Mid-Term Review Report of Japanese ODA Loan Project for FY2012
External Evaluator: Tadayuki Kanazawa (OPMAC Corporation)
Field Study: October-November 2012
Project Name: Mozambique “Montepuez-Lichinga Road Project” (L/A No. MZ-P1)[Project Description]
Loan Amount / Disbursed Amount
Loan Agreement Signing Date
Original Date of Project Completion
Executing Agency
Operation and Maintenance Organization: 3,282 Million Japanese Yen / 1,037 Million Japanese Yen (as of the end of July 2012): March 2007
: August 2011
: National Roads Administration/ANE: National Roads Administration/ANE[Project Objectives]
The objective of this Project is to increase transport capacity and improve access to distribution bases by widening and improving the national road between
Montepuez in Cabo Delgado province and Lichinga in Niassa province, in northern Mozambique, thereby improving the livelihood of local residents andcontributing to the revitalization of the local economy and poverty reduction.
Consultant
Contractor1: Aurecon AMEI/Studi JV (previously called Ninham Shand & Studi), South Africa (Lot A)
SNC LAVALIN in association with COB and Consultec, Canada (Lot C): CMC/CMCAA Co. Ltd. JV, Italy (Lots A and C)

1

The names and nationalities of consultants and contractors are entered only when they have been made public in JICA’s annual statistical report, “List of Names of Major Companies
and their Contract Amount of Japanese ODA Loan” (these are names for which the contract amount is not less than 1 billion Japanese Yen for contractors and not less than 100 million
Japanese Yen for consultants were entered). Where the names have not been entered in JICA’s annual statistical report, they are described only as “local contractors/consultants” or“Japanese contractors/consultants”. These names can be provided by JICA.

1

Item
Relevance

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)(1) Relevance to Development Policy
In 1991, the Government of Mozambique (GOM) launched the
10year Roads and Costal Shipping Projects (ROCS) to strengthen
the transport infrastructure. Under the 3rd ROCS (ROADS-3), theRoad Sector Strategy (RSS) 2007-2011 has been implemented. Inorder to implement the RSS effectively in cooperation with donors,
GOM initiated a sector-wide approach (SWAP) and drafted a codeof conduct in January 2007. The draft code of conduct (DCC)
provides a three-year implementation program to be materialized
through the donor cooperation. The DCC requires that all thedonors intending to provide assistance in the road sector should
prioritize assistance to those projects listed in the RSS.

(1) Relevance to Development Policy
Road Sector Strategy (RSS) 2007-2011 has been updated as RSS
2012-2014(ROADS-4). In order to implement the ROADS-4, anIntegrated Programme for Roads Sector (PRISE) was prepared andpresented to the annual donors meeting held on October 11, 2012.
According to ANE, PRISE is a three-year road project implementation
program for 2012-2014, which designates the northern provinces as
one of the prioritized areas. Since GOM is planning to continue road
improvement projects in cooperation with the donors, the Project isconsidered relevant to the current GOM development policy. In
addition to Montepuez-Lichinga and Nampla-Cuamba corridor
projects, which are under implementation, GOM is planning toprioritize the implementation of Lichinga-Cuamba road project. GOM
is also attempting to secure funds from AfDB to prepare a program forthe improvement of secondary and feeder roads linking the national
and provincial roads in 2013. GOM has successfully applied for a
grant from AfDB toward the feasibility and detailed engineering
design of a road linking Mueda –Nagomane. The Project is therefore
considered relevant in terms of current GOM development policy.

(2) Relevance to Development Needs
Mozambique road development is far behind other developing
countries due to the prolonged civil war. The per capita roaddensity is 0.02km/m2 in Mozambique, compared with 0.2km/m2 inaverage in the other developing countries. The road pavement ratio
is as low as 20%, and the east-west road corridor is in particularlow. The improvement of the east-west corridor is, therefore,
essential in view of the integrated regional development. GOM
considers that the investment in construction and maintenance inthe road sector is vitally important to achieve regional integration,(2) Relevance to Development Needs
Niassa and Cabo Delago provinces are behind in terms ofinfrastructure development and poverty ratio, compared to the otherprovinces. GOM considers it important to improve the transportsystem to accelerate agricultural produce in these provinces, andprioritizes the improvement of the northern corridor. As part of thenorthern corridor, the Project is considered important in the context ofconnectivity with the other part of the northern corridor. The Project istherefore considered relevant to the current development needs.

2

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)
economic development and provision of access to basic social
services in view of the poverty mitigation, in particular, for Niassa
and Cabo Delgao provinces in the northern region, which sufferfrom enormous lack of road infrastructure. GOM has prepared apoverty alleviation strategy called PARPA II 2006~2009, in which
the basic infrastructure and the regional development areconsidered crucial for the poverty alleviation.

Effectiveness(1) Quantitative Effects
Operation and Effect Indicators(1) Quantitative Effects
Operation and Effect Indicators
The projections for the target year have not been revised until thetime of the mid-term review (MTR).

Indicator

Indicator

Baseline
Target (2010,(2005)
at completion)
Annual average
Mt - Bl Section (54km)
264
611
daily traffic volume Bl - Lt Section (81km)
204
518(vehicles/day)
Lt - Lc Section (66km)
130
401
Vehicle operation cost saving (USD/unit/km)
0.443
0.222
Time saving (opportunity cost: USD/day)
192
110
Note: Mt: Montepuez; Bl: Balama; Lt: Litunde; Lc: Lichinga

Mid-Term Review(Oct. 2012)
375
113
210
0.340
165

Annual average
Mt - Bl Section (54km)
traffic volume
Bl - Lt Section (81km)(vehicles/day)
Lt - Lc Section (66km)
Vehicle operation cost saving (USD/unit/km)
Time-saving (opportunity cost: USD/day)
Sources: ANE
Note: Mt: Montepuez; Bl: Balama; Lt: Litunde; Lc: Lichinga

No major change is noted in the traffic volumes from baseline,
although the quantity shown for MTR is the result of one time survey,
not an annual average. The decrease of traffic volume in Balama andLichinga section is because of their inland location far from town
areas. ANE and the Project consultant anticipate that the traffic will
significantly increase when the local economy becomes active after
the Project is completed.

3

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)(2) Qualitative Effects(a) Improved road transport network, trade activation, improved
access to social services(education and/or health facility),
improved livelihood of the local population, economic
development of the inland region and mitigation of regional gap,etc.

(2) Qualitative Effects
The qualitative effects anticipated at ex-ante evaluation will be
viable, given that needs for regional economic development andlivelihood improvement remain unchanged in the region from those
assessed at ex-ante evaluation. In view of increased economic
activities in the northern part of Mozambique, the Project willcontribute as basic infrastructure to enhance economic activities andlocal transport for the population and goods in the region.

(3) Impacts
There is nothing to mention.

(3) Impacts
Same as (2) Qualitative Effects(4) Other items influencing effectiveness(a) Project implementation structure, technical and financial aspectof the Executing Agency
National Roads Administration (Administracao National deEstradas/ANE) is the Project Executing Agency. ANE’s
Directorate for National Roads has 29 staffs, of whom 24 staffs arecivil engineers. According to AfDB project completion report for
Pemba-Montepuez Road Project, July 2002, ANE’s capacity for
project implementation was assessed adequate, and therefore there
will be no major problem for implementing the Project. Necessary
funds for project implementation will be financed from the Road
Fund, government budget and the participating donors. It is part ofthe loan conditions that project local cost should be financed fromthe Road Fund.

(4) Other items influencing effectiveness(a) Project implementation structure, technical and financial aspect of
the Executing Agency
The capacity of ANE, Executing Agency (EA) in terms oforganization and the numbers of staff and engineers remains basicallyunchanged from the time of ex-ante evaluation. While ANE’s key
staff are well qualified and experienced, the number of qualified staff
is still insufficient to absorb the current workloads. There are threefull-time persons assigned in the Project Management Unit (PMU).
While they are all well qualified, the PMU Head is held responsible
for handling the other projects being implemented over the country.
Even the project coordinator for the Project is responsible to supervise
several projects within the northern corridor. Under thesecircumstances, it appears that sufficient person-time is not allocated tohandle various implementation issues that the Project has beenencountering and to coordinate with AfDB in a timely manner.
As for financing arrangements, sufficient funds have been so far
allocated for the Project from the Road Fund, given that the Project is

4

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

designated as one of the important national projects. The cost overrun
was resolved by a supplementary loan from AfDB, which was signed
between GOM and AfDB in September 2010. The supplementary loan
agreement stipulates that GOM will absorb further cost overrun, if
happens. The GOM’s position for this arrangement will remain thesame as in November 2012.
(b) Cooperation with NGO, universities, etc.
There is nothing to mention.

(b) Cooperation with NGO, universities, etc.
There is nothing to mention.

(c) Cooperation with Japanese grant aid and/or technicalcooperation
No mention(c) Cooperation with Japanese grant aid and/or technical cooperation“The Project for the Capacity Development of Road Maintenance in
the Republic of Mozambique” (hereafter “TC”) is now under
implementation under JICA technical cooperation. The TC aims todevelop the capacity of ANE staff concerned with road maintenancework. It will help ANE develop field inspection and O&M planningtechniques in a model area and establish an adequate O&M
mechanism for paved road maintenance. The TC will contribute to
ANE for O&M of the roads completed under the Project. The
implementation of the TC is from August 2011 to July 2014. The teamis assigned in the ANE Road Maintenance Division. Under the
Program, several ANE engineering staffs including General Director
were dispatched to Japan for road maintenance training once in a year.

(d) Cooperation with other donors
According to the financing plan, the AfDB and JICA are to
jointly co-finance with GOM the road works and consulting
services for Lots A and C. SIDA will co-finance as grant to GOM
the road works and consulting services under Lot B. SIDA will
also entirely finance road safety and GOM will finance the(d) Cooperation with other donors
The Project is jointly co-financed by AfDB and JICA. JICA’s
project implementation supervision has been delegated to AfDB, andtherefore Japanese ODA loan disbursements to ANE is made subject
to AfDB’s prior review and payment to the clients. At the time of
MTR, Japanese ODA loan disbursement ratio stands at as low as 35%,

5

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

resettlement and compensation costs. Audits services for Lots A while 5 years has passed since the loan signing. The major reason
behind this was said to be delays in payment to the contractor by
and C will be financed by AfDB.
AfDB. However, AfDB, ANE and the consultant attribute the delayed
payment by AfDB mainly to: (a) the poor quality of contractor’s
invoices, and (b) different interpretation of condition of contract forcontract price adjustment (CPA) and price indices used by thecontractor. Namely, the contractor includes, in addition to the basecost, the CPA amount calculated by applying certain price indices,with which AfDB was unsatisfied and rejected the payment.
SIDA is financing as grant for the implementation of Lot B:
Ruaca-Marrupa section. According to ANE report, the implementation
progress of Lot B was 31% as in November 2012.
(e) Effect on the natural environment
In accordance with JBIC Guidelines for Confirmation ofEnvironmental and Social Consideration, April 2002, the Project
belongs to Category “A.” The Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) was prepared and approved in September 2006.

6(e) Effect on the natural environment
ANE has the Cross Cutting Unit, which is responsible for handlingall cross cutting issues including environmental and social issues.
Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) was conducted by ANE Cross
Cutting Unit with assistance by the consultant before the construction
work, and the EIA report was submitted to all the agencies concerned
including AfDB. Given a limited number of inhabitants living along
the project sites and the works being implemented along the existingroad alignment, negative impact to the social and natural environment
is considered minimal. According to AfDB Project appraisal report,
the Project will be implemented in accordance with Environmental
and Social Management Plan (ESMP). Under the ESMP, thecontractor is required to dispatch an environmental expert, but is yet
to be materialized. To date, no report on environmental monitoringhas been submitted by the contractor. ANE has been requesting thecontractor to field the environmental expert and submit the report as
required.

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)(f) Land acquisition
The Project will involve the resettlements of 72 resident
households. The resettlements and compensations will be
undertaken in accordance with the GOM law.

(f) Land acquisition
Due to changes in road alignments in preparation of detailed design, aresettlement action plan (RAP) 2003 was revised and approved by
ANE and AfDB. The land acquisition and resettlement under the
Project have therefore been implemented in accordance with therevised RAP. To date, the land acquisition for AfDB financed section(Lots A and C) of Montepuez-Lichinga section totaled at 1,843 ha andthe affected resident households at 1,284, of which 799 resident
households have been resettled. The resettled resident households in
Lot A: Montepuez-Ruaca section was 158 resident households. The
RAP was prepared in accordance with GOM land law and its
involuntary resettlement policy.
During the site visit, the MTR mission had interviews with several
affected resident households and found that they were all satisfied
with the arrangements for compensation and the relocated places. A
monitoring structure for land acquisition and resettlements has been
established. The land acquisition and resettlements were undertaken inaccordance with the RAP and the reports were prepared.

(g) Operation and maintenance structure and the technical andfinancial aspects of the executing agency
Maintenance of national roads is under the responsibility of
ANE, which engages local contractors and supervises theperformance of the contractors for maintenance works through its
10 regional offices. The road section to be financed by JICA will
be under the responsibility of Cabo Delgado and Niassa offices. In
order to undertake O&M works in an efficient manner, ANE is
improving its road database. The O&M capacity of ANE isconsidered adequate given its capacity strengthened under a WorldBank (WB) technical assistance.

(g) Operation and maintenance structure and the technical andfinancial aspects of the executing agency
ANE has a total of 472 staff, of which 15 staffs are assigned formaintenance. Since 1992, ANE has been developing its capacity forroad improvement and maintenance through assistance by various
donors including World Bank (WB) and AfDB. However, it isactually the case that road maintenance data are mostly kept byconsultants who have been engaged for maintenance services.

7

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)(h) ANE is furthering to outsource road maintenance works in theprivate sector. ANE is in the process of selecting a contractor who will
be engaged for the maintenance works in the pilot project for
maintenance of N1 road between Pambara and Rio Save. The projectis financed through WB technical assistance program. The WB
technical assistance also provides assistance to ANE in strengthening
its Highway Information Management System (HIMS) through data
gathering and staff training. With these assistance programs, the ANE
capacity for O&M will be strengthened. However, strengthening thecapacity of local contractors including mobilization of equipment,materials and funds is essential to proceed with outsourcing O&M
works. ANE intends to strengthen the capacity of local contractors
with external donors including WB.
(i) HIV/AIDS and Traffic Accident Prevention Programs
In order to avoid increased cases of HIV/AID and traffic accidents
as a result of the implementation of the Project, awareness campaign
and medical check-up programs are envisaged. As scheduled, a
HIV/AID services provider was dispatched by the consultant. With
cooperation of the service provider and local government officers,
ANE has carried out public awareness programs for local
communities.
Traffic accident prevention program is conducted under a roadsafety component financed by SIDA. Under the program, thecommunities in the zone of influence are re-oriented throughawareness campaigns on road utilization, the importance of following
road signs and other road furniture.
(j) Gender Consideration
As requested by ANE, the contractor has engaged female workers

8

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

in carrying out construction works. The number of local workers
mobilized in the works is given by gender in the consultant progress
reports. As at August 2012 when the construction works werebasically suspended, the number of female works was 16 out of about
190 workers in total.
Efficiency(1) Outputs(a) Civil Works
1) Montepuez-Ruaca (135km) road expansion and pavement(Lot A)(1) Outputs(a) Civil Work
1) As a result of bidding where the lowest bid for civil work wasmuch higher than that estimated at ex-ante evaluation, the scope ofJapanese ODA loan was limited only to Lot A: Montepuez-Ruaca
section (135km) for road widening and pavement works after
JICA’s concurrence dated March 2011.
Lot A consists of the following 3 sections:
Section I: Montepuez-Balama (55km)
Section II : Balama-Kwekwe (30km)
Section III : Kwekwe-Ruaca (50km)
As at the time of MTR, the physical progress of civil works was
20.5%. Namely, the progress of construction works for Section I isestimated at 60-70% with completion of soil foundation and basecourse while bridge and culvert construction is still under way,whereas almost no progress except landmine removal was noted for
Sections II and III. The overall progress is therefore significantly
delayed. The completion of the Project is expected to be much later
than November 2012 originally estimated.
A limited capacity of the contractor is considered one of the reasonsfor delays. ANE and AfDB viewed that the volume of works that thecontractor has in his hand far exceeds his capacity and therefore he is

9

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

unable to allocate such resources (equipment, materials and laborers)
as necessary for the Project. However, ANE indicated its satisfaction
with the quality of the works the contractor has produced.
2) Litunde-Lichinga (66km) road expansion and pavement(Lot C-I)
3) Marrupa-Litunde 5 bridges and 2 box culverts construction(Lot C-II)

2) and 3)
As stated above, Lots C-I and C-II: Litunde-Lichinga section were
excluded from Japanese ODA loan, and therefore are implemented
through AfDB supplementary loan with GOM. The contract for Lot C
has been already awarded to the same contractor as for Lot A. The
work for Lot C is at preliminary stage (survey and marking), whileadvance payment has been already made.

4) Ruaca-Marrupa (68km) road expansion and pavement(Lot B: SIDA portion)4) Lot B: Ruaca-Marrupa section (68km) is financed by SIDA. ANEreported that the progress for Lot B is 31%.

(b) Consulting Services· Assistance for bid processing, construction supervision, etc· Project audit services (AfDB)· Traffic safety provision (SIDA)(b) Consulting Services
As a result of exclusion of civil works under Lots C-I and C-II fromJapanese ODA loan, the loan has been provided for consulting
services for detailed design and bid processing for Lots A, C-I and
C-II, but not for construction supervision for Lot C-I and C-II. The
construction supervision services for Lot A are co-financed by JICA
and AfDB with GOM. The consulting services for construction
supervision of Lot C-I and C-II are financed by AfDB with GOM.
According to ANE, they requested to exchange the team leader ofthe consultants because of their poor performance. The performanceof the consultants is in general satisfactory since the team leader was
replaced in June 2012. However, AfDB has viewed that the consultant
is lack of professionalism, only reporting the progress of works andaccepting contractor’s proposed design changes and invoices as they
were. AfDB also viewed that insufficient review and checking of

10

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

contractor’s invoices by the consultant was part of the reasons that
resulted in delayed payment to the contractor, and subsequently thecontractor withdrew their resources from the site, leading to further
delays in the implementation.
(2) Inputs(a) Project Cost
Due to global inflation that happened during 2007-2008, the bid
prices for the civil work in 2009 exceeded the estimated cost at
ex-ante evaluation by about 80%. Accordingly, JICA agreed toreallocate unallocated contingencies amounting to 290 million
Japanese Yen to the civil work out of 3,282 million JPY as requested
from ANE. At the time of MTR, the Japanese ODA loan proceeds areallocated as follows:· Civil Work: 3,052 million Japanese Yen· Consulting Services: 230 million Japanese Yen· Contingencies: 0(2) Inputs(a) Project Cost: 3,282 million Japanese Yen· Civil Works: 2,762 million Japanese Yen· Consulting Services: 208 million Japanese Yen· Contingencies: 312 million Japanese Yen

Due to delays in the civil work, another cost overrun coupled with
CPA adjustments and interest for delayed payment to the contractor is
likely.
(b) Implementation Period
The loan agreement was signed on 19 March 2007 and became
effective on 14 November 2007. The loan expiry date is 14 November
2013. The selection of contractor for civil work started in 2009 andconcluded in May 2010. The contractor commenced the work in June2010 with the date of completion in November 2012 under thecontract between ANE and the contractor. However, as at MTR, theprogress of physical work is only 20.5%, far behind the schedule(b) Implementation Period:
November 2006-August 2011 (57 calendar months)

11

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

under the contract.
According to the contractor, the major reason for this delay is due
to delayed payments to the contractor from AfDB. For this reason, thecontractor suspended almost all the construction works and withdrawn
workers and equipment from the construction sites from February toAugust 2012. Upon the receipt of almost all pending payments inAugust 2012, the contractor has gradually resumed the construction
works since September 2012. However, with the rainy season tocome, the progress rate at the moment is only about 30% of thenormal work rate.
According to information from the parties concerned, the delay inproject implementation was also attributed to the following:a. Front-end delays such as land acquisition and resettlements,
employment of a contractor, removal of landmines, etc.
b. Cost overrun due to the bid price exceeding the estimated cost at
ex-ante evaluation by 80%
c. Poor performance of the consultant
d. Limited capacity of the contractor
e. Limited number of ANE staff members concerned
f. Delays in AfDB processing invoices from the consultant and thecontractor, resulting in delayed payments by the donors
g. Major changes in designh. Adverse weather conditions
Major changes in design works were made as during the feasibility
study no removal of land mines was made and the conceptual design
was prepared based on aerial photos, and therefore, there were anumber of sites where the conceptual design did not match actual site
conditions. Accordingly, the alignment and elevation of the roads
were changed from those prepared at F/S. In addition, base course has

12

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

been changed to 2-layer crush stone construction from single layer
cement mixed crush stone construction to lower the cost of
construction.
On 26 November 2012, ANE hold a tripartite meeting to discussvarious issues facing the Project. As a result, ANE found it essential
to accept the extension of the completion date to September 2014(delays by 22 months) and sent a letter to AfDB for approval on 27
November 2012 to extend the Project Completion Date until 30
September 2014.
(3) Internal Rate of Return
Economic internal rate of return (EIRR) has been recalculated by
AfDB, due to changes in scope works (cf. Lot. A) made on 1 March
2009. The recalculated EIRRs are as follows:(3) Internal Rate of Return

Economic Internal rate of Return (EIRR)
Economic Internal rate of Return (EIRR)
Overall: 19.6%
Overall: 19.6%
Lot A Montepuez - Balama Section: 20.02%
Lot A Montepuez - Balama Section: 12.8%
Lot A Balama - Ruaca: 18.53%
Lot A Balama - Ruaca: 16.4%
Cost: Project cost excluding local taxes, administration andoperation costs
These EIRRs are considered valid while both ANE and AfDB have
Project Benefits: vehicle operation cost saving, reduced travel not updated the calculations since the change in scope was made.
time

13

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)

Lessons learned [Lessons learned]
and· The project implementation period was estimated at 30 calendar months at appraisal. Given, however, the amount of works, needs ofRecommendations
major changes or modification of conceptual designs prepared at F/S, and adverse geographical conditions to transport equipment andmaterials to the site, the estimated number of months at appraisal appears insufficient. During project appraisal, the implementation
period for inland civil work should be determined taking fully into account the local conditions such as location, means of transport,
likeliness of design changes, etc.
· A limited number of qualified civil work contractors available in Mozambique are a problem in the construction industry. This has
affected the implementation of the Project. In order to develop the capacity of local contractors as a whole, participation of Japanesecontractors in the construction industry in the country will be one solution. For the countries where the capacity of local civil work
contractors needs to be strengthened, consideration should be placed on Japanese ODA loan to facilitate Japanese contractors inparticipating construction works or technical assistance programs, such that technology transfer, etc. are made to the local constructionindustry.
· The Project is jointly financed by JICA and AfDB. JICA has two co-financing schemes, joint financing and parallel financing. While
there are pros and cons for each scheme, the use of parallel financing scheme may be considered appropriate in case that the capacity of
the co-financing partner appears weak. In case of the parallel financing, JICA needs to administer the project implementation supervisionby itself, for which JICA may wish to strengthen its organization and staffing.
[Recommendations to JICA/AfDB/ANE]· The limited capacity of the consultant and the contractor to carry out the works under their contracts is considered a major reason for thedelayed progress of the project after the procurement. However, lack of communication among ANE, the consultant, the contractor andthe donors, mainly AfDB, mutual distrust, and minimal effort to resolve issues by the parties concerned have exacerbated the situation. It
is therefore recommended that a tripartite meeting including AfDB representative is held as soon as possible to discuss and resolve allissues. The discussions and agreements reached during the meeting should be recorded in the minutes of meeting and signed by the
representatives of all the parties concerned.
· The contractor stated that delayed payment by the donors attributed to the delays in their construction work. The interpretation of
conditions of contract for CPA differs among ANE, the contractor and the donors, and it also should be discussed and agreed at thetripartite meeting.
· The contractor has neither mobilized a person responsible for environment nor prepared an environmental monitoring report as required
under the contract. ANE should strongly request the contractor to do it. In case that the contractor fails to respond, ANE should consider
the recruitment of another party to handle the environmental aspect.

14

Item

Mid-term Review results and Ex-post Evaluation results
estimated at the time of Mid-term Review (2012)

Ex-ante Evaluation (2007)[Recommendations to JICA]· JICA has delegated its responsibility for project implementation supervision to AfDB. Given that AfDB’s insufficient project supervision
is part of the reasons for the delays in project implementation, it is recommended that JICA always participates in AfDB review
activities, express its view and present its ideas to resolve various issues cooperatively with AfDB members.
· It is likely that the completion of the Project will result in another substantial cost overrun. The use of the unallocated fund, if any, should
be considered, only in case that GOM is unable to absorb the overrun and requests JICA for reallocation.
Indicators for
the Ex-post
Evaluation

Indicators established at the ex-ante evaluation(1) Average annual daily traffic (unit/day))(2) Reduced vehicle operation cost (USD/unit・km)(3) Reduced travel time (opportunity cost: USD/day)(4) Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) (%)

No change is needed for the indicators established at the ex-anteevaluation.

15