Regional Portfolio Review: Enhancing Implementation Performance

1. 2005 Project Implementation Workshop, Bamako2004 Portfolio Review: Main Findings

2. 2004 Portfolio Review: Main Findings 2004 Portfolio Review: Main Findings • What is the portfolio review? • Status of the regional portfolio • Performance indicators and ratings • Implementation performance • Major problems • Crucial challenges • Proposed indicators to improve the regional portfolio

3. What is the regional portfolio review? • Tool to analyse and assess the structure and quality of the regional portfolio • identify management issues at IFAD level • provide appropriate responses • basis for corporate reporting to IFAD’s governing bodies • provide input for PBAS • aggregate and analyse RIMS indicators • Process is staff-driven • Project and country levels: Review of data available • Preparation of project status reports and country programme issues sheets (based on supervision reports) • Country review meetings with all relevant IFAD staff • Revision, aggregation and analysis of inputs at a regional level • Draft version, comments • Finalisation • Period covered: 1 July 2003 – 30 June 2004

4. Status of the regional portfolio • Current portfolio: 18 active countries • 55 loan projects, 39 ongoing, $ 660 million • Geographic imbalance • 35 ongoing projects in 11 West African countries • only 4 ongoing projects in 3 Central African Countries • Reactivation of loan portfolio in 3 post-conflict countries (Congo, DR Congo and Sierra Leone) • No loan projects in 6 countries, Cote d’Ivoire “frozen” • In general, quality and impact of the regional project portfolio has improved

5. Performance Indicators and Ratings • Rating system: • Project-at-Risk Methodology • Indicators influence performance ratings and country allocations

6. Implementation performance • 20% of effective projects show a disbursement lag of ≥ 40% • Project management performance remains a concern in many countries • Performance of Cooperating Institutions • Only in 35% of projects, supervision is found to be problem-free • 54% with moderate problems • 10% projects with major problems

7. Portfolio Performance

8. Areas of Low Performance

9. Project management performance remains a concern • Measures • Regional Management Capacity Strengthening Programme • Regional M&E Capacity Strengthening Programme • Follow-up of case-specific supervision and mid-term review recommendations • Redesigning problematic project components as appropriate

10. Crucial challenges • Manage time to achieve results (planning/implementation) of project cycle • Average time laps from approval to loan signature 3.4 months • Average time laps from signature to start-up 1 year • Low disbursement performance during implementation • Manage quality throughout the cycle based on responsibilities assigned to the partners • Government: Ownership and implementation • Cooperating Institution: Basic Supervision/Implementation Support • IFAD: Ensure good governance in resource use

11. Proposed indicators to improve the portfolio • By 2006, resources used annually for implementation support increased by at least 30% depending on needs identified in cooperation with the PCU, CPM and CI. • By 2006, there are no projects rated at risk in the region. • By 2007, low ratings are below 10% for all implementation performance indicators in ongoing projects. • By 2008, all ongoing and new projects have action plans to improve performance of their M&E systems.