1

PCR EVALUATION NOTE (Form)

ANGOLA: ARTISANAL FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (AFDEP) 1. Basic Project Data Country: ANGOLA Project SAP

Reference/No: P-AO-A00-002 2100150006974

Project Title :

ARTISANAL FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (AFDEP)

Sector : AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (FISHERIES)

Appraisal/Planned Actual

Theme Project Costs (MUA)

9.26million UA

Amount cancelled (MUA)

0.00UA`(511,972.50UA undisbursed balance)

Loan/Grant (MUA) ADF:7,000,000 million UA

6,488,027.50million UA

PCR Date 14, July 2011 Co-financing (MUA)

GOA/Beneficiaries: 2.26 million UA

PCR Evaluation Note Date

12,October 2011 Board Approval Date

October, 2002 30-10-2002

Partners Signature Date 20-01-2003 :Effective Date 30-10-2002 17-11-2003 Mid Term Review N/A N/A Project

Completion Date 31-12-09 14-07-2011

Project Officers (Names)

Designation (HQ or FO) From (mm/yy)

To (mm/yy)

C. Ojukwu C.Spencer A. Belleh A. Moussa K. Johm J. Opio-Omoding F. Marttin

Regional Director Sector Director Sector Director Sector Manager Sector Manager Task Manager Task Manager

At Completion At Appraisal

At completion At Approval

At Completion At Approval

At Completion

Evaluator/consultant: Richard Carew Peer Reviewer/Task Manager: Turay Foday 2. Project Description (summary from Appraisal Report including addendum/corrigendum or loan agreement)

a. Rationale and Expected Impacts: .The fisheries sector has the potential of being one of the most economically viable industries in Angola as it currently rates third after oil and diamond mining. Conservative estimate is that it provides half of the animal protein consumed in the country. The average per head per annum fish consumption in Africa is around 7kg,however in Angola it is 11.1kg per head per annum (though this is less than Congo 22kg,Senegal 22.6kg, Sao Tome/Principe 37.6kg,and Seychelles 47.5kg. Like in many African countries fish is a staple food item for Angolans, and value added fish products derived from local

2

catches offer significant export opportunities. Fisheries together with Agriculture and Forestry sectors have contributed 7-13% per annum to the GNP of Angola. The domestic importance of the fishing sector is much greater than the statistics indicates. The industry is labor intensive, which is a plus for a country with such an extraordinary unemployment level. According to the Fisheries Master Plan 2002, the sector employs conservatively more than 40,000 people, half of whom are employed by the artisanal fisheries. Roughly half of the revenue from fish and fish products comes from export. After 27 years of civil war, it’s only natural to have the problem of massive displacement of population which resulted in reduced capacity for production and access to food. The malnourished found their way to the provincial capitals and coastal areas. The influx of the displaced people exerted much pressure on the limited resources in the coastal areas. The civil strife completely destroyed the livestock, wildlife, and games sectors thus limiting major sources of animal protein for the population. To meet this deficiency, the fisheries sub sector is the sector which can contribute within a short period towards the production of large quantities of food (animal protein).Before independence; there were boatyards everywhere along the coast. They used to build and repair 50% of the national fleet made of wooden boats. At that period timber was extensively used for building boats. Nowadays there is a shortage of timber along the coast, and there are few reliable boat yards, which can be used for boat building, repair and maintenance. Infrastructure in the fisheries sector had deteriorated due to lack of maintenance; boats were in disrepair due to lack of wood and other materials, annual catches before the war were about 600,000 tonnes (this shrank to about 35,000 during the war), fish administration was equally inadequate due to shortage of qualified staff, there was equally the depletion of the national fishing fleet. Aware of the importance of the artisanal fisheries sub-sector for poverty alleviation, in 1986, the Government of Angola approached the ADB for a loan to finance the Artisanal Coastal Fisheries Development Project (loan amounting UA 15.38 million was approved, the disbursement rate reached 4.9% before it was later cancelled due to the civil war and insecurity). However, the continuation of the deterioration of food security caused by reduced food and fish production prompted the GoA in 2001 to once again approach the ADB for assistance, as an artisanal fisheries project fits well within the context of Angola Interim CSP 2001-2002 and Bank’s policy and vision for poverty reduction. The impact of the project was expected to be reflected through a reduction in poverty, and an improvement in the standard of living, and food security among the population targeted. This would be achieved through increased number of catches in the ten CPAs covered by the project, and in the coastal areas improve food security, and incomes; strengthen rational management of fisheries resources through improved capacity of, fisheries and research staff, and fisher folks. The rationale behind the project was that, with under-exploited fisheries resources, relatively small investment to boost the productive capacity of fishers can rapidly increase production and consequently reduce poverty. The investment is expected in addition to provide the necessary impetus to other value added income generating activities and create new jobs for more members of the targeted communities. As incomes of the direct beneficiaries increases, this indirectly increases the purchasing power of the communities, thus opportunities for other auxiliary income generating activities will be created. The project is expected to generate 1000 jobs for men in the smallholder production and 1500 women in processing (including drying) and distribution (marketing, transport and sales).This will give a large number of the populace the opportunity to rebuild their lives. Fishing communities in Angola for decades have been operating in groups where they mobilize their resources and share the benefits accruing from fishing operations. Fisher folks living in the selected project sites have a strong degree of solidarity among

3

themselves. Some members of the target group own boats, sails and some other fishing equipment as individuals or as groups. Community ties are thus strong, which can facilitate community based approach to development activities. The project will create social cohesion and re-establish harmony in the civil society. It will also improve the livelihoods of the populace through the provision of basic amenities and infrastructural facilities destroyed during the protracted civil strife. The project is in line with the Government development strategy for the sector and in line with the Bank’s Vision for poverty reduction. From the field visits of Bank staffs to all related artisanal institutions, it was obvious that managerial, institutional and human capacity in the sector is in need of strengthening. Simple technology’s already in use, such as fish salting and drying, will be enhanced and supported by the project. Thus, fish smoking technology was eliminated as a result of lack of timber in the coastal provinces and substituted with concrete brine tanks, which will be provided at each center to improve the salting process. The artisanal nature (small scale) of the project also led to the rejection of the use of bigger boats. The focus of the project is on improving community infrastructure and capacity building to boost food production, processing and marketing.

b. Objectives / Expected Outcomes: The goal of the sector is to reduce poverty and improve/achieve food security. The specific objective of the project was to expand the fishing activities and improve the income, livelihoods, and standard of living of fisher folks, and population dependent on artisanal fishing in the targeted communities. The expected outcomes comprised: (i) Ten Artisanal Fisheries Centers (CPA) established including an administrative section, a training /meeting area, a saving and credit space with the conveniences, 3 Landing quays and 1 boat ramp built, 3 fish sale points rehabilitated, 12 wells sunk, 10 generators provided, 25km access road improved, and equipment for 11 offices purchased; 23 motor cycles and 11 project vehicles acquired. (ii) 7 fish reception and processing facilities acquired, 8 salting tanks and drying space acquired and rehabilitated,7 boats acquired, net repair shed rehabilitated,5 loading and parking space rehabilitated,4 equipment and spare parts facilities acquired. (iii) 1000 fishermen and 1500 women involved in processing and marketing trained in accounting, mechanics, boat and net repair, production technology, savings and credit, promotion, marketing, management and communication. In the appraisal report, the quality of training to be given to the staff of fisheries ministry was not clearly stated, however 15 fisheries staff trained on fisheries statistics, fishery management, and accounting; 22 extension officers trained in fishery biology, safety at sea, net and out-boat engine repair, fish processing, production technology. (iv) Through the rural credit 30 boats, 20 out-boat engines,10 fuel tanks,3,000 meters of nets and small fishing items, 60 ice holds, 20 ice making machines, 3 freezers, 3 compressors, and 20 boat repair kits acquired..

c. Outputs and Intended Beneficiaries: The main outputs included: 10 CPA’s and 3 fish markets, 3 landing quays,, 14 wells and 11km feede roads. 1200 fishers (male) and 1700 processors/marketers (female) trained. 22staff of IPS trained in fishery statistics, accounting, enterprise management, project management. 5 surveillance staff trained on operation of Maritraq System. 20 boats (including ice boxes), 74 outboard engines, 10 fuel tanks 74 engine repair kits. 4 Project Management Unit (PMU) and Project Steering Committee (PSC) trained. The project beneficiaries include the poor fisher folks (fishermen and women involved in fish

4

production, processing and trading in and around the 10 coastal fisheries centers and the evvirons, namely: (a)Praia da Sancanda in Tombwa District, Namibe Province;(b) Lucira in Namibe District, Namibe Province;(c) Praia do Cambolo, in CaotaDistrict,Benguela Province;(d) Kicombo in Sumbe District,Kwanza-Sul Province;(e) Buraco in Cacuaco District, Luanda Province;(f) Barra do Dande in Dande District,Bengo Province;(g) Cabo ledo in Kissama District,Bengo Province;(h) Kasai in Tomboco District, Zaire Province;(i) Lombo-Lombo in Cabinda District, Cabinda Province; and (j) Landana in Kakongo District,Cabinda Province. The total number of the fishing population of these sites is around 24,000 out of whom about 15,840 are women. Though women are not involved in fishing (capture), however 80% of the fish processors and traders are women. It’s the women fish folks that deal with fish salting and drying. Indirect beneficiaries to the project are children who assist women in offloading fish from boats and in marketing of fish. It is estimated that eight household members depend on one fisherman. The capacity of the sector government institutions are equally enhanced through the capacity building component. The main considerations for choosing these localities as project sites included: (i)Strategic location in terms of importance for the surrounding fishing villages, (ii)Large settlements of displaced communities; (iii) Population density;(iv)Fishing potential; (v) poverty in the fishing communities; (vi)lack of facilities for fish handling and processing; and fishing experience and simple technology used. These sites were selected with the participation of its fishing communities and in line with the 2002 Fisheries Master Plan. The beneficiaries participated actively in the selection of the Artisanal Fisheries Center locations and the market places to be rehabilitated. Discussions and consultations also took place with major national players and international donors, NGOs involved the fisheries sector.

d. Principal Components and/or Activities: The project comprised of four basic components: (i) Infrastructure Development: The objective of this component is to boost the revival of the sub-sector by providing basic support services to the artisanal fisheries communities in the selected project area. Basic fishing infrastructure was either practically inexistent in most project sites or were in dare need of urgent rehabilitation. Thus this component has as sub-components: (a) Basic Community Infrastructure, (b) Provision of a Local Development Fund (LDF). This sub-component will cater for the construction of 10 artisanal fisheries centers (CPA), the rehabilitation of three major town fish markets, the construction of three landing quays and one boat ramp, the improvement of 25km access roads to the fish landing sites, and the supply of portable water and energy supply. (ii)Capacity Building: As a result of the 27 years civil strife. Based the capacity assessment of the fisheries institutions in Angola, provision is made in the project for rehabilitation, staff training, and office equipments to strengthen the capacity of the Ministry of Fisheries and Environment (MPA) and other related fisheries institutions which are facing human and institutional constraints in delivering the needed extension and research services to the artisanal fisheries sub-sector. The MPA is responsible for defining and implementing the overall fishing policies. It is mandated to coordinate all activities of marine fisheries, policy, research, extension and statistics. The main problems of the Ministry are that the staff is not well trained in the fisheries science, and budgetary allocations are very low. The project will strengthen the capacity of MPA and PMU through Agricultural Management Training for Africa (AMTA) program. MPA staff will be trained in fisheries management, statistics, procurement and disbursement. The Institute of Artisanal fisheries Development (IPA) is the main Government body dealing

5

with artisanal fisheries. The IPA is entrusted with the responsibility of data collection, extension and policy making. Its capacity is severely limited by lack of human and physical resources. Its personnel have several specialties, but require additional skills in fisheries, which are needed for the performance of important tasks required by the sub-sector. The project will strengthen IPA by building up it’s capacity through training sessions for extension staff at CEFOPESCAS in fish biology, fish processing, quality control and economics of fisheries. The Institute of Fisheries Research (IIM) is the institution mandated to carry out the fisheries applied research program in fish stock assessment, fish processing, aquaculture and oceanographic studies. The institute is facing basically the problem of limitation of funds for research. The institute will be aided by the project in fish stock assessment, and development of appropriate fish processing technology i.e drying and salting. The Marine Surveillance Unit (USM) is mandated to monitor the fishing activities along the Angolan coast. The unit is in dare need of both human and material resources in the policing of the Angolan territorial waters, to prevent abuses committed by both national and foreign industrial fleet especially in the in-shore coastal spots where artisanal fisheries is taking place. The USM has five small and three medium size surveillance boats. In addition three other medium boats are under repair in South Africa. The component will build the capacity of the unit by providing 2 speed boats and communication equipments. The School for Fisheries Management (CEFOPESCAS) deals with the training of technicians for the fisheries industry. It deals with repair and maintenance of boats, navigation, electrical devises used at sea, and freezing technology as complement for training. The school however faces problem of funding and needs urgent restructuring and reorganization of its activities. The project will provide technical assistance to the school to carry out restructuring and reorganization. Review will be done on the schools’ training materials, policy and curriculum, and a program for training the trainers will be designed. These trained trainers will then conduct training sessions for the beneficiaries in all the ten selected project sites. The school’s English Language Lab will be rehabilitated by the project. This component will also train the target group of beneficiaries on basic technology needed to improve the quantity and quality of their produce by enhancing fish processing, handling, promotion and marketing. Beneficiaries will be trained in repair and maintenance of nets, boats, outboard motors, ice making machines, book-keeping and accounting, proper salting and drying techniques, proper handling of fish at sea, good practices in fish hygiene and fish marketing. Training will be given to government officials and beneficiaries on environmental awareness (iii) Rural Credit: This component seeks to provide access to financial resources for fisher folks. Here we find two types of loans (a) medium term loan, for items having a value above US$3,000 (b) short term loan, for items having a value below or equal to US$3,000.The credit will be managed as a revolving fund. (iv) Project Management: The Project Management Unit (PMU) is under the supervision of the Ministry of Fisheries and Environment. It will be composed of a coordinator, who would be a Civil Engineer an accountant and a Procurement Specialist. It will equally consist of two Government staff from the IPA for Monitoring and Evaluation. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be formed to supervise the implementation of the project.

Concise and clear description of principal components and activities, and highlight of any revisions.

6

3. Evaluation of Design and Implementation a. Relevance of Project Design.

The strategic context of the Artisanal Fisheries Project attempted to address the basic needs of the country firstly by addressing fish supply to meet the animal protein requirements of the populace, rehabilitate and provide the needed social infrastructure. Secondly, to empower people to engage in income generating activities and reestablish artisanal fisheries and the related institutions to promote sustainable fishery development after more than 27 years of civil war. The fisheries sector policy in Angola has three main objectives (i) to create jobs by attracting investment; (ii) protect the marine environment including the control of foreign vessels fishing within the national waters (iii) contribute to poverty reduction for people in coastal provinces. The project was consistent with the Fisheries Master Plan 2002. It was equally consistent with the development priorities of the Government of Angola to increase the national food security and poverty alleviation. It was consistent with the Bank’s strategy and vision for poverty reduction as indicated in the 2001-2002 Interim Country Strategy Paper when the project was designed. In terms of the process, the project was designed with the full participation of the beneficiaries of the communities of the ten CPA sites to achieve its objectives. The ten project sites were selected out of one hundred and two proposed by the Government in its Fisheries Master Plan because they are a part of the fourteen top priority sites based on their impact on poverty reduction at the national and community level. The project is participatory in its design, and decentralized in its implementation to ensure sustainable development of the fishing communities. The project is demand driven and lessons from the Gambia Fisheries project, as well as other donor interventions in the country,(IFAD Artisanal Fisheries Project in Zaire Province) were applied in its design. The project is the first Bank sponsored project in the agricultural sector in Angola since 1996. The infrastructure, capacity building and rural credit components of the project were suggested by the beneficiaries, are inter related/interdependent and also based on observations made during the three field missions of the Bank team to the country. In addition the design envisaged that beneficiaries will participate in the implementation of the project through their already existing fisheries cooperatives and associations. For all civil works and infrastructure to be carried out, beneficiaries will contribute/participate in cash or kind in terms of building materials. However neither the PCR nor other project documents reported that these were done. Capacity building for the PMU as a project component was mentioned in the project matrix, but the quality/level of training was not clearly stated at appraisal, it came up in the implementation process. The scope was artisanal fisheries sub sector and institutional capacity development. In terms of scope and content, the design was in line with government’s objectives of increasing national food security as a contribution food security and reducing poverty. The approach was holistic to addressing the problems of the artisanal fisheries sub sector i.e from harvesting through processing and marketing, with the crux being capacity building and micro–finance for the fish folks. The project was also conceived as an investment that would directly benefit small-scale operators in the fisheries sector with downstream benefits to the people and the country as a whole and provide a solid base for future fisheries development activities in other areas in the country. The four main technical components of the project complemented each other and were expected to provide synergies to attain the overall objective of the project. However, owing to the challenges to the rural credit component

7

the implementation of this component was limited. The start of the credit component was promising with a satisfactory recovery level. However, the implementing NGO did not supply monthly reports, or bank reconciliation statements (as described in the contract) which resulted in the suspension of the Special Account of the Credit Component. This led to the withdrawal of the NGO and the collapse of all of the activities of this component. Looking at the content, the objectives of the project were realistic and clearly stated though; the resources in terms of finance and time frame were inadequate because of the large number of outputs, the nature of some of the outputs essentially civil works and the limited capacity in the country that has just come out of civil war. The lack of understanding of the Bank’s process in areas of procurement and disbursement affected the performance of the PMU. Procurement rules of the Bank impeded the implementation of the project. Cost of translating tenders was not included in the project, as contractors were not willing to make tenders in neither English nor French, and at design this was not put into consideration. The IPA was not consulted during the design of the project, which was done by the Planning and Study Cabinet of the Ministry of Fisheries, thus resulted in errors in the project design and needed to be adjusted at implementation of the project. Furthermore, the PMU could not attract the best hands in the country due to poor remuneration. The project design included a project log-frame the content of which was not discussed at appraisal. The log-frame contained very limited baseline data probably because data was destroyed during the prolonged armed civil conflict and it had not been possible to retrieve. The log-frame mentioned verifiable indicators (data from reports and reviews) which were realistic for the project, but this was not mentioned in the PCR. Furthermore the link between the outputs and outcomes of the project were not clearly stated. However, the outcomes were not properly defined in the log-frame as outputs were taken to be synonymous to outcomes. At appraisal a Mid-Term Review was planned but was never carried out. The project had a strong civil works complement, however this was modified at implementation and resulted in serious delays. A monitoring and evaluation (M & E) plan was not available at entry and neither the PCR nor any other documentation indicated that one was developed during project implementation. Indicators in the process of M&E were not clearly stated at appraisal or at implementation. The log-frame only mentioned some of the key assumptions not the risks to the project, while the Appraisal report analyzed the risks. However, considering the Bank’s experiences, the associated risks regarding the credit component should have been highlighted. The design provided for environmental safeguards; and the Bank provided a summary of an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) as an annex to the Appraisal report,thus a comprehensive ESMP was developed to be addressed by the PMU and the Bank, which included a number of mitigation measures against the identified risks. However as predicted in the ESMP, the building of the infrastructures has not produced any significant negative results. Despite that several of them were built on mobile sand dunes, because they occupy relatively small areas, therefore the effect on sand movement and dune is ecologically limited. The potential negative environmental effects from the production side of the project has not materialized, due to the fact that the production-linked infrastructures have not yet entered into operation, and limited credit was yet used on increasing fishing capacity. Furthermore, by prescribing awareness campaigns on overexploitation of stock as a panacea to some of the risks to the project is an additional for the design. This is to be applied at the loan application stage and during the training sessions and fishing demonstrations. The project design provided that the processing facilities are all of modest size, just to suffice artisanal production. They are positioned away from sensitive habitats and are expected to maximize the commercial use of solid fish wastes with residual materials recycled for secondary use (such as aqua cultural fertilizer, animal feed, shoe, bag, belt production) or incinerated.

8

In conclusion, this review observed that the implementation of the project faced some challenges which were design and formulation related. At appraisal the formulation never considered that Angola was a country just getting out of a prolonged civil war, an environment where human and institutional capacities are degraded. The second appraisal mission of the Bank in the country probably did not reveal such inherent decay in the institutional capacity in the Ministry of Fisheries and Environment (MPA) which affected the performance of the PMU.In addition the design failed to address the issue of specifications and designs for, and the management of, the Handling and Processing facilities(LDF) at entry resulting in serious delays in implementation and the absence of a management arrangement for the facilities at completion. There was no evidence in the PCR/ Appraisal report that the design intended to create mechanisms to increase the attachment of the fisher folks to the CPAs promoted by the project, and this will take some time, clearly outside the current time frame for the project. A system whereby the CPAs would be centres for economic support and development were not put in place. The design did not indicate move being made to increase the attractiveness of the CPAs and the surrounding communities for landing, processing and trading fish and fish products, inclusive through the improvement of the social support structures, like health and educational structures institutions. The design did not indicate moves to adapt the current national fisheries management and trade regulations to favour the CPAs and the communities hosting them relatively to nearby unstructured and unregulated fish landing places. In the design, no system of support was put in place for the CPAs to ensure maintenance and protection of the investment made, especially of all buildings and equipments of the CPAs. As a result of the challenges faced with the credit component, attempts were not made at the reactivation and acceleration of the credit component, targeting directly the support to the remaining activities of the project, like the creation of adequate equipment maintenance capability in the coastal communities, and also the processing and trade of fish and fish products by the communities with an emphasis on women. The design and formulation of the project was overall less satisfactory. b. Project Cost (including Borrower Contribution), Disbursements, and Adherence to Schedules (as relevant to project performance): The PCR did not treat this section (a fair breakdown was given in annexes). It only mentioned the challenges faced by contractors in acquiring Bank guarantees and the lateness in the response of the Bank to make payments to the contractors, and how this hampered the continuation of works. The PCR did not provide breakdown information on expenditure, source of funding and procurement schedule. It mentioned under implementation the challenges faced by the Credit component which led to the pulling out of the implementing NGO, thus the collapse of the activities of this component. Twice there was a suspension of disbursements of at least 6 months (due to delays in the submission of the 2008 audit report, and the reception of indications of fraudulent practices by a contractor of the project). The total project cost was estimated during appraisal at UA9.26million, of which UA7.24million (78%) will be in foreign currency and UA2.02million (22%) will be in local currency, and UA2.26 million as counterpart funding. The ADF loan of UA7.00 million amounting to 76% of the total project cost will be used to finance 81% of foreign exchange (UA5.5million) and 60%of the local cost (UA 1.5million). The actual project cost was UA 8,748,027.50million or 94.47% of estimated cost. The GoA as at March 2011 (last supervision mission) had already provided US$3million in counterpart fund contribution which converts to about 140% of the agreed financing plan at appraisal. The GoA provided a total sum of US$1.5million for the credit component. An additional US$500,000 is ear-marked for disbursement to the project beneficiaries with women as the target group. It was reported in the project narrative that the GoA funded the

9

construction of four extra boat ramps and three extra landing quays (due to some errors in project design) The project Sub-Component (The Surveillance Unit USM) experienced a suspension of payments of funds by the Bank pending the completion of investigations. Information available is insufficient to know the actual counterpart contribution (it is far above estimates at appraisal). One of the documents available shows that in one of the activities (the rehabilitation of access 25km access roads), 13.5km of these roads was rehabilitated using GoA funds (Cabo Ledo), and that the funds remaining would barely be sufficient to for the rehabilitation of 11.5km feeder roads in Buraco and Caota. This shows that funds were not only inadequate; they were released in an unpredictable manner. At closure, a considerable amount (UA511,972.) was left unspent, although not all outputs had been delivered. In the area of scheduling, the project was approved in October 2002, signed in January 2003 and declared effective in November 2003. The first disbursement was made in September 2004. The project’s original disbursement deadline was 31 December 2009. The project lasted 20.2 months longer than originally scheduled due to delay in the fulfillment of the loan conditions and the declaration of the loan effectiveness by the Bank. Another reason for the delay is that the PMU, and contractors could not understand the Bank procedure as per procurement and disbursement of funds. Also lots of time was wasted in the translation of documents (as this was not factored into the cost of the project). The project was accorded one extension to disburse till the month of August 2011 to allow for the completion of various civil works especially the fish landing sites, (water points) wells for fresh water supplies and the access roads that were not yet completed. As at March 2011, contract for two feeder roads were just being awarded. At appraisal, a Mid-Term Review was planned for the project, but probably as a result of time factor was put aside. c. Implementation Arrangements, Conditions and Covenants, and related Technical Assistance: The implementation of the activities of the project was delayed, relatively to the original schedule. It should however be noted that most of the delays accumulated during the first years of the project, due to difficulties in the start up phase (quality at entry). The review considered the PCR unsatisfactory and largely in complete, as the salient details concerning the project implementation process is missing. However, the project followed the implementation arrangements as set at appraisal. The executing agency was The Ministry of Fisheries and Environment (MPA) and her agencies and fisheries Institutes. The day today management and coordination was done by the Project Management Unit (PMU). Civil works activities were contracted out to local institutions, and the credit component was managed by an NGO (World Vision International WVI). Furthermore, the NGO handled beneficiary training in gender, HIV Aids and Malaria control as well as environmental issues. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) was put in place to review and give guidance to project implementation and management. The conditions and covenants stipulated for the Project were realistic and relevant. The Government’s compliance with the loan covenants was overall less satisfactory. A number of agencies and institutions under the Ministry of Fisheries and Environment contributed to the project as implementing partners, thereby enhancing the implementation of the Capacity building component. This approach of assigning components of the project to agencies and institutions of the MPA was realistic, sound and prudent, bearing in mind that the fisheries administration in Angola was and continues to have the problem of being grossly under-staffed. Responsibilities and functions of each of each partner institution were clear. In Component B (Capacity Building), trained staffs of the Artisanal Fisheries Institute (IPA) were firstly trained in fishery statistics, accounting, and enterprise and project management. Project beneficiaries were trained the IPA staffs in cooperative and credit management, marketing and business management etc. A training of trainers (TOT) program on the operation of the Maritrack system (a navigational and/or electronic fish finding system) saw to the training of

10

Surveillance Staffs by the (IPA), and they are expected to train other beneficiaries in the project area. These beneficiaries are in turn expected to train fisher folks in other non project areas in navigational and electronic fish finding system. The contribution of all the Implementing Partners was appreciable but those of the MPA and IPA were outstanding. 1200 fishers (male) and 1700 processors (females) were trained as against 1000 (males) and 1500 (females) respectively as stated at appraisal. The implementation of the project faced many challenges. There was significant delay between the signature of the project agreement (2001/2003) and the first disbursement (11/05/2004) The fish landing sites were redesigned as the budgeting on some infrastructures was incorrect. Disbursement was suspended twice for at least six months. The debut of the implementation of the credit scheme was smooth, promising and satisfactory until the World Vision International (the implementing NGO) stopped the supply of monthly reports and bank reconciliations (as described in the contract). This resulted in the suspension of the Special Account of the Credit Component. Afterwards WVI retreated and all activities in this component collapsed. Two extensions were required for the successful implementation of the project. The first was necessitated as a result of the suspension of disbursement for six months because of delays in submission of audit report. The second extension came about when the reception of a mail on suspected fraudulent practices by a contractor was received, thus automatically led to the suspension of disbursement. However contractors had challenges acquiring Bank guarantees, which led to late payments to the contractors and thus hampered the continuation of works. In general the quality of the work can be considered satisfactory. Though several of the structures for the roofing installed for the markets or for the fish processing areas were made of iron, and are showing signs of rust, due to the action of the sea spray (in Kikombo). Also in some sites, the water supply relied on constant pumping. This will firstly increase the running cost of the facility, and secondly increase the wear and tear on the generator when there are power shortages. The PMU’s supervision of the civil works was fairly satisfactory (considering challenges faced), while oversight by Government authorities was not satisfactory (in the process of implementation, the Government authorities did not perform their oversight functions efficiently). The appraisal report provides for the PMU to be staffed with four members of staff, paid by the project: Project Coordinator, Project Engineer, Accountant and Procurement Specialist. In addition there are provisions for 2 more staff to be deployed from the Ministry of Fisheries: (i) Fisheries Officer; and (ii) Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Specialist, this was not done by the ministry. The PCR reports that the PMU persistently faced problems to fill the vacant posts of Project Engineer, M&E Specialist, due to the poor remuneration that the project offered qualified hands. Towards the end of the year 2010, the Procurement Specialist indicated his wish to leave. In the Appraisal report, it was stated that two Government staff from IPA will be seconded to the PMU for Monitoring and Evaluation. This was not done till the project closed. The Bank undertook 17 supervision missions (averagely more than 2 missions per year) during the life of the project, considered adequate by Bank standard. However, it was unable to resolve some very important issues despite the several missions. Of particular concern is the sustainability of the infrastructure and equipments on the fish landing sites. There is the need to put in place a strategy in conjunction with the stakeholders for the management of the infrastructure and equipments in the landing sites. The Bank with the expertise at her disposal was not able to forge a management arrangement for the fish receiving centers. At Appraisal, 20 portable water points were planned; only 14 were constructed because the remaining sites have very salty water. Thus the provision of portable water in these sites by well construction

11

was practically impossible. Desalination equipment is usually expensive and difficult to maintain. The Bank’s supervision mission proposed the installation of pipes to bring water from the closest portable water point to these sites. This however still needs technical and economic analysis which the Bank ought to have done. Also considering the enormous challenges faced by the credit component, measures were not put in place by the Bank at completion to ensure continuity of activities on the credit component by the implementing NGO. d. Monitoring & Evaluation Design, Implementation, & Utilization (Evaluator assessment): As stated in the Appraisal report overall supervision and implementation of the project’s activities was expected to be carried out as a regular management function by the Project Steering Committee (PSC). IPA representatives will be trained as trainers in the project sites under the guidance of the PMU will conduct the monitoring and evaluation of the projects activities and will focus on the effectiveness of the impact of the project on poverty reduction. Thus data needs to be disaggregated by sex to reach some gender equity balance. Monitoring indicators were agreed upon through the appraisal report, but the monitoring plan was not agreed upon before the launching of the project. There was no M & E plan at appraisal and none was developed during the project. The project log-frame contained some verifiable indicators which were realistic for the project. At project design, baseline data were available, but at implementation these data was not used for informed decision making. These data was not used in the monitoring the project. Furthermore, designs and specifications were not ready at appraisal; the scope of the project was not clear at appraisal. At implementation, the Bank provided quality supervision, but the skills mix available was not adequate, as usually one or two persons would comprise the mission. The PCR reported that at some point, the Bank delayed in their response to issues raised by the borrower. The frequent changing of Task Managers was equally an issue that slowed implementation. However, the fisheries project was the first project to start after the end of the civil war. There were no other PCRs to draw lessons from, thus experiences from projects like PESNORTE (IFAD) (the rural component), Projeto Ambris (UNDP), Fishing Vessel Financing Project (SIDA), were just the only lessons imputed into the project. Though at appraisal it was indicated that lessons learned from the interventions of other donors (World Bank, FAO, IFAD) in the sector would be used as guide, the PCR only reported that during supervision missions, efforts were made to harmonize instruments, systems and approaches. The gains of the harmonization are not yet visible on the ground as projects continue to be viewed as autonomous entities of each multilateral organization. e. Other Issues (such as Safeguards, Fiduciary): Procurement procedures were outlined in the Appraisal report, as were the financial management system and monitoring. The procurement of civil works for infrastructure development was to be done by National Competitive bidding (NCB), and those for some goods were to be done through International Competitive Bidding (ICB). Procurement for consulting services, Training, Technical assistance and surveys were to be done through short-listing in accordance with the Bank rules for of procedure for employment of consultants. The PCR reported that procurement was quite challenging for the PMU for in the middle of the implementation process, the procurement specialist showed interest in leaving the PMU because of poor remuneration. It should be noted that the Bank did not provide timely procurement documents for the project. The first training on procurement was done two years after the debut of the project. The GoA also found the Bank procurement related issues rather

12

cumbersome as it was obvious that there was a lack of familiarity with Bank procurement procedures, and request for replenishment which resulted in substantial delays in implementation. It was difficult for the Government of Angola to fulfill the conditions for the loan facility, within the prescribed time period. Though compliance with the conditions was satisfactory, there were delays were noted on application for replenishment. Out of the total ADF loan of UA 7.0 million, at closing only UA 511,972.50 was not disbursed. The Government of Angola at closing had provided more than US$ 3 million in counterpart fund contribution which converts to more than 140% of the financing at appraisal.

13

4. Evaluation of Performance

a. Relevance of project objectives The project was relevant and supportive of the Government’s efforts in poverty reduction, reduction of unemployment rate and the development of national fisheries resource and institutional management (both human and material) especially in the artisanal sub-sector. The approach adopted by the project in implementation is decentralized, participatory. It had a strong social mobilization element targeted especially at women and artisanal fish folks. This which was consistent with the needs of post war Angola and conformed to the approaches of the Bank and Government. Relevant government institutions and agencies involved in fisheries and the stakeholders and development partners (World Bank, FAO, IFAD) were involved in project design and remained engaged as implementing partners despite serious delays at start-up and during implementation. Among its outcomes, the project contributed to the reduction of illegal fishing by industrial large and international fishing vessels in Angolan waters, especially in areas reserved for artisanal fishing. It has also been able to reduce the loss of human lives at sea due to the fact that it has exposed the fisher folks to better fishing methods and safety at sea (through the capacity building component). It has been able to generate information and data that could be used to influence and guide policy. Considering the state of the Angolan polity and government institutions after 27 years of civil strife, some assumptions and scope of the project at appraisal were optimistic. That notwithstanding, this review agrees with the PCR that the project objectives were good and of utmost relevance as at that period to the development priorities of the fisheries sector being: improve/guarantee food security of the fishing communities, increase fish production, and the reduction of poverty in the fishing communities. The project objectives are also in line with the Bank’s country and regional strategy and the interim CSP for 2001-2002 which focuses on poverty reduction through the financing of development projects in the artisanal fisheries sub-sector, rehabilitation of social infrastructure and the development of human resources.

b. Effectiveness in Delivering Outputs The PCR rated the overall effectiveness of the project in delivering outputs highly satisfactory, because the project was expected to generate sector-wide outputs ranging from the establishment of CPAs (fish receiving stations), the rehabilitation of 3 fish markets, the provision of social infrastructures to institutional capacity strengthening for government institutions in the fishing sector and project beneficiaries. At completion, the project has been able to deliver most of the deliverables. The project was able to deliver 10 CPAs, 3 fish markets, 3 landing quays, one boat ramp,14 water points(rather than 12 at appraisal), 11km of feeder roads(rather than 25km at appraisal),10 generators etc. Human capacity of project beneficiaries was enhanced through the training of 1200 fishers (male) and 1700 processors/marketing (females) in cooperative and credit management, business management, fish handling and processing, fish gear repair and safety at sea. This is the core of capacity building and is the main element for the social and economic development of the small scale artisanal fishing communities. The institutional capacity of the MPA, IPA, IIM, CEFOPESCAS and USM was strengthened through training and supply of equipment and materials for research and extension work. Human capacity developed through 22 staffs of IPA trained in fishery statistics, accounting, enterprise management and project management. Five surveillance staffs (USM) trained on the operations of the Maritraq System (electronic fishing system), in the training the trainers (TOT) programme. These surveillance staffs will in turn train all surveillance and security teams in the project area. On the rural credit component, the WVI have been able to upgrade the knowledge of beneficiaries in all areas of rural credit including savings, credit delivery, recovery, related

14

penalties and their reinforcement. However, the credit operation has produced a limited positive social impact, both in income levels and in gender issues. It has promoted the status of women who got an appreciable share of the total credit disbursed, and used it mostly for trade related operations. This contributes to improving gender balance in distributing income and social influence. The stoppage of the credit scheme due to the pulling out of the implementing NGO towards the closing of the project led to the slowing of fishing and fish trade activity in the project sites. This is important for the effectiveness of the implementation process. The support to improved water supply reduced significantly the time and effort spent, mostly by women in fetching water for domestic consumption. Fifty eight (58) per cent of the beneficiaries are women. However, important challenges at implementation which are crucial to improving sustainability of the project were not resolved at project completion. Moreover there was an undisbursed balance of UA 511,972.50 that could have been used effectively but was not used. This review agrees with the PCR in rating of the project satisfactory in delivering outputs.

c. Effectiveness in Achieving Outcomes The PCR rated the project satisfactory in achieving outcomes. This review agrees that the project outputs in the capacity building component for the fisher folks and government institutions were achieved and delivered in an effective manner. The facilities delivered by the project: 10 CPAs, 3 fish markets, 3 landing quays 14 wells, 11km feeder roads and other physical outputs to aid fishing and fish processing and marketing were effectively completed, but achieving outputs does not necessarily result in outcome. There were no reported increases in annual fish landing of artisanal marine fisheries of approximately 15,000 MT in PY5, as envisaged in the project log-frame. There was no reported increase in income of fisher folks by 35% for 1000 men in fishing and 1500 women in processing and marketing by PY5 . No evidence that increase standard for better quality products by 50% by PY5. However it is expected that the value of fisheries products will go up as a result of better business practices, the provision of the fishing infrastructure coupled with capacity enhancement given to fisher folks. Post harvest wastage/losses of fish and fish products are expected to reduce as a result of new facilities for preservation of fish through freezing, drying and salting. This review hopes this will make fish more available, thus reduce food insecurity. The support given to the Marine Surveillance Unit (USM) through the provision of two small speed boats, and training on the Maritraq System will enable the unit to better police the Angolan territorial waters more effectively, and also give guidance to the fisher folks. The management of the fishery sector and artisanal fisheries in particular is expected to be improved. The PCR reports that a significant number of people were trained, but gave no information about the impact of the training. Generally, it is thus impossible to establish the outcome of the intervention. Information needed in the form of data was not collected, if it was then it was not reported in the PCR. Considering that the log frame did not identify outcomes, and looking at all the outputs of the project as stated in the PCR, (thus inferring the outcomes) this review can only but agree with the PCR rating that the project was satisfactory.

d. Efficiency in Achieving Outputs and Outcome The PCR rated the project as satisfactory in achieving outputs and outcome but presented no financial analysis/justification of the project. According to the appraisal report the annual gross revenue from increased production would rise from 7,923MT to 15,514MT in the fifth year. The sale value of fresh and dried fish would increase from UA 13,355 to UA 31,724 in the fifth year. The net incremental benefits for the project for each year from PY3 net of total costs would yield

15

a Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) of 17%which shows that the project is viable. The net incremental benefits show an Economic Rate of Return (EIRR) of 28%, with the opportunity cost of capital put at 12%. The lack of a financial analysis of the project in the PCR hampers the assessment of the efficiency of the project. The cost-benefit analysis is the factor influencing returns on investment. With the EIRR determined at 28%, and considering that the project was delayed for two years, if this review assumes that within the two years of delay, inflation increased the cost of the project by 10%, and that production reduced by as much as 20%, thus EIRR reduces to 14%. The project still comes satisfactory (though on the lower side of the scale) because the earning which will accrue as a result of the intervention will generate an IRR lower than at appraisal, with a NPV greater than at appraisal. The expected increase in NPV would be attributable to value added in processing (better practices) as a result of the intervention. Despite these impressive FIRR and EIRR some important intended project activities did not take place and some were only partially addressed as was the case with the credit component.

e. Project/Development Outcome (PO) The fisheries sector is of strategic importance to the development of Angola. With the completion of the CPAs, and a management team in place, and the strengthening of the responsible government institutions in fishery and artisanal fisheries sub-sector (through capacity building), and with the improvement in the infrastructure available, and capacity building given to the beneficiary communities an efficient and effective mechanism has been created as result of the project in the MPA and other institutions in the sector. The intervention has created a synergy within institutions in artisanal fisheries and the fisher folks to improve on and deliver improved quality products, and improved access to markets, improved and more sustainable livelihoods, better health and hygiene etc. This review agrees with the PCR that the development outcome is satisfactory.

f. Risk to sustained achievement of Project Outcomes The PCR reported that the absence of sound management of the infrastructures delivered by the intervention poses a significant challenge to the project. The project does not have a management strategy for the maintenance of the facilities and equipments delivered by the intervention. The situation concerning the maintenance of the refrigeration and freezing equipments is a critical to the sustainability of the project for there are only but a few qualified hands in Angola, the situation of provinces outside Luanda is more critical. At the Kampala workshop on fisheries infrastructure management (2009), it was raised that all costs, including maintenance and depreciation should be included in the business plan of the sites. Income generating facilities such as the ice plants, fish landing sites ought to be self sustaining. At closing provision was not made for the development of manpower for the maintenance of fishing vessels. Despite the boat ramps built, boat work spaces for the maintenance of the boats were not built in the centers. Furthermore, when the bidding and signing of the contract for the fisheries surveillance system (Maritraq System) was in progress, the need for beneficiary training was overlooked. These are serious challenges to the sustained achievement of the outcomes of the project. The beneficiaries ought to be directly involved in the management of the sites and the equipments for sustainability of outcomes. lack of continued support for research to assess and monitor the resources and generate management advice (to and by the artisanal fisheries institutions), as well as failure to ensure continued surveillance by (UMS) in the policing of Angolan territorial waters are some of the risks to sustained achievement of outcomes. The PCR equally mentioned risks to the credit component. The sustainable management of the component by cooperatives in the landing sites may be significant to sustaining the

16

achievement of project outcomes. Despite the training by World Vision International is quite comprehensive, the cooperatives are not experienced in managing revolving funds. The IPA could use its experience to ensure that that the revolving fund continues after closure of the project. This risk could be mitigated by the positive engagement of the IPA. Research (in stock assessment and bi-catch) could be very expensive and there is no evidence that it could be sustained in the country without some form of external assistance. These risks are considered to be significant or substantial.

g. Additional Outcomes/Impacts (positive and negative, not captured in the logframe):

The PCR provided a vivid assessment of outcomes not covered in the log-frame. The project conducted more than 10 HIV/AIDS, cholera and malaria awareness campaigns per year. Through these campaigns, awareness of the vulnerable fisher communities (963 men, 673 women) has been raised in the HIV/AIDS pandemic. With respect to cholera, the awareness campaign gathered 688 men and 467 women in their campaigns. Materials used in the malaria campaign were financed by the project. Treated nets against malaria were supplied to more than 1050 families in the project area. The campaigns were conducted by the health ministry in conjunction with WVI. The project also conducted sensitization campaigns on the roles of women in society, the importance of women in the cooperatives which saw to the special training of 650 men, and 498 women in alphabetization and led to the participation of more women in the cooperative, savings and credit schemes. h. Performance of Borrower

The PCR rated the performance of the borrower as good but provided very little justification. Considering the fiduciary requirements and project covenants, it was difficult for the Government of Angola to fulfill the conditions of the loan facility within the prescribed time period. There were delays in the submission of audits reports; applications for Loan replenishments were equally delayed. The borrower and executing agent’s performance was interesting. The Government fulfilled its obligations to the loan agreement and provided significant counterpart funding, even if they were released in an unpredictable manner. There were delays in the completion of audit reports, and several issues raised but these were nonetheless complied with. The Project Steering Committee (PSC) provided limited strategic orientation to the PMU and did not meet regularly (at the beginning of the implementation process), which resulted in the slow implementation of some activities. Supervision findings and recommendations were responded to in a timely manner. Data was gathered in the implementation process, but this was not used for decision making in the monitoring of the project. In terms of the environmental safeguards, the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) of the project was implemented during the project, but a full EMSP was not developed as was described in the ESMP summary. As predicted in the ESMP the building of the infrastructures has not produced yet any significant negative impact. Despite that they were built on sand dunes, the areas occupied is relatively small, and therefore the impact on ecological functions is very limited. This review agrees with the PCR rating of the performance of the borrower as satisfactory but on the lower side of the scale.

i. Bank Performance This review rated the Bank’s performance as significant/satisfactory but on the lower side. This review agrees with the PCR rating that the Bank’s performance was satisfactory. The Bank fulfilled its obligations in the loan agreement. It was responsive to the borrower’s request to extend the loan disbursement dates. The Bank undertook 2 desk supervisions, one

17

Identification mission, one preparation mission, one appraisal mission, one financial supervision mission, one sector portfolio improvement mission and 11 project supervision missions. In total, the Bank undertook 15 missions during the life of the project. These can be considered adequate by Bank standard. However, it was unable to resolve some very important issues despite the several missions. Of particular concern was the inability of the Bank to forge a management arrangement for the CPAs with all the infrastructure and equipments delivered by the project. There were delays in providing “No objections” needed concerning the arrangements for sustainability/continuity of the credit component etc. The satisfactory but on the lower side of the scale rating by this review is because of the Bank’s inability to ensure that an appropriate management arrangement was in place for the infrastructure delivered by the intervention before project completion.

i. Overall Assessment This review agrees with the PCR rating of the project as satisfactory. The project was able to cover all of the project components quite effectively. The rural credit component which seeks to provide access to financial resources for fisher folks and processors to acquire necessary equipment/inputs for their activities later ran into problems, and this led to the pulling out of the implementing NGO (WVI) thus depriving the beneficiaries the opportunity to improve on their activities and eventually their livelihoods. This was noted in one of the project documents that when micro credit activities stopped, this slowed down the pace of fishing and fish processing activities by the fisher folks. The outputs of the other components of the intervention (community infrastructure, capacity building, and project management) were well delivered. Though, the corrugated iron sheets used in roofing the fish receiving centers are showing signs of rust, this can however be traced to the effects of sea water. There are comments in other documents on the project that the fish receiving centers are small, but this review is of the opinion that the design is good for artisanal purpose, and also for the sustainability. However the challenges with the new equipments delivered by the project are with maintenance after closure. Strategies were not put in place before closure to ensure sustainability. Out of the 20 portable water points planned, fourteen (14) were constructed as the remaining other sites it was reported have salty water and it is considered impossible to provide portable water in these sites by well construction. One of the solutions could be the use of desalination equipments. The equipment is expensive and difficult to maintain. The other solution could be in the installation of pipes to take the water from the closest points to other communities. There is the danger of contamination of wells from latrines and toilets, with severe public health consequences. The project has been able to enhance the capacities of public sector staffs in fisheries and artisanal fisheries in Angola for future interventions. By the time management strategies are put in place for the infrastructure and equipments delivered by the project, the goals and objectives of the sector “to reduce poverty and achieve food security among the population, to expand the fishing activities and improve fisher’s incomes and their standard of living at the targeted fishing communities” could be achieved, though not at the level envisaged in the appraisal report.

18

5. Key Lessons, and Recommendations (Evaluator assessment) a. Lessons Learned In the PCR, seven lessons are identified from the intervention, and are endorsed by this review.

(i) The PCR observed the necessity of having an adequately sensitized PMU to know the importance of timely submission of audit reports and their fiduciary responsibility to avoid delays caused by additional penalties of suspension of disbursements. This makes the PMU more vigilant with respect to timely reporting. As observed in the project, most of the delays in the implementation schedule were due to difficulties at the project start up phase. Although, at appraisal it was proposed that the Bank second one Professional Staff to Angola to help with the implementation, this was not done. Another that the PMU faced was that it was incomplete as the position of Project Engineer, M&E Specialist, and Project Accountant were not filled, (especially towards the end of the project). The staff turnover resulted in the overstretching of the PMU. This was due to the poor remuneration of the project staff which was not competitive. The project could not attract and retain competent hand to ensure timely implementation.

(ii) The expansion of fish landing sites to include social facilities that would support communities as proposed by the PCR, would have given the possibility that the fish landing sites be integrated into the social system of the fishing communities as avenues for social interaction amongst the people. This could also have the effect of improving the maintenance thereby sustainability of the infrastructures and equipments delivered by the project. The social spaces created can be rented to serve as venues for meetings and other social events.

(iii) World Vision International (WVI) the implementing NGO of the credit component should ensure the continuity of activities in the credit component and make sure that reporting on activities is done on a monthly basis. This is in consonance with the observations made during implementation. When WVI withdrew their services, fisheries activities reduced in the project areas. This was a treat to the livelihoods of the fisher folks.

(iv) Efforts should be made by the Bank to minimize conditions for loan to only realistic ones. This is to ensure that beneficiary communities are not unduly penalized.

(v) In future interventions, a strategy on the management and monitoring of infrastructures delivered should be developed with direct involvement of the beneficiary communities from the debut of the project.

(vi) Since French/English language are the official language of the Bank, and it was observed that comprehension of the official Bank documents by contractors and project staff, it would be useful if official documents could be translated into

19

Portuguese to avoid errors and delays in implementing project activities. (vii) Data on the fishery sector ought to be gathered and used in decision making for future

interventions, thus the need for International Technical Assistance for Angola. b. Recommendations The PCR made no recommendations. However, this review recommends a strategy must be put in place to ensure a system of support for the CPAs. This system should ensure the maintenance and protection of the investments made (buildings and equipments); the CPAs are made real economic support units, attractive to the to the surrounding communities for landing, processing and trading of fish and fish products, inclusive through the improvement of the social support structures , like heath, and educational structures. The current national fisheries management and trade regulations are made to favor the CPAs and communities hosting them relatively to unstructured, illegal and unregulated places. The credit component is reactivated and accelerated targeting the creation of adequate equipment maintenance capacity building in the coastal communities (especially women). Strategies should be put in place to ensure economic, social and ecological sustainability of the investments. Considering the time frame necessary to achieve sustainable changes in procedures, institutions and capacity, this review prescribe, the preparation of follow up project that will further support the further development of the CPAs into true dynamic development promoting organizations, and the increased integration of the artisanal fisheries sub sector into the overall economic and social system of the target communities first, and of Angola at large after. This is recommended because the original design of the project did not contemplate that all CPAs should have the full set of support facilities for servicing the fleet, the fishers and the fish buyers, meaning that these actors will have to search for these services and supplies elsewhere, which diminishes their attachment to the CPAs as business hubs, and therefore also the potential effectiveness of their actions. ASSESSMENT SUMMARY 6. Ratings: PCR OPEV

Review Reason for Disagreement/Comments

Relevance: 4 4 The objective of the project is consistent with Angola’s development objectives.

Effectiveness in delivering outputs:

3 2.7 The credit component produced limited social impact as a result of the stoppage. Challenges with key project (PMU) officers.

Effectiveness in achieving outcomes:

3 3 Outcomes were not properly

identified in log-frame. The project created synergy in/between the sector institutions and beneficiaries.

Efficiency in achieving outputs & outcomes -Timeliness:

3 3 This review has reservations as no evidence is provided in PCR. Project late for 20.2 months.

20

Efficiency in achieving outputs & outcomes –other criteria

3 3 Despite that disbursement was suspended twice, outputs were well delivered (except for the credit component)

Overall efficiency in achieving outputs & outcomes

3 3 Challenges with the PMU slowed and procurement slowed the pace of project activities.

Risk to sustained achievement of project/development outcome:

3 2.7 Could be mitigated once the strategy for use, maintenance and sustainability is agreed upon by sector institutions and beneficiaries

Borrower Performance: 2 2.5 Baseline data was not used for decision making, procurement was problematic, monitoring plan was not agreed upon before project launch, GoA lack capacity to implement M&E system, release of fund for credit component was haphazard.

Bank Performance: 3 2.5 Designs and specifications were not ready at appraisal, Bank delayed response to borrower questions, and Bank supervision was good, skill mix was insufficient.

Quality of PCR: NA 2.75 The PCR can be rated as fairly satisfactory. It did not show how the intervention has been able to attain the said objectives. It equally has no recommendations on how to sustain the outcomes of the project.

7. Comments on PCR Quality and Timeliness The PCR is the result of collaborative work by the Bank and representatives of the Government of Angola. It involved joint visits of the PMU, Bank representatives, implementing partners of the project to all project sites to undertake qualitative assessment of infrastructures and equipments delivered by the project, and also interaction with some of the beneficiaries. The PCR is of significant quality, though on the lower end. It captured important highlights of the project cycle; it did not identify strengths or weaknesses, enabling factors, constraints and weaknesses in the project. It was fair and balanced in its assessment. The PCR is however partially complete, it did not make recommendations for solving the challenges to the project,(especially in the area of sustainability) in its reporting on some sections for example the credit component, it did not delve into the details of the challenges or treats, effects and the way forward to/for the component, and their effects, if any, on the overall project synergy and outcome. The PCR did not mention the conduct of the MTR and its outcome (though it was planed but did not take place).

8. Priority for Future Evaluative work: Project for Performance Evaluation Report, Impact Evaluation, Country/Sector reviews or Thematic Evaluation Studies:

21

- Project is part of series and suitable for cluster evaluation

- Project is a Success Story

- High priority for impact evaluation

- Performance evaluation is required to sector/country reviews

- High Priority for thematic or special evaluation studies (Specify )

- PPER is required because of incomplete validation rating Major areas of focus in future evaluation work:

a) Sustainability mechanism as a tool to ensure continued delivery of outcomes considering the weakness of sector institutions.

b)

c) Follow Up Action by OPEV: Manager Clearance &Signing Off Data sources for validation:

• Held discussions with Felix Marttin. • : Appraisal Report, Aide Memoire, Supervision Mission reports, CSP and Country portfolio

performance report, loan agreement, supervision summaries,

Attachment: PCR Evaluation Note Validation Sheet of Performance Ratings

22

Appendix 1

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT EVALUATION NOTE Validation of PCR Performance Ratings

PCR Rating Scale: Score Description 4. Very Good – Full 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 UTS Unable to score/rate NA Non Applicable

Criteria Sub-Criteria PCR Work Score

OPEV Review

Reason for deviation/ Comments

Relevance of project Objectives & Design

Relevance of project Objectives

1. Project objectives were relevant to country development priorities.

4 4

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

2 2

Time frame is short to achieve full objectives

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

3 3 Objectives in line with Interim CSP 2001-2002

4. Project Objectives were consistent with the Bank’s corporate priorities

3 3 Through the project Bank’s MTS 2008-2012 is supported

5. Ex-post Relevance of objectives

3 3

Relevance of project Design -Project Design & Readiness for Implementation

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

3 2

Log frame did not indicate the outcomes.

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

2 2

No measureable indicators of outcomes in logframe.

23

3. The log frame states the risks and key assumptions.

3 2 Risks/Assumption to outcomes of project was not mentioned in log frame.

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

3 2.75

There were shortcomings in design, communication problems, lack of capacity on the part of government, funding was haphazard

5 Project design includes adequate risk analysis. 3 3

Capacity building component was to a mitigating measure to cushion risks.

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

2 2

Monitoring system was problematic for Government/IPA

7. Responsibilities for project implementation were clearly defined.

3 3

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

2 2

Design and specification was done at implementation.

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

2 1 Monitoring plan was done at implementation

10. Baseline data were available or were collected during design.

3 2 Data gathered at design, but not used for informed decision making.

Achievement of Project Outputs* Infrastructure development 4 3

Out of 25km of feeder roads, only 11km was done. Design problems at appraisal (each CPA ought to have a landing quay, boat ramp)

Capacity building for sector government institutions and fisher folks

3 3

At appraisal, the number of staffs of Government institutions to be trained was not stated.

Rural credit facility 2 2 Government funding was haphazard, pull out of WVI implementing NGO

Project Management 2 2.5 The PMU was overstretched as there were problems with staffing.

Overall Output weighted Score

3 2.75 Several shortcomings with the delivery of outputs.

Achievement of Project Outcomes

Increase in value of fisheries products 2 2

Data not available but it is expected that the value of fisheries products will improve.

Increase in fisher folks income

2 2 Data not available but it is unclear if fisher folk’s income will go up.

24

Improvement in business practices 2 3

As a result of the capacity building component, the business practices of fishers, processors/marketers will have improved.

Reduction of food insecurity 3 3

If post harvest losses are reduced, more fish will be available with all its multiplier effects.

Improved management of artisanal fisheries sector

3 3

The support and management of artisanal fisheries should improve as a result of the capacity building component.

OVERALL PROJECT OUTCOME SCORE 3 3

Data not available to prove or disprove assumptions/claims

Additional Outcomes (not captured in the logfarme)

Institutional Development NA 3

The capacity building component has led to a synergy between government institutions in the sector.

Gender NA 2

Of a total of 2301 participants in awareness campaigns on HIV/AIDS, malaria, and cholera, 1,638 are women.

Environment & Climate Change NA 1

Measures to minimize environmental damage as written in ESMP were undertaken, though the ESMP was not developed.

Poverty Reduction NA 2

The extent to which poverty was reduced cannot be measured as data was not available in PCR

Private Sector Development NA 2

Contractors and consultants got more familiar with the procurement, disbursement procedures of the Bank

Regional Integration

Other (Specify) 3 2.5

Audit and progress reports were submitted late, disbursement was suspended twice.

Efficiency in achieving outputs & outcomes

Timeliness (in adhering to the original closing date) 3 3

Project closed 20.2 months late

Rates of returns (Specify if applicable) NA 2

Though was put at 28%, no explanations/ analysis given in PCR

Other Criteria (Specify)

OVERALL PROJECT EFFICIENCY 3 3

Some important outputs compromised efficiency of outcomes. Cost/benefit analysis and ERR/FRR not available in PCR

25

Risk to Sustained achievement of Project Outcome**

Key Risks (Specify common risk factors to be a basis for rating)

3 3

The project has no sound strategy for the management of infrastructure and equipments for sustainability of project outcomes

* The output ratings have to be weighted by the relative output costs (see PCR format). The Overall rating is given Very Good, Good, Fair and Poor. Overall rating is the sub-criteria average. ** Overall risk to sustained achievement of project outcome is rated as follows:

(i) High (H) : 1 (ii) Substantial/significant ( S) : 2 (iii) Moderate (M) : 3 (iv) Negligible (N): 4 (v) UTS (vi) NA

26

Criteria Sub-Criteria PCR Work Score

OPEV Review

Reason for disagreement/ Comments

Bank Performance

Design and Readiness

1. Project Objectives were relevant to country development priorities.

4 4 In line with the development objectives for artisanal fisheries in the country.

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

2 2

Time frame to attainment of objectives too optimistic

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

3 3 Project objectives in line with interim CSP 2001-2002.

4. Project Objectives were consistent with the Bank’s corporate priorities

3 3 It’s in line with the Bank’s MTS 2008-2012

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

3 3

Outcomes were not defined

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

2 2

Outcomes were neither defined, nor measurable indicators for the outcomes. Objectives are stated, measurable and quantifiable

7. The log frame states the risks and key assumptions.

3 2 Risks to continued achievement of outcome not stated

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

3 2.5

Design was faulty (number of boat ramps, landing quays), communication problems, lack of capacity on the part of government, funding was haphazard

9. Project design includes adequate risk analysis.

3 3 Capacity building addressed weaknesses in government capacity

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

2 2

Government lacked capacity in monitoring. Procurement procedure was stated in appraisal report.

11. Responsibilities for project implementation were clearly defined.

3 3 As stated in appraisal report

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

2 2

Designs, specifications not ready at appraisal. Procurement documents not ready on time.

27

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

2 2 Monitoring plan not agreed upon at project launch

14. Baseline data were available or were collected during design.

3 2 Base line data was available at project design, but was not used for decision making.

Project Design and Readiness Sub-Score 3 2.5

IPA was not consulted during design. It was done by Planning and Study Cabinet of Fishery Ministry.

28

Criteria Sub-Criteria PCR Score

OPEV Review

Justification/ Reason for deviation/Disconnect/ Comments

Bank Performance Supervision

1. Bank complied with:

• Environmental Safeguards

3 3 Mitigating measures in ESMP were undertaken by Bank.

• Fiduciary

Requirements 3 3

Progress and audit reports preparation were part of terms during supervision missions.

• Project Covenants 3 3 Covenants were satisfactory

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

3 2.5

Supervision was good, but skills mix of supervision teams was inadequate.

3. Bank provided quality management oversight.

2 2 Bank delayed response to issues raised by borrower

PCR was delivered on a timely basis 3 3

Project was 20.2 months late

Supervision Sub-Score 3 2.5 Skill mix of supervision team not adequate

OVERALL BANK PERFORMANCE SCORE 3 2.75

Oversight challenges on the part of the Bank

The Overall rating is given Very Good, Good, Fair and Poor. Overall rating is the sub-criteria average.

(i) Very Good (HS) : 4 (ii) Good ( H) : 3 (iii) Fair (US) : 2 (iv) Poor (HUS): 1

Criteria Sub-Criteria PCR Score

PCR-EVN Validation

Justification/ Reason for deviation/Disconnect/ Comments

Borrower Performance

Design and Readiness

1. Responsibilities for project implementation are clearly defined.

3 3 All responsibilities were clearly defined in appraisal report

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

2 2 Designs ,specifications and procurement documents were not ready at appraisal

3. Monitoring indicators and monitoring plan are agreed upon and baseline data are available or are being

2 2

Monitoring indicators were agreed upon at appraisal , though monitoring plan was not agreed upon before

29

collected launching of project

Project Design and Readiness Sub-Score 2 2 Distortions with the design of

project Implementation

1. Borrower complied with:

• Environmental Safeguards

2 2 A full ESMP was not developed

• Fiduciary Requirements

3 2

Delays on applications for replenishment. Audit and progress reports were delayed. This caused disbursement suspension. Compliance with loan conditions was satisfactory.

• Project Covenants 2 2 Reason for poor loan effectiveness date

2. Borrower was responsive to Bank supervision findings and recommendations.

3 3 Borrower used recommendations of supervision missions.

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

2 2 Data was not used for decision making

Implementation Sub-Score NA 2

Challenges with replenishment, Audit/Progress reports, Disbursement and data not used for decision making.

OVERALL BORROWER PERFORMANCE SCORE 2 2.2 Borrower performed averagely

The Overall rating is given Very Good, Good, Fair and Poor. Overall rating is the sub-criteria average.

(i) Very Good (HS) : 4 (ii) Good ( H) : 3 (iii) Fair (US) : 2 (iv) Poor (HUS): 1

M &E Design, Implementation & Utilization

Criteria Sub-Criteria PCR Score

PCR-EVN Validation

Justification/ Reason for deviation/Disconnect/ Comments

M & E Design M & E Design

Clear, adequate and realistic M & E system in place

NA 2 If it was in place, it was not agreed upon

Monitoring indicators and monitoring plan are agreed upon during design

2 2

Indicators were agreed upon through appraisal, but monitoring plan not agreed upon before project launch

30

Baseline data were available or collected during design 3 3

Were available during project design

Design Score 3 2.5

Errors in design were observed after the start of project (eg. Boat ramps, landing quaysmetc)

M & E Implementation

M & E Implementation

Adequately staffed and equipped M & E function NA

Borrower collected and analyzed relevant M & E

NA

Implementation Score

M & E Use Borrower used monitoring information for decision-making.

2 2 Borrower did not use monitoring information for decision-making.

Use Score

OVERALL M & E PERFORMANCE SCORE NA

PCR Quality Assessment

Criteria PCR-EVN (1-4) Comments

QUALITY OF PCR

1. Extent of quality and completeness of the PCR evidence and analysis to substantiate the ratings of the various sections:

2 Lacked thorough discussion on

project costs, Credit,

2. Extent of objectivity of PCR assessment scores

3 Was objective in scoring

3. Extent of internal consistency of PCR assessment ratings; inaccuracies; inconsistencies (in various sections; between texts and ratings; consistency of overall rating with individual component ratings)

3 Internal consistency of ratings was good.

4. Extent of identification and assessment of key factors (internal and exogenous) and unintended effects (positive and negatives) affecting design and

3 Identification and assessment

was good but incomplete

concerning implementation

31

implementation:

5. Adequacy of treatment of safeguards, fiduciary issues, and alignment and harmonization

3 Well covered

6. Extent of soundness of data generating and analysis processes (including rates of returns) in support of PCR assessment:

2.5 Outcomes of the project not well covered

7. Overall adequacy of the accessible evidence (from PCR including annexure and other data provided)

3 Annexes were useful

8. Extent to which lessons learned (and recommendations) are clear and based on the PCR assessment (evidence & analysis):

3

Clear and based on assessment of the project. Analysis could be improved because a lot is assumed which is not covered in PCR but in other documents

9. Extent of overall clarity and completeness of the PCR

3 . Clear but incomplete in some sections

Other (to be specified)

PCR Quality Score Good on the low side of

scale Incompleteness and outcomes not well covered

PCR Compliance with Guidelines (PCR/OM; OPEV)

1. PCR Timeliness (On time = 4; late = 1) 4 On time

2. Extent of participation of Borrower, Co-financiers & field office in PCR preparation***

4 Produced with PMU in an interactive and participatory manner

3. Other aspect (Specify) 3 Provided annexes

PCR Compliance Score 3

*** rated as high/exemplary (4), or substantial/significant (3), or moderate (2), or negligible (1)

32