, 2065

iv

Project Summary

Project Overview The project will involve rehabilitation of the Bo-Bandajuma road at an estimated total cost of

UA23.84 million. Project Funding is from ADF13 (Transition Support Facility (TSF) Loan of

UA 3.71 million and PBA Loan UA 3.23 million) and OPEC Fund For International

Development (OFID) Loan of UA 14.24 million and Government of Sierra Leone Counterpart

Funding (Contribution of UA 1.43 million and PAPs compensation of UA 1.23 million). The

Project components include: (i) Infrastructure investments comprising the rehabilitation of Bo-

Bandajuma road (46km),, three (3) studies for the construction of Kailahum-Koindu-Guinea

border road, a pre-feasibility for rehabilitation of the Mano River Union Bridge and a study for

the identification of trade facilitation needs on the MRU corridors; (ii) Project Management

(Implementation Support, Financial and Technical Audits, Monitoring and Evaluation); and

(iii) Cross cutting and Complementary Components (Compensation of PAPs and Awareness

Campaigns on HIV/AIDS, Malaria, Ebola, Gender Sensitization and Road Safety). The

beneficiaries include the local communities within the road zone of influence, which is

expected to benefit from the project through provision of reliable access to socio-economic

facilities including schools, markets and health centers which in turn should boost the local

economy and contribute to poverty alleviation. The road will also serve international traffic

within ECOWAS/Mano River Union Region (Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone), and will thus

contribute to regional integration.

Needs Assessment The Project road is a critical link of national and regional importance linking the south eastern

parts of the country and regionally to neighboring MRU member states and ECOWAS. The

road passes through one of the areas that was severely affected by the Ebola Virus Disease

(EVD) Crisis and will aide in the post recovery period in delivery and provision of access to

social-economic services. The project fits well with the country’s development agenda

(Agenda for Prosperity) and is in line with Bank’s Ten Year Strategy and Country Strategy

Paper (CSP, 2013-2017). As a fragile state in transition Sierra Leone still requires the much

needed support to finance infrastructure to boost its post conflict recovery efforts.

Bank’s Value Added The Bank has wide experience in financing a range of infrastructure in Africa and particularly

in challenging fragile state environments such as Sierra Leone and is thus preeminently placed

to assist Government of Sierra Leone to satisfactorily implement this project. The Bank’s added

value is twofold: firstly the Bank’s wealth of experience in delivering the projects across Africa

will be applied; and secondly the Bank has retained the trust of co-operating partners (OFID)

to manage a significant co-financing instrument for the project.

Knowledge Management Through this project the Bank continues to increase and consolidate its knowledge on working

in Fragile States. Additional knowledge has been accumulated during the design phase and will

continue to be consolidated during implementation. During design the Bank engaged the

sponsor, client and consultant to advice on study outputs that supported the project’s

bankability and resulted in timely provision of financing by the Bank and its partners. The Bank

has gathered further knowledge on mobilising and leveraging substantial co-financing

instruments for the project. During implementation the monitoring and evaluation components

as well as awareness campaigns will provide opportunities for further knowledge

accumulation. The project will provide specific valuable lessons on how provision of reliable

transport infrastructure will affect the EVD Post recovery efforts. All these efforts will

facilitate Bank and GoSL to improve project design and implementation activities that are not

only unique to fragile states but other operations across the Bank’s portfolio.

v

RESULTS BASED LOGIC FRAMEWORK Country and project name: Mano River Union, Rehabilitation of Bo-Bandajuma Road Project, Sierra Leone

Purpose of the project: Support Sierra Leone’s economic growth agenda through development of strategic transport infrastructure that significantly contribute to its poverty reduction strategy.

RESULTS CHAIN

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

MEANS OF VERIFICATION RISKS/MITIGATION MEASURES Indicator

(including CSI)

Baseline

2015

Target

2020

IMP

AC

T

Impact

Contribute to improved socio-economic

development in the project’s zone of

influence.

Incidence of Poverty (%)

51%

47%

National Statistics from: Ministry

of Finance (MoFED)

OU

TC

OM

ES

Outcome 1

Reduced transport costs

Vehicle Operating Costs

(Cost/veh-km)

US$ 0.34/veh-km reduced by 25% SLRA, Monitoring & Evaluation

Report

Risks: (i) Axle Load Control may not be

implemented and (ii) poor road maintenance

practices. Mitigation Measures: (i) GoSL

has drafted Axle load Control Policy and is

working on an institutional framework; and;

(ii) GoSL maintenance funds are increasing

annually and other forms of financing like

PPPs are actively being pursued.

Average Travel Time

between Bo – Bandajuma

(Hours)

1.0 hour 35 minutes (21 % reduction) By inspection / Driver Interviews

( SLRA), Monitoring and

evaluation Report

Taxi Passenger fares

between Bo -Bandajuma

US$ 2 Reduced by 10%

Monitoring & Evaluation Report

National Statistics reports from

Ministry of Finance Outcome 2

Temporary and permanent jobs

generated

No. people employed (%

female, % youth)

No jobs 500 No. temporary jobs and 300

permanent jobs generated (at least

30% female, at least 20% youth)

Outcome 3

Contribute to higher yields of palm oil

smallholder producers

Hectares of palm oil

produced

4500 hectares Increased by 1000 hectares

OU

TP

UT

S

Infrastructure Investments (i) Road between Bo and

Bandajuma rehabilitated

(ii) Studies conducted

(iii) Social infrastructure

constructed

(iv) Engineering graduates supported

through internships to develop skills

in road maintenance and construction

(i) Km

(ii) Studies

(iii) Market, Boreholes +

pumps

(iv) Graduates trained

0km

No Studies

No markets,

Boreholes + pumps

No graduates trained

(i) 46 Km

(ii) 3 studies

(iii) 1 Market, 2 Boreholes +

pumps

(iv) 20 internship for graduate

engineers trained in road

maintenance and

construction (50% women)

By inspection / Substantial

completion of works (SLRA)

Quarterly Progress Reports

Risks: (i) cost over-runs; (ii) project control;

and (iii) erratic payments of counterpart

funds; Mitigation: (i) provision of adequate

contingencies; (ii) engage competent

contractor and supervisor; technical audit;

provision of adequate client logistics support

to carry out project supervision; and (iii)

Government has provided comfort letter to

pay counterpart funds. Overall the project

management component will contribute to

project control.

ESMP/RAP Implemented:

(i) ESMP Implementation

(ii) PAPs compensated

(iii) Awareness campaigns

(i) ESMP implemented

(ii) Households Compensated

(ii) Communities Sensitized

Nil

Nil

Nil

(i) ESMP quarterly reports provided

(ii) 295 Households compensated

(iii) 13 communities sensitized

-Project quarterly progress reports

-Quarterly ESMP Compliance

Monitoring Report

Risks: (i) delay in payment of

compensation of PAPs;

Mitigation: (i) GoSL committed to pay

compensation of PAPs through budget

commitment.

KE

Y A

CT

IVIT

IES

COMPONENTS INPUTS

Component 1: Infrastructure Investments : Rehabilitation of Bo-Bandajuma road & ESMP, Supervision of Works ,

Studies on Trade Facilitation Needs on MRU corridors, Kailahum Koindu Guinean Border & Pre-feasibility for rehabilitation of the

Mano River Bridge

Component 2: Project Management (Project Implementation Support, Financial &Technical Audits, Monitoring and Evaluation)

Component 3: Cross cutting and complementary : Compensation of PAPs, Awareness Campaigns ( HIV/AIDS , Malaria, Ebola,

Gender Sensitisation, Road Safety)

Budget (UA Million)

Component 1 18.16

Component 2 0.59

Component 3 1.13

Contingencies 3.96

Total 23.84

Financing Plan (UA Million)

ADF TSF Loan 3.71 15%

ADF PBA Loan 3.23 14%

OFID 14.24 60%

GoSL Counterpart Fund 1.43 6%

GoSL PAPs Compensation 1.23 5%

Total 23.84 100%

vi

PROJECT TIME FRAME

1

Report and Recommendation of the Management of the ADB Group to the BoardS of

Directors on a Proposed Loans to the Republic of Sierra Leone

Management submits the following Report and Recommendation on a proposed Loan of

UA 3.23 million of PBA and UA 3.71 million of TSF to the Republic of Sierra Leone.

1. STRATEGIC THRUST & RATIONALE

1.1. Project linkages with country strategy and objectives

1.1.1 Sierra Leone’s Agenda for Prosperity: Sierra Leone has been through a challenging

security situation of a decade long civil conflict that destroyed the country’s social and physical

fabric of society. Beyond the conflict, the country continues its difficult path towards socio-

economic recovery. Growth has been resilient and well established over the past 5-10 years

averaging above 5% wedged by buoyant revenues from extractive industries and growing

business confidence. This has, however, been amidst continuing development challenges

including more recently the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) crisis that to ravaged the country with

the possibility of negating past economic gains. The country remains among the poorest in the

world and needs to do more to generate wealth that would have significant impacts on poverty.

Sierra Leone’s Country development agenda is pinned on the Agenda for Prosperity 2013-18

(A4P) that outlines key development strategies. The A4P was launched in 2013 and has eight

(8) pillars namely; economic diversification, managing natural resources, accelerating human

development, promoting international competiveness, labour and employment, social

protection, governance and public sector reform and gender equality and women’s

empowerment. Through Pillar 4 the A4P has identified strengthening road infrastructure

among core sectors that would contribute to lowering the cost of business as well as promoting

competiveness of the economy. Though roads account for over 80% of passenger and freight

traffic only about 10%1 of the road network estimated at 11,500 km is paved and only 21%2 of

rural population (60% of the country population) resides within two (2) kilometres of an all-

weather road. These compounded effects ultimately result in high transaction costs and poor

competiveness of the economy particularly for the people residing in rural communities that

depend on agriculture for their livelihoods.

1.1.2 Strategic link between the project and Sierra Leone’s development objective:

Though Sierra Leone is endowed with a wealth of fertile land suitable for agriculture much of

the activity is concentrated in the north while the south east remains unexploited due to poor

transport connectivity that presently is not adequate to support agriculture productivity.

Located in south-east of the country, the section of road between Bo-Bandajuma thus holds

immense potential to open up the region. The road is not only of national importance but

regionally is also part of the Trans-African Highway (TAH) 7, from Lagos-Nouakchott

providing the main connection between Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. The road passes

through Bo, the country’s second largest town and continues southerly to a small chiefdom

community called Bandajuma. Beyond Bandajuma, the section of road is adjacent to the TAH-

7 only missing link between Bandajuma to Mano River Union Bridge at the Liberia Border.

1.1.3 The project road pavement has been resilient over its service period of over 25 years

though its deterioration is now accelerating with the possibility that the road will reach terminal

serviceability within two (2) years. Already sections of approximately 2km have failed and will

require total reconstruction and if timely intervention on the rest of the section of 44 km is

1 Compared to about 12% for Sub-Sharan African and 82% for Middle Income Countries (The Little Data Book on Africa

2010 and AICD, 2010) 2 Compared to at least 31% for middle income countries (AICD Road Sector Database on 40 Sub-Saharan Countries, 2010)

2

delayed, costlier solutions including full reconstruction will be required. The collective

intervention of government with support of the Bank is therefore timely as it seeks to ensure

that the residue value on the fair section of road is efficiently used to preserve the asset and

would result in significant savings of road user costs.

1.1.4 Nation-wide, the Bo-Bandajuma road (46 km) provides access to the southern region

district towns of Bo (second largest City after Freetown) and Pujehun. The road plays an

important role in the delivery of social services and at the peak of the Ebola Virus Disease

crisis, it provided a life line for transportation of emergency supplies as well as patients

between established treatment centres, samples to laboratories, communication alerts and

information campaigns. This section of road corridor has considerable agriculture potential in

rubber, palm oil, citrus fruits, horticultural produce and rice. Despite potential of good yields,

the condition of road obliges farmers to avoid agriculture investments in perishables such as

tomatoes, eggplant, cumber, melons and others since the region is cut off during the rainy

season.

1.1.5 Sierra Leone is a member of the Economic Community of West African States

(ECOWAS) and Mano River Union (MRU). Both RECs advocate for the realisation of reliable

regional road connectivity among its member states to promote growth of trade markets and

unlock economic potential in agriculture, mining and other sectors. Despites its strategic

regional importance, the section of the TAH7 in Sierra Leone, has not been maximised to its

full potential due the deteriorating road conditions between Bo-Bandajuma, the adjacent

missing link between Bandajuma to MRU Bridge as well as lack of a bridge over the Moa

River that forces traffic to divert to a longer route through Kanema. The construction of the

missing link with committed financing from the European Union and the rehabilitation of the

deteriorating section under this project will however ensure that the section of the corridor

between Bo - MRU Bridge is maximised to its full regional and national potential that will

result in trans-national social and economic benefits. The project will specifically contribute

to the EVD recovery effort by providing an efficient transport link to social services

1.2. Rationale for Bank’s involvement

1.2.1 The proposed project addresses key development objectives outlined in the country

development agenda, the A4P. The project is in line with the Bank’s Ten Year Strategy twin

objectives that promotes inclusivity through development of infrastructure as a key priority

area and promotion of green growth through development of sustainable infrastructure. The

project also supports the country’s CSP (2013-17), Pillar 2 (Supporting Transformational and

Sustainable Infrastructure Development), specifically Sub-Pillar 2 (Expanded Transport/

Roads Infrastructure and Enhanced Operation and Maintenance) and Pillar 1, Sub-pillar 3

(Improving Business Enabling Environment). The project is also in line with the Bank’s West

African Regional Integration Strategy Paper (RISP) 2011-2015, whose first pillar seeks to

invest in missing links on the Trans-African Highway Corridors.

1.2.2 The Bank will use its wealth of experience and leadership in delivering projects in

similar fragile state environments to leverage the project. In spite of limitations in country’s

financing instruments the Bank’s determination to support the project has resulted in

mobilising significant amounts of co-financing instruments for which the cooperating partners

have retained the Bank’s ability and trust to manage.

1.2.3 The Bank’s intervention complements the planned upgrading of the TAH missing link

between Bandajuma-Zimmi-MRU Bridge that is to be financed by the EU. This simultaneous

3

financing of the two sections on the TAH-7 corridor demonstrates close collaborative

initiatives among Development Partners (DPs) and has the common goal of ensuring

development of viable and sustainable infrastructure that promotes seamless and efficient flow

of traffic.

1.3. Donor Coordination

1.3.1 Donor coordination in the road transport sector has formally been conducted through a

road transport thematic group that has not been active since 2013. The Bank and EU

Commission are committed to revive the group and commence meetings before the end of

2015. The Government, however, has several instruments to manage aid coordination broadly,

including a Development Partners (DP) group, which meets quarterly. The Government

through its Development Assistance Coordination Office (DACO) oversees donor coordination

and promotes a division of labor amongst DPs which reflects comparative advantages and

which guides the closing of strategic funding gaps. The Sierra Leone Roads Authority (SLRA)

under the supervision of the Ministry of Works Housing and Infrastructure ensure

harmonization of project prioritization and implementation in line with the national

development agenda in the A4P. The Mano River Union (MRU) Secretariat in Sierra Leone

works with Government and other Development Partners promoting regional integration within

the MRU. Their activities focus on mobilizing resources for regional roads within the MRU,

Sierra Leone inclusive. The Road Transport sector in Sierra Leone is currently supported by

the African Development Bank (AfDB), the European Union (EU), OPEC Fund for

International Development (OFID), Saudi Fund for Development (SDF), Islamic Development

Bank (IDB), Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa (BADEA), Kuwait Fund for

Arab Economic Development (KFAED) and Abu Dhabi Fund. The World Bank (WB),

currently, has no on-going infrastructure project in the transport sector but is active in policy

dialogue and sector reform issues and recently supported Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL)

in the preparation of an Integrated Transport Policy Strategy and Investment Plan, an Urban

Transport Policy and Mobility Plan for Greater Freetown.

Table 1.1: Donor Coordination

Players – Public Annual Expenditure (Average)

Government Donors EU 87.1%

AfDB 6.1%

OFID 2.6%

IsDB 2.6%

BADEA 1.0%

Others 0.6%

69.9%

30.1%

Level of Donor Coordination

Existence of Thematic working Group Yes

Existence of SWAPs or Integrated Sector approaches No

ADB’s involvement in donor group M

*** L: leader, M: member but not leader, none: no involvement

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1. Development Objectives

2.1.1 The overall goal of the project is to support Sierra Leone’s economic growth agenda

through development of strategic transport infrastructure that significantly contribute to its

poverty reduction strategy.

4

2.1.2 The objectives of the Project are to provide efficient nation-wide road transport access

to the southern districts of Bo and Pujehun and regionally to the Mano River Union Member

States and ECOWAS as a whole. The Project is expected to improve the living conditions of

the communities in the project’s zone of influence. The expected outcomes include: (a) reduced

transport costs and travel time; (b) enhanced potential for agriculture development thereby

contributing to poverty reduction among communities along the corridor; and (c) improved

access to social – economic services including, local markets, schools and health facilities; and

(d) improved road safety.

2.2. Project components

2.2.1 The Project road constitutes an important road corridor of strategic national and

regional importance. Given its advanced state of deterioration, its rehabilitation is necessary to

maintain its status as a route of choice providing safe and efficient movement of freight and

services. The components that have been included in the project are thus aimed to ensure that

the road continues to provide its intended primary functions. A description of components to

be financed is provided in Table 2.1. Further details on the Project Components are in the

detailed annex.

Table 2.1: Project Components

No. Component Estimate

(UA million)

Description

1 Infrastructure Investments 15.73 Rehabilitation of 46 km section of road between

Bo-Bandajuma and Implementation of ESMP

1.41 Consultancy services for supervision of road

works.

0.56 Update of Studies for the Kailahum Koindu

Guinean Border road

0.32 Pre-feasibility study for rehabilitation of the

Mano River Bridge

0.14 Study to identify Trade and Transport

Facilitation needs and assessment of Joint

Border operations within the MRU Transport

Corridors

2 Project Management 0.11 Project Implementation Support

0.21 Monitoring and Evaluation

0.27 Technical and Financial Audits

3 Cross cutting 1.10 HIV/AIDS, Malaria, Ebola, Gender and Road

safety awareness campaign

1.03 Compensation for Project Affected People

(PAPs)

2.3. Technical solution retained and other alternatives explored

2.3.1 The project road follows an existing alignment and therefore did not require an

investigation of alternative routes at feasibility level. Selected geometric re-alignments have

however been proposed to smoothen curves to make them compliant to safe driving conditions.

The cross section requirements are based on the Sierra Leone Road Design Manual (SLRDM3)

and ECOWAS4 guidelines. A road safety analysis was further conducted to identify road

3 SLRDM road classification standards recommend pavement width of 7.0m and shoulder of least 1.5m 4 ECOWAS guidelines recommend a pavement width of at least 7.00 m and shoulder width of at least 1.35m to 1.50m

5

improvement measures that promote safe use of the road by both vehicular and non-motorized

transport.

2.3.2 To remain consistent with design of adjacent sections and government preference, the

asphalt concrete pavement surfacing has been adopted. The pavement design used to propose

the dimensions of the road layers required for the rehabilitation is based on standards that are

commonly applied in Sierra Leone and cross checked with other established methods like

Southern African Transport and Communications Commission (SATCC) road design manual.

2.3.3 At least three (3) design alternatives with respect to the road geometry have

subsequently been considered and subjected to economic analysis to determine the most

feasible as summarised in table 2.2 below.

Table 2.2: Summary of technical solutions

Options Pavement Design Geometric Standards Reasons for

Acceptance / Rejection

Option 1

Asphaltic concrete

overlay of depth varying

between 50 mm and 120

mm over 44km.

Remaining 2km will be

reconstructed with

crushed stone base of

170mm, subbase of

200mm and asphaltic

pavement layer of

50mm,

Pavement width of

7.00 m with shoulders

of 1.35m

Though this option meets minimum

ECOWAS requirements it was rejected

because the carriageway and shoulder

widths were not compliant with adjacent

sections that are wider and provide better

road safety benefits. Option 2 Pavement width of 7.2

m and 1.25m

This option was rejected because it only

meets Sierra Leone road design standards

and not ECOWAS with respect to the

shoulder width. Option 3 Pavement width of

7.2m and shoulders of

1.5m

This option which requires widening was

accepted because it meets both the Sierra

Leone road design standards and fully

complies with ECOWAS guidelines. It is

also similar to other recently rehabilitated

primary roads in the country including the

adjacent section between Bandajuma to

MRU to be upgraded to paved standard

with financing from EU. The wide profile

of the road carriageway and shoulder will

provide adequate safety for vehicular and

non-mortised traffic.

2.3.4 All three (3) options were economically feasible with the only difference between

options two (2) and three (3) being widening of shoulders from 1.25 m to 1.50 m. Government

has made a preference for option three (3) albeit its higher cost to ensure that it remains

compliant to ECOWAS guidelines as well as the geometric standards of similar recently

rehabilitated roads in the country and the Bandajuma to MRU bridge to be upgraded soon to

paved standards with financing from the EU.

2.3.5 The road safety analysis has resulted in re-alignment of least three (3) curves to meet

speed requirements of 80 Km/hr and provision of other road safety features including: (i) paved

shoulders of at least 1.5 m on either side; (ii) traffic calming measures at approaches to

populated centres; (iii) bus bays to avoid passenger services providers stopping on carriageway;

and (iv) provision of raised kerbs at bridge crossings to separate pedestrians from vehicular

traffic.

6

2.4. Project type

2.4.1 The project is designed as a single investment operation to be financed through ADF

loan facilities from the Banks’s country allocation for Sierra Leone, Transition Support Facility

(TSF) and a co-financing instrument from OFID. The investments against which the funds are

to be disbursed are well defined and specific. As such, the project approach is the most

appropriate arrangement for Bank’s intervention in this operation.

2.5. Project cost and financing arrangement

2.5.1 The total project cost including compensation for Project Affected Persons is UA 23.84

million (US$ 33.54 million) of which the foreign exchange cost is UA 17.93 million (US$

25.29 million) or 80% of the total, and the local cost is UA 5.91 million (US$ 8.25 million) or

20% of the total cost. These cost estimates are based on detailed design studies of the project

as well as international norms and average unit prices for the works and services.

Table 2.2: Project cost estimates by component

No Components

UA (millions) %

FE Foreign

Exchange

Local

Currency Total

1 Infrastructure Investments 14.50 3.66 18.16 80

2 Project Management 0.37 0.22 0.59 63

3 Cross Cutting & complementary 0.08 1.05 1.13 07

Total Base Cost 14.95 4.93 19.88 75

Physical Contingency 1.49 0.49 1.98

Price Contingency 1.49 0.49 1.98

Total Project Cost 17.93 5.91 23.84 75

2.5.2 As shown in table 2.3 total ADF contribution to the project would be UA 6.94 million

(29%) in form of TSF loan of UA 3.71 million (15%) and UA 3.23 million (14%) ADF-IV

Performance Based Allocation (PBA) loan. UA 14.24 million (60%) will come as co-financing

loan from OFID. The Bank shall manage the OFID loan which shall exclusively be applied on

the civil works component. This exceptional contribution is a continuing demonstration of

corporation among development partners under which OFID has financed a similar operation

for the on-going rehabilitation of the Matoko – Sefadu road. As demonstration of commitment,

Government of Sierra Leone is expected to contribute a total of UA 2.66 million (11%) in the

form of UA 1.43 million (6%) counterpart fund and UA 1.23 (5%) million for compensation

of Project Affected People. Contribution of the Country’s PBA as well as total government

counterpart funding have been confirmed by government authorities.

Table 2.3: Sources of financing

Source ADF XII DSF Class US$ millions UA million %

TSF Loan 5.20 3.71 15

ADF - XIII PBA Loan 4.53 3.23 14

OFID Loan 20.00 14.24 60

29.73 21.18

GoSL Counterpart Funds 2.07 1.43 6

GoSL Compensation 1.74 1.23 5

Total 33.54 23.84 100.00

7

2.5.3 The project cost by category of expenditure and schedule by component are presented

in tables 2.4 and 2.5 respectively.

Table 2.4: Project cost by category of expenditure (UA millions)

No Category UA (millions)

Funding Source (UA millions)

ADF OFID GoSL Foreign Local Total

1 Civil Works 12.58 3.15 15.73 3.85 11.88

2 Consultancy 2.37 0.64 3.01 1.93 1.08

3 Project Coordination-Logistics 0.06 0.06 0.06

4 Project Coordination-Goods 0.05 0.05 0.05

5 Compensation of PAPs 1.03 1.03 1.03

Total Base Cost 14.95 4.93 19.88 5.78 11.88 2.22

Physical Contingency 1.49 0.49 1.98 0.58 1.18 0.22

Price Contingency 1.49 0.49 1.98 0.58 1.18 0.22

Total 17.93 5.91 23.84 6.94 14.24 2.66

Table 2.5: Expenditure schedule by component

No Components UA millions

2016 2017 2018 2019 Total

1 Infrastructure Investments 3.63 6.35 6.35 1.83 18.16

2 Project Management 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.59

3 Cross Cutting Components 1.05 0.02 0.02 0.04 1.13

Total Base Cost 4.85 6.48 6.48 2.07 9.88

Physical Contingency 0.48 0.65 0.65 0.20 1.98

Price Contingency 0.48 0.65 0.65 0.20 1.98

Total 5.81 7.78 7.78 2.47 23.84

2.6. Project’s target area and population

2.6.1 The project area lies in altitude ranges of 100-200m above sea level with undulating

topography in most areas. Large parts of the areas are fairly of high elevation while others in

poorly drained inland valley swamps are increasingly being used for paddy rice growing. The

project is located in Bo district with a population of about 228,392 inhabitants and a density of

112 person/km2 constitutes the primary target beneficiary population. The people in the area

earn their living mainly from agricultural activities, small scale trading and in transportation

services through operating motorcycles (okadas). Poverty in the road corridor is manifest in

terms of; poor housing; lack of access to safe potable water and poor education infrastructures

and impact of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) can be seen in terms of closed/non-operational

market facilities which has affected the local population. The road is particularly of importance

as it will help the people to transport produce to the markets, access social services, and once

improved it will help reduce bus fares and directly creat some jobs directly during its works. It

will also improve regional connectivity through MRU to Liberia thereby facilitating regional

intergration.

2.7. Participatory process for project identification, design and implementation

2.7.1 Key consultations have been made with stakeholders and has resulted in inclusion of

relevant project features. Those consulted included interviews with district technical officials

in Bo and Freetown, NGOs operating in the project area including ActionAid in Gondama,

8

Watsan Project Sembehun at Buuma, Africare in Bendu, Medicines Sans Frontiers in Bellor

and World Vision in Bontiwo. Other consultations were held with chiefdom heads in Jaima

Bingor Chiefdom in Bo District, Gondama in Tikondo Chiefdom, Bo District and at Bandajuma

Sowa in Sowa Chiefdom, in Pujehun. The ESIA team also consulted the Environmental team

in SLRA, representative of transport operators and held focus group discussions with various

women and youth groups along sections of the road. During preparation and appraisal

additional consultations where undertaken by the Bank team with communities at Bandajuma,

Koribondo, Gondama and Jendema. The main concerns raised by stakeholders included: road

safety issues before and after construction, increase of HIV/AIDs prevalence, need for safe

water sources, gender empowerment through giving fresh female engineers opportunities for

their internship trainings, youth employment and provision of health facilities. To address these

concerns, the project includes provision of selected social infrastructures such as markets and

water boreholes with pumps (if possible solar powered) at major population centres (Gondama)

located along the road and programmes to promote road safety, HIV/AIDS, Malaria and EVD

awareness. The project also includes a capacity development programme that aims to support

at least 20 graduate civil engineers (50%) female) to develop their skills in road construction

and maintenance through internships on the construction site and the supervision consultant

office.

2.8. Lessons reflected in project design

2.8.1 Bank Activities: The Bank’s operations in Sierra Leone commenced in 1973. As at 31

October 2015, the Bank’s portfolio for Sierra Leone comprises 15 active operations with a total

commitment of UA 152.27 million in various sectors (details are in Appendix 2). Two road

projects have been included in the Bank’s Country Strategy (CSP 2013 -2017). These are: (i)

Bandajuma – Zimmi (61km) and (ii) Kenema – Zimmi (88km). The Bandajuma – Zimmi road

project was replaced by Bo – Bandajuma project. The decision on replacement followed EU’s

confirmation of funds been secured to reconstruct the entire stretch from Bandajuma – Zimmi

– MRU bridge leaving Bo – Bandajuma as the missing link along the road corridor. Current

Bank’s commitment to the transport sector comprises only one operation which is the Matotoka

– Sefadu Road Rehabilitation Project. The Bank is financing UA22 million of the total project

cost. The project involves the rehabilitation of 70km of inter-urban road and the provision of

social infrastructure including rehabilitation of 3 primary schools (provision of classroom

blocks, sanitation and water facilities), a health centre, market and 20km of feeder roads. The

recently completed Lungi – Port Loko Road project upgraded 62km of inter-urban road and

has improved road accessibility from the capital city to the only international airport in Sierra

Leone.

2.8.2 Lessons learnt in Project Design from on-going / completed projects: The Bank

has funded three (3) road projects in the transport sector since 2006. One Project Completion

Report (PCR) has been completed with another one currently ongoing for the Lungi-Port Loko

Road Project. Major lessons that have been learnt from the implementation of the above

projects and which have been considered in the design of this project include: (i) weaknesses

in project and contract management that have resulted in a number of issues including weak

monitoring and evaluation systems, lengthy and bureaucratic approvals at various government

levels; sufficient provision has been allocated for outsourcing an M&E consultant preferably

from the region and inclusion of minimum logistics support to the project will assist the

Executing Agency (EA) carry out its contract management functions. (ii) fiduciary challenges

in procurement and financial management have resulted in poor construction lead time

resulting from lengthy procurement processes and financial losses to contractors arising from

9

highly tedious approvals as well as lack of follow-up on numerous audit recommendations; the

Bank’s continuous training through fiduciary clinics and support to the Accounting Department

of SLRA shall enhance the FM aspect of the project. The Bank’s field office shall follow-up

on procurement related issues and continue to provide procurement clinics to enhance

performance; (iv) constrained cadre of local contractors has restricted tender participation and

limited competition; however, the cost/km is within tolerable limits to attract a pool of regional

and international contractors; and (v) inclusion of minimum social community infrastructure

component such as schools, clinics and boreholes to ensure a more inclusive development. The

project include the construction of a market and water boreholes as accompanying measures.

2.9. Key performance indicators

2.9.1 The key performance indicators are shown in the results-based log-frame. Data on these

indicators will be collected under the framework of the Monitoring and Evaluation Component

of the Project. This activity shall facilitate refining of baseline values, monitoring during

implementation and at the end of construction period. At the bassline study other indicators

such as agricultural yields and Employment generation will be included for the purposes of

arriving at reasonable development impacts and outcomes. In addition, the performance

monitoring and evaluation mechanisms shall also cover monitoring the social, economic and

environmental impact within the project’s zone of influence.

3. PROJECT FEASIBILITY

3.1. Economic performance

3.1.1 The methodology for the economic analysis is based on cost-benefit analysis by

comparing the “with” and “without “ project scenarios over a period of 20 years, using Road

Economic Decision (RED) model. A discount rate of 12%, a standard conversion factor (SCF)

of 0.90, and construction period of 2 years starting in 2016 are adopted. The economic costs

consist of: (i) the capital investment costs and (ii) the routine and periodic maintenance

expenses. The benefits consist of savings in: (i) vehicle operating costs; (ii) motorized traffic

travel time for passenger and cargo; and (iii) maintenance costs. Other benefits (exogenous)

include: (iv) employment generation, (v) reduction in transport fares, (vi) enhanced agricultural

production; and (vii) reduction in traffic accidents. The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

on the project road are 1,254 vehicles per day, and 579 vehicles per day (excluding motor

cycles).

3.1.2 The measures of assessing project viability used are the Economic Internal Rate of

Return (EIRR) and the Net Present Value (NPV). The economic analysis for the three technical

alternatives (options 1-3) of the project road yielded an EIRR of 27.2% and an NPV of €20.219

million, an EIRR of 26.4% and an NPV of €19.751 million, an EIRR of 21.5% and an NPV of

€15.744 million respectively for option 1, option 2 and option 3. Option 3, with an EIRR of

21.5% and NPV of €15.744 million is the most feasible alternative since it complies with

ECOWAS standards. Sensitivity analysis of a 20% increase in the investment costs and a 20%

reduction in benefits (worst-case scenario) of the most feasible option results in an EIRR of

14.7% for the project road. The summary of the economic analysis for the selected pavement

intervention is presented in Table 3.1, with details presented in Annex B7. The economic

analysis results indicate the Project road is economically viable. Further confirmation of the

robustness of the economic analysis results through Switching Values analysis revealed that

10

the Project would become unviable only when the project costs increase beyond 82% (unlikely)

and the benefits decrease below 45%.

Table 3.1: Key Economic and Financial Figures

Scenario Economic Parameters

NPV

(€ Million)

EIRR

(%)

Base Results 15.74 21.5

Sensitivity Results: (+20% costs & -20% benefits) 4.90 14.7

3.2. Environmental and Social impacts

3.2.1. Environmental: The road project is a Category 1 type as it is likely to lead to loss of

businesses and shelter for about 2,807 communities, loss of 3,099 multi-purpose trees and

community water sources. RAP and ESIA summaries have been posted in Bank’s website on

20 August, 2015. Positive impacts include: better paved road implying improved transportation

and access to markets, employment for about 500-800; reduced road accidents; enhanced

agricultural production and boost tourism; reduced travel time and vehicle operations costs by

20 and 21% respectively as well as improved regional connectivity between Sierra Leone and

Liberia. Its negative impacts include destruction of roadside water sources to be mitigated

through relocation of water points before start of construction. Dust and air emissions impacts

mitigated through routine sprinkling of water and land uptake to be mitigated through

compensation as in the RAP. Soil erosion and siltation to be mitigated by landscaping and re-

grassing. Public health, EVD and HIV/AIDS impacts are to be mitigated through awareness

and sensitization campaigns. An ESMP has been developed to provide mitigation and

management measures for the impacts. The Cost of ESMP implementation is estimated at US$

300,000 (included in civil works).

3.2.2. Climate Change: Some sections of the road pavement have failed due to rusted and

broken down metallic Armco culverts while across trading centres, there is direct discharge of

run-off onto the carriageway attributed to silted covered access drains. These issues are to be

addressed by use of concrete reinforced culverts (CRC) in place of metallic Armco culverts

and appropriate access drains across trading centres as well as securing the road reserve to

allow for unimpeded functioning of off-shoots drains. These measures have been adopted based

on hydrological, topographical, land use and settlements assessments in the road corridor and

its wider catchment which was a basis of decision on the type, nature and sizes of proposed

storm water discharge infrastructure on the road project. For the sections to be reconstructed,

there are plans to pulverize and re-use the asphalt concrete as sub-base materials. In addition,

modalities for timely and effective maintenance interventions by SLRA on its road network

have also been worked out with the Road Maintenance Administration Fund. In all, GoSL is

cognizant of climate change impacts in all its sectors of development and multi-sectoral

adaptation strategies have been drawn. For the transport sector, some measures that have been

instituted include, ban on importation of leaded fuels. Furthermore, in an attempt to address

issues of CO2 and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, import tax of 5-110% is imposed on all

vehicles imported into the country taking into account, year of manufacture (age of vehicle),

model and cubic centimetres of the vehicle engine amongst others..

3.2.3. Gender: GoSL is committed to ensure that gender analysis is embedded within all

national development programmes as enshrined in its Pillar 8 in The Agenda for Prosperity

2012-2017. The Ministry of Social Welfare and Children Affairs has also undertaken a review

of the National Gender Policy and also prepared a Draft Gender Bill which has been approved

11

by Cabinet and is soon to be presented to Parliament. All these instruments provide for at least

30% of available employment opportunities in projects to be availed to women. Already on

Matotoka-Sefadu road project under Bank financing, 30% for women is being observed by the

contractors and this is already a best practices instituted by SLRA regarding gender

mainstreaming. However, by the time the road project becomes operational, these laws will

have become effective and the contractor will simply stream the practice in line with the policy

frameworks then. The project plans to drill some 2 boreholes and considering the fact that, it

is mostly women with the responsibility of fetching water, the boreholes under the project are

of large positive benefit to the women. At 00+750km LHS from Bo town, there are two women

palm oil wholesalers engaged in buying palm oil from the countryside smallholders and wild

collector dealers. The palm oil is packed in 20 liter jerry can which is sold to traders from

Barmoi market and to those coming from as far as Madina and Bonfi in Conakry. However,

this business is handicapped in terms of parking space for trucks for loading and off-loading

the palm oil; they also have no shelter for storage of the merchandise and the containers as well

as the area is poorly drained. It is proposed that the road project should provide for a

parking/bus bay at the section where this palm oil wholesale point, construct a shelter for

handling the business transactions of palm oil and improve the drainage around the site. This

is hoped to improve the working environment for the women wholesale palm oil dealers, to

provide safe and secure working shelter and a lorry parking on the road. These will improve

their enterprises and enable them earn better income which is hoped to translate to better

livelihoods at their households. The planned capacity building to support at least 20 graduate

civil engineers (50%) female) to develop their skills in road construction and maintenance

through internships on the construction site will both benefit men and women. The sensitization

programs to be undertaken about gender will equally benefit the women in the project area.

The contractor is to adopt a code of conduct to make the work place conducive to both men

and women.

Social

3.2.4. Development of economic growth: The project will contribute to economic growth in

the project area by improving market accessibility and stimulating development of other

economic opportunities thereby diversifying avenues of accessing earnings. Having this road

as all weather type and being of regional importance, the road will improve access to markets

and support better marketing of produce. The key activity in the project area is agriculture

which is expected to become market oriented will provide incentive for households to increase

their production especially of marketable produce such as rice, kola nuts and garri. For

instance, the road will improve access to Tiwai forest tourist destination close to Potoru tourism

site hence after Bandajuma town and that will boost tourism which brings a number of

economic opportunities both at local and national levels. It is also expected that, the road

project will offer estimated 500-800 jobs across its various activities and based on gender law

soon to be passed, 30% of these jobs will be availed to the women and this will give them

alternate sources of incomes to support their households. The project will also develop market

facilities at new Gondama market which will provide good marketing environment for the

market vendors especially the women who comprise 45% of the vendors thereby improving

their trade which translates to income and livelihoods at their household levels.

3.2.5. Improved accessibility to social economic infrastructure: No doubt, the Bo-

Bandajuma road link connects main areas such as Bandajuma, Koribondo, Gondama and as far

as MRU to Bo City which has the main district referral hospital. The current state of the road

makes access to referral medical services in Bo City difficult to access because of its deep

potholes which are most of the time filled with pools of water. Improved access will lead to

12

expansion of production and enhanced marketing and household incomes as well as new

businesses and general economic development along the rehabilitated road. Implementation of

the project will also lead to improved transportation services that are expected to drive an

increase in the volume of trade and commercial activities in the two districts and in the regions.

Improved transportation services are also expected to result in better access to health care,

particularly for expectant mothers with obstructed labour who cannot sustain longer than three

(3) hour delay to the nearest health unit at Bo, improved delivery of social services, agriculture

and education sectors and increased school enrolment rates. Other social benefits will include:

opening up regional markets to local players, thus encouraging the sharing of formal and

informal business practices, increasing exposure and connectivity to communities in

neighboring regions and countries, thus promoting cultural, social, and economic linkages. As

part of the Ebola Recovery Strategy, the United Kingdom Department for International

Department (DFID) is considering a grant of US$ 5 million to GoSL to rehabilitate the arterial

network of 200 km feeder roads that directly connect to the project road. DFID is expected to

support this activity in 2016 through supplementary financing to be managed by the Bank. This

effort is expected to complement the project through providing efficient linkages to farms with

regional markets and other social services all aimed at uplifting the livelihoods of the rural

population and introduces a local economic development dimension to the project.

3.2.6. Ebola Virus Disease sensitization and awareness campaigns: The GoSL has put in

place a National Ebola Response Centre (NERC) under direct supervision of the Office of the

President. NERC is a Task Force whose mandate is to coordinate support and response to

contain the Ebola pandemic. The NERC has championed the hand washing, screening,

treatment as well as burial procedures for those who die of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD).

However, once WHO declares Sierra Leone to be Ebola free then the country will be in its post

Ebola period and at that time, the efforts on Ebola control will be handled by the recently

created National Disaster Management Agency under the Office of the National Security in the

President’s Office. For now, NERC has decentralized to the districts the management of Ebola

under the District Ebola Response Centre (DERC) and in the areas of the road project, the Bo

District DERC will be a key stakeholder in management of Ebola interventions on the road

project. Of particular importance to the road project is the need for the contractors to be aware

of Ebola survivors who have discharge certificates from NERC and are reported to be free of

EVD and should not be discriminated in the recruitment to work if they turn up during the

recruitment process. During consultation on this subject, it emerged that, the road project

should mainstream deliberate EVD control measures to ensure sustained awareness and

sensitization on Ebola in the project areas during works in view of the trans-regional nature of

Bo-Bandajuma road, and that, there is still a lot of unknown scientific and social dynamics on

Ebola which can easily trigger its re-occurrence in the event of relaxed public education and

caution. However, the project design has already integrated EVD sensitizations and awareness

sessions amongst its outcome yardsticks.

3.2.7. Road Safety Campaigns: In addition to the engineering aspects included in the design

such as provision of sealed shoulders, signage, speed calming measures, the project will mount

IEC (Information, Education and Communication) campaigns to all road users on safety

aspects. This will be done in collaboration with the SLRSA.

3.2.8. Baseline data: It is expected that basic socio-economic data will be collected at the

beginning of project implementation under the M&E sub-component. The SLRA will maintain

a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Expert who with input of the M&E consultant be

responsible for the development of a baseline to measure Objectively Verifiable Indicators

13

(OVI) and monitor the project’s social and development impacts, such as: (i) all season access

to public transportation within 2 km of their homes; (ii) yearly traffic accidents and mortality

along the project zone of influence; (iii) monthly household expenditures devoted to transport

and other indicators.

3.2.9. Inclusive Growth: GoSL envisages that, improvement of its road network such as Bo-

Bandajuma road will greatly have multiplier transformational impacts on the livelihoods of its

populace across gender, various age groups and geographical divide through improved

transportation and access to markets for their agriculture produce both within the areas of the

road project and beyond. In particular, inclusion of women and the youth will bring on board

these vulnerable groups into income earnings from the project. Recruitment of casual labour

will bring on board some of the poor in the communities as well to earn fairly stable income

for the time of project. These will enhance and provide means of livelihoods to men and women

and bring about growth and development to them in many fronts. The road will facilitate

women, men and youth alike to have easy access to the markets, social facilities and more so,

enter new enterprise ventures in trading and value addition. It is also clear that, the proposed

project passes through areas that have had devastating impacts of the EVD as such, the planned

rehabilitation of this road will greatly assist the population in the region have reliable transport

to access much needed social and health facilities and general post recovery interventions. With

all these, the road project will contribute to national efforts of encouraging inclusive economic

growth in Sierra Leone as enshrined in the national constitution of the country and other

sectoral laws and policies dealing with inclusive growth.

3.2.10. Involuntary resettlement: Though the rehabilitation of the Bo-Bandajuma road will to

large extent follow the exiting alignment, a few re-alignments at populated settlements will

result in involuntary resettlement of more than 220 households. SLRA has therefore prepared

a Full Resettlement Action Plan (FRAP) that identified 295 households (2,807 Persons) who

will be affected by the project comprising of 233 dwelling houses, 29 dwelling houses with

shops and 33 community structures. Other assets to be impacted include uptake of hectares of

farmland 3,033 multi-purpose fruit trees including 1,118 bananas and 664 mango trees. The

FRAP outlines the compensation measures for affected properties, institutional arrangements

and timeline and grievance mechanisms. The loss of estimated 3,000 trees will be compensated

through deliberate tree planting along the road alignment. Its estimated budget is US$

1,451,048.50. The Government will however set aside a budget of US$ 1.73 million as

included in the project cost. The FRAP summary was published on the Bank’s website on 10

August 2015 along with the ESIA and will be locally disclosed in specific public spaces

accessible to the general public especially in the project zone of influence and through media

including local language newspapers. The FRAP implementation will be led by SLRA with

oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency and other stakeholders including, Anti-

Corruption Commission; Civil Society; Auditor General and; selected community leaders/

elders. For more information on Environmental and Social aspects, please refer to Detailed

Technical Annex B.8

4. IMPLEMENTATION

4.1. Implementation arrangements

4.1.1. SLRA will be the Executing Agency for the Project. SLRA has experience in managing

of similar road projects financed by the Bank including the recently completed Lungi Port

Loko road project and on-going rehabilitation of the Matotoka - Sefadu road. SLRA is also

14

implementing a number of other similar operations financed by multilateral development banks

including OFID, KFEAD, IsDB, SFD, IDA and IFAD. SLRA will rely on its organisational

structure to implement the project and mainly draw on lessons from similar Bank financed

operations. SLRA functions are not without challenges and management have identified a

number of notable areas needing improvement including strengthening of staff numbers and

capacity, updating of operations procedures manuals and training. The authority also cites lack

of consistent financing for project supervision that has hampered effective supervision of donor

financed projects.

4.1.2. Minimum implementation support to the SLRA will be provided to the project through

provision of some logistics in form of project operation recurrent costs, transport and office

equipment. To coordinate bank financed projects, SLRA presently has a designated project

coordinator and similar to the on-going transport operation will appoint a Project Manager as

the key contact person from within the institution acceptable to the Bank for the day to day

management of the project. In carrying out project activities, the PM will rely on existing

SLRA management systems in areas such as finance, procurement, monitoring and evaluation

and environment. The provision of a suitable person acceptable to the Bank will constitute a

condition prior to first disbursement.

4.1.3. In cognisance of the future regional importance of the road, the project includes a Study

to identify Trade Facilitation needs and assessment of Joint Border operations within the MRU

Transport Corridors. SLRA and Ministry of Trade and Industry (MoTI) will form an

interagency committee to manage this component of the project. These activities include but

not limited to evaluations, review and approval of reports. The outputs from this study are

expected to inform bankability of a likely Phase II multinational project with Liberia and that

would include the construction of one-stop border post and implementation of trade facilitation

measures. Similarly SLRA will form a similar committee with the Sierra Leone Road Safety

Authority (SLRSA) to assist with management of the road safety feature in the awareness

campaign activity.

4.1.4. Procurement: The procurements of civil works and selection of consultants services

under the project will be done in accordance with the Bank’s Rules and Procedures for

Procurement of Goods and Works ((May 2008 edition, revised July 2012) or the Bank’s Rules

and Procedures for the Use of Consultants (May 2008 edition, revised July 2012), using the

Bank’s standard bidding documents, and with the provisions set out in the financing

agreements with the country.

4.1.5. The Sierra Leone Roads Authority shall carry out procurement for all civil works

contracts and consultancy services for this project through the existing procurement structures.

The institutional capacity of SLRA was assessed and it was found that they have established

procurement unit staffed with procurement personnel such as Procurement Manager, two

Procurement Officers and an assistant. The procurement manager has acquired formal training

in the procurement of works and consultancy services for World Bank projects and has also

gained experience on the Bank’s rules and procedures for goods and works and consulting

services through his involvement in the implementation of two similar projects.

Financial Management, Disbursement Arrangements and Project Audit

4.1.6. Financial Management: The SLRA will be responsible for the Financial Management

(FM) functions of the Project. The SLRA has adequate staffing to carry out FM work and is

15

thus familiar with the Bank’s FM requirements for projects. Marginal improvement was noted

in the FM performance of ongoing Bank financed projects, albeit, Fiduciary Risk was

considered high. Thus, the FM system of SLRA would need to be strengthened in order to

satisfactorily discharge its fiduciary requirements of the project. This will include provision of

appropriate accounting software along with support equipment to appropriately operate the

software, revision of the accounting and procedures manual, and training of FM and

procurement staff in short term project management courses including FM and Procurement.

This will enhance and underpin the FM system required to achieve the set project outcomes.

4.1.7. Disbursement: Disbursement will be direct payment method (similar to those ongoing

Bank funded projects) for the main works component, goods and services (including audit). A

Special Account (SA) will be established to facilitate project management operation costs and

will follow the normal procedure of operating the SA as per the Disbursement Hand Book.

4.1.8. Audit and Reporting: The Audit Service Sierra Leone (ASSL) is mandated to audit

all public funds and due to capacity constraints, some audits are outsourced to private firms.

Accordingly, the ASSL audits the main SLRA accounts while projects’ audit are outsourced

to private firms; similar audit arrangement would be retained for the proposed Bank project.

Therefore, external Project audit by an independent auditor acceptable to the Bank will be

conducted annually to ensure submission of audited financial statements within six months

following the year audited. Quarterly unaudited interim financial statement will be required to

be submitted to the Bank 45 days following the end of each quarter.

4.1.9. The overall conclusion of the FM capacity assessment is that, based on the above, the

proposed project can be considered to utilize the existing country FM system in full which

after addressing the agreed FM action plan (see Annex B4) will have adequate capacity to

manage the FM inclusive of disbursement and audit. Therefore the residual risk is moderate.

4.2. Monitoring

4.2.1. The project will be monitored during implementation by the Works Supervision

Consultant and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Consultant, Executing Agency [Project

Coordinator/SLRA] and through the Bank Missions; and during the operations maintenance

phases (by the Executing Agency - SLRA). The M&E consultant will also monitor cross-

cutting issues in liaison with the EA, Relevant Sector Ministries, Communities, NGOs and

CSOs.

4.2.2. Monitoring is aimed at close oversight to ensure adherence to the set out delivery

timelines, quality and quantity standards, early detection of problems/challenges and provision

of timely remedial measures. The various targets specified in the Results based log-fame

provide a basis for monitoring activity, output and outcome levels by relevant project

stakeholders. The Monitoring and Evaluation Consultant to be engaged by the Executing

Agency will assist with refining the framework for monitoring the project indicators. In

addition to the day-to-day project oversight by the Works Supervision Consultant, M&E

Consultant and the Project Coordinator assigned to be assigned by SLRA, the Bank’s

monitoring strategy includes: semi-annual supervision missions, review of quarterly project

progress reports from SLRA, mid-term review and preparation of the project completion report

(PCR) at about 85% completion of the project.

16

4.2.3. The Annual Technical, and Financial Audits are some of the measures that will monitor

adherence and compliance to the agreed upon project standards/deliverables. Special attention

will be made on the monitoring of the implementation of the Environmental and Social

Management Plan activities to be executed by the Supervision Consultant and SLRA. Other

Ministries and agencies such as the Ministry of Works, Housing and Infrastructure,

Environmental Protection Agency, Ministry of Social Welfare, Gender and Children Affairs,

Ministry of Health and Sanitation, NGOS and CSOs will also be encourage to do independent

monitoring.

4.3. Governance

4.3.1. While Sierra Leone still performs significantly below world and regional averages in

many areas of governance, most indicators reflect positive governance trends since President

Ernest Bai Koroma took office in 2007. The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators

shows Sierra Leone scoring 35.4 on a 0 to 100 scale in 2010 in terms of control of corruption,

compared to 28.1 in 2005. However, there has been some reversal in the gains made and the

score has dropped to 27.5 in 2014 due mainly to the general perception that graft incidences

are still high. 4.3.2 Both the Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance and the ADB’s CPIA

indicator has shown marked progress. Sierra Leone has improved from a rank of 48th in 2011

to 30th of 52 African countries in 2012 and moved five places up to 25th in 2014 with a

remarkable score of 51 on a 0 to 100 scale. In the former, and in the public sector Management

and Governance rating of the AfDB CPIA, rating moved from 2.5 in 2005 to 3.0 in 2012 and

further improved to 3.5 in 2014 CPIA calculation. This consistent improvement is a

manifestation of the ongoing wide scale governance reforms and institutional strengthening

programs supported largely by development partners. Its ranking in the Transparency

International Corruption Perception Index has improved slightly, from 123th in 2012 to 119th

in 2014 of 175 countries but still maintained a score of 31 out of 100 in both instances.

4.3.2 Although significant challenges remain, weak institutions, low public sector salaries,

lack of training and limited capacity, as well as insufficient and cumbersome regulations have

created both incentives and opportunities for corruption across the public sector. There has

also been marked improvement in open budget index done every two years with a score of 31

in 2013 to 51 in 2015 with the country leading in open and transparent budgeting in the West

Africa sub region. The project has included in its design governance risk mitigation measures

such as (i) the appointment of external and independent financial / technical audit firms to

ensure that funds are used efficiently and for the intended purposes; and (ii) Bank’s prior review

and approval of all project procurement activities.

4.4 Sustainability, Institutional and Road Sector Reforms

4.4.1. Sierra Leone has made some positive steps to reform the road sector institutional and

regulatory environment though much still remains. Positive steps include creation of the Sierra

Leone Road Authority (SLRA) in 1993 as semi-autonomous government entity that is

responsible for the development, maintenance, administration, control and maintenance of the

road network. A Road Fund to finance road maintenance was also created in 1998 and its

operations were streamlined through the creation of a third generation Road Fund, the Road

Management Fund Administration (RMFA) in 2003. As part of rationalizing road network

management, the local government act was passed in 2004 that devolved management of the

feeder and chiefdoms roads network to the Local Government Authorities. In addition cross

cutting regulatory reforms in environment management made it mandatory to undertake

17

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) reports for all major road projects and

the factories act have reinforced the need for employers to provide mandatory protective

clothing to workers on construction sites

4.4.2. Key sector challenges that could invigorate the contribution of transport to economic

prosperity however remain and include: improving the quantity and quantity of trunk and

feeder roads; unlocking market access to productive areas of the country through all-weather

roads; improving connectivity to neighbouring countries; and provision of adequate sustainable

maintenance of the existing road network.

4.4.3. Concerning maintenance, Sierra Leone has since 1990s put in place a road fund whose

operation remained within the SLRA until 2010 when the Road Fund Administration Act of

2010 established the Road Maintenance Fund and an administration to administer the funds.

RMFA is a 3rd generation road fund, governed by a board of directors from a wide stakeholder

representation and is administered by a lean management of professional staff. RMFA’s main

mandate includes management and administration of the maintenance funds, monitoring of

monies allocated from the fund; approval of applications for financing of maintenance

activities from designated bodies. In approving maintenance plans, RMFA is guided by the

Integrated Transport Policy, Strategy and Investment Strategy (ITPSIP) current policy to

prioritize preservation of all roads that are in good and fair condition by channeling funds first

to routine maintenance and then to periodic maintenance.

4.4.4. Contributions to the road fund consist of road user charges levied on fuel, vehicle

licence fees, vehicle registrations fees and other licenses collected under the road traffic act,

capital gains and or profits from investments; and donations/grants and any other road user

charged that may be allocated to the fund from time to time. There has been a general increase

in revenue from about US$ 8.6 million in 2011 to US$ 16 million in 2013 and projected to rise

to US$ 23 million for 2014. Maintenance funds though still remain considerably below needs

with a huge backlog of roads in need of major maintenance. In the absence of accurate data,

Sierra Leone’s annual routine maintenance budget on the paved core road network is estimated

at US$ 12.6 million. Based on audited accounts, road fund user receipts have averaged US$11

– 14 million over the past four years and it would appear that the current receipts are just about

enough to cover routine maintenance, including this project, though not sufficient to cover

periodic maintenance.

4.4.5. RMFA cites the mobilization of additional revenue to the fund as one of the major

challenges and is increasingly looking to means of expanding its revenue base. PPPs present

an opportunity that could be exploited with assistance of the Bank to crowd in financial support

and leverage government financial commitments in the road sector. The project design

therefore includes as condition provision of evidence on GoSL commitment to implement

measures aimed at increasing other local revenue resources to the Road Fund.

4.4.6. With regard to quality of work, the impact of the recurrent maintenance cost on the

government is minimal, due to the selected technical solution. The choice of asphaltic concrete

is most appropriate and improves the overall efficiency of the project with regard to

maintenance. The construction and maintenance costs spent over the pavement commonly

referred to as life cycle costs are significantly lower with asphalt concrete when compared to

other paving interventions. In addition maintenance of asphalt road is often less disruptive and

can realised within a shorter period and save often ignored significant user delays costs.

18

4.4.7. To ensure physical sustainability, there is need for Sierra Leone to ensure enactment of

the draft policy reform on axle load control and to finalise the institutional framework for its

management. Previously the Bank supported SLRA under the Matotoka - Safedu Road Project

to purchase road weigh bridges and went further to include a project condition that required

government to report on a programme for the rolling out of vehicle overload and axe load

control in Sierra Leone. The Bank is currently, monitoring the programme albeit slippages and

will continue to encourage government along this process through another condition on this

project that will monitor implementation related aspects.

4.5. Risk management

4.5.1. The potential risks at outcome and output levels have been identified and mitigation

measures have been highlighted.

Outcome Risks

4.5.1.1. Sustainability: Inadequate Institutional and Financial Capacity to maintain the

paved road. In addition lack of axle load management system may lead to pre-mature failure

of the road due to overloading. GoSL has drafted Axle load Control Policy and is working on

an institutional framework. GoSL maintenance funds are increasing annually and other forms

of financing like PPPs are actively being pursued.

Output Risks

4.5.1.2. Cost overruns (price volatility of construction materials): Considering the project

location some 250 km from the nation’s capital Freetown, the cost of commodities are normally

above market rates and it is likely that bidding contractors will factor in adequate and or

excessive risk to cover likely sharp increase in cost of construction material mostly oil products

and cement. Adequate price contingencies have been included in the project’s detailed cost

estimates.

4.5.1.3. Project Control: The incompetence of the Contractor and or supervisor will lead to

delayed completion of the Project. The Contractor will be procured through the International

competitive bidding (ICB) to improve chances of getting a better qualified and experienced

Contractor. Similarly the selection of the Consultant will be carried out through a competitive

procurement process. The Project works will also be closely monitored to ensure adherence to

quality, cost and timelines by the Supervision Consultant, SLRA, Technical Audits and the

Bank through the Field Office and Bi-annual Supervision Missions. The project also includes

minimal project logistics support to provide effective client supervision.

4.5.1.4. Erratic payments of counterpart funds: The project includes GoSL financial

contribution in form of counterpart funding. Delays in honouring payments may lead to project

implementation slippages. As mitigation, government has provided a letter committing to

provide counterpart funding. In addition all critical project activities relating to civil works,

supervision and project management have all been placed under Bank and OFID financing.

4.5.1.5. Resettlement Action Plan (RAP): Timely implementation of the RAP is key for

smooth project implementation. It is thus recommended that the SLRA maintains the team

responsible for the elaboration of the RAP (environmental and social safeguard officers and

19

assistants) to supervise its implementation. In addition, it is expected that the resources

included in GoSL’s Budget for meeting the RAP implementation will be released timely for

Compensation of the Project Affected Persons (PAPs).

4.6. Knowledge building

Through this project the Bank continues to increase and consolidate its knowledge on working

in the Transport Sector of a Fragile. Additional knowledge has been accumulated during the

design phase and will continue to be consolidated during the implementation and post

construction phase. During design the Bank engaged the sponsor, client and consultant to

advise on study outputs that supported the project’s bankability and resulted in timely provision

of financing by the Bank and its partners. The Bank has gathered further knowledge on

mobilising and leveraging substantial co-financing instruments for the project. During

implementation the monitoring and evaluation components as well as awareness campaigns

will provide opportunities for further knowledge accumulation. The project will provide

specific valuable lessons on how provision of reliable transport infrastructure will affect the

EVD Post recovery efforts. All these efforts will facilitate Bank and GoSL to improve project

design and implementation activities that are not only unique to fragile states but other

operations across the Bank’s portfolio.

5. LEGAL INSTRUMENTS AND AUTHORITY

5.1. Legal instrument

5.1.1. The Bank instruments to finance this operation are an ADF Loan for an amount of UA

3.71 million from the TSF; and an ADF Loan of UA 3.23 million from ADF 13 PBA.

5.2. Conditions associated with Bank’s intervention

A. Entry into Force Conditions

i. Conditions Precedent to Entry into Force of the ADF Loan and TSF Pillar I Loan

Agreement: The entry into force of the ADF Loan Agreement and TSF Pillar I Loan

Agreement shall be subject to the fulfilment by the Republic of Sierra Leone of the

provisions of Se`ction 12.01 of the General Conditions.

B. Conditions Precedent to First Disbursement of the ADF Loan and TSF Pillar I Loan

Agreement

The obligation of the Fund/Bank to make the first disbursement of the Loan shall be conditional

upon the entry into force of the Loan Agreements, as specified above, and submission by the

Borrower, of evidence in a form and substance acceptable to the Fund/Bank of fulfilment of

the following:

i) Evidence of having developed and submitted to the Bank the updated Resettlement Action

Plan (RAP); the Works Schedule and Compensation Payment Schedule detailing: (a) each

section of the road under the Project and; (b) the timeframe for compensation and

resettlement of all Project Affected Persons (PAPs) in respect of each section under the

Project;

20

ii) Evidence of having compensated and/or resettled all PAPs with respect to the civil works

for the first section of the road identified under the Works Schedule under the Project. The

compensation shall be done in accordance with the Updated RAP and Compensation

Payment Schedule; and

iii) Evidence of the appointment of a Project Manager with terms of reference, qualifications

and experience acceptable to the Bank.

C. Other Conditions

i) Prior to commencement of civil works for each of the remaining sections of the road, the

Borrower shall have submitted evidence, in form and substance satisfactory to the Fund,

of having compensated and/or resettled all PAPs, with respect to such section of the road

in accordance with the Updated RAP;

ii) Within three (3) months of the date of signature of this Agreement, submit an

Environmental Impact Assessment Licence or Certificate of Approval from the authorised

approval agency in Sierra Leone;

iii) Within three (3) months of the date of signature of this Agreement, submit an

implementation manual agreed upon between the Borrower, the Bank and OPEC Fund for

International Development for common implementation arrangements including

institutional, procurement, disbursement, financial management, environmental and social

measures, monitoring and evaluation, and reporting arrangements for the execution of the

Project;

iv) Within three (3) months of the date of signature of this Agreement, submit evidence of the

Executing Agency having formed an interagency committee to manage the Mano River

Union Trade Facilitation needs Assessment component with the Ministry of Trade and

Industry; and

v) A committee will be established with the Sierra Leone Roads Safety Authority to assist in

implementation of the Road Safety awareness aspects of the Project.

D. Undertaking

(i) The Borrower undertakes to implement and report on the implementation of the

Environment and Social Management Plan, Environment and Social Impact

Assessment, and the RAP on a quarterly basis in a form acceptable to the Bank.

5.3. Compliance with Bank Policies

This project complies with all applicable Bank policies.

6. RECOMMENDATION

Management recommends that the Boards of Directors approve:

(i) The proposed Loan of UA 3.71 million from TSF Pillar 1 resources;

and ADF Loan of UA 3.23 million from ADF 13 PBA Allocation to the Republic

of Sierra Leone for the purposes and subject to the conditions stipulated in this report.

I

Appendix I Country’s comparative socio-economic indicators

II

Appendix II: Table of ADB’s portfolio in the country as at October 2015

Sector

Name

Longa Name Status of

Project

Approved

Amount

(UA million)

Cum.

Disbursement

(UA million

Cu. %

Disbursed

(UA million)

Investment Programme

1 ADF Power CLSF Sierra Leone Approved 14.50 0.00

2 ADF Power CLSD Rural

Electrification Sierra

Leone

On-Going 4.88 0.05 1.03

3 ADF Transport Matotoka – Sefadu Road

Rehabilitation Project

Section I Matotoka – Yiye

I

On-Going 22.00 10.29 46.76

4 ADF Agriculture Addax Bio-energy Project On-Going 22.10 22.09 99.95

5 ADF Water

Supply /

Sanitation

Rural Water Supply and

Sanitation Project

On-Going 14.59 0.42 2.91

6 ADF Water

Supply /

Sanitation

Three Towns Water

Supply Project

On-Going 28.50 17.36 60.93

Institutional Support Programme

7 FSF Multi-

Sector

Technical Assistance and

Capacity Building Support

to Ministry of Energy and

MCC (TCB-ERPU &

MCC)

Approved 0.45 0.00

8 FSF Finance Central Bank of Sierra

Leone Capacity Building

Component

On-Going 0.81 0.57 70.65

9 FSF Multi-

Sector

Public Financial

Management and Business

Enabling support Project

On-Going 4.00 2.42 60.61

10 FSF Multi-

Sector

PFM Improvement and

Consolidation (PFMIC)

On-Going 2.30 0.00

11 FSF Multi-

Sector

Technical Assistance and

Capacity Building to

support mineral and

extractive revenues

governance.

On-Going 1.20 0.24 19.74

12 FSF Social Institutional Support –

Mano River Union II

On-Going 0.94 0.21 22.72

Emergency / EVD Assistance Programme

13 FSF Social Strengting West Africa’s

Public Health Systems

Response

On-Going 1.20 0.00

14 ADF Social Crisis Response: Technical

Assistance to support

countries

On-Going 1.80 1.43 79.62

15 ADF Social Ebola Fight Back

Programme

On-Going 33.00 33.00 100.00

Active Portfolio as at 31 August 2015 15 152.27 88.09 57.89

III

Appendix III: Key related projects financed by the Bank and other

development partners in the country

No. Project Name / Description Length

(Km)

Revised

Start / Finish

Date

Funding

Agency

Initial

Project Cost

(US$’ million)

Type of

Funding

1 Kenema – Pendembu 86 Dec 2009 / Dec.

2015

OFID, SFD,

IDB,

BADEA,

KFAED +

GoSL

58,7 Loan

2 Pendembu - Kailahun Road 28 Feb. 2015/ Feb.

2017 IDB + GoSL 27,6 Loan

3

Targrin - Lungi -

Konakridee (Targrin - Lungi:

Dual Carriageway 14Km x

2)and (Lungi - Konakridee

(14Km)

25.8 Nov 2015 / Jan

2016 GoSL - Loan

4 Lumley – Tokeh (21Km-

Original Contract 21

Jul 2009 / Jul

2016

KFAED +

OPEC Fund +

Abu Dabi +

GoSL

27,7 Loan

5 Restoration Works on

Waterloo - Kent Road 17

Jan. 2013 /June.

2015

KFAED +

OPEC Fund +

GoSL

- Loan

6 Hill Side By Pass Road

Construction (Phase I) 1.5

April 2010/

Dec. 2015

BADEA +

GoSL +

OPEC

13,3 Loan

7 Hill Side By Pass Road

Construction Phase II 2.2

April 2015/ Feb.

2017

KFAED +

GoSL 30,0 GoSL

8

Magbele, Mabang,

Kpangbama, Moyamba

Bridges and Moyamba –

Moyamba Junction

36

Sept 2014 / Sep

2015 EU + GoSL 52,9 Grant

9 Matotoka - Sefadu (Section

1: Matotoka - Yeyie) 70

Dec. 2013 /Nov.

2015

AfDB, OFID

+ GoSL 46,8

Loan +

Grant +

GoSL

10

Matotoka -

Sefadu (Section 2: Yeyie -

Sefadu)

50

commencement

date yet to be

established

KFAED +

GoSL 30,1 Loan

11

Reconstruction of the

Bandajuma - MRU Bridge

and 3 Bridges

108 March 2014 /

March 2018 EU + GoSL 174,6 Grant

12

Priority Infrastructural Works

Lot 1: Makeni - Kabala Road

and Seven (7) Bridges on the

Bo - Masiaka Highway

2013 - 2014 EU + GoSL 12,6 Grant

13

Priority Infrastructural Works

Lot 2: Cape Road, Rue De

La Paix

2013 - 2014 EU + GoSL 12,8 Grant

IV

Appendix IV: Map of the Project Area

Source: Updating of Studies for the Bo-Bandajuma Road, 2015, DIWI Germany GmbH. The map is only for the

purposes of showing the location of the project road.