Uganda - Creation of Sustainable Tsetse and ......Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign (PATTEC) -...

SCCD : F.S.

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND ADF/BD/IF/2012/191 2 November 2012 Prepared by: OSAN Original: English

Probable date of Board Presentation Not applicable

FOR INFORMATION

MEMORANDUM

TO : THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM : Cecilia AKINTOMIDE Secretary General SUBJECT : UGANDA: CREATION OF SUSTAINABLE TSETSE AND TRYPANOSOMIASIS FREE AREAS IN EAST AND WEST AFRICA

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT *

Please find attached the above-mentioned Report.

Attach:

Cc: The President

* Questions on this document should be referred to:

Mr. G. NEGATU Director EARC Extension 8232 Mr. A. BEILEH Acting Director OSAN Extension 2037 Mr. A. DAGAMAISSA Manager OSAN.1 Extension 2495

Mr. A. NUWAGIRA Task Manager OSAN.1/UGFO Extension 67677

1

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

A. PROJECT DATA AND KEY DATES

I. BASIC INFORMATION

Project Number Project Name Country (ies)

P-Z1-AZ0-006: Loan No. 2100150009197, Grant No. 2100155003920

Creation of Sustainable Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Free Areas in East and West Africa - Uganda Component

Uganda

ID Number of all Lending Instrument(s) Department Environmental Classification

ADF Loan and Grant Agriculture and Agro-Industry Department

Category 1

Original Commitment Amount

Amount Cancelled Amount Disbursed Percent Disbursed

ADF Loan: UA 6,550,000 and ADF Grant UA 240,000 (Total Commitment: UA 6,790,000)

ADF Loan: UA 3,189,968.15 and ADF Grant: UA 5,039.42 (Total Cancelled: UA 3,195,007.57)

ADF Loan: UA 3,360,031.85 and Grant UA 234,960.58 (Total Disbursed: UA 3,594,992.43)

After all cancellations: ADF Loan: 100% and ADF Grant: 100%.

Borrower

Government of the Republic of Uganda (GoU)

Executing Agency(ies) [List the main Ministries, Project Implementation Units, Agencies and civil society organizations responsible for implementing project activities.]

Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) - Executing Agency, Ministry of Health (MoH) - coordinating human health interventions on the Project, Coordinating Office for the Control of Trypanosomiasis in Uganda (COCTU) - statutory body coordinating policy and strategic tsetse eradication activities, National Livestock Resources Research Institute (NaLIRI) - hosts the tsetse insectary for mass sterile male tsetse fly rearing, Pan African Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign (PATTEC) - Commission of the African Union which coordinates continental efforts to eradicate T&T, and, 15 District Local Governments - field level implementation agencies.

Co-financers and other External Partners [List all other sources and amounts of financing, technical assistance or other resources used in this project]

Government of the Republic of Uganda (GoU): UA 1,075,000. Of these funds, only 51% was released to the Project by the time it closed in December 2011.

II. KEY DATES

Project Concept Note Cleared by Ops. Com. Appraisal Report Cleared Board Approval

N/A N/A 18.12.2004

Restructuring(s): 2008 and 2010

The Design of the Project anticipated use of sterile male tsetse flies for its tsetse eradication interventions that were expected to be imported from Ethiopia. Ethiopia is one of the six countries financed by the Bank under this multinational project and had received additional funding for establishing an insectary from which sterile tsetse flies would be procured by Uganda and Kenya for tsetse eradication interventions. The project design provided that Uganda would use Project funds to procure these sterile Male tsetse flies. In 2008, the GoU was informed that the Government of Ethiopia would not be able to supply the said tsetse flies within the project period and in consultation with the Bank, the design was changed to focus on use of aerial spraying instead. Owing to poor project management and delayed procurement processes, the project was restructured again in March 2010 to focus on tsetse suppression activities.

2

As a result, an equivalent to UA 3.1 million was cancelled, including funds earlier earmarked for aerial spraying and sustainable land management. It should be noted that at the time of restructuring in 2010, no field activities had been undertaken and that the Project was already rated Potentially Problematic with an overall disbursement ratio of only 15.3% after about 4 years of project life. This enabled the Project to focus on a few activities that could be implemented with tangible results within the remaining time frame. It should be noted also that as a result of these design changes, which also involved revision of the Project's List of Goods and Services (LOGS) and preparation of new work plans/budgets, a Mid Term Review was not undertaken as should have been the case.

Original Date MM/DD/YY

Actual Date MM/DD/YY

Difference in months

(auto-calculated)

EFFECTIVENESS 04.01.05 04.21.06 12 months

MID-TERM REVIEW 04.01.08 MTR was not undertaken, the Project was restructured in 2008 and 2010

N/A

CLOSING 12.31.11 For ongoing projects enter date of 98% disb. rate

0 moths 12.31.11

III. RATINGS SUMMARY All summary ratings are auto-generated by the computer from the relevant section in the PCR. CRITERIA SUB-CRITERIA RATING

PROJECT OUTCOME

Achievement of Outputs 3

Achievement of Outcomes 3

Timeliness 4

OVERALL PROJECT OUTCOME 3

BANK PERFORMANCE

Design and Readiness 3

Supervision 3

OVERALL BANK PERFORMANCE 3

BORROWER PERFORMANCE

Design and Readiness 2

Implementation 2

OVERALL BORROWER PERFORMANCE 2

IV. RESPONSIBLE BANK STAFF

POSITIONS AT APPROVAL AT COMPLETION

Regional Director G. NEGATU, Director EARC

Sector Director C. Spencer A. BEILEH, Ag. Director OSAN

Sector Manager S. MOUSA A. DAGAMAISSA, Manager OSAN.1

Task Manager C. TAWAH A. NUWAGIRA, OSAN.1/UGFO

PCR Team Leader A. NUWAGIRA, OSAN.1/UGFO

PCR Team Members J. MUGISHA, Consultant R. AZUBA, Consultant

3

B. PROJECT CONTEXT

Summarize the rationale for Bank assistance. State: -what development challenge the project addresses, -the Borrower's overall strategy for addressing it, -Bank activities in this country (ies) and sector over the past year and how they performed, -ongoing Bank and other externally financed activities that complement, overlap with or relate to this project. Please cite relevant sources. Comment on the strength and coherence of the rationale. [250 words maximum. Any additional narrative about the project's origins and history, if needed, must be placed in Annex 6: Project Narrative]

For many years, attempts have been made to control Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis (T&T) in Africa, Uganda inclusive. Where modest reduction in fly densities is achieved, resurgence quickly occurs due to re-infestation. This is particularly so because most interventions in T&T activities have been aimed at reducing tsetse population densities through tsetse suppression activities. As a result of this continued tsetse infestation, milk and meat off-take is reduced and so is work efficiency where oxen are used for cultivation. Access to areas with good grazing and cultivable land is obstructed, resulting in relocation to relatively tsetse-free areas that are characteristic of immence land pressure, environmental degradation, declining soil fertility, etc. Further, productivity of humans exposed to bite flies is reduced and tsetse transmitted sleeping sickness, if un-treated, may lead to death. The project's aim, therefore, was to complement the borrower's overall strategy of integrating tsetse suppression, control, and eradication while ensuring that the reclaimed areas are equitably developed for sustainable economic benefit of the population. It was envisaged that Government would intensify its other development programme activities, such as the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS), agricultural infrastructure development, agro-processing and marketing, etc., to enable the occupants of these areas use the land to their full economic benefit. Projects, like the Bank funded National Livestock Productivity Improvement Project, the Community Infrastructure Improvement Programme, etc., would complement the government's efforts to improve agricultural production and productivity in these target areas. As a result of the Project's interventions, sustainable T&T free areas would be created in Uganda, and other African countries where similar projects were being implemented, for expanded agricultural production and productivity and also ensuring that the success of Africa's major social and economic development initiatives such as NEPAD are not compromised due the absence of a lasting solution to the T&T problem. The design of the Project drew on lessons learned from similar projects to control and eradicate T&T in Burkina Faso, Nigeria, and Zanzibar, as well as the intervention efforts of the affected countries and the donor community over the past 2-3 decades.

4

C. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND LOGICAL FRAMEWORK 1. State the Project Development Objective(s) (as set out in the appraisal report)

Create sustainable tsetse-free areas in Uganda by integrating suppression, control and eradication approaches while ensuring the reclaimed areas are sustainably, equitably and economically exploited

2. Describe the major project components and indicate how each will contribute to achieving the Project Development Objective(s).

1. Tsetse Suppression and Eradication Component comprised of 4 subcomponents of (i) community involvement, (ii) baseline data collection and processing, (iii) mass-rearing of tsetse flies, and (iv) serial release of gamma-radiated sterile males. The baseline data is used to map tsetse distribution upon which selection of participating districts and sub counties was based. Communities are sensitized and imparted with knowledge and skills in deploying traps, monitoring fly catches, presenting animals and participate in applying pour –on insecticide used as live bait for Tsetse flies. Mass-rearing and serial release of gamma-radiated sterile males contributes by suppressing reproduction and multiplication of flies in the wild. 2. Capacity Building Component, with 3 subcomponents aimed at establishing a integrated national data information system for GIS research methodologies, Tsetse data entry and Information Recording and Reporting and data base validation. The component also developed and strengthened national institutional capacities through developing human resource, infrastructure, and structural support to manage and control Tsetse and trypanomiasis 3. Sustainable Land Management Component, By supporting production of broad based land use planning guidelines for securing land tenure especially for the poor and women whose land rights are ignored, the component contributes towards institutional strengthening to intensify agriculture through efficient and sustainable utilization of reclaimed land and reduce possibilities for tsetse re-infestation. This component was later dropped and not implemented under the project due to delayed commencement of activities coupled with poor project management and delayed procurement processes. 4. Project Coordination and Management Component involves setting up of a Project Coordination and Management Unit (PCMU) charged with establishing systems for national, regional and international coordination and project management.

3. Provide a brief assessment (up to two sentences) of the project objectives along the following 3 dimensions. Insert a working score, using the scoring scale provided in Appendix 1.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES DIMENSIONS ASSESSMENT WORKING SCORE

RELEVANT a) Relevant to the country's development priorities

The project was and remained relevant to Uganda’s development needs and is in line with the National Development Plan (NDP) and the Agriculture Sector Development Plans (DSIP)

3

ACHIEVABLE

b) Objectives could in principle be achieved with the project inputs and in the expected timeframe

Whereas the objecives could be achieved , the time frame was prohibitive given the reliance on external inputs like Sterile flies from Ethiopia and objectives like sustainable land management relying on levels of tsetse suppression

2

5

CONSISTENT

c) Consistent with the Bank's country or regional strategy

The project is consistent with the Bank’s country strategy paper that identifies agriculture and rural development as a key sector in the country focusing on poverty reduction, growth and equity in order to promote stability and sustainable development.

3

d) Consistent with the Bank's corporate priorities

The objectives are in full alignment with the Bank's corporate priorities emphasizing rural infrastructure in agricultural development, economic growth and poverty reduction.

3

4. Summarize the log. frame. If a log. frame does not exist, complete the table below, indicating the overall project development objective, the major components of the project, the major activities of each component and their expected outputs, outcomes, and indicators for measuring the achievement of outcomes. Add additional rows for components, activities, outputs or outcomes if needed.

COMPONENTS ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS EXPECTED OUTCOMES

INDICATORS TO BE MEASURED

Component 1 Collecting baseline data, analysis of the data

Baseline report on households available

data used for developing indicators, tsetse mapping, and selection of project areas

GD baseline data on Environment, Entomology, Parasitology, socio-economic and land use collected, processed by PY6

i) Identifying and agreeing on appropriate indicators ii) Regular Monitoring of agreed to indicators

Appropriate indicators for tsetse and trypanosomiasis prevalence and environmental impact established

Project management improved

M&E framework available and used to guide project

i) Construct Insectary ii) procure and install G-radion source, tsetse production units and other equipment’s , iii) Produce sterile male flies

Tsetse-mass rearing insectary established at NaLIRRI, Tororo.

300 breeding females being produced from insectary

i) Insectary completed and functional by PY6

i) Train village level field technicians ii) Procure and deploy traps iii) execute pour on, treat infected cattle and undertake iv) Sequentially release SMF v) deploy barriers where required

i) Communities sensitized ii) District teams formed iiii) traps procured and deployed iv) pour on activities applied v) diminazene procured and used to treat cattle vi) flies released vii) barriers created

Prevalence of Nagana reduced to less than 0.8 % in the tsetse suppressed areas Tsetse popualtion suppressed in project intervention area

i) 100 Sub counties in 15 districts in Tsetse infested area sensitized, by end of PY 5, ii) 15 Tsetse control teams in target communities, undertaking trap deployment and maintenance iii) 150 Training session organized in 15 target

6

districts by PY5 with 100% of the 150 sub-counties involved in organizing voluntary participation among the communities iv) 440,000lts of insecticide procured for 5 cycles in15,000 km2 by PY6, ) 99,000 traps deployed and serviced, v) 100,000 sachets procured

i) Diagnose and treat infected people ii) Conduct adaptive research to refine bait and SIT technologies

People screened and treated for sleeping sickness in the project areas

i) Sleeping sickness cases reduced to less than 5 cases per sub county per year

i) Develop plan for suppression and eradication

strategic plan for suppression and eradication of tsetse and trypanosomiasis in whole country developed

Strategic plan in place

Component 2 2.1 Develop and install data base management system and GIS hardware and software ii)acquire, check and incorporate data iii)

1. Integrated IMS established and operational , ii ) Computers procured and Internet connection installed

A pool of competent technical staff and empowered institutions ready to manage T&T data, diagnosis , control and prevention

hardware and software procured, installed and functioning by PY2

2.2 Train technical staff in T&T Management

2. Regional and national capacity for coordinated eradication of T&T strengthened

i) PCMUs staff trained in ICT by PY3 ii) 268 extension staff trained in project related activities within PY2 - PY6 iii) 600 community members trained in identification of flies, keeping of records, and setting and repairing traps by EoYr 6

2.3 Support National Environmental Agency to carry out Periodic Environmental Audit of the project

3. National Capacity for Environmental audit strengthened

2.4 Equip and /or rehabilitate training centers

4. Selected training facilities strengthened

7

Component 3 3.1 Recruit PCMU staff ii) establish and equip PCMU office , iii) Establish regular communication between all levels iv) Execute periodic reporting and meeting schedules

i) Project PCMU functional ii) Systems for information exchange and coordination between national PCMUs, PATTEC focal points and Regional PATTEC Office established

Project effectively and efficiently executed to completion

i) 6 key PCMU personnel in place by Py1 ii) Assorted project equipment procured timely . Iii) Management and Financial Manuals in Place. Iv) M&E Framework in place by PY2, MT review conducted by PY4 and Final Evaluation Report by EoPY6 iv) Disbursement s and procurements of works, goods and services done according to schedule

5. For each dimension of the log. frame, provide a brief assessment (up to two sentences) of the extent to which the log. frame achieved the following. Insert a working score, using the scoring scale provided in Appendix 1. If no log. frame exists, score this section as a 1 (one).

LOG. FRAME DIMENSIONS ASSESSMENT WORKING SCORE

LOGICAL

a) Presents a logical causal chain for achieving the project development objectives

The logical causal chain was sound in the original project design until design changes were made. There was a vertical gap from results to project purpose

3

MEASURABLE

b) Expresses objectives and outcomes in a way that is measurable and quantifiable

To an extent yes except for some indicators that were drawn at regional and not collapsed to national level 2

THOROUGH c) States the risks and key assumptions

Yes they were well stated 3

8

D. OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES

I. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTPUTS

In the table below, assess the achievement of actual vs. expected outputs for each major activity. Import the expected outputs from the log. frame in Section C. Score the extent to which the expected outputs were achieved. Weight the scores by the activities' approximate share of project costs. Weighted scores are auto-calculated by the computer. The overall output score will be auto-calculated as the sum of the weighted scores. Override the auto-calculated score, if desired, and provide justification.

MAJOR ACTIVITIES

Working Score Share of Project Costs

in percentage (as stated in Appraisal Report)

Weighted Score (auto-

calculated)

Expected Outputs Actual Outputs

Component 1: i) 3,000 Community leaders sensitized ii) 15 District teams formed iiii) 94,000 traps procured and deployed iv) 100,000 pour on satchets procured and applied on livestock v) sterile tsetse flies released vi) 1 tsetse-mass rearing insectary established at NaLIRRI vii) strategic plan for suppression and eradication of tsetse and trypanosomiasis in whole country developed

a) 150,000 pour on satchets (150% of target) purcahsed and applied on 473,000 head of cattle in 15 districts, b) 114,800 tsetse traps (121% of target) procured and deployed in 15 districts c) 0.5% of targeted flies produced and no barriers created c) Insectary established and completed d) Strategic plan for suppression and eradication developed but not operational, 15 district teams formed and (f) over 3,400 community leaders were sensitised on T&T.

3 61 1.83

9

Component 2: i) an Integrated IMS established and operational , ii ) Computers procured and Internet connection installed iii) Regional and national capacity for coordinated eradication of T&T strengthened iv) Selected training facilities strengthened

a) Integrated IMS established, b) computers purchased and internet connected c) capacities for coordinated suppression of T&T strengthened. d) 53 Extension staff trained and communities participated in the T&T suppression

3 7 0.21

Component 3: i) Baseline report on households available ii) National Capacity for Environmental audit strengthened Broad iii) land use planning information, Sustainable Land Management Guidelines” and supporting leaflets developed, Improved capacity for village and farm level land use planning and land husbandry, and Complimentary agricultural development projects and issues identified and promoted.

a) One Baseline report produced and used b) All other activities not done and no outputs

1 0.1 0.001

Component 4: i) Project PCMU functional ii) Systems for information exchange and coordination between national PCMUs, PATTEC focal points and Regional PATTEC Office established

a) Activities to enhance and support PCMU were undertaken b) PCMU functional c) Project implementation only 3 components carried out

3 29 0.87

OVERALL OUTPUT SCORE [Score is calculated as the sum of weighted scores]

3

Check here to override the auto-calculated score

Provide justification for over-riding the auto-calculated score

Insert the new score or re-enter the autocalculated score 3

10

II. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOMES

1. Using available monitoring data, assess the achievement of expected outcomes. Import the expected outcomes from the log. frame

in Section C. Score the extent to which the expected outcomes were achieved. The overall outcome score will be auto-calculated as an average of the working scores. Override the auto-calculated score, if desired, and provide justification.

OUTCOMES Working

Score Expected Actual

15,000 sq. km of tsetse infested area is suppressed to less than one fly per trap per day

12, 312 sq. km was suppressed. Indicator on no of flies per trap per day was not specific some had that as baseline

3

All sub-counties (90) to have a least 75% reduction in the apparent density of tse tse flies

Only 56 out of 90 (62% ) were able to achieve 75% reduction in fly densities

2

OVERALL OUTCOME SCORE [Score is calculated as an average of the working scores]

3

Check here to override the auto-calculated score

Provide justification for over-riding the auto-calculated score

Insert the new score or re-enter the autocalculated score 3

2. Additional outcomes. Comment on the project's additional outcomes not captured in the log. frame, including cross-cutting issues (e.g., gender). The main purpose of the pour-on spraying of livestock (live baits) was to suppress tsetse fly populations. This had an anticipated outcome of reducing ticks and other insect-related problems on the livestock. This increased the interest of farmers to use the pour-on method. Although the project did not gather socio-economic data concerning productivity of the animals, hence making it difficult to translate the activities into changes within the animals in real terms which in the long run would translate to economic achievements, the beneficiaries attested to observing improved body conditions of the animals, animals increasing feeding as they were less affected by biting flies. Other farmers mentioned increased milk production. In terms of veterinary costs, a few beneficiaries related the free drugs (accaricide) and less ticks on the body to reduced veterinary costs as these interventions led to reduce number of calls on the veterinary doctor. By design, the project focused on livestock owners and therefore had limited focus on gender concerns. Environmental concerns were originally embedded in the sustainable land use/management component, which could not be implemented, and as a result, environmental surveys and audits were not undertaken. On the other hand, the multinational nature of the Project enabled staff in the participating countries to learn from each other’s' experiences for capacity building. Small insectaries are being developed in each of these countries which present an opportunity for continued research and collaboration for future T&T control and eradication interventions.

3. Risks to sustained achievement of outcomes. State the factors that affect, or could affect, the long-run or sustained achievement of project outcomes. Indicate if any new activity or institutional change is recommended to help sustain outcomes. The analysis should draw upon the sensitivity analysis in Annex 3, where appropriate.

There is a significant risk that the project benefits will not be sustained. The project has carried out sensitization activities, trained staff and involved communities, but if further mechanisms to ensure sustainability in terms of, for example, government budgetary allocations, community co-participation and sensitisation of decision makers (Parliament and government leaders) for political support are not adopted, sustainability of the project outcomes will be affected. The project interventions have suppressed the tsetse population within the Project area by only 50-75%. Discussions with technical teams indicate that the buildup of the tsetse population can reach the original level within two years if tsetse suppression activities are not sustained. The mission was informed that Government has planned for UGX 1.4 billion during the financial year 2012/2013 to continue with some of the project activities. Although the allocation is small, it is a sign that Government recognizes the adverse effects of an increasing tsetse problem among her communities. It is, however, recommended that the Government should increase its allocation of funds to these activities to enable the Executing Agency to sustain the current intensity of project implementation. Government is also preparing a new project proposal that will enable extensive interventions in the sub-sector, including use of aerial spraying for tsetse eradication. The proposal will be submitted to various development partners, including the Bank for possible financing. The Executing Agency should expedite processing of this proposal.

11

E. PROJECT DESIGN AND READINESS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 1. State the extent to which the Bank and the Borrower ensured the project was commensurate with the Borrower’s

capacity to implement by designing the project appropriately and by putting in place the necessary implementation arrangements. Consider all major design aspects, such as extent to which project design took into account lessons learned from previous PCRs in the sector or the country (please cite key PCRs); whether the project was informed by robust analytical work (please cite key documents); how well Bank and Borrower assessed the capacity of the implementing agencies and/or Project Implementation Unit; scope of consultations and partnerships; economic rationale of project; and provisions made for technical assistance. [200 words maximum. Any additional narrative about implementation should be included at Annex 6: Project Narrative]

The project drew on some lessons from past similar Bank-funded projects like the National Livestock Productivity Improvement Project (NLPIP). From a positive angle, the project invested in staff capacity building which contributed significantly in applying relevant technologies. The national capacity to handle GIS and use GPRS to undertake tsetse survey and map tsetse infested areas was enhanced. Capacity to manage the insectary and breed sterile male flies is in place. On the other hand, previous projects included a sustainability component like community management committees and charging user fees for services, which this project lacked. The National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) and Farming in tsetse free areas (FITCA) embedded cost sharing fees to strengthen ownership and reduce dependency on free services which this project did not adopt. Whereas community participation was inbuilt, the immediate communities where traps were deployed were not fully involved in trap management. The project also commendably included a comprehensive baseline study covering all relevant aspects (parasitological, entomological, environmental and socio-economic) which would inform the design and implementation although this report was delayed limiting its usefulness. However, the original design of using sterile male tsetse flies from Ethiopia for tsetse eradication interventions eventually became a very big drawback.

2. For each dimension of project design and readiness for implementation, provide a brief assessment (up to two sentences). Insert a working score, using the scoring scale provided in Appendix 1.

PROJECT DESIGN AND READINESS FOR IMPLEMENTATION DIMENSIONS

ASSESSMENT WORKING

SCORE

REALISM

a) Project complexity is matched with country capacity and political commitment.

The project had strong commitment from both GoU and MAAIF as has been with other previous Bank Livestock projects. The plan to import sterile tsetse flies from another government became a key challenge to implementation leading to cancellation of these activities. The project however met its new targets after the change to suppression was agreed in March 2010.

3

RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION

b) Project design includes adequate risk analysis.

The project design included adequate risk analysis in the project appraisal report and log frame including assumptions and mitigation measures for some of the risks within limits of the project control.

3

USE OF COUNTRY SYSTEMS

c) Project procurement, financial management, monitoring and/or other systems are based on those already in use by government and/or other partners.

The Project used both the Bank’s and Government procurement procedures. The use of both and bureaucratic government procedures resulted in significant procurement delays. The country's Financial systems including planning, accounting procedures and reporting were followed. The M&E systems were in place and reporting Quarterly and annually in a timely manner although some key socio-economic data was missing.

2

12

For the following dimensions, provide separate working scores for Bank performance and Borrower performance:

WORKING SCORE

Bank Borrower

CLARITY d) Responsibilities for project implementation were clearly defined.

Responsibilities for project implementation were clearly identified at design and Appraisal.

3 3

PROCUREMENT READINESS

e) Necessary implementation documents (e.g. specifications, design, procurement documents) were ready at appraisal.

The relevant implementation documents for specifications, designs and procurement were ready at appraisal. However during implementation several changes had to be undertaken in procurement.

3 2

MONITORING

READINESS

f) Monitoring indicators and monitoring plan were agreed upon before project launch.

Evaluation indicators at Regional level were agreed upon at the beginning. A national M&E framework was agreed upon before the project launch, although necessary adjustments were not made after change of the project design from eradication to suppression.

3 3

BASELINE DATA

h) Baseline data were available or are were collected during project design.

A baseline survey was undertaken with significant but insufficient baseline data in some areas. The baseline report which was due in PY 2 was only completed in PY5

2 1

F. IMPLEMENTATION

1. State the major characteristics of project implementation with reference to: adherence to schedules, quality of construction or other work, performance of consultants, effectiveness of Bank supervision, and effectiveness of Borrower oversight. Assess how well the Bank and the Borrower ensured compliance with safeguards. [200 words maximum. [Any additional narrative about implementation should be included at Annex 6: Project Narrative.]

There were indications that certain service providers (e.g. Consultants for the baseline study) did not perform well, thus negatively affecting project implementation. On the borrower’s side, the procurement process suffered delays throughout project implementation due to the concurrent application of both Bank and Government rules and procedures. Audit reports were not submitted in time mainly due to complex institutional procedures within Government. Regarding environmental safeguards, there was no systematic follow-up and reporting of environmental and social safeguards. The baseline study included environmental issues, but there was no systematic monitoring system in place for follow-up and reporting. Based on discussions with District staff, there appears to have been consideration given to chemical disposal and safety of personnel. The ESMP should have been revisited when the focus of the project was changed from eradication to suppression activities, the latter with less potential environmental impacts. However, the project performance improved since 2010, with most of the outputs delivered as planned, and the last audit report was unqualified. In terms of oversight by Government, a multi-disciplinary steering committee was in place and it played a significant role in advising the PCMU and Executing Agency on technical matters. Senior Government officials, including District Leaders, Permanent Secretaries and Ministers participated in monitoring of Project activities. On the Bank’s side, the STATFA team reported that some more flexibility was desirable from the Bank in terms of accepting alternative T&T techniques and allowing for an extension of the last disbursement deadline, which could have allowed the Project to achieve much better tsetse suppression rates.

13

2. Comment on the role of other partners (e.g. donors, NGOs, contractors, etc.). Assess the effectiveness of co-financing arrangements and of donor coordination, if applicable.

Government counterpart funding requirements were not met; the counterpart funding was significantly lower than expected. At the end of the project in December 2011, 100% of the new loan amount and 100% of the grant amount had been disbursed to GoU. However, in regard to GoU contribution only 51% of the planned funds were released to the Project. The contract for baseline was delayed due to a delayed procurement process. Construction of the insectary was also delayed due to contractual challenges. The Project did not have any other co-financing arrangements.

3. Harmonization. State whether the Bank made explicit efforts to harmonize instruments, systems and/or approaches with other partners.

The project design stipulated that the project was to be implemented within existing GoU mechanisms. A PCMU of 5 staff was the initial design. However due to a need to speed up procurement and audit reporting, a procurement Officer and an accountant were recruited and seconded to the PCMU . A National Steering Committee (NST) and T&T committee were also established to guide and support project implementation.

4. For each dimension of project implementation, assess the extent to which the project achieved the following. Provide a brief assessment (up to two sentences) and insert a working score, using the scoring scale provided in Appendix 1.

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION DIMENSIONS ASSESSMENT WORKING

SCORE

TIMELINESS

a) Extent of project adherence to the original closing date. If the number on the right is: below 12, "4" is automatically scored between 12.1 to 24, "3" is automatically scored between 24.1 to 36, "2" is automatically scored beyond 36.1, "1" is automatically scored

Difference in months between original closing date and actual closing date or date of 98% disb. rate. (auto-generated)

The project closed at the stipulated closing date, December 31st 2011

4

0.0

BANK PERFORMANCE

Bank

Environmental Safeguards

There was no environmental and social safeguards before implementing the project. It was not cleared by the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). The baseline study included environmental issues, but there was no systematic monitoring system in place for follow-up and reporting

1

Fiduciary Requirements

A total of 5 financial audits were carried out. The Bank ensured that recommendations of these audits were implemented. The Bank also ensured compliance with procurement and disbursement guidelines

2

Project Covenants All project covenants were complied with. 3

c) Bank provided quality supervision in the form of skills mix and practicality of solutions

The Bank conducted 10 field supervision missions to assess progress, identify bottlenecks, and provide guidance for implementation. Mission recommendations were useful to Project management. However, some of the missions lacked sufficient skill mix to advise project technical issues - e.g. entomological dimension.

2

14

d) Bank provided quality management oversight

The Bank was responsive to the needs of the Project and responded to government requests in time. The Bank influenced changes in project managers on two occasions that has enabled the project achieve its objectives.

3


e) Borrower complied with:

Environmental Safeguards

There was no environmental and social safeguards before implementing the project. It was not cleared by the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA). There was no systematic follow-up and reporting of environmental and social safeguards. The ESMP should have been revisited when the focus of the project was changed from eradication to suppression activities, the latter with less potential environmental impacts..

1

Fiduciary Requirements

All audits were undertaken; however we note that the submission was always delayed mainly due complex institutional procedures within Government, as well as delays in the procurement of the audit services. The last audit report was unqualified.

2

Project Covenants All project covenants were complied with 3

f) Borrower was responsive to Bank supervision findings and recommendations

The borrower was responsive to Bank supervision findings and recommendations. This is partly why the project was completed on time and realised some outputs as planned despite the change in the initial design and delays in procurement

3

g) Borrower collected and used monitoring information for decision making

A baseline study was done. The PCMU collected and used project monitoring findings, however, the information in the baseline report and the monitoring data for outcomes are inadequate. For example there are no socio-economic data collected.

2

G. COMPLETION 1. IS THE PCR DELIVERED ON A TIMELY BASIS, IN COMPLIANCE WITH BANK POLICY?

Date project reached 98% disb. Rate (or closing date if applicable) (auto-generated)

Date PCR was sent to [email protected] MM/DD/YY

Difference in months (auto-calculated)

WORKING SCORE if the difference is 6 months or less, a 4 is scored. If the difference is 6.1 or more, a 1 is scored (auto-calculated)

12/31/11 06/30/12 6.1 4 2. Briefly describe the PCR Process. Describe the Borrower’s and co-financers' involvement in producing the document. Highlight any major differences of opinion concerning the assessments made in this PCR. Describe the team composition and confirm whether a site visit was undertaken. Mention any major collaboration from other development partners. State the extent of field office involvement in producing the report. Indicate whether comments from Peer Reviewers were received on time (provide names and positions of Peer Reviewers). [100 words maximum]

15

PCR was jointly undertaken by the Bank and GoU. Discussions were held with: UGFO, Permanent Secretary and Technical Staff MAAIF, PCMU, Director Livestock Health and Entomology MAAIF and representatives from Finance Ministry. The team visited selected project sites in Buikwe, Mukono, Iganga, Kaliro, Tororo and Mayuge Districts where discussions were held with farmers, communities, district officials (Veterinary Officers, Agriculture Production Officers, Entomologists, Extension workers) & Chief Administrative Officers.The team comprised of Chief Policy Economist, Chief Quality Assurance Specialist, UGFO Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist, Livestock Expert Consultant and Agricultural Economist Consultant. The Government team had the Project Coordinator and his Deputy, M&E Officer, GIS and Data Specialist, Accountant, Procurement Officer, Principal Entomologist, Evaluation Officer, Senior Livestock Officer, and Administrator. The draft PCR was peer reviewed and comments received and incorporated in time. The peer reviewers were Messrs.’ M.S. BA (Chief Agronomist, GAFO), P. AGBOMA (Chief Operations Officer, OSAN.2), A. Ba (Senior Agricultural Economist, OSAN.3), and A. DJIRO (Agronomist, MLFO).

H. LESSONS LEARNED

Summarize key lessons for the Bank and the Borrower suggested by the project’s outcomes [250 words maximum. Any additional narrative about lessons learned, if needed, must be placed in Annex 6: Project Narrative]

(i) Design and implementation: When original techniques are considered to be inappropriate, decisions need to be quickly taken to adopt a more cost-effective approach and there should be flexibility on both sides (Borrower and Bank) including the possibility to extend the project duration. The Bank should be more flexible when responding to Government proposals regarding project design and implementation (in particular related to technological solutions), and ensure timely response to changing circumstances that may affect project implementation. When reformulating a project, revised targets/indicators for both outcomes and outputs should be agreed upon. (ii) Counterpart funding: The Borrower needs to commit sufficient budget allocations to ensure sufficient geographic coverage and impact. The Borrower and Bank should adopt more flexible approaches to calculating counterpart funding (e.g. land, salaries, and office space) and ensure a systematic monitoring and reporting mechanism. Waiving the counterpart requirements in future projects should also be considered. (iii) Follow-up and reporting: Procurement of goods and services and submission of audit reports should be done in a timely manner. The project should have a monitoring mechanism to follow up and report on environmental and social safeguards. The log frame should have socio-economic indicators at the outcome level that are achievable, monitorable and economical within the project timeframe. (iv) Sustainability: The Borrower should increase its budgetary allocations to the project to avoid the high risks of tsetse population buildup hence eroding all the positive achievements of the project which can occur within two years. All interventions should include community co-participation and encourage group collaboration as well as cost sharing. Specific mechanisms should be put in place to engage with the private sector (e.g. stockiest) and involvement of other stakeholders (e.g. schools, civil society) to further enhance sustainability. Decision makers (Parliament and government leaders) should be sensitized for political support. (v) Regional collaboration: Although promoting regional collaboration is desirable, the project design should undertake a thorough baseline assessment to support decision making to minimize dependence on other countries for key project activities.

16

I. PROJECT RATINGS SUMMARY All working scores and ratings are auto-generated by the computer from the relevant section in the PCR.

CRITERIA SUB-CRITERIA WORKING

SCORE

PROJECT OUTCOME

Achievement of outputs 3

Achievement of outcomes 3

Timeliness 4

OVERALL PROJECT OUTCOME SCORE 3

BANK PERFORMANCE

Design and Readiness

Project Objectives were relevant to country development priorities. 3

Project Objectives could in principle be achieved with the project inputs and in the expected time frame.

2

Project Objectives were consistent with the Bank’s country or regional strategy 3

Project Objectives were consistent with the Bank’s corporate priorities 3

The log frame presents a logical causal chain for achieving the project development objectives. 3

The log frame expresses objectives and outcomes in a way that is measurable and quantifiable. 2

The log frame states the risks and key assumptions. 3

Project complexity was matched with country capacity and political commitment. 3

Project design includes adequate risk analysis. 3

Project procurement, financial management, monitoring and/or other systems were based on those already in use by government and/or other partners. 2

Responsibilities for project implementation were clearly defined. 3

Necessary implementation documents (e.g. specifications, design, procurement documents) were ready at appraisal. 3

Monitoring indicators and monitoring plan were agreed upon during design. 3

Baseline data was available or were collected during design. 2

PROJECT DESIGN AND READINESS SUB-SCORE 3

Supervision:

Bank complied with:

Environmental Safeguards 1

Fiduciary Requirements 2

Project Covenants 3

Bank provided quality supervision in the form of skills mix provided and practicality of solutions.

2

Bank provided quality management oversight. 3

PCR was delivered on a timely basis 4

SUPERVISION SUB-SCORE 3

OVERALL BANK PERFORMANCE SCORE 3

17


Design and Readiness

Responsibilities for project implementation are clearly defined. 3

Necessary implementation documents (e.g. specifications, design, procurement documents) are ready at appraisal.

2

Monitoring indicators and monitoring plan are agreed upon 3

Baseline data are available or are being collected 1

PROJECT DESIGN AND READINESS SCORE 2

Implementation

Borrower complied with:

Environmental Safeguards 1

Fiduciary Requirements 2

Project Covenants 3

Borrower was responsive to Bank supervision findings and recommendations. 3

Borrower collected and used of monitoring information for decision-making. 2

IMPLEMENTATION SUB-SCORE 2

OVERALL BORROWER PERFORMANCE SCORE 2

J. PROCESSING STEP SIGNATURE AND COMMENTS DATE

Sector Manager Clearance

Regional Director Clearance

Sector Director Approval

APPENDIX 1

Scale for Working Scores and Ratings

SCORE EXPLANATION

4 Very Good- Fully achieved with no shortcomings

3 Good- Mostly achieved despite a few shortcomings

2 Fair- Partially achieved. Shortcomings and achievements are roughly balanced

1 Poor- Very limited achievement with extensive shortcomings

NA Non Applicable

Note: The formulas round up or down for decimal points. Only whole numbers are computed.

LIST OF ANNEXES

Mandatory

1. Project Costs and Financing a. Project costs by component b. Financing by sources of funds

2. Bank Inputs. List the key team members, and their specialties, during preparation and supervision. Provide a consolidated list of Preparation, Supervision and Completion Missions in chronological order. Provide the date and ratings of the last supervision report.

3. Economic Analysis (ERR) and Financial Analysis, if appropriate Re-estimate the economic rates of return based on costs and benefits at completion, and compare with apprailsal estimates. Break down by components as appropriate. Analyze the sensitivity of the ERR to key assumptions. Present a financial analysis for project beneficiary entities.

4. Procurement Plan. Please attached the most recent Procurement Plan

5. List of Supporting Documents

Optional

6. Project Narrative. Key factors not covered in the main template that affected the design and implementation of the project. Such factors, both positive and negative, could include: climate and weather, political changes, contractual or personnel matters, technical issues, procurement processes, and interactions with other partners. If any of these factors is significant enough to affect the evaluation ratings, it should be noted in the template with a reference to this annex.

Annexes for Creation of Sustainable Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Free Areas in East and West

Africa Uganda Component PCR

Annex 1

Project Costs and Financing

(a) Project Costs by Components (actual amount disbursed)

(UA’000) %

Components Foreign

Cost

Local

Cost

Total Cost Foreign

Cost

Suppression and Eradication

Capacity Building

Sustainable Land Management

Coordination and Management

2,309

171

0

273

651

114

0

77

2,960

285

0

350

78.0%

60.0%

00.0%

78.0%

TOTAL 2,753 842 3,595 76.6%

(b) Project Costs by Categories

Category Total Amount Disbursed (UA’000) % of Total

Cost

Goods 2,257 62.8%

Works 0 0.0%

Services 368 10.2%

Operations 970 27.0%

TOTAL 3,595 100.0%

(c) Financing by Sources of Funds (UA’000) – Actual Expenditure

Source Foreign

Cost

Local

Cost

Total % Total Cost

ADF Loan

TAF

GoU

2,621

132

0

739

103

548

3,360

235

548

81.1%

05.7%

13.2%

Total 2,753 1,390 4,143 100.0%

Annex 2

Bank Inputs

Appraisal Team:

E. KASALU-Coffin, Principal Agricultural Economist, OCAR.2 (mission leader); C.L. TAWAH, Senior Livestock Expert,

ONAR.1; B. BOEDTS, Principal Agronomist, OCAR.1; A. DIAW, Senior Financial Analyst, OCAR.3; M. TRAORE, Senior

Environmental Expert, OCAR.0; R. Ba Gender Expert, OCAR.0

Supervision Missions:

Type of Supervision and Mission Members Dates

1. Launching (C. Ojukwu, Chief Agricultural Economist/Team leader; C. L. Tawah, Senior Livestock Expert; J. Ribeiro,

Principal Procurement Specialist; and R. Peprah Principal Financial Analyst

07/02/2006 – 08/02/2006

2. Field Supervision (C. Ojukwu, Chief Agricultural Economist; S. Babale, Senior Financial Analyst; and A. Nuwagira,

Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist).

05/02/2007 – 16/02/2007

3. Field Supervision (C. L. Tawah, Senior Livestock Expert/Team Leader; J. Kabyemera, Senior Agricultural Economist; A.

Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist; and M. Nandujja, Procurement Assistant).

15/08/2007 – 28/08/2007

4. Sector Portfolio Improvement Plan/ Field Supervision (C. Ojukwu, Manager OSAN.1/Team Leader; C. L. Tawah,

Principal Livestock Officer; J. Ribeiro, Principal Procurement Specialist; R. Peprah, Principal Financial Analyst;

11/08/2008 – 22/08/2008

5. Sector Portfolio Improvement Plan/Field Supervision (C. Ojukwu, Manager OSAN.1; J. Ribeiro, Principal Procurement

Specialist; R. Peprah Principal Financial Analyst; C. Ndi, Consultant Livestock Production Expert; A. Nuwagira,

Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist and G. Kagoro, Disbursement Assistant)

14/04/2009 – 01/05/2009

6. Sector Portfolio Improvement Plan/ Field Supervision (C. Ojukwu, Manager OSAN.1/ Mission Leader; Justus

Kabyemera, Principal Agricultural Economist; A. Byll-Cataria, Gender Expert; M. Nandujja, Procurement Assistant

(UGFO); A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist; and, G. Kagoro, Disbursement Assistant)

23/11/2009 – 04/12/2009

7. Sector Portfolio Improvement Plan/Field Supervision (C. Ojukwu, Manager, OSAN.1/Mission Leader); J. Kabyemera,

Principal Agricultural Economist; R. Peprah, Principal Financial Management Specialist; A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and

Rural Development Specialist; G. Kagoro, Disbursement Assistant, and M. Nandujja, Procurement Assistant)

22/03/2010 – 01/04/2010

8. Field Supervision (A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist/Mission Leader and G. Kagoro,

Disbursement Assistant)

06/10/2010 – 15/10/2010

9. Sector Portfolio Improvement Plan/Field Supervision (A. Mend, OIC OSAN.1/Mission Leader, K. Numasawa, Financial

Analyst, YP, OSAN.0, A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist, M. Nandujja, Procurement Assistant,

and G. Kagoro, Disbursement Assistant),

21/03/2011 – 01/04/2011

10. Field Supervision (A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist/ Mission Leader; and G. Kagoro,

Disbursement Assistant)

01/08/2011 – 12/08/2011

11. PCR Mission (A. Nuwagira, Agriculture and Rural Development Specialist /Mission Leader; J. Mugisha, Consultant

Agricultural Economist; and R. Azuba, Consultant Livestock Specialist)

19/03/2012 – 30/03/2012

The Project’s last supervision mission was undertaken from 1-12 August 2011 and the ratings are presented below.

INDICATORS

RATINGS

Precedings report This report

01.08.2011 23.11.2009 22.03.2010 06.10.2010 21.03.2011

A. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

Compliance with loan conditions precedent to entry into force 3 3 3 3 3

Compliance with General Conditions 3 3 3 3 3

Compliance with Other Conditions 3 3 3 3 3

B. PROCUREMENT PERFORMANCE

Procurement of Consultancy Services 2 2 2 2 3

Procurement of Goods and Works 1 2 2 2 3

C. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

Availability of Foreign Exchange 3 3 3 3 3

Availability of Local Currency 2 2 2 3 3

Disbursement Flows 1 1 2 2 3

Cost Management 2 2 2 2 2

Performance of Co-Financiers 0 3 3

D. ACTIVITIES AND WORKS

Adherence to implementation schedule 1 1 2 2 3

Performance of Consultants or Technical Assistance 1 2 2 2 3

Performance of Contractors 0 2 3 3 3

Performance of Project Management 1 1 2 3 3

E. IMPACT ON DEVELOPMENT

Likelihood of achieving development Objectives 2 2 2 2 3

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

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

Current Rate of Return 1 1 1 2 2

F. OVERALL PROJECT ASSESMENT

Current Supervision Average

1.67

2.00

2.24

2.50

2.89

Current Trend over time

2.26

RATINGS: 3 = Highly Satisfactory, 2 = Satisfactory, 1 = Unsatisfactory, 0 = Highly Unsatisfactory, ‘ ‘ = Non applicable

STATUS

Implementation Progress (IP) = 2.93

Development Objectives (DO) = 2.75

OVERALL STATUS : NON PROBLEMATIC PROJECT / NON POTENTIALY PROBLEMATIC PROJECT /

Annex 3

Financial and Economic Analysis

The original project design was a combination of interventions including tsetse fly suppression and eradication, and sustainable land management.

The plan was to undertake these interventions in a period of five years. However, the design was later changed dropping the tsetse fly eradication

and sustainable land management components. There were also significant delays to an extent that implementation was only in the last two years of

the project life. The baseline was completed in 2010 and traps were deployed in 2011. This led to half of the activities of the project being dropped

which affected the original goals as well as the efficiency of the project.

Despite the challenges of project restructuring, a lot was achieved in the last two years of the project. The project targeted an area of 15,000 km2

and 82% (12,312 km2) of this was achieved, and tsetse fly suppression level has been estimated at 50-75%. This area is relatively safe for both

livestock and humans, hence expected to be conducive for improved crop and livestock production. Although there are no accurate records of the

total population of cattle, by close of the project (December 2011), a total of 1,021,966 pour-ons had been undertaken on 473,593 heads of cattle,

benefiting a total of 44,495 farmers. Although no baseline and monitoring data exist to determine the change in socio-economic indicators of the

project, healthy animals have higher productivity and humans with reduced risks and fears of sleeping sickness are more productive in the crop

sector in terms of the time spent in the gardens and the coverage/size of cultivated land.

Livestock is mainly used for milk and meat production, ploughing the land (done by oxen), and income generation when sold live. Discussion with

communities during the mission visit to the project areas indicated that where oxen were used for ploughing, their work efficiency had significantly

improved. Although they could not quantify, farmers were satisfied with the project in terms of the health and productivity of their livestock. They

reported their livestock looked healthier and some reported improvement in milk production. Healthy looking animal means improved economic value

of the animal.

Because they were using pour-on insecticide which kills both tsetse flies and other pests such as ticks, the farmers reported a reduction in the costs

associated with animal treatment, and prevention and control of pests and diseases.

The period of effective implementation of the project interventions was too short to realize impact in terms of calving, milk production, meat off take

and work efficiency (for the case of the ploughing oxen). It was also too short to undertake a comprehensive assessment to determine socio-

economic benefits. Besides, the project monitoring mechanism did not have a provision to capture any short-term socio-economic outputs and

outcomes. Another challenge regarding economic analysis is that the baseline study does not give sufficient data. There is also no country-specific

appraisal report, hence no specific ERR calculated for Uganda. The existing appraisal report, estimating the ERR at 17.9% is at multinational level

and it is difficult to isolate the Ugandan case. Furthermore, the multinational appraisal report includes all the components of the project as originally

planned. Therefore, the ERR at the time of PCR could not be re-estimated due to unavailability of data.

Nonetheless, based on the significant reduction in the population of the tsetse flies, the number of cattle treated and the human capacity built, the

social and economic situation is much better than it was before the project. The key issue is sustaining and improving the outcomes that have so far

been achieved.

As a lesson, future project log frames should include socio-economic indicators at the outcome level that are achievable within the project timeframe.

In addition, monitoring systems should be designed to adequately capture socio-economic data throughout the life of the project. At appraisal stage,

economic analysis in multinational projects should be calculated at the level of each country, and baseline studies should be comprehensively done

to capture all the socio-economic data.

Most Recent Procurement Plan Annex 4

1. General Fill gray cells only!

Country/Organisation: UGANDA/MAAIF

Project/Programme: Creation For Sustainable Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis free area in East and West Africa.

Loan No: ADF2100150009197

Implementing Agency, Address: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

Bank's Approval Date of Procurement Plan:

Date of General Procurement Notice:

Period Covered by these Proc. Plans: Financial Year 2010/2011

G O O D S

2. Prior Review Threshold: Procurement decisions subject to Prior Review by the Bank as

stated in the Appraisal Report

Goods and Non-Consulting (see Note 1)

Prior review

Procurement Method Threshold Comments

(UAequiv.)

1. International Competitive Method (ICB)

2. Limited International (LM)

3. National Competitive Method (NCB)

4. National Shopping (NS)

5. International Shopping (IS)

6.

3. Procurement Packages with Methods and Time Schedule BASIC DATA

Description of Contract Lot

Number Quantities Procured

Estimated Amount in USD

Procurement Method

Pre-or Post Qualification

Dom/Reg. Preference

(Y/N)

Prior or Post Review

Date bidding docs ready

Date of Bank no objection

Date Contract

Committee approval

Expected Date Issue of

Bid Docs

Expected Bid closing

Date

CAMPING EQUIPMENTS

1 15,000

NCB

N/A N/A

Prior

20 FEB 09 5 Mar 09 19 Aug 09 8 OCT 09 12 Dec 09

PROTECTIVE WEAR/WADERS/IMPREGNATION GEAR

17,500 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010

WATER TRANSPORT CANOE &OUTBOARD ENGINE

14,687 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010

ISOMETAMIDIUM CLORIDE 5000 39,340 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jan 2010 15 Jan 2010 7th Feb 2010 14th Feb 2010 30 Mar 010

GLOBAL POSITINIG SYSTEM

20 13,280 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jan 2010 15 Jan 2010 7th Feb 2010 14th Feb 2010 30 Mar 010

LCD AND LAPTOP COMPUTER

1 2 4,000 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010

VETERINARY DRUGS

50,000 25,000 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 20 FEB 09 5 March 09 05 Oct 09 08 Oct 09 12 Dec 09

HOT FOGGING MACHINE AND FOGGERS INSECTICIDE

1 5 26,000 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 8 Feb 010 15 MAY 010 25 MAY 010 30 May 010 30 Jun 010

TRAPS 1 11000 80,000 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

INSECTICIDE FOR TRAPS

1 420 117,600 IS N/A N/A N/A 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

INSECTICIDE FOR TRAPS 1 1600 litres 320,000 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 18 OCT 09 18 OCT 09 19 NOV 09 20 NOV 09 15 JAN 010

POUR -ON 1 10,000 300,000 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

POUR -ON 1 15,000 600,000 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 22 Dec 010 11th Jan 010 3 Feb 010 8 Feb 2010 26 Mar 010

POUR -ON AND DIMINAZENE 2 1 245,000 IS N/A N/A PRIOR 15th Oct 2010 24th oct 010 5th Nov 010 25TH NOV 010 10th JAN 010

STATION WAGON VEHICLE

1 60,000 NCB N/A N/A PRIOR N/A 20 JUN 010 28 JUN 010 30 July 010

MOTOR VEHICLES (DOUBLE CABIN)

1 4 150,000 NCB N/A N/A PRIOR 14 Sept 09 01 OCT 09 4 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010

BICYCLES

1 575 45,000 NCB N/A N/A PRIOR 5 May 010 10 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010

MATCHETS

1 562 1265 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010

EQUIPMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENT (BINOCULARS) 1 10 8000 NS N/A N/A PRIOR 5 May 010 10 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010

MIST NESTS, COMPASSES,ANIMAL TRAPS, MAPS 1

4,000

SAMPLE CONTAINERS 1 PRIOR 5 May 010 10 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010

CAPACITY BUILDING & AWARENESS MATERIALS

POSTERS

1 5000 7,500 NS N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

BROCURES 1 10000 3,000 NS N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

PROJECTS BOOKLETS 1 1000 3,600 NS N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

SERVICES

DOCUNTARY FOR T &T 1 1 15,000 RFP N/A PRIOR 15 FEB 010 22 FEB 010 15 FEB 010 1ST MAR 010 30 MAR 010

SERVICES FOR PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION 1 1 24,000 RFP N/A PRIOR 15 Jan 2011 15 Jan 2011 7th Feb 2011 14th Feb 2011 30 Mar 011

SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL AUDIT 1 1 20,000 RFP N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

PROCUREMENT OF TALLY SOFT WARE

1 1 3000 RFP N/A PRIOR 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010

SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING MANUALS 1 1 50,000 RFP N/A PRIOR 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010

3. Procurement Packages with Methods and Time Schedule Bid Documents Bidding Period Bid Evaluation


Number Quantities Procured

Transmission Bid Docs Date

No-objection Date

Bid Invitation Date

Bid Closing-Opening

Bid Evaluation Report

Approval by Contracts Committee

No-objection Date

Approval by Sollicitor Gl

CAMPING EQUIPMENTS

1 20 FEB 09 5 March 09 08 Oct 09 12 Dec 09 8 Jan 2010 20 APRI 010 10 FEB 010 N/A


15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010 23 Sept 010 30 Sept 010 6 Oct 010 10 Oct 010


7th Feb 010 15 Jan 2010 14th Feb 2010 30 Mar 010 7 April 010 15th April 010 23 April 10 29 April 10

ISOMETAMIDIUM CLORIDE 5000 7th Feb 010 15 Jan 2010 14th Feb 2010 30 Mar 010 7 April 010 15th April 010 23 April 10 29 April 10


20 20 FEB 09 5 March 09 08 Oct 09 12 Dec 09 8 Jan 2010 20 APRI 010 10 FEB 010 N/A


1 2 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010 30 Sept 010 10 oct 010 N/A

VETERINARY DRUGS

50,000 20 FEB 09 5 March 09 08 Oct 09 12 Dec 09 8 Jan 2010 20 APRI 010 10 FEB 010 N/A


1 5 15 MAY 010 25 MAY 010 30 May 010 30 Jun 010 15Jul 010 30 Jul 010 15 Aug 010 10 Aug 010

TRAPS 1 11000 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010


1 420 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

INSECTICIDE FOR TRAPS 1 1600 litres 19 NOV 09 18 OCT 09 20 NOV 09 15 JAN 010 26 JAN 010 4 FEB 010 18 FEB 010 25 FEB010

POUR -ON 1 10,000 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

POUR -ON 1 15,000 3 Feb 010 11th Jan 010 8 Feb 2010 26 Mar 010 5 April 010 8 April 010 22 April 010 27 April 010

POUR -ON AND DIMINAZENE 2 1 24th oct 010 5th Nov 010 25TH NOV 010 10th JAN 011 15FEB 011 25FEB 011 10 MAR 011 18 MAR 011


1 28 JUN 010 N/A 28 JUN 010 30 July 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010


1 4 14 Sept 09 01 OCT 09 15 Jun 010 30 July 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

BICYCLES

1 575 5 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

24 Nov 010

MATCHETS

1 562 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010 30 Sept 010 10 oct 010 N/A

EQUIPMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENT (BINOCULARS) 1 10 5 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010


SAMPLE CONTAINERS 1 5 May 010 10 May 010 15 Jun 010 30 July 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010


POSTERS


BROCURES 1 10000 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

PROJECTS BOOKLETS 1 1000 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

SERVICES

DOCUNTARY FOR T &T 1 1 15 FEB 010 22 FEB 010 1ST MAR 010 30 MAR 010 9 APRIL 010 16 APRIL 010 30 April 010 30 April 010

SERVICES FOR PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION 1 1 7th Feb 011 15 Jan 2011 14th Feb 2011 30 Mar 011 7 April 011 15th April 11 23 April 11 29 April 11

SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL AUDIT 1 1 22 JUN 010 11th Jul 010 8 Jul 010 26 Jul 010 5 Aug 010 13 Aug 010 22 Aug 010 27 Aug 010

PROCUREMENT OF TALLY SOFT WARE


SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING MANUALS 1 1 15 Jul 2010 15 Jul 2010 7thAug 2010 14th Aug 2010 15 Sept 010 30 Sept 010 10 oct 010 15 Oct 010

3. Procurement Packages with Methods and Time Schedule Contract Award Contract Implementation


Number Quantities Procured Contract Amount in USD Contract Award Dat Contract Signature Date Start Date End Date

CAMPING EQUIPMENTS

1 15,000 21 JUN 010 30 JUN 010 1 JULY 010 15 Aug 010


17,500 8 oct 010 15 Oct 010 15 Nov 010


15 April 010 5 May 010 6 May 010 29 Sept 010

ISOMETAMIDIUM CLORIDE 5000 100,000 15 April 010 5 May 010 6 May 010 15 Jun 010


20 13,280 30 JUN 010 09 JUL 010 12 JUL 010 30 AUG 010


1 2 4,000.00 15 Oct 010 15 Oct 010 16 Oct 010 30 Oct 010

VETERINARY DRUGS

50,000 25,000 21 JUN 010 20 JUL 010 22 JUL 010 15 Aug 010


1 5 26,000 10 Aug 010 25 Aug 010 28 Aug 010 15 Oct 010

TRAPS 1 11000 72,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 oct 2010


1 420 117,600 28 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 oct 2010

INSECTICIDE FOR TRAPS 1 1600 litres 320,000.00 8 FEB 010 3 MAR 010 4 MAR 010 30 JUN 2010

POUR -ON 1 10,000 300,000.00 28 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 oct 2010

POUR -ON 1 15,000 607,880 8 April 010 15 june 2010 16 JUN 010 31 AUG 2010

POUR -ON AND DIMINAZENE 2 1 245,000 3 April 011 5 April 011 6 April 011 20th May 011


1 60,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Nov 010


1 4 150,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Nov 010

BICYCLES

1 575 45,000.00 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Nov 010

15 Sept 010

MATCHETS

1 562 1,265.00 15 Oct 010 15 Oct 010 16 Oct 010 30 Oct 010

EQUIPMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENT (BINOCULARS) 1 10 8,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Nov 010


SAMPLE CONTAINERS 1 8,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Nov 010


POSTERS

1 5000 7,500 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30sept 010

BROCURES 1 10000 3,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 sept 010

PROJECTS BOOKLETS 1 1000 3,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Sept 010

SERVICES

DOCUNTARY FOR T &T 1 1 15,000.00 16 APRIL 010 17 may 010 17 May 010 30 NOV 2010

SERVICES FOR PROJECT FINAL EVALUATION 1 1 24,000 15 April 011 5 May 011 6 May 011 29 Sept 011

SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL AUDIT 1 1 20,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Sept 010

PROCUREMENT OF TALLY SOFT WARE 1 1 3,000 22 Aug 010 30 Aug 010 31 Aug 010 30 Sept 010

SERVICES FOR FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING MANUALS 1 1 50,000 15 Oct 010 15 Oct 010 16 Oct 010 30 Dec 010

Uganda - Creation of Sustainable Tsetse and ......Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign (PATTEC) -...

Documents

Transcript of Uganda - Creation of Sustainable Tsetse and ......Trypanosomiasis Eradication Campaign (PATTEC) -...