Findings - Africa Region

Ghana: the Village Infrastructure Project

The project, with a IDA credit of US$30 million, and a total of $60 million was implemented by the government between 1998 and 2004. It was jointly financed by KFW $7m; IFAD, $10; GoG $7.1m; District Assemblies $3.0m and beneficiaries $2.9m. Its main objective was to support the government’s efforts to reduce poverty and enhance the quality of life of the rural poor through the increased transfer of technical and financial resources for the development of basic village-level infrastructure that could be maintained by the beneficiaries. It also supported the capacity building of District Assemblies to better plan and manage these investments. The project had 4 components: (i) Rural water infrastructure; (ii) Rural transport infrastructure; (iii) Rural post-harvest infrastructure; and (iv) Institutional strengthening.

Impact on the ground

The project provided 1,354 rural water facilities including boreholes, hand-dug wells, dams, dugouts and irrigation systems.
Crop production under irrigation nearly doubled as beneficiary vegetable growers took advantage of the availability of water and ensured 4 growing seasons per year.
The local capacity of communities to manage water resources and their sense of ownership was also greatly increased as witnessed by the high rate of facilities adequately maintained.
The capacity of Area Councils ( ACs ) to plan, negotiate, operate and maintain water-related infrastructure was also considerably enhanced.
This increase in capacity at the community and Council level has led to significant increases in the quality of life of beneficiaries through a reduction in water-borne diseases, improved nutrition and reduced effort in carrying water and watering crops.
The project constructed or rehabilitated 552 km of feeder roads, farm tracks and trails and supplied, through the private goods delivery system 207 intermediate means of transport made up of power tillers, motor-tricycles, with carts and animal traction systems. The recipients of IMTs were also trained in their maintenance. These facilities have improved access to production centers, and substantially reduced the drudgery of long-distance travel and head portage for women and children.
Vehicle access to participating communities nearly doubled, and farm produce was sent significantly faster to market.
Under the component on Rural Post-harvest Infrastructure, 174 markets were constructed or rehabilitated. This number included 16 grain stores, 2 abattoirs and 1 fish-landing site. Over 1,900 groups benefited from post-harvest infrastructure, and training and capacity building was carried out in over 30 villages. These activities contributed to more hygienic food transformation, improvement in storage facilities, increased shelf-life of harvest produce, and better prices for produce.
Under the private goods window, 425 small-scale agro-processing projects supplying equipment to private groups were completed ( palm oil presses, cashew nut processing ) and these have facilitated the processing of agricultural produce at the village level, adding value to commodities, reducing post-harvest losses and increasing the income of beneficiaries.
A total of 1,295 communities with a population of almost 4 million were covered through training and awareness campaigns. Three hundred villages were sufficiently capacitated to undertake new projects with their own funds without relying on outside assistance.
All 110 District Assemblies (DAs) in Ghana ( 2,000 DA members ) and 61 pilot Area Councils received training in participatory planning techniques and utilized this expertise to prepare their own development plans.
Over 100 District Finance Officers were trained in financial management and decentralized planning – this helped to clear project backlogs.
Approximately 60 traditional leaders participated in the project, and over 3,300 beneficiary groups also participated - a great deal of gender awareness was also generated through these initiatives.
Various other groups, including ACs, NGOs, CBOs and private sector providers have been trained in procurement, business management, and the operation and maintenance of facilities, which has enhanced their ability to both deliver services as well as manage project-related facilities.

Lessons learned

The large number of indicators, several not easy to measure, were not conducive to project efficiency. M&E indicators should be realistic and appropriate.
In CDD projects, since the demand from communities determines the number of micro-projects to be implemented, setting targets by predicting the number of micro-projects is a difficult, and often, self-defeating exercise. It would seem more realistic to link the progress of micro-projects with indicators and to review them periodically.
Without institutional strengthening and capacity building, infrastructure projects can prove unsustainable, e.g. a dam built for irrigation purposes can be used only as a source of drinking water.
Numerous examples in the project indicated that without serious attention being paid to planning for maintenance and actual maintenance, sustainability of the asset becomes difficult.
The key to the sustainability of rural water delivery lies in the viabiliity of the supply chains. Stocking parts is not the key issue – rather, having a national spare part supply system including outlets at the community/district levels is key.
Area mechanics need to be trained and be available to provide maintenance services. The training of pump caretakers is a critical activity.
To maximize health impact, water, sanitation and hygiene education need to be integrated.
In order to address the issue of feeder road maintenance, which cannot be carried out by poor rural communities or the chronically under-funded Department of Feeder Roads, the successor Community-Based Rural Development Project will hand over maintenance responsibility to the DAs.

This Infobrief was sourced from Implementation Completion Report No. 31016. For more information, e-mail Charles Annor-Frempong : cannorfrempong@worldbank.org.


	No. 128 September 2006
	Ghana: the Village Infrastructure Project The project, with a IDA credit of US$30 million, and a total of $60 million was implemented by the government between 1998 and 2004. It was jointly financed by KFW $7m; IFAD, $10; GoG $7.1m; District Assemblies $3.0m and beneficiaries $2.9m. Its main objective was to support the government’s efforts to reduce poverty and enhance the quality of life of the rural poor through the increased transfer of technical and financial resources for the development of basic village-level infrastructure that could be maintained by the beneficiaries. It also supported the capacity building of District Assemblies to better plan and manage these investments. The project had 4 components: (i) Rural water infrastructure; (ii) Rural transport infrastructure; (iii) Rural post-harvest infrastructure; and (iv) Institutional strengthening. Impact on the ground The project provided 1,354 rural water facilities including boreholes, hand-dug wells, dams, dugouts and irrigation systems. Crop production under irrigation nearly doubled as beneficiary vegetable growers took advantage of the availability of water and ensured 4 growing seasons per year. The local capacity of communities to manage water resources and their sense of ownership was also greatly increased as witnessed by the high rate of facilities adequately maintained. The capacity of Area Councils ( ACs ) to plan, negotiate, operate and maintain water-related infrastructure was also considerably enhanced. This increase in capacity at the community and Council level has led to significant increases in the quality of life of beneficiaries through a reduction in water-borne diseases, improved nutrition and reduced effort in carrying water and watering crops. The project constructed or rehabilitated 552 km of feeder roads, farm tracks and trails and supplied, through the private goods delivery system 207 intermediate means of transport made up of power tillers, motor-tricycles, with carts and animal traction systems. The recipients of IMTs were also trained in their maintenance. These facilities have improved access to production centers, and substantially reduced the drudgery of long-distance travel and head portage for women and children. Vehicle access to participating communities nearly doubled, and farm produce was sent significantly faster to market. Under the component on Rural Post-harvest Infrastructure, 174 markets were constructed or rehabilitated. This number included 16 grain stores, 2 abattoirs and 1 fish-landing site. Over 1,900 groups benefited from post-harvest infrastructure, and training and capacity building was carried out in over 30 villages. These activities contributed to more hygienic food transformation, improvement in storage facilities, increased shelf-life of harvest produce, and better prices for produce. Under the private goods window, 425 small-scale agro-processing projects supplying equipment to private groups were completed ( palm oil presses, cashew nut processing ) and these have facilitated the processing of agricultural produce at the village level, adding value to commodities, reducing post-harvest losses and increasing the income of beneficiaries. A total of 1,295 communities with a population of almost 4 million were covered through training and awareness campaigns. Three hundred villages were sufficiently capacitated to undertake new projects with their own funds without relying on outside assistance. All 110 District Assemblies (DAs) in Ghana ( 2,000 DA members ) and 61 pilot Area Councils received training in participatory planning techniques and utilized this expertise to prepare their own development plans. Over 100 District Finance Officers were trained in financial management and decentralized planning – this helped to clear project backlogs. Approximately 60 traditional leaders participated in the project, and over 3,300 beneficiary groups also participated - a great deal of gender awareness was also generated through these initiatives. Various other groups, including ACs, NGOs, CBOs and private sector providers have been trained in procurement, business management, and the operation and maintenance of facilities, which has enhanced their ability to both deliver services as well as manage project-related facilities. Lessons learned The large number of indicators, several not easy to measure, were not conducive to project efficiency. M&E indicators should be realistic and appropriate. In CDD projects, since the demand from communities determines the number of micro-projects to be implemented, setting targets by predicting the number of micro-projects is a difficult, and often, self-defeating exercise. It would seem more realistic to link the progress of micro-projects with indicators and to review them periodically. Without institutional strengthening and capacity building, infrastructure projects can prove unsustainable, e.g. a dam built for irrigation purposes can be used only as a source of drinking water. Numerous examples in the project indicated that without serious attention being paid to planning for maintenance and actual maintenance, sustainability of the asset becomes difficult. The key to the sustainability of rural water delivery lies in the viabiliity of the supply chains. Stocking parts is not the key issue – rather, having a national spare part supply system including outlets at the community/district levels is key. Area mechanics need to be trained and be available to provide maintenance services. The training of pump caretakers is a critical activity. To maximize health impact, water, sanitation and hygiene education need to be integrated. In order to address the issue of feeder road maintenance, which cannot be carried out by poor rural communities or the chronically under-funded Department of Feeder Roads, the successor Community-Based Rural Development Project will hand over maintenance responsibility to the DAs. This Infobrief was sourced from Implementation Completion Report No. 31016. For more information, e-mail Charles Annor-Frempong : cannorfrempong@worldbank.org.