• Reference: P-BJ-FA0-001
• Approval date: 28/06/2000
• Start date: 02/02/2001
• Appraisal Date:
• Status: CompletedComp
• Implementing Agency:
• Location:

This UA 4.8mln ADF-financed project was the sixth electricity project to be implemented by the Bank since it began working in Benin in 1970. It aimed to achieve the electrification of 17 rural centers – connecting 7000 households and delivering power for street-lighting, clinics and schools, amongst other facilities. An economic analysis determined that the most appropriate approach was to connect the centers to the electricity grid rather than support the development of local generation plants. The project outputs consisted entirely of infrastructure development including the installation of some system management equipment.

Whilst it was approved in June 2000 it only became effective some 14 months later due to the delays by the government in achieving loan effectiveness. Further delays were incurred in the procurement process which resulted in physical works only commencing in November 2003. As with most projects of this kind the delays resulted in some modifications to the initial project design.

The PCR mission, conducted in late 2005 found that the project had been very successful. Twenty-eight rural centers had been electrified - some 11 more than originally planned and the build quality were assessed as good. The number of street lights installed was also double that originally planned. Whilst only about 4000 households had been connected at that point the PCR was confident that the planned 7000 would be reached by the end of the following year (2006) as all the necessary system components had been put in place and the electricity company was progressing steadily in this aspect of the work. It was also reported that the pricing structure was designed to be attractive to low-income households.

The expansion in the number of centers benefiting from the project resulted in a 12% increase in project costs but this was co-financed by the state electricity company and the government. Whilst the appraisal had estimated the expected economic rate of return to be 12% the PCR calculated the actual delivered rate as 19%. Overall, the project more than satisfied expectations.

Whilst no quantitative data was available on the impact of the project on the local communities the PCR found that schools, health and recreation centers had benefited in a number of ways, that new small enterprises had been created and existing ones developed , and that local film houses, libraries and ICT access facilities had been opened. This, it was claimed, was having a positive effect in helping reduce the migration of youth to the larger urban centres.

There was a need for some technical re-design due to some unexpected problems with soils and line support infrastructure. Also the project implementation unit was not managed as autonomously as had been expected. This resulted in some implementation delays and in a certain loss of clarity in financial management, as the finances were managed as a part of the electricity company’s normal operations.  Whilst the performance of the state electricity company (SBEE) was unsatisfactory the performance of the government overall was rated positively, partly because it was gradually implementing the structural reforms necessary to ensure the effective management of the sector.

The procurement process resulted in some significant project implementation delays. The lesson to be learned here is that the Bank needed to field procurement training earlier in the project cycle and that the Bank’s procurement department should be represented in the Bank’s bid evaluation results review team for large or sensitive contracts.

The project offers a number of lessons for both the Bank and the government related to ways of speeding up and otherwise improving procedures. The Bank self-evaluation (the PCR) recommended that the government consider adopting the Senegalese approach of approving ceilings for cumulative loan amounts per budgeting cycle rather than requiring individual loans to be separately ratified by parliament. It also recommended that the government rationalize its procurement approval process.

On the Bank side it was felt that more careful work at the appraisal and loan negotiation stages could reduce loan effectiveness delays by assisting the government to better plan and prepare for loan ratification and implementation. Secondly, the Bank was recommended to improve its responsiveness and level of support to the Borrower in the procurement processes.

Nguema-ollo Jean-Bap - OINF3

Finance source	Amount
ADF	UAC 4,800,000
Co-financier	UAC 1,690,000
Total	UAC 6,490,000