Design Criteria and Procurement Principles for Rural

Design Criteria andProcurement Principles forRural Access Trails

October 2017

389785-MML-DCPPT-01PER-Nepal/Deliverables/01. Design Criteria Report_TrailsMott MacDonald

Mott MacDonald22 Station RoadCambridge CB1 2JDUnited Kingdom

T +44 (0)1223 463500F +44 (0)1223 461007mottmac.com

Design Criteria andProcurement Principles forRural Access Trails

October 2017

Mott MacDonald Limited. Registered inEngland and Wales no. 1243967.Registered office: Mott MacDonald House,8-10 Sydenham Road, Croydon CR0 2EE,United Kingdom

Mott MacDonald | Design Criteria and Procurement Principles for Rural Access Trails

389785-MML-DCPPT-01 | October 2017PER-Nepal/Deliverables/01. Design Criteria Report_Trails

Issue and Revision Record

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description1.1 31 October

2017Simon Cohen Simon

HowarthChris Brown First Draft for WFP review

Document reference: 389785-MML-DCPPT-01

Information class: Standard

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only.It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any otherpurpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.

This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties withoutconsent from us and from the party which commissioned it.

This r epo rt h as b een pre par ed s olely fo r us e by the par ty which co mmissio ned i t (t he ‘Clien t’) in conn ectio n with t he c aptio ned pr oject. I t sho uld not b e us ed f or a ny o the r pu rpos e. No pe rson oth er t han the Clie nt o r a ny pa rty w ho h as ex pres sly ag ree d te rms of r elianc e with us (t he ‘Re ci pien t(s)’ ) m ay r ely on the cont ent, i nfo rma tion or a ny views exp resse d in t he rep ort. W e acc ept no d uty o f ca re, resp onsibility or lia bility to any oth er recipie nt of this docu men t. This r epo rt is c onfid ential and cont ains p rop riet ary in tellect ual p rop erty .



Acronyms

DAG Disadvantaged Group

DCC District Coordination Committee

DDC District Development Committee

DDRC District Disaster Relief Committee

DoLIDAR Department of Local Infrastructureand Agriculture

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

DTMP District Transport Master Plans

EOI Expression of Interest

EQ Earthquake

FCHV Female Community HealthVolunteer

FIDIC International Federation ofConsulting Engineers

HH Household

INGO International Non-GovernmentalOrganisation

KAP Knowledge, Attitude and Practice

LDMC Local Disaster ManagementCommittee

LNGO Local Non-GovernmentalOrganisation

MML Mott MacDonald Limited

MoFALD Ministry of Federal Affairs and LocalDevelopment

NRA National Reconstruction Agency

PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment

PDRF Post Disaster ReconstructionFramework

RFP Request for Proposals

SWC Social Welfare Council

TSP Trail Safety Plan

TMW Trail Maintenance Worker

VDC Village Development Committee

WDMC Ward Disaster ManagementCommittee

WFP World Food Programme



Contents

Executive Summary 1

1 Trail Selection 31.1 Gap Analysis 31.2 Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping 41.3 Technical and Socio-Economic Analysis 41.4 Coordination with Government Authorities 71.5 Community Application 71.6 Confirmation of Trails to be Assessed 71.7 Trail Assessment 71.8 Trails Selected 8

2 Trail Safety Plan 92.1 Local Engagement and Team Formation 10

2.1.1 Focus Group Discussion and Key Informant Interviews 102.1.2 Mass Meeting 112.1.3 Trail Safety Plan Team Formation 112.1.4 Trail Safety Plan Team Training 122.1.5 Trail Maintenance Workers 12

2.2 Analysis of the Trail 132.3 Identifying and Assessing Hazards, Risks, and Existing Control Measures 142.4 Development of the Trail Safety Plan 14

2.4.1 Short Term Plan 152.4.2 Long Term Plan 15

2.5 Trail Safety Plan Monitoring and Verification 162.6 Trail Safety Plan Review and Improvement 162.7 Financial and Payment Mechanisms for the Trail Safety Plan 16

2.7.1 Regular Maintenance Fund 162.7.2 Periodic Maintenance Fund 17

3 Design Criteria 183.1 Earthworks 18

3.1.1 Landslide Clearance 183.1.2 Formation Width 193.1.3 Cut Slope 193.1.4 Fill Slope 19

3.2 Drainage 203.3 Retaining Structures 21

3.3.1 Dry Stone Walls 213.3.2 Gabion Boxes 21



3.4 Steps and Railings 233.5 Bioengineering 24

4 Procurement and Implementation Methodology 254.1 Shortlisting of Contractors 254.2 Request for Proposals 264.3 Awarding of Contracts 274.4 Project Implementation 27

4.4.1 Quality Assurance and Control 274.4.2 Community Involvement 284.4.3 Health and Safety 284.4.4 Coordination with Government Authorities 28

5 Project Handover and Accountability 305.1 Project Handover 305.2 Defect Liability 305.3 Accountability to Affected Populations 30

Appendices 31

A. Preliminary Technical and Socio-Economic Analysis 33

B. Trail Assessment Report 36

C. Trail Safety Plan Team Formation Application 49

D. Trail Safety Plan Team Example Contract 50

E. Trail Maintenance Worker Selection and Tools 53

F. Trail Maintenance Worker Application 55

G. Trail Maintenance Worker Application Scoring 56

H. Road Maintenance Worker Performance Standards 57

I. Road Maintenance Group Task Rates 58

J. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Short-Term Plan Form 59

K. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Long-Term Plan Form 60



L. Expression of Interest Questionnaire 61

M. Appendix to FIDIC Conditions of Contract 65

N. Scope of Works 67

O. Remuneration, Payment and Time Schedule 87

P. Community Feedback Mechanism 92

Q. Bioengineering Techniques 93

FiguresFigure 1: Work Plan 2Figure 2: Trail Selection Process Flow Chart 3Figure 3: Vulnerability Mapping 6Figure 4: Trail Safety Plan Flow Chart 10Figure 5: Cross-Section of Trail Width 19Figure 6: Cross-Section of Cross Drainage 20Figure 7: Dry Wall Design Drawing 21Figure 8: Gabion Wall Design Drawing 22Figure 9: Handrail and Steps Design Drawing 23

Mott MacDonald | Design Criteria and Procurement Principles for Rural Access Trails 1


Executive Summary

After the devastating earthquake of 2015, numerous fragile mountainous areas were affected bylandslides that damaged or destroyed many rural trails, impacting safe access to manysettlements and markets. In response, the national authorities and international communityundertook quick win projects to address critical humanitarian needs. While the projects haveworked to deliver reconstruction at scale, more attention is needed to ensure trail sustainability;with systems and mechanisms in place for conducting and funding maintenance activities. Thisreport documents current practice for design and procurement as applicable for this componentof the project. The report also suggests ways to improve maintenance and highlights some keyissues related to implementation, to the extent that they influence design and procurement, butthese will be covered in more detail in later reports.

The first chapter details a trail selection process that is designed to ensure the poorest and mostvulnerable municipalities, wards and households are supported to improve access routes. Itstarts with a district level gap analysis, then conducts vulnerability mapping within the districtsand finishes by assessing trails that are located in the most vulnerable areas in the prioritisedmunicipalities and wards. This identifies and addresses critical reconstruction needs, especiallyin areas where other actors are not already working or planning to work. The process isconducted in partnership with local governments and bodies to increase the awareness of thestatus of trails and remaining gaps in the selected wards. The partnership approach will alsohelp to gain ownership and commitment from local government to maintaining trails over thelong term.

As introduced at the start of the executive summary, robust management and maintenancesystems are required to increase trail sustainability. The second chapter suggests a sustainablecommunity led and cost-effective trail maintenance methodology that could reinvigorate currenttrail maintenance practices and help to solve the resourcing issues faced by the DistrictCoordination Committees (DCCs) and the Department of Local Infrastructure and Agriculture(DoLIDAR). It is achieved by combining the tried and tested Water Safety Plan methodology(used for maintaining water systems) with DoLIDAR’s Road Maintenance Group Guidelines.The seven-step process equips a Trail Safety Plan (TSP) team with the skills and tools toensure that the trails are planned and constructed according to the users’ needs and are wellmaintained with robust management and financial procedures.

The third chapter details the design criteria for trails using existing World Food Programme(WFP) practices and the draft Engineering Guideline for Foot Trail Construction in MountainousRegions, prepared by Unnat Goreto. There is a critical requirement to build back better asprevious trails were not well built and have become unusable due to poor design, weakconstruction quality control and/or inadequate drainage provision. The design criteria anddrawings are provided for earthworks, drainage, retaining structures, steps and railings arebioengineering practices.

Following the design of the trial, the fourth chapter details the procurement and implementationmethodology. The current practice is that the project will be implemented by contractors and thechapter provides information on the selection and monitoring of contractors, which is achievedby following the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) Green BookConditions of Contract. While contractors are used, the project is cognizant of the importance ofproviding livelihood opportunities to the rural poor and the need to increase communityownership, and thus sustainability of the trails, when the users are involved in the project



implementation. Therefore, the implementation practice ensures that local labour is used for theconstruction and labour-intensive methods to complete non-critical path tasks.

The final chapter details the procedures for the project handover, defect liability andaccountability to the affected population.

The various tasks and steps are summarised in an indicative workplan as shown in Figure 1below:

Figure 1: Work Plan

Source: Mott MacDonald



1 Trail Selection

This chapter details a trail selection process that is designed to ensure the poorest and mostvulnerable municipalities, wards and households are supported to improve access routes. Theeight-step process detailed below starts at the district level and finishes by assessing trails thatare located in the most vulnerable areas in the prioritised municipalities and wards. It identifiesand addresses critical reconstruction needs, especially in areas where other actors are notalready working or planning to work. The process is conducted in partnership with localgovernments and bodies to increase the awareness of the status of trails and remaining gaps inthe selected wards. The partnership approach will also help to gain ownership and commitmentfrom local government to maintaining trails over the long term.

1.1 Gap AnalysisOutput Area 1 of the Post-Earthquake Reconstruction project is to ‘support the government indetailed year-wise reconstruction planning, co-ordination and capacity building’. Part of this willinvolve working closely with the National Reconstruction Agency (NRA) and key line ministries

Figure 2: Trail Selection Process Flow Chart




to map stakeholders and identify resource and capacity gaps in relation to foot trailinfrastructure in the four core project districts1, ensuring that no one is being left behind.

The starting point for conducting the gap analysis will be to refer to the Post Disaster NeedsAssessment (PDNA), Post Disaster Reconstruction Framework (PDRF) and the work conductedby ICF; in particular, the municipality planning meetings and development of the PERP softwelsystem. The second step will be to consult directly with the district line ministries such asDoLIDAR and with municipalities. In addition, organisations working in each district areexpected to update their plans and provide first hand gap analysis through clusters andsystems, such as the 4Ws.

Initial analysis has identified that the districts of Gorkha and Dhading should be prioritised forthe reconstruction of trails. However, this shall be updated if the year-wise reconstructionplanning of Output 1 or other consultations identifies that there is greater need in Nuwakot,Rasuwa or other adjacent areas of earthquake-affected districts.

1.2 Vulnerability Analysis and MappingVulnerability mapping should be undertaken in each district. As can be seen in Figure 3, a mapis produced for each of the below criteria. These maps are overlaid to identify the mostvulnerable municipalities and wards within the districts.

● Food Insecurity (Source: Nepal Food Security Monitoring System, WFP/MoAD)● Poverty (Source: Nepal small area estimation of poverty, 2011)● Road Access and Remoteness (Source: RAP Nepal)● Climate Zones and Remote Villages (Source: LRMP)● History of Disasters (Source: WFP, USGS, Desinventar Nepal)● Precipitation Induces Landslide Susceptibility (Source: ADPC, World Bank Nepal, WFP)

1.3 Technical and Socio-Economic AnalysisFollowing the identification of the most vulnerable areas within the districts, the status andlocation of existing trails and access routes is mapped (refer to Figure 3). This includes a gapanalysis that identifies trails and roads that have been improved, are currently underimprovement and those that still require improving.

A preliminary desk based technical and socio-economic analysis is conducted on the possibletrails identified above. The analysis is completed based on internal WFP knowledge and inliaison with DoLIDAR and the DCC.

The technical analysis focuses on:

● Trail length● Reported issues directly or indirectly as a result of the earthquake● Possible structural work required (gabion/concrete/dry walls, culverts, trail widening, bio-

engineering, steps, clearing land slides etc.)● Rough estimation of cost● Approximate construction time required

1 Under the decentralisation process, districts do not have a decision-making role in the future governance. However, there will still be aDistrict Assembly and District Coordination Committee. The NRA and some departments intend to continue to work from districtlevel. Therefore, the gap analysis shall continue to be conducted at the district level.



● Feasibility of construction including possible health and safety risks● Accessibility to the trail for vehicles for the delivery of materials.

The socio-economic analysis focuses on:

● Number of wards and population the trail serves● The number of schools, health posts and religious sites the trail serves● The socio-economic outcomes and impact.

The trails are ranked according to their technical priority, weighted socio-economic benefit andpriority of the DCC as detailed in Appendix A.



Figure 3: Vulnerability Mapping

Source: World Food Programme



1.4 Coordination with Government Authorities2

The Department of Local Infrastructure and Agriculture (DoLIDAR) has prime responsibility forcoordinating, planning, budgeting, and delivering the reconstruction of trails. This includes thedevelopment, implementation, and monitoring of District Transport Master Plans (DTMP). In thepast, DoLIDAR was guided by the District Development Committee who have overallresponsibility for the reconstruction efforts within the district. In the process of devolution, someresponsibilities and funds will be passed to newly formed and elected municipalities and wards.

To ensure effective coordination with relevant authorities, following the identification of thepotential trails in step 1.2 and 1.3, a planning meeting shall be held with DoLIDAR, DCC,municipality and possibly ward representatives. The technical and socio-economic analysis shallbe presented, cross checking and de-conflicting with the DTMP shall be performed and theproposed trails for assessments shall be agreed. This cross checking with the DTMP is toensure that trails are not built where new or repaired roads are planned.

Following the agreement of the trails to be assessed, the municipality (supported by DoLIDARand the DCC) makes a formal request to WFP to confirm the trails to be considered forrehabilitation. The request shall be in writing and include:

● population with percentage breakdown by caste/ethnic group which uses the trail● purpose of trail, type of traffic (local, mules, tourists, etc.)● main problems with the current trail● proposed repairs to the trail● contributions that the community can provide● commitment to preventative maintenance and repairs.

1.5 Community ApplicationFor a successful community-based approach (as proposed in Section 2 Trail Safety Plan), arequest for the trail improvement must come from the users. This helps to demonstrate thatthere is demand for the improvement. The communities that will benefit from the trail need towrite a letter of application that includes similar details to the municipality letter in step 1.4.

1.6 Confirmation of Trails to be AssessedWFP writes a site selection report including the Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (step 1.2),Technical and Socio-Economic Analysis (step 1.3) and the letter of request from DoLIDAR andthe DCC (step 1.4.) and the Community application (step 1.5), which is then reviewed by MMLand recommended for assesment. Based on this information, NRA and the Department forInternational Development (DFID) approve the trails to be assessed.

1.7 Trail AssessmentThe trail assessment is conducted by WFP engineers who walk the entire length of the trail toachieve the following objectives:

● assess the trail condition● track the trail route using a GPS device

2 In the ongoing process of devolution, the powers held by DoLIDAR may be passed to the newly formed municipalities. This process hasnot happened to date; thus, the report details the current practice. Once the transition of the responsibility is completed, the reportwill be updated.



● photograph the waypoints● establish the location and size of settlements along the respective trail● locate existing and probable material sources● prepare a provisional scope of work for the various trail sections.● recommend repairs and re-routing, if that can be done to achieve sustainable accessibility.

When walking the trail, the engineers should consider if the alignment:

● offers a reasonably direct walking option without excessive meandering● passes through fairly stable terrain or can be stabilised within available budget● does not pass through dangerous landslides or has too many river crossings requiring

bridges● is usable by elderly, weak or young children through the length. This is possible by

avoiding a very high gradient.

An assessment report and preliminary budget is produced (example provided in Appendix B)that details the general trail condition, topographic profile and specific details on the waypointsthat require improvements such as landslides, rock fall areas, re-route area etc. For eachwaypoint, the length, photographs and required mitigation with approximate associated costsare produced such as for:

● trail widening● re-routing● clearing land slides● slope stabilisation● gabion/dry/concrete walls● steps● drainage / culverts● railings● bioengineering.

The reports are provided to the DCC and DoLIDAR so that the DTMP can be cross checked toensure that trails are not built where new or repaired roads are planned. Once agreed locally,the reports should be provided to NRA, MML and DFID for review and approval.

1.8 Trails SelectedFollowing the approval of trail assessment reports, MML (with the concurrence of DFID andNRA) will provide confirmation to proceed with the rehabilitation. An agreement is signed withWFP and agreed with DoLIDAR, DCC and municipality. Once TSPs are instituted (in Chapter2), the TSP team will also sign the agreement.



2 Trail Safety Plan

In response to the devastating earthquakes that damaged or destroyed many rural foot trails,the national authorities and international community undertook quick win projects to addresscritical humanitarian needs in the short term. While the projects have worked to deliverreconstruction at scale, more attention is needed to ensure trail sustainability, with systems andmechanisms in place for conducting and funding maintenance activities.

Rural foot trails often fall into disrepair, not because the users are unable to perform themaintenance, but because they were not adequately involved in the planning and construction,which has resulted in a lack of community ownership and the expectation that external actorsshould be responsible for the maintenance. While the maintenance does fall under the remit ofthe municipality and previously the DDC, limited resources and interest means maintenance isseldom performed adequately.

The approach detailed in this chapter identifies an alternative community-led and cost-effectivemethodology that reinvigorates trail maintenance practices while helping to solve the resourcingissues previously faced by the DDC and DoLIDAR. It is achieved by combining the tried andtested Water Safety Plan methodology (used for maintaining water systems) with DoLIDAR’sRoad Maintenance Group Guidelines. While the approach will be more cost effective, it will stillrequire financing from the municipality as it is not feasible for all funds to be raised by trail users.

The seven-step process (detailed in Figure 4 below) equips a Trail Safety Plan (TSP) team withthe skills and tools to ensure that the trails are planned and constructed according to the users’needs and are well maintained with robust management and financial procedures. It is achievedthrough a comprehensive risk assessment and risk management approach that addresses thefollowing:

· Direct and indirect environmental and climate-induced hazards to trail dilapidation (suchas landslides, floods/excess runoff) and how to mitigate or adapt to them

· Monitoring the implementation of the Trail Safety Plan, i.e. implementation of controlmeasures and hazard mitigation and adaptation measures

· Regular operation and maintenance activities as well as long term repairs andupgrading

· Establishment of a funding mechanism from the municipality to ensure resources areavailable for maintenance and repair.

It is recommended that every trail has one TSP team within each municipality, thus easing theadministration of the trail maintenance works. However, where the trail is long and the trailmaintenance workers would have to travel long distances to carry out maintenance, it may beadvisable to split the trail sections and create separate TSPs per ward.

It should be noted that this approach is new and recommended to be tested on a pilotbasis to be refined over the lifetime of the project, taking into account the impact ofdecentralization. It has not been applied on the initial trails for immediateimplementation.



Figure 4: Trail Safety Plan Flow Chart


2.1 Local Engagement and Team Formation

2.1.1 Focus Group Discussion and Key Informant Interviews

For successful implementation of a project, it is important that the municipality, ward andcommunity, particularly community leaders and decision-makers, understand the benefits. Thisis to ensure that they are committed to the continued operation, maintenance, and managementof the trail including making sure sufficient resources are available.

Therefore, the first part of local engagement is to hold focus group discussions and keyinformant interviews to understand the local needs and gain the support from leaders. Theproject methodology will be presented along with the expected roles and responsibilities of themunicipality, ward and communities.



2.1.2 Mass Meeting

The successful implementation of a Trail Safety Plan requires the empowerment of communitiesand local government to define their priorities, and the terms of their contributions andmaintenance plans. This will be started by holding a mass meeting in each community that willbenefit from the trail. To ensure the process is inclusive and considers gender as well as theneeds of elderly and vulnerable community members it is important that at least half of theparticipants should be women or from vulnerable groups3.

The seven steps of the trail safety plan should be explained and the community membersshould identify their aspirations and needs. The mass meeting should:

● tap into local knowledge and experience in the identification, assessment, andmanagement of risks;

● identify resources within the community that can be called upon when needed;● initiate a dialogue between the community and other stakeholders (municipality

representatives, DoLIDAR) on the benefits and requirements of the trail improvement andthe joint preparation of a TSP;

● raise awareness of the role that community members can play in protecting and improvingtheir trail.

The community must be well informed about the options, costs, potential problems and their rolein the development, management and maintenance of the trail. To ensure ownership, theremust be a demand and willingness to be responsible for maintenance.

2.1.3 Trail Safety Plan Team Formation

The TSP team is responsible for developing and implementing the TSP and managing themaintenance of the trail. The team also needs to help the community to understand and acceptthe TSP approach. A poorly performing TSP team will most likely lead to the trail falling intodisrepair. Considering this vital role, the selection of the TSP team should be carefullyconsidered. The team shall mainly be drawn from those directly benefiting from the trail, butshould also include representatives from the municipality or ward, health workers or volunteers,teachers and the municipality engineer.

The details of the TSP management structure will be developed with the municipality, but it isanticipated that the community should elect the TSP team. As one trail may serve severalvillages, representatives of each village need to be included4. The TSP members shouldcollectively have the following characteristics:

● be familiar with, and use the trail;● be responsible for the maintenance of the trail or have helped during construction or earlier

repairs;● have the authority to make decisions about spending money, training and/or recruiting

staff;● have the knowledge and capacity to identify and characterise potential risks to the trail from

the environment and the users;● be responsible for and have the capacity to help manage and prevent those risks;

3 Dalits, Janajati, the elderly, disabled, chronically ill and households that are below the poverty line, hazard prone, single female or singlechild headed households

4 It is recommended that every trail has just one TSP team, thus facilitating the administration of the trail maintenance works. However,where the trail is long and the trial maintenance workers would have to travel long distances to carry out maintenance, it may beadvisable to split the trail sections and create separate TSPs.



● be influential and interested, at both the community level and at least one administrativelevel up, in representing community concerns and investment needs;

● be permanently resident in the trail location with no plans to migrate;● have the time available and commitment to devote to trail management.

Once the TSP team is identified, participants’ names and roles should be documented andshared with all team members and the community. The TSP team should also formally requestto form a TSP team with the municipality and DoLIDAR (an example letter taken from the RoadMaintenance Group Guidelines is provided in Appendix C).

Based on the success of the pilot of this TSP approach, a longer-term ambition is for amaintenance contract between the TSP team, the municipality and DoLIDAR to be made thatdescribes the trail maintenance activities to be undertaken and the performance standardsexpected (an example contract taken from the Road Maintenance Group Guidelines is providedin Appendix D).

2.1.4 Trail Safety Plan Team Training

Following the selection of the TSP team and during the construction of the trail, several trainingsshould be conducted to ensure that the committee are empowered and have the ability tomanage and maintain the trail. The training should include the technical issues involved in themaintenance contract (how, when and where to implement the different maintenance activities)as well as the managerial aspects of the maintenance contract (how the payments are made,what documents are required etc.). The training should ensure the TSP team can complete thefollowing tasks:

● ensure active cooperation and participation of the ward, municipality and DoLIDAR in thepreparation and implementation of TSP

● establish an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) fund and develop O&M regulation● play an active role in the different steps of the trail planning and implementation● properly manage and store tools and components● plan and ensure routine, recurrent and specific maintenance work are conducted on a

regular basis (detailed further in step 2.1.5 below and in 2.4.1 Short Term Plan)● train maintenance worker(s) who carry out their work regularly● plan periodic and emergency maintenance when required (detailed further in 2.4.2 Long

Term Plan) including raising funds from the municipality and DoLIDAR (detailed further insection 2.7)

● public auditing & hearing and mass meetings conducted on regular basis● solve all disputes that arise in the project● promote proper care and use of the trail.

The TSP team will also be linked with community/local disaster management committees, toreceive technical support in case of future disaster, and to facilitate integration with DRRconsiderations into the TSP.

2.1.5 Trail Maintenance Workers

The TSP team should hire and train Trail Maintenance Workers (TMWs) to be responsible forcleaning and clearing works, recurrent minor repairs and minor specific maintenance. This is toallow trouble-free use of the trail and reduce damage of the trail protection measures,particularly the drainage system, bioengineering and retaining walls.



2.1.5.1 Trail Maintenance Workers’ Responsibilities

TMWs are responsible for routine, recurrent, specific, and emergency (when possible)maintenance as detailed below. These actions, except emergency maintenance, are conductedon a regular basis to prevent the trail deteriorating into poor condition that would require costlyperiodic maintenance (detailed further in 2.4.2 Long Term Plan).

Routine Maintenance refers to small maintenance works to be carried out in all seasons on aregular basis. It comprises simple categories of maintenance to ensure that the trails workproperly and damage is avoided, such as:

● Clearing of small landslides and other material on the trail● Clearing of drains and culverts● Cutting and clearing of vegetation● Cleaning of retaining walls● Maintenance of bioengineering features.

Recurrent Maintenance refers to small maintenance works not falling under routinemaintenance. It is carried out annually to repair minor damage resulting from foot and animaltraffic as well as rainfall to prevent the damage from becoming more serious.

Specific Maintenance refers to all the spot improvements and repairs that do not occur everyyear and are very specific in nature and location.

Emergency Maintenance refers to works that are to be carried out due to unexpected andsudden blockage of the trail due to natural disasters that stop movement. The aim of emergencymaintenance is to reopen the trail quickly and protect the trail from further damage. Reinstatingthe trail to its original condition is not included under emergency maintenance and falls underperiodic maintenance.

The trail maintenance workers will assist with, but will not be solely responsible for periodicmaintenance, which will require higher investments and skilled workers (as detailed in 2.4.2Long Term Plan).

The selection of the trail maintenance workers, such as the number required and tools needed,will be refined during the implementation of the pilot TSP approach. For the moment, a draftselection process based on the road maintenance manual is provided in Appendix E.

2.2 Analysis of the TrailFollowing the selection and training of the TSP team, the team need to get a specificunderstanding of the trail components and locations. This includes how each componentdeteriorates so that the TSP team can plan how to prevent the deterioration. This is achieved byfollowing a similar process as detailed in 1.7 Trail Assessment.

WFP will provide the TSP team with the Trail Assessment completed in step 1.7. The TSP teamwill walk the length of the trail to confirm the scope of works required for each waypoint.

In the process of the trail assessment, the TSP team will review the WFP trail map (or prepareone if none is available) that details the waypoints that require repair and confirm the proposedupgrading works to be conducted. They should add any local details which are helpful formaintenance planning, such as:

● community features (houses/clusters, buildings, roads)● environmental features (forests, grazing grounds, rivers etc.)



● land use patterns and potential hazards (e.g. deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion) aswell as areas of landslides.

The hazards should be discussed to identify the risks of damage and potential mitigatingmeasures, as described below.

This process provides a check to the WFP assessment (step 1.7) and encourages localownership and involvement in the trail rehabilitation process. There should be scope, at thisstage, to make minor adjustments where required. However, it is important that any proposalsfor changes are given to WFP for review and incorporation in the contract as appropriate, andnot directly to the contractor. The TSP should never directly instruct the contractor as thiscreates a risk of confusion and delay.

2.3 Identifying and Assessing Hazards, Risks, and Existing Control MeasuresThe TSP team should undertake their own analysis of the hazards that can disrupt eachwaypoint of the trail and the trail in general. They should develop an understanding of thehazards and potential mitigation measures during the implementation of the repairs, and usethis help develop a plan for maintenance towards the end of the initial construction period. Thefindings of the discussion should be recorded in the Hazard and Risk Assessment and Short-Term Plan Form in Appendix J. Some of the items that should be discussed include:

● environmental and climate-induced hazards, such as magnitude and frequency of flooding,expanding gullies and landslides, and their possible impacts on the trail such as damagingretaining walls, blocking drains, blocking paths

● excessive use of the trail forming ruts, pot holes and corrugations● surface run-off and overgrown vegetation blocking the trail drains● indirect hazards such as the degradation processes in the trail area that might undermine

sustainability in the long run. Signs of degradation include, for example, rills and gullyerosion, wind erosion (dust storms), degraded vegetation such as cleared forests, sparsetrees, over-grazed lands, poor crops and patches of bare soil.

The TSP team should consider not only the obvious hazards and hazardous events, but alsothe potential for them to occur or be compounded through:

● lack of understanding of the trail and how to maintain it● various shortcomings associated with faulty infrastructure● human-made degradation, resulting from sabotage or neglect (such as pack animals

destroying the trail).

Existing activities and processes that help to prevent or reduce the occurrence of a potentialhazard should be identified and taken into account in the TSP.

2.4 Development of the Trail Safety PlanAfter identifying the hazards and risks to the deterioration of a trail in step 2.3, the control andmitigation measures to prevent the hazard and minimise the risks as well as measures to adaptto the changes, should be developed.

Short-term and long-term activities should be identified and the need of internal or externalsupport should be assessed and recorded in the Hazard and Risk Assessment and Short-TermPlan Form (Appendix J) and Hazard and Risk Assessment and Long-Term Plan Form(Appendix K). The TSP team should consider:



● the level of risk associated with each hazard and hazardous event;● control measures to address the risk (i.e. what and how);● the person(s) responsible for carrying out the control measure (i.e. who);● timelines for the control measure (i.e. when);● financial resources needed (i.e. cost);● training requirements for operating the control measure.

The TSP prepared by the TSP team shall be approved in a mass meeting in which the usersand committee members shall commit to its implementation.

2.4.1 Short Term Plan

The short-term plan (Appendix J) will consist of regular (day-to-day) activities and minorimprovement measures that can be implemented immediately and regularly by the TSP teamand TMWs. These activities consist of routine, recurrent, specific and emergency maintenanceas detailed in 2.1.5.1. Similarly, simple activities for preventing natural hazards and reducingrisks (e.g. awareness raising on the proper use of the trail, control of deforestation,implementation of simple technologies) should be included in the short-term plan.

The corrective maintenance activities mentioned above will entail routine cleaning and clearing,grading of the trail surface and minor repairs to the drainage system and other trail structures.Carrying out these activities when the trail is still in good condition will have to be repeated morefrequently, but will prevent the trail from deteriorating into a poor condition, which would requirecostly complete reshaping of large stretches of trail and complete rehabilitation or replacementof trail structures. Overall, the more frequent minor maintenance and repair activities result inlower trail maintenance costs and better trail conditions than waiting until the trail hasdeteriorated into poor condition before conducting repairs.

2.4.2 Long Term Plan

The long-term plan (Appendix K) should include major mitigation and adaptation activities tonatural hazards, as well as major repair and upgrading works of the trail. This periodicmaintenance is to be carried out in intervals of years or after an emergency that results incatastrophic damage to the trail. The maintenance is large-scale and is aimed at preserving thestructural integrity of the trail. This mainly involves activities aimed at rejuvenating the trailsurface and structures:

● In earthen areas, periodic maintenance should be conducted every two to three years andinclude grading and reshaping of the trail with some localised repairs (e.g. retainingstructures, culverts, dry stone pitching, repairs of drains, creation of earthen drain)

● In gravel surfaces, periodic maintenance should be conducted every three years andinclude re-gravelling with some localised repairs (e.g. retaining structures, culverts, drystone pitching, repairs of drains)

● In concrete surfaces, periodic maintenance should be conducted every five to seven yearsand includes surface dressing and patch repair.

Implementation of the long-term activities will require substantial budget and additional externalresources (both financial and technical). The long-term plan will form the basis for chapters 3.Design Criteria and 4. Procurement and Implementation Methodology.



2.5 Trail Safety Plan Monitoring and VerificationThe purpose of the monitoring and verification step is to confirm that the TSP is leading to goodmaintenance of the trail and that it is kept in satisfactory condition as expected. The monitoringplan should address both preventive (detecting risks so that action may be taken beforeproblems occur) and remedial objectives (identifying problems so that corrective actions can betaken promptly).

To prepare the monitoring plan, the TSP developed above (step 2.4) includes space to monitorthe progress against each activity as can be seen in Appendix J and K. The TSP Team shouldprepare the monitoring plan and commit to monitoring the implementation of TSP (i.e. all themeasures identified in TSP). Since the monitoring is a continuous process, it should be carriedout before, after and at regular intervals for each specific activity so that the impact/effect ofTSP is assessed and maintained.

2.6 Trail Safety Plan Review and ImprovementThe purpose of the TSP review and improvement is to document the status and sustainability ofthe trail to ensure that the TSP approach is embedded in operations and that the TSP remainsup-to-date and effective. The TSP team should do this by reviewing the monitoring andverification step above. The findings and way forward are then discussed in a mass meeting,with an objective to ensure the effective implementation of TSP in future. The TSP is updated asrequired and presented to the related ward, municipality and DoLIDAR along with theassistance needed regarding the implementation of TSP.

2.7 Financial and Payment Mechanisms for the Trail Safety PlanAs detailed in the introduction to this chapter, trail maintenance is the responsibility of themunicipality. However, due to limited personnel and resources, maintenance is seldomperformed. The TSP approach detailed in this chapter identifies an alternative community ledand cost-effective methodology that reinvigorates trail maintenance practices. However, theimplementation of the TSP will still require financing from the municipality. This sectiondescribes the calculation of finances required and the payment mechanisms that should beadopted.

Two main funds are required:

● Regular Maintenance Fund - routine, recurrent and specific maintenance that involvescleaning and minor improvements that are conducted regularly

● Periodic Maintenance Fund - emergency and periodic maintenance that are to be carriedout in intervals of years or after an emergency that results in catastrophic damage to thetrail.

2.7.1 Regular Maintenance Fund

The regular maintenance fund is required to conduct the day-to-day trail maintenance activitiesas detailed in Section 2.1.5.1. The main costs will be the wage payments to the trailmaintenance workers, but the management costs of the TSP team also need to be included.

The calculation of the wage payments to the TMWs is based on the number of person daysrequired per kilometre of trail as detailed in Appendix E: The rates of pay should be based onthe updated district rate for unskilled labour.



Experience gained from Road Maintenance Groups suggests that maintenance worker wagesaccount for 80-90% of the total costs. Therefore, the total regular maintenance fund that isrequired from the municipality should be based on the expected TMW inputs plus 20%.

While the estimation of the maintenance fund is based upon the number of person days, thepayments will be made according to performance, not on the amount of time that the TMWsspend on maintenance activities. The payment by results mechanism lowers the administrativeburden and motivates the TMWs to complete their job quickly and to high quality.

A list of recommended performance standards from the Road Maintenance Group Guidelines(DoLIDAR, 2016) is given in Appendix H. Following the inspection, the agreed payment is madefrom the municipality to the TSP team’s bank account. The TSP team then make the paymentsto the TMWs according to the number of days they worked (to do this, the TSP team need tokeep an attendance record). The distribution of wage payments should be monitored by theward, municipality and DoLIDAR to avoid misuse of funds. The TSP team should also presenttheir accounts to the community in a public audit.

2.7.2 Periodic Maintenance Fund

The periodic maintenance fund is required from the municipality for conducting emergency andperiodic maintenance. A work plan and budget need to be developed, as detailed in 2.4.2 LongTerm Plan. This should be based on agreed task rates, which define the volume of work thatmay be completed in a one-person day. A list of recommended task rates from the RoadMaintenance Group Guidelines (DoLIDAR, 2016) is given in Appendix I. Depending on theseverity of the damage and complexity of the repair, the TSP team may need assistance toproduce a work plan from a technical person within DoLIDAR. Skilled workers may also berequired to conduct the repairs in addition to the TMWs and this needs to be budgetedaccordingly. Following the calculation of the work plan and associated person days, a budget forthe maintenance activities will be calculated and approved by the municipality.

As with the Regular Maintenance Fund the payments will be made based against agreedperformance standards (as detailed in Appendix H). The payments are made from themunicipality to the TSP team’s bank account and distributed to the TMWs in accordance withthe number of days worked.



3 Design Criteria

The chapter has been produced on the basis of WFP practices and the draft EngineeringGuideline for Foot Trail Construction in Mountainous Regions, prepared by UnnatGoreto.

Following the trail assessments (1.7) and the development of the long-term maintenance plan(2.4.2) the project is designed. A critical requirement is to build back better as previous trailswere not well built and often become unusable due to poor design, weak construction qualitycontrol, and inadequate drainage provision. The trail needs to be designed to be compliant withnational standards and best practice to ensure that the trail is sustainable, particularly in relationto seismic and landslide risk.

Foot trails are designed to serve the mobility of people and animals as well as transportation ofgoods by animal or by human. For this, they must make walking easy and safe including:

· enough width for smooth passage of the trail users;

· avoiding critical sections and finding suitable alternative arrangements;

· bioengineering and slope stabilisation works in unstable and landslide prone areas;

· hand rails for high grades along the alignment and steep cliff areas;

· provisions of proper landing areas in steps and avoiding continuous series of steps.

The design criteria and drawings for earthworks, drainage, retaining structures, pavements,steps and railings are provided below. The drawings provide the general information regardingcomponents, elements, layouts, details and site networks to complete the project. However, thecontractor who will conduct the works shall verify the designs, measurements and all technicaldetails prior to contract signature and point out any details that may require adjustments. Thecontractor must abide by the specifications or propose a cost-effective alternative solution thatmust be approved by WFP prior to construction.

3.1 EarthworksEarthworks are engineering works created through the moving or processing of quantities of soilor unformed rock. Much of earthworks involves excavation and fill or backfill and the two shouldbe balanced with as little transport of materials as is possible. Wherever possible, the earthshould be moved to another location and used as fill and formed into the desired shape for thenew purpose. However, in loose sandy soils, erodible soils, black cotton and marshy land, thesurface layers of trails are treated by using sand, gravel, stone pitching etc.

3.1.1 Landslide Clearance

Materials removed from landslide areas should be separated into those which are suitable forreuse and those which need to be disposed of. Suitable materials shall be used in the formationof the embankment, subgrade, slopes, backfill for structures, etc. All landslide debris notsuitable for reuse shall be removed or deposited at a site or disposal area designated by theWFP Engineer.



3.1.2 Formation Width

Formation width is an important component of a foot trail. The following features are essentialfor a technically sound walking surface:

● The width of a trail depends upon the number of users and the type of traffic. The minimumwidth of the trail should be 1.5m, but greater if the trail is going to be used to transportgoods by pack animals.

● The minimum vertical clearance of the trail should be 2.5m, but greater if the trail will beused to transport goods by pack animals.

● The gradient of the path should not be too high. A desirable maximum gradient forpedestrians and pack animals is 15%.

● The trail surface should be well compacted to achieve optimum strength.

3.1.3 Cut Slope

● Cut slope designs are normally based on geotechnical parameters, such as soil and rockproperties, terrain slope, water tables and height of cut slope. The cut slope for cohesivesoil is 1: 6 (H: V), 1: 3 (H: V) for non-cohesive soil and 1: 10 (H: V) for rocky areas.

● Cut heights are kept to a minimum due to possible landslides and erosion problems.

3.1.4 Fill Slope

● The fill slope should preferably be 1.5:1 (H: V).● If the valley side is too steep, different retaining structures like dry stone walls, structures

from timber etc. are used. While constructing retaining structures, toe height should be atleast 20cm and slope of face should be 1:2 (H: V). Small boulders, gravels can be used asbackfill material.

Figure 5: Cross-Section of Trail Width

Source: WFP



3.2 DrainageWater management is one of the main issues in foot trail construction, and drainage serves toconvey water across the alignment of the trail. Drainage usually take the form of pipe culverts,which are used to convey water from streams crossing the trail and to carry water safely withoutdamaging the trail. For the durability and well-functioning of the trail, drainages need to be welldesigned and include:

● 5 to 6% slope is needed (1 in 20 to 1 in 16) for cambers and cross-falls.● For culverts, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes compliant with the requirements of

NS 40/2040 for a minimum of 6kg pressured pipe should be used. Alternatively, concretepipes can be used or simple stone slab culverts if suitable rock is available.

● Turnout drains are constructed to lead water from the side drains away from the path ortrack. They should be carefully located to avoid cultivated land and vegetation.

● A catch water drain is constructed in the hill side where considerable water flows towardsthe trail. This drain can be a ditch of 30cm deep and 30cm wide. It is constructed on theuphill side at every 3 to 5m interval.

● Stone lining on the trail surface needs to be provided for areas with water logging or softsoil.

Where flows are small, cross drainage can be allowed to flow over the trail. In this case thereshould be a depression in the path and it should be protected with stone to reduce erosion

Figure 6: Cross-Section of Cross Drainage

Source: WFP



3.3 Retaining StructuresRetaining structure works are designed to retain soil, control erosion, prevent landslides,stabilise slopes, and act as livestock barriers. They can be made from gabions or dry stonemasonry. Gabion retaining walls are often preferred to dry stone walls as they are more flexibleand can be built with smaller stones. However, this is offset by the need to import gabionbaskets. Design details for both are provided below.

3.3.1 Dry Stone Walls

Dry stones walls should be built with the following considerations:

● The height of a dry wall should be limited to a maximum of 2.5m when it is possible to carryit out with good design, supervision and workmanship, i.e. use of stones of good qualitywith appropriate bonding, and well-maintained side slopes.

● Face stones shall be comparatively larger and uniform in size and colour to give a goodappearance, and breadth of face stones shall be greater than the height. Face stonesshould tail into the wall to a sufficient depth to bind well.

● Stones shall be broken and faces of wall shall be truly in plumb. Corner stones or quoinsshould be a good stone and dressed correctly to angle and laid as headers and stretches.

● Generally, stones should be of 30kg in weight while constructing retaining walls andthrough stone must be placed in corners as well as in intervals of one or two layers.

Figure 7: Dry Wall Design Drawing

Source: WFP

3.3.2 Gabion Boxes

Gabion boxes are most suitable for poor foundation, wet soils and soil with high ground waterlevel and unstable slopes. They are useful for erosion control and river protection works.Gabions can be constructed up to a height of 14m, although they should be preferably limited to10m and in practice are generally less than 3m. Since trail cutting height and width are relativelylower than for roads, high walls (>3m) can generally be avoided. It is recommended toreconsider the alignment of the trail if high walls are found necessary.



The gabion boxes should be machine-woven rectangular units made from double-twisthexagonal mesh of heavy galvanised mild steel wire. All edges of the standard gabion includingthe diaphragms, if any, should be mechanically selvedged in such a way as to preventunravelling of the mesh and to develop the full strength of the mesh.

The dimensions and materials of the gabion boxes should be as follows:

The wire used for manufacturing of the gabions shall be annealed mild steel complying with BS1052:1990 or NS 169:2045 with an average strength of 380-500 N/mm2 and shall be galvanisedbefore weaving as specified in BS 443:1982 of NS 163:2045.

All the gabions of lengths more than 2.00m should contain diaphragms spaced at a distance ofnot more than 1.00m. Gabion boxes shall be laid in staggered manner. Back slope of 10:1 (V:H)shall be maintained in gabion wall. Gabion mattress shall be embedded and installed on asound foundation. Before the crates are packed, the selvedges of one crate shall be bound tothe selvedges of an adjacent crate. When the crates are packed with boulders, the lids will beclosed and the selvedges bound with binding wire. The packing shall be with hammer dressedsound boulders, placed individually by hand, bedded on all sides on each other and bondedtightly. No loose stones shall be inserted into the crate. In the case of river bank protection, bothends of the gabion walls shall be keyed into the river bank.

Figure 8: Gabion Wall Design Drawing

Source: WFP



3.4 Steps and RailingsIn steep longitudinal gradients that exceed 20%, it becomes difficult to walk straight and at anormal pace. To avoid this, steps are provided in trails with the following design parameters:

● Riser (R) =maximum 25cm. (Best value 17cm.) Tread (T) =minimum 25cm. (Best value30cm.)

● A general rule of thumb for stairs: (2R+T) = 600 To 700mm.● The best value of riser = 17cm and tread = 30cm gives a gradient of 57%.● Provide handrail if the gradient of the steps is greater than 60%.● Rest areas/landing can be placed in an interval of 40 to 50m.● Start construction from the bottom, provide an overlap of minimum 150mm for the stones.● Tilt the stones inward such that they don’t slip out with a downward slope.

When designing steps, quality considerations should be given to the materials used. All stoneshould be hard, uniform in texture, be the best available from the nearest quarry or elsewhereapproved by the site engineer/supervisor. No round stone shall be used unless three faces arebroken. Stones shall be fairly regular in size and every stone shall be fitted to the adjacentstones. No stone shall be less than 15cm in size.

In general, the use of cement is avoided in structures of a foot trail. However, if the quality ofstone is low or if mules will be using the trail, their hard hoofs can break or loosen the stones.To avoid such damage, masonry steps are constructed or top step PCC/cement mortar(minimum 7.5 cm) capping is done. The bed on which rubble soling is to be laid shall be clearedof all loose materials, levelled, watered and compacted before laying rubble soling with OrdinaryPortland Cement mortar 1:4 ratio to be filled between the joints of stone.

Figure 9: Handrail and Steps Design Drawing

Source: WFP



3.5 BioengineeringBioengineering is the application of engineering design and technology to living systems.Combined with civil engineering measures, bioengineering techniques can reduce the overallcost of slope instability mitigation considerably. Bioengineering offers an environmentallyfriendly and highly cost and time effective solution to slope instability problems in mountainousand hilly areas and is a technique of choice to control soil erosion, slope failure, landslides, anddebris flows, and thus ultimately to help minimise the occurrence of floods and flash floods.Common bioengineering techniques are provided in Appendix Q.



4 Procurement and ImplementationMethodology

It is initially intended that the project will be implemented through contractors. This chapterprovides information on the selection and monitoring of contractors, which is achieved byfollowing the FIDIC Green Book Conditions of Contract.

While contractors ensure efficiency and timeliness given contractual obligations, WFP iscognizant of the importance of providing livelihood opportunities to the rural poor and the needto increase community ownership, and thus sustainability of the trails, by involving the users inproject implementation. Therefore, WFP contractually obliges contractors to hire local labourforces, as outlined in Appendix N, Scope of Works, Section 2.1. The local labour should bechosen in partnership with the TSP team and include the TMWs as detailed in the TSP Section2.1 Local Engagement and Team Formation.

4.1 Shortlisting of ContractorsAn expression of interest (EoI) questionnaire (Appendix J) is launched in the national and localnewspapers to find licensed, suitably qualified, and competent construction firms that areinterested in working with WFP to implement the trail projects in the respective districts.

The EoIs received are evaluated by the WFP engineering team and scored in accordance withthe assessment matrix below. A shortlisting report is produced that ranks the companies inaccordance with their score and recommends the companies to be placed on the WFP roster. AWFP procurement committee of at least four members, including the deputy country directorand the senior programme manager, who were not involved in the scoring, approves thesuggested companies to be placed on the WFP roster.

Table 1: EoI Evaluation CriteriaSection Heading Section Details Weighted

Percentage ScoreContact Details ● Company type (Ltd, PLC, Inc, JV etc.)

● Primary contact (including CV)● Years in business● Website

8%

Legal ● Bankruptcy or administration● Professional conduct● Compliance with international law● Joint ventures

9%

Financial ● Annual turnover (with auditor reports)● Current workload● Bonds and insurances

17%

Design Experience ● Experience in rural roads, trails, bridges, civilworks

● Services able to provide● Personnel● Number of current projects

6%

Construction Experience ● Design and build service capability● Experience with construction of trails, rural roads,

bridges

30%



Section Heading Section Details WeightedPercentage Score

● Experience with FIDIC contracts● Similar projects● Sub-contracting arrangements● Current construction projects● Available assets

Human Resources ● Organogram● CVs● Total Employees

10%

Quality control ● Internal quality control systems and procedures 8%

Health and Safety ● Company Health and Safety procedures● Compliance with National / International Health

and Safety standards

8%

Other ● Experience of projects with the United Nations 4%

Total - 100%Source: Mott MacDonald based on WFP EoI Questionnaire

4.2 Request for ProposalsFollowing the Trail Assessment (step 1.7) and Trails Selected (1.8) with associated approvalfrom MML and DFID, a request for proposals (RFP) is launched for the shortlisted contractors instep 4.1. Only contractors that have a presence in the district in which the trail is are invited totender as this ensures that the benefits are kept locally.

The RFP has five parts, ‘books’, including the Particular Conditions, Bidder CapacityQuestionnaire, Scope of Work, Pricing Document and Trail Assessment Report:

● Particular Conditions– Based on FIDIC Green Book conditions of contract and providing procedures for general

provisions, responsibilities of the contractor, variations and claims, contract price andpayment, risk and responsibility, insurance and resolution of disputes.

– Contain several appendices including the ‘Appendix to Tender’ (refer to Appendix M),which provides specific details, such as completion time, subcontracting allowances,defect period, payment conditions and insurance. Also annexed to the ParticularConditions are the contract agreement, performance security demand guarantee,advance payment guarantee and retention money guarantee.

– The bidder is required to complete the letter to tender indicating their acceptance of theConditions of Contract, Employer's Requirements, Schedules and Scope of Work.

● Bidder Capacity Questionnaire– The bidder is required to complete and submit the questionnaire as part of their proposal,

which is similar to the EoI questionnaire detailed in step 4.1 and Appendix J.● Scope of Work (attached in Appendix N) provides detail on the:

– Project - trail location and length, waypoints to be rehabilitated and the proposedrehabilitation measures

– Technical Requirements - technical drawings as detailed in Section 3. Design Criteria;basic standard operating procedures; materials (source, quality and inspectionprocedures); waste, rubbish and cleaning and noise, dust and vibration procedures; staffand labour welfare

– Technical Specification – detailed in step 3. Design Criteria and includes specifications forearthworks, drainage works, structural works, pavement work and railings



– Other Work Requirements – construction procedures, progress and programmemonitoring, testing and supervision

– Specification of Materials and Workmanship● Remuneration, Payment and Time Schedule (refer to refer to Appendix O)

– Instructs the bidder how to produce a financial proposal, which involves providing aschedule of quantities against each activity including earthworks, cross drainage works,retaining structures, pavement works and railing works. The bidder is also required toprovide a schedule of rates for skilled and unskilled labour.

– The bidder needs to provide a schedule of payments based on a lump sum basis and inaccordance with the Particular Conditions that state a 20% advance payment repaid bydeducting 20% off each milestone payment and 10% retention of payment held until theend of the defect liability period.

– The bidder also needs to provide a Project Work Schedule with all project activities andmilestones defined and linked.

● Trail Assessment Report– A copy of the report (detailed in step 1.7 and attached in Appendix B) is provided to the

bidder for information only.

4.3 Awarding of ContractsThe proposals submitted in step 4.2 are assessed based on the technical competence andprice. The technical scoring is completed in a similar method to scoring the EoIs as detailed instep 4.1.

The evaluation report is provided to MML and DFID for review and approval, and then WFPawards the contracts to the winning contractor(s) .

4.4 Project Implementation

4.4.1 Quality Assurance and Control

Good supervision is essential for assuring high quality construction, durability and futuresustainability. Therefore, WFP will provide an engineer to oversee and support the contractor onsite. The engineer helps ensure that standards and specifications are implemented and acts asfocal point of contact for the contractor on all technical queries.

WFP will closely manage the contractor using WFP Engineer Quality Assurance / QualityControl requirements. This includes following the standards outlined in WFP’s ConstructionManual (use of FIDIC suite of contracts), “Small Rural Infrastructures – Technical Guidelines forProjects Management and Design”, 2011, SAMARTH draft guidelines, and specifications as perthe RFP, in particular the scope of works which includes technical requirements andspecifications (detailed in section 3. Design Criteria and Appendix N).

Performance measurement is assured as WFP follows the FIDIC Suite of Contracts, whichincludes reporting procedures and correlating mechanisms. The scope of works (Appendix N)also details the reporting requirements including:

● Progress Photographs - The Contractor shall prepare and maintain an electronic dailyphotographic record of on-site activities and progress. The photographs shall beappropriately tagged identifying the date, location and objective. The photographic recordwill be provided as copies in both hard copy (prints) and electronic format (on compactdisk) at site meetings.



● Daily Site Diary - The Contractor shall prepare and submit daily site diary to WFP in theformat provided. Daily site diary should have all the required information on constructionactivities.

● Progress Meetings - The Contractor will be expected to participate in weekly progressmeetings during the course of the Works or any other intervals agreed between the parties.The meetings will be coordinated by WFP who will manage agendas and prepare recordsof discussions and decisions for circulation. The Contractor shall ensure that staff withresponsibility for the planning and delivery of the Works are present at these site meetings.

● The contractor will submit a progress report on a weekly basis, outlining:– Substantive works completed to date– Milestones achieved in accordance with the project plan– Report of any issues on site affecting the performance of the contract– Report of any health & safety or security issues, incidents or concerns– Any other details deemed relevant– The Contractor shall take photographic records of each stage of the construction, both

before and after each stage is complete.

WFP will further monitor progress using the agreed work schedule in the respective contractsusing MS Project. WFP Nepal will provide monthly Project reports to MML and DFID.

4.4.2 Community Involvement

While WFP will use contractors, WFP will ensure that local communities are involved in the trailrehabilitation process according to the Trail Safety Plan as detailed in Chapter 2. Through thisWFP seeks to ensure that no one is left behind and that WFP reaches those that are below thepoverty line. The Scope of Works, Appendix N, Section 2.1 also states that the “Contractorshall endeavour to hire as many local labours, for the duration of the project, and use labourintensive methods to complete non-critical path tasks.” The local labour should be chosen inpartnership with the TSP team and include the VMWs as detailed in the TSP Section 2.1 LocalEngagement and Team Formation.

Providing local people with an opportunity for wage labour is critical for the success of thereconstruction, and contractors are required to hire people in a transparent manner compliantwith Leave No One Behind objectives.

The WFP will monitor and record the skilled and unskilled workers involved in the trailconstruction including their home location, gender and vulnerability.

4.4.3 Health and Safety

Any construction activity carries risks and it is essential that health and safety requirements arefully understood and rigorously enforced at all times. This applies in all cases but is particularlyproblematic where small local sub-contractors are employed, where sites are remote fromvillages and where the concepts are unfamiliar. There is provision in the FIDIC contracts tomake adequate provisions and these must be rigorously applied and enforced.

4.4.4 Coordination with Government Authorities

WFP Nepal’s standard operating procedures stipulate that interventions are completed in closeconsultation with DoLIDAR, DDCs, VDCs, wards, and local stakeholders, dependent on the



local requirements. WFP will continue operating in this manner, taking into account localgovernment and stakeholders throughout the duration of the project, and recognising thechange in local government structure. This is detailed further in Section 2. Trail Safety Plan.

As a monitoring measure, WFP will hold weekly site meetings with the contractor and will meetwith DoLIDAR, DCCs and wards on a monthly basis to ensure all stakeholders are kept advisedon progress.



5 Project Handover and Accountability

5.1 Project HandoverThe WFP contract process includes the formal handover of the construction site from thecontractor to WFP. In turn, WFP will then hand over the construction site to the municipality,with a recommended maintenance plan and outlining standard operating procedures (SOPs).Recommendations will also be made to the DCC and municipality in regard to fundingmodalities for maintenance plans.

WFP will deliver a final report to the respective DCCs with guidelines for the methodology ofongoing maintenance and recommendations of maintenance costs that should be incorporatedinto the National Maintenance Plan controlled by DoLIDAR.

5.2 Defect LiabilityAs stipulated in the Appendix to FIDIC Conditions of Contract (Appendix M), WFP will ensureresilience to future natural hazards as contractors will be held accountable through contract lawand defect liability periods of 12 months.

5.3 Accountability to Affected PopulationsAccountability to affected populations (AAP) will be ensured through two mechanisms; the WFPcommunity feedback system (detailed in Appendix P) and through public audits.



Appendices

A. Preliminary Technical and Socio-Economic Analysis 33B. Trail Assessment Report 36C. Trail Safety Plan Team Formation Application 49D. Trail Safety Plan Team Example Contract 50E. Trail Maintenance Worker Selection and Tools 53F. Trail Maintenance Worker Application 55G. Trail Maintenance Worker Application Scoring 56H. Road Maintenance Worker Performance Standards 57I. Road Maintenance Group Task Rates 58J. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Short-Term Plan Form 59K. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Long-Term Plan Form 60L. Expression of Interest Questionnaire 61M. Appendix to FIDIC Conditions of Contract 65N. Scope of Works 67O. Remuneration, Payment and Time Schedule 87P. Community Feedback Mechanism 92Q. Bioengineering Techniques 93





A. Preliminary Technical and Socio-Economic Analysis







B. Trail Assessment Report



























C. Trail Safety Plan Team FormationApplication

Source: Road Maintenance Group Guidelines, DoLIDAR, 2016



D. Trail Safety Plan Team Example Contract








E. Trail Maintenance Worker Selection andTools

Trail Maintenance Worker SelectionThe first task in the selection of the TMW is calculating the size of the team required. This isdefined by the trail length, the required work input (number of person days per km of trail peryear) and the approximate number of days to be worked by each TMW per year. The RoadMaintenance Group Guidelines (DoLIDAR, 2016) suggest 65 person days per km per year for arelatively good or fair condition blacktop road to 156 person days per km per year for an earthenor gravel road in poor condition. Considering the maintenance of the trail will require less inputsthan a road, the following person days per km of trail is suggested:

Table 2: Trail Maintenance Worker InputsCondition of Trail Approximate Input LevelGood 40 person days per km per year

Average 60 person days per km per year

Poor 80 person days per km per yearSource: Mott MacDonald based on Road Maintenance Group Manual (DoLIDAR, 2016)

The TMWs are selected from the communities situated along the trail using an approvedselection criteria that will ensure the choice of most suitable candidates. Suitability refers to theability of the candidates to perform the job well (technical criteria) as was as to social objectivesof providing jobs and income to vulnerable groups in society (social criteria). The RoadMaintenance Group Guidelines (DoLIDAR, 2016) suggest the following:

Technical Requirements● Above 18 years of age● Physically and mentally able to work on trail maintenance● Live near the trail to be maintained with no plans to move

Social Criteria

● Unemployed or employed less than 25% of their time● Priority given the poorest and most marginalised groups● Preference given to female candidates with no less than 33%● At least 40% from disadvantaged groups (such as Dalit, Janajati)

To promote accountability and transparency, the VMWs should be selected through a massmeeting that clearly explains information on payments, working hours and the selection criteria.To ensure the process is inclusive and considers gender as well as elderly and vulnerablecommunity members it is important that at least one member from 50% of the householdsattend, at least half of the participant are women and marginalised groups are well represented,including Dalits, Janajati, the elderly, disabled, chronically ill and households that are below thepoverty line, hazard prone, single female or single child headed.

To apply for the jobs, the applicants will be required to submit an application form (example inAppendix D). If people are unable to read or write, they should be assisted with the form.Candidates are selected based on the score of the application (example in Appendix G). Once



the TMWs are identified, participants’ names and roles should be documented and shared withthe community, DCC and DoLIDAR.

Tools and Safety EquipmentThe tools and safety equipment required by the TMWs are listed below. The tools and safetyequipment should be purchased by the project and provided to the TMWs at the begging of theproject.

Table 3: Tools and Safety EquipmentItem # Workers SharingWheelbarrow 2-4

Hoe 2-3

Pickaxe 2-3

Shovel 1

Long Handled Shovel 1 per TSP Team

Rake 2-3

Curved Knife 2-3

Machete 2-3

Hand Rammer 1 per TSP Team

Large Crowbar 1 per TSP Team

Large Hammer + Chisel 1 per TSP Team

Pulling Rope 1 kg per TSP Team

Foot Pump 1 per TSP Team

Plastic Tubs 2-3

Watering Can 1 per TSP Team

Hard Hat 1

Gloves 1

Safety Vest 1

Safety Googles 1

Mask 1

Boots 1

Raincoat 1

Safety Harness 3-5

First Aid Kit 1 per TSP TeamSource: Road Maintenance Group Guidelines, DoLIDAR



F. Trail Maintenance Worker Application




G. Trail Maintenance Worker ApplicationScoring




H. Road Maintenance Worker PerformanceStandards



I. Road Maintenance Group Task Rates



J. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Short-Term Plan Form

WaypointReference

WaypointLocation

GPS

Risk Cause of Risk(Present Condition)

Yes/No Routine,Recurrent or

SpecificMaintenance

Implementation Monitoring

When? By Whom? When? By Whom ImplementationStatus (Done / Not

Done)



K. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Long-Term Plan Form

WaypointReference

WaypointLocation

GPS

Present Status Long Term Major Repair,Upgrading and RiskReduction Activities

Source ofFunds

Implementation Monitoring

By When? By Whom? By When? By Whom? ImplementationStatus (Done / Not

Done)



L. Expression of Interest Questionnaire









M. Appendix to FIDIC Conditions ofContract





N. Scope of Works









































O. Remuneration, Payment and TimeSchedule











P. Community Feedback Mechanism



Q. Bioengineering Techniques



mottmac.com

Documents

Design Criteria and Procurement Principles for Rural