Project Completion Report (PCR) Template

1 PCR Template Version 28/08/2019

I BASIC DATA

A Report data

Report date Date of report: 16 September 2019

Mission date (if field m From: 24th June 2019 To: 28th June 2019

B Responsible Bank staff

Positions At approval At completion

Director General (*)

F. BLACK, ORSA Kapil Kapoor, RDGS Gabriel Negatu, RDGE(*) El Azizi Mohamed, RGDN Dore Ousmane,RDGC

Deputy Director General Nwabufo, Nnenna, RDGE

Country Manager N/A M.Monyau,COZM

M. Phiri, CORW

Sector Directors G. Mbesherubusa, OITC

A.Oumarou,PICU

Sector Manager A. Oumarou,ONRI1(appraisal at Appraisal)

J.K.Kabanguka, PICU.1

Task Manager A. Oumarou, Transport Engineer(at the

appraisal stage )

P. Munyaruyenzi, Infrastructure Specialist

Alternate Task Manager Romain Ekoto, Chief Aviation expert, PICU1

PCR Team Leader Philippe Munyaruyenzi, Infrastructure Specialist

PCR Team Members Romain Ekoto, Chief Aviation expert, PICU1

(*) it is “Multi-Regions”, and the management of the project was in HQ and CORW since the PIU was based in Rwanda, in the RDGE region.

C Project data

Project name: COMESA Airspace Integration Project

Project code: P-Z1-DA0-003 Instrument number(s):ADF- Regional Envelope : ADF Grant No2100155019666

Project type: Technical Assistance Sector: Transport( Air)

Country: Multinational Environmental categorization (1-3): N/A

Processing milestones – Bank approved

financing only (add/delete rows depending

on the number of financing sources)

Key Events (Bank approved financing

only)

Disbursement and closing dates (Bank

approved financing only)

Financing source/ instrument1: ADF

Grant

Financing source/ instrument ADF grant: Financing source/ instrument1: ADF Grant

Date approved: 15/9/2010 Cancelled amounts: UA 1,758,606 should

be cancelled,

Date signed: 04.11.2013 Supplementary financing: 0.00 Original closing date:30/06/2016

Date of entry into force: 5/8/2011 Restructuring (specify date & amount

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT FOR COMESA AISPACE INTEGRATION PROJECT (P-Z1-DA0-003).

AFRICAN

DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP


involved): n/a

Date effective for 1st disbursement:

26/12/2012

Extensions (specify dates): 30/06/2016 -

30/06/2017; 30/06/2017 – 30/03/2018;

30/03/2018 -30/06/2019

Revised (if applicable) closing date:

30/06/2019

Date of actual 1st disbursement: xxx

Financing source/instrument (add/delete

rows depending on the number of financing

sources):

Disbursed amount

(amount, UA):

Percentage

disbursed (%):

Undisbursed

amount (UA million

):

Percentage

undisbursed (%):

Financing source/ instrument1: ADF Grant 5.75 69.4% 1.92 31.7%

Financing source/ instrument2:

Other (eg. co-financiers). COMESA 0.30 0% 0.30 100%

TOTAL 6.05 70.9% 2.22 29.1

Co-financiers and other external partners: None

Executing and implementing agency (ies): Comesa Secretriat

D Management review and comments

Report reviewed by Name Date reviewed Comments

Country Manager M. MONYAU

M.PHIRI (**)

Sector Manager J.K.KABANGUKA,PICU1

Regional Director (as chair of Country Team) Covering 4 Regions (***) : RDGE,RDGS,RDGC,RDGN

Sector Director A. OUMAROU

(**)While the project was a multi-region project, the implementation was carried out in Rwanda,’’CORW” where the PIU is located

and all communications to the Execvution Agency by ‘’COZM’’.

(***) due to the fact that this is a “special project” it will be cleared only by Sector Director in conjunction with RDGE.

II Project performance assessment

A Relevance

1. Relevance of project development objective

Rating* Narrative assessment (max 250 words)

3 The Sector Goal of the project is to provide safe, efficient air navigation services in a unified airspace to

support trade, tourism and regional socio-economic integration in COMESA.

The objectives of the Technical Assistance (TA) are: (i) To determine suitable legal and institutional

requirements to establish a cooperative Regional Framework for a unified airspace in the COMESA region; (ii)

To Prepare detailed analysis of strategic technical, financial, and operational options for the provision of upper

airspace navigation services using CNS/ATM and make recommendation for implementation modalities; (iii)

To build the partnerships needed for implementing the project and promote private sector participation in

financing and operating regional air transport infrastructure and services.

The project is of a regional nature and spans over three of the Bank regions. As such it doesn’t reference a

specific Country Strategy or Regional Strategy Papers of the Bank. However its objectives are in line with


Bank’s Transport Policy, and Regional Integration Strategy. The project is also aligned with the Bank’s Hi Five

focus areas, in particular “Integrate Africa”, which were adopted during the implementation of the prioejct.

The Project’s objectives are aligned with COMESA’s Article 87(3g) of the Treaty which mandates all

COMESA Member States to “consider ways to develop, maintain and co-ordinate in common, their

navigational, communications and meteorological facilities for the provision of safe air navigation and the joint

management of their air space.

The project is also a priority under the NEPAD short-term action plan theme of having , safe, secure and

efficient skies and airports. The project is also in line with NEPAD’s policy on promoting regional integration”.

The overall rating towards the development objective is satisfactory

* For all ratings in the PCR use the following scale: 4 (Highly satisfactory), 3 (Satisfactory), 2 (Unsatisfactory), 1 (Highly unsatisfactory)

2. Relevance of project design

Rating* Narrative assessment (max 250 words)

2 The project design was based on extensive consultations with COMESA, National Civil Aviation Authorities of

several member countries, and airline companies as well as Development Partners active in the sector including

the World Bank, the European Union, JICA, and USAID. International Civil Aviation stakeholders,

particularly ICAO, ASECNA, and EUROCONTROL were also consulted. The project design took into account

the lessons learned from previous interventions of the Bank in multinational operations, and project involving

regional entities and reflected these lessons by providing a dedicated and appropriately staffed project

implementation unit and designing a strong regional project coordination steering committee with appropriate

budgetary provisions.

The implementation arrangements were also designed to leverage the political leadership role entrusted to

Rwanda by the COMESA’s Heads of State to spearhead the CNS/ATM initiative.

The current management of the lower and upper airspaces are handled by the same Air Navigation Sevice

Provider (ANSP) in most COMESA States. Additionnally, regarding the implementation arrangements, the

chair of the Project Steering Committee (SC) was entrusted to one country throughout project rather than

envisaging a rotating mechanism. As a result the implementation oversight mandate of the SC was not

achieved consistently throughout the project life cycle.

The project objectives could be achieved at least partially with the given level of inputs. However, given the

complexity of having 19 countries , a sterring Committee composed by seven ( 7) countries and the need for

consensus building, the project timeframe was not sufficient to establish the ultimate needed Air Traffic control

( Though Public Private Partnership) for full achievement of project objectives. On some of the initiatives (e.g.,

ground infratructures ), more financial resources are required in order to deliver on the initial planned outputs of

the project.

The rating of relevance of project design is satisfactory

3. Lessons learned related to relevance

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned Target audience

Complexity in design

of Multinational

Projects of such

magnitude and 19

Multinational projects design should incorporate country

specificities and ensure full understanding, consensus and ownership

by Member States to ensure effective implementation. The project

AfDB, COMESA and

Member States


countries involved. has succeeded in achieving this and creating ownership through its

Steering Committee implementation mechanism, which allowed

countries to present their specific concerns and views. The example

should be replicated in similarly complex proejcts.

Sovereignty and

security of Airspace

Sovereignty of airspace remains a major challenge in airspace

management as countries are very sensitive on national security

issues when it comes to entrusting the operations of their airspaces

to foreigners.at the implementation,involvement of Senior Military

Officials in the project has helped to alleviate this challenge at the

conception stage of the project.

AfDB, COMESA and

Member States

Private Sector

Involvement in

Airspace Management

In cases where national security issues may be involved, Member

States can be strongly opposed to the involvement of foreign private

sector in the management of their airspace for national security

reasons.

AfDB, COMESA and

Member States

Implementation

arrangements / PIU

location

The location in Kigali is what helped push the project considering

Rwanda’s strong commitment expressed in availing facilities,

support from Chairman of Civil Aviation, etc. This location was

agreed upong from day one, including by COMESA Countries

themselves. However, significant challenges in the project

coordination and monitoring by the COMESA Infrastructure

Directorate were noticed. The colocation of the PIU and the grantee

approach for such projects was not an issue rather the Comesa

Secretraiat (EA) performance due to limited time in focusing of

project management. The nature of their staff mandate require more

missions in member states countries.

COMESA

Stakeholder

Participation

Consistent participation by the same experts from Member States

helps to improve project understanding, reduces delays in the project

implementation and enhances cooperation among experts and

together have a better understanding of the critical issues on the

subject matter.

AfDB, COMESA and

Member States

B Effectiveness

1. Progress towards the project’s development objective (project purpose)

Comments

Provide a brief description of the Project (components) and the context in which it was designed and implemented. State the project

development objective (usually the project purpose as set out in the RLF) and assess progress. Unanticipated outcomes should also be

accounted for, as well as specific reference of gender equality in the project . The consistency of the assumptions that link the different

levels of the results chain in the RLF should also be considered. Indicative max length: 400 words.

The project sector goal was to provide safe and efficient air navigation services in a unified airspace to support

trade, tourism and regional socio-economic integration in COMESA. The project’s specific objectives were (i) to

establish a cooperative Legal and institutional Regional Framework for a unified airspace in the COMESA region,

(ii) to prepare detailed analysis of strategic options for the provision of upper airspace navigation services using

CNS/ATM and (iii) to promote private sector participation in financing and operating regional air transport

infrastructure and services.

In order to achieve these objectives, the following activities were planned :


i. Prepration of Legal and Institutional Arrangements

ii. Technical and Financial Feasibility

iii. Transaction Advisory Services

iv. Establishment of Regulatory Framework & Agency

At the beginning of the Project implementation, some Member States cautioned against the idea of pursuing the

project objectives, i.e. to establish an unified upper airspace and to conclude PPP arrangements to finance, build and

operate the regional CNS/ATM infrastructure. Accordingly, out of the four studies listed above, three were

succesfuly conducted after a revision of the TORs by Member States as follows :

i) Establishment of a Cooperative Legal and Institutional Framework (Sept. 2016). In addition to a report, the

study also produced a set of Regulations establishing the COMESA Seamless Upper Airspace,

ii) Establishment of a Regulatory Framework and Agency (Oct. 2016). In addition to a report, the following

deliverables were produced: ;

(1) Draft Agreement for the setting up of the COMESA Regulatory aviation Agency,

(2) Civil-Military Interface Framework and Model MoU for the establishment of National

Civil/Military Committees,

(3) Model Air Navigation Safety and Economic Regulations and Guidelines, and

(4) Framework for the Business and Strategic Plan of the Agency.

iii) Technical and Financial Feasibility study (June 2017) In addition to a detailed gap analysis on the legal,

regulatory and equipement aspects, the study Report proposed a phased approach towards a Unified Upper Air

Space in the COMESA region sequenced as follows;

(a) Phase 1 : Establishing a Seamless Upper Airspace; time frame : from 2018 to 2027;

(b) Phase 2: Establishing sub-regional Clusters; from 2028 to 2037; and

(c) Phase 3 : Establishing the Unified Upper Airspace; from 2038 to 2047.

The fourth Study on Transaction Advisory Services was not undertaken because Member States were opposed to

private sector’s involvement in the management of their airspace.

In addition to the above, the project also contributed to capacity development by providing Training on CNS/ATM,

Civil-Military Cooperation, Cost Benefit Analysis and Safety Management Systems;

The overall rating towards the development objective is satisfactory

2. Outcome reporting

Outcome indicators (as per RLF; add more rows as needed)

Baseline value (Year) (2013)

Most recent value (2019)

End target (C)

(expected value at project

completion)

Progress towards target

(% realized) [(B-A)/(C-

A)]

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 50 words per outcome)

Core Sector Indicator (Yes/No)

Outcome1:

COMESA

Unified Airspace

Agreement

N/A

Not signed Unified Airspace Agreement signed by

90 Member States were against the

establishment of a COMESA Unified

Airspace opting for a Seamless Upper

Airspace instead as the first step

Yes


signed by several

member countries member countries by Oct. 2012.

torwards unification. The Technical and

Financial Feasibility Study

recommended a phased approach

starting with a seamless upper airspace

at ultimate phase3. Accordingly, a

Framework Regulation was developed

for adoption by the COMESA Council.

The Multilateral Agreement takes the

form of a Regulation which when

adopted by the Council of Ministers will

become automatically binding on the

COMESA Member States in accordance

with Article 10 of the COMESA Treaty

Outcome2:

COMESA

Airspace Control

Company and

Regulatory

Agency are

established.

N/A Not

established

( put on

hold due to

a Member

State

concerns

during the

Council of

Ministers) –

some

adjustments

required.

COMESA Airspace Regulatory Agency operational .

70 Draft Agreement establishing the

Agency and accompanying Regulations

were prepared and are due for review by

the DG CAA in October 2019 after

integration of comments from Egypt. It

will then go through the signing and

subsequent ratification process by

Member States. Its coming into force

will be subject to its ratification by 2/3

of Member States.

Yes

Outcome3:

Financial Close

and Concession

Agreement for

building and

operation of

regional

CNS/ATM and

Unified Upper

Space Control

Center

N/A No Financing mobilized

Financial Close and/or Concession Agreement signed by 09/14.

0 Due to the fact that the Unification of

the airspace and private sector

participation in the project were rejected

by Member States, no resource

mobilization efforts were initiated per

se. However the Technical and

Financial feasibility study estimated the

investment required for the

implementation of Phase 1 of the

Seamless Airspace (approx.. 310 M €)

over the ten year period.

Yes

Total Number of Outcomes :

3

Number of outcomes

achieved/likely to be

achieved

1

Number of outcomes likely to be achieved with

corrective measures

1

Number of expected

outcomes to be achieved2

Rating* (see IPR methodology)

Narrative assessment

2 The project outcomes performance can be rated as satisfactory. Just like with most multilateral

instruments, it would take time for the agreement and the regulatory agency to be established.

Nevertheless, the development of these instruments and the agreement and endorsement by the

Member States will generate the momentum towards realization of the these outcomes.


3. Output reporting

Output indicators (as specified in the RLF; add more rows as needed)

Most recent value

(A)

End target (B) (expected value at project

completion)

Progress towards target

(% realized) (A/B)

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 50 words per output)

Core Sector

Indicator

(Yes/No)

Draft Legal

Framework for a

Multilateral

Cooperative

Agreement for

Unified Airspace

Management in

COMESA

Region.

multilateral

agreement

delayed.

Draft

Multilateral

Agreement

and

institutional

framework

for Unified

Airspace

Management

adopted.

90 The Draft Legal and Institutional Agreement

developed for COMESA Seamless Upper

Airspace is going through COMESA

approval processes. Commencement of the

project was delayed as it only started in the

second half of 2014.

Yes

Draft Institutional

Framework for

implementing,

managing and

regulating the

Unified

COMESA

Airspace.

Drafts of

regulations

completed

n/d 100 The safety, economic and performance

regulations; Guidelines were prepared and

when implemented would create

harmonization amongst Member States:

i) Regulations establishing the

COMESA Seamless Upper Airspace,

(1) Draft Agreement for the setting up

of the COMESA Regulatory aviation

Agency,

(2) Civil-Military Interface Framework

and Model MoU for the establishment of

National Civil/Military Committees,

(3) Model Air Navigation Safety and

Economic Regulations and Guidelines, and

(4) Framework for the Business and

Strategic Plan of the Agency.

The Structure and funding mechanism of the

Multilateral Regulatory Agency to oversight

the provision of air navigation services in the

Upper Airspace of COMESA Member States

was developed.

yes

Technical

Reports,

Specifications and

Cost Estimates for

CNS/ATM. Cost

Benefit Analysis

for alternative

options.

Technical

report with

cost estimates

Technical

Reports,

Specifications

and Cost

Estimates for

CNS/ATM.

validated by

stakeholders.

100 All technical reports for CNS/ATM were

developed and validated by stakeholders.

The Study provided a cost estimate (total of

Euro 1,593 million) and investment plan for

the implementation of the project in a phased

manner over 30 years

yes


Advisory Services

for Private Sector

Participation

(PPP/BOT)

PPP Advisory

Services

completed

RFQ, RFP for BOT

concession completed.

0 PPP Advisory Services were not done because

COMESA Member States were against the

involvement of the private sector in the project.

The study on Transaction Advisory Services was

not undertaken. Member States originally they

were with it, but later changed, and this happened

due to political changes in the region.

yes

Audit Reports Audit reports Audit Reports

submitted

yearly

100 Compliance with the obligation to conduct

annual audits. All audits report approved by

the Bank

No

Total Number of Outcomes :

5

Number of Outputs

Achieved/On-track

4

Number of Outputs Off-track

1

% On-track

Outputs 80

Rating* (see IPR methodology)

Narrative assessment

3 The performance is satisfactory. Four out 5 indicators achieved ( (80% rate of achievement).

4. Development Objective (DO) rating

DO rating (derived from updated IPR)*

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words

3 Although there was a shift in the approach, i.e. rather than establishing a unified upper

airspace directly with the involvement of the private sector to cover the capital intensive

requirement, the project maintained the same ultimate objective but identified intermediary

phases/activities consisting of the establishment of a seamless upper airspace first.The

unification was envisaged as the third phase within 30 years. Accordingly, the Project’s

outcomes and outputs as reviewed above are considered satisfactory.

5. Beneficiaries (add rows as needed)

Actual (A) Planned (B) Progress towards target (% realized) (A/B)

% of women

Category (eg. farmers, students)

Airlines, Airport

Agencies,

Ministries in charge

of Air Transport.

Air Travelers, Air

Freight Shippers,

Business

community,

Airlines, Airport

Agencies,

Ministries in charge

of Air Transport

50% n/a Airlines, Airport Agencies, Ministries

in charge of Air Transport

6. Gender equality

Assessment on the performance of gender equality in the operation (indicative max length: 250 words)

Women will naturally benefit from the project considering their involvement in area of air transport industry. A


total of 139 people including women from 17 countries were trained under the project. The training was in the

following fields : CNS/ATM (51) , COSECNA and ASECNA Case Studies (15); Tour of EUROCONTROL

and Maastricht Upper Airspace Control Centre (15); Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) (15) Flexible Use of

Airspace (FUA) (14); Safety Management Systems (SMS) (29). Women constitute 8 % of the total number of

people trained under the project.

7. Unanticipated or additional outcomes (add rows as needed)

Description Type (eg. gender, climate change, social, other)

Positive or negative

Impact on project (High, Medium,

Low)

n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a n/a n/a n/a

8. Lessons learned related to effectiveness (add rows as needed)

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed) Lessons learned Target audience

Output delivery

Some outputs were not according to project design due

to Member States interests. For instance the project

ended up delivering on the COMESA Seamless Upper

Airspace as opposed to COMESA Unified Airspace

envisaged in the design. Member States also opposed

involvement of the private sector in the project which

rendered the study on Transaction Advisory Services

irrelevant.

AfDB/COMESA

Readiness for execution

• Political changes can have an impact on such

regional high level project.

• For multinational projects that encompass a

large number of countries, the risk of changes to

the project design is high. Accordingly project

components and outcomes that should be kept at

a manageable risk level, e.g. producing reports,

NOT producing report and establishing Agency,

for example.

• Ensuring quality at entry and during

implementation through proper planning and

focused execution will eliminate unnecessary

delays to the project.

COMESA

Staffing. Competences of PIU staff have a

bearing on the implementation success of

the project

Shortage in the specialized types of skills affected the

quality of PIU staff who were hired (leading the Bank,

based on COMESA’s own assessment, not to concur

with the renewal of the contract of the Project

Coordinator),

Ensuring timely recruitment of skilled and

knowledgeable staff helps in executing the project

COMESA,

Member States


efficiently.

Consultation and Participatory Approach.

Involvement of all concerned Member

States at every stage of the project

contributed positively towards

advancement of project objectives.

Extensive consultation and involvement of all concerned

Member States in the execution of the project assisted in

securing stakeholder buy-in and avoiding pitfalls of

related past studies. However, Member States interests

may in some cases militate against effectiveness as they

may override decisions of implementers.

AfDB, COMESA

The nature of the project involved discussions and

consultation on new technologies and concepts such as

PPPs that were new to a large number of Government

officials participating in the project. This led to

comments and feedback that were not comprehensive

enough, and also led to major decision taken by the

Steering Committee countries on aspects the team were

not fully familiar with. The project offered the option for

the COMESA to obtain experts from the target countries

as the need arose. This plan presented a good approach

but was not utilized (for different reasons).

Location of PIU office

Effective coordination and monitoring will be achieved

if the PIU Office is located within the implementing

agency’s offices.

AfDB, COMESA

C Efficiency

1. Timeliness

Planned project duration – years (A) (as per PAR)

Actual implementation time – years (B) (from effectiveness for 1st

disb.)

Ratio of planned and actual implementation time (A/B)

Rating*

5 years 7.17 years 0.70 2

Narrative assessment (indicative max length: 250 words)

Commencement of the project delayed. From the signing of the Grant Agreement in February 2011, effectiveness of first

dirsbursment by August 2011, recruitment of the full staff compliment of the PIU was completed in August 2014 although

the Project Manager was recruited in May 2013. The procurement process for consultants to carry out the studies was

finalized in 2015.

2. Resource use efficiency

Median % physical implementation of RLF outputs financed by all

financiers (A) (see II.B.3)

Commitment rate (%) (B) (See table 1.C – Total commitment

rate of all financiers)

Ratio of the median percentage physical implementation and

commitment rate (A/B)

Rating*

100% 95% 105% 4


The Bank’s resources were used efficiently as they were spent on activities as indicated by the appraisal. At the closing

date, ADF disbursement stood at 69.42% against the project budget of UA5.75million.


N° Categoryof

expenditure

Ammount allocated Actual Cost (dirsbursed) Variation

UA million UA million UA million

1 Goods 0.16 0.03 -0.13

3 Services 3.6 3.22 -0.38

4 Operating cost 1.61 0.57 -1.04

7 Unallocated 0.38 0 -0.38

7 Total 5.75 3.82 -1.93

3. Cost benefit analysis

Economic Rate of Return (at appraisal) (A)

Updated Economic Rate of Return (at completion) (B)

Ratio of the Economic Rate of Return at completion and at

appraisal (B/A)

Rating*

N/A N/A N/A


N/A

4. Implementation Progress (IP)

IP Rating (derived

from updated IPR)

*

Narrative comments (commenting specifically on those IP items that were rated Unsatisfactory or Highly Unsatisfactory, as per last IPR). (indicative max length: 500 words)

3 For most activities, schedules were not adhered to. Setting up PIU, and equipping the offices was not

adhered to. Some appointments of the PIU staff was not done on time, and affected overall project

progress. although the project had to be extended due to late start after technical launching.

Compliance with commitments: The project complied with project covenants, environmental and social

safeguards and audit. Adherence and compliance with Grant agreements and clauses are satisfactory. The

project complied with applicable Bank policies. This project was classified as Category 3 under the Bank's

Environmental and Social Assessment procedures. According to the Bank's policy, an Environment and

Social Management Plan (ESMP) was not required during the implementation of the project. As the project

was on studies with no adverse impacts recorded.

Project systems and procedures: (procurement, financial management and monitoring and evaluation)

strictly followed Bank rules set at the appraisal. As the bulk of the acquisition was related to consultancies

and goods and all the procurements were subjected to the bank's pre-approval for awarding the contract, no

significant problem was recorded during the implementation.

The Executing Agency achieved acceptable performance in the overall coordination of the project. At the

closing date, disbursement stood at 69.42% against the project budget of UA5.75 million,. A fruitful

partnership was also developed with and among Civil Aviation Authorities which is vital in improving

safety in the aviation sector.


Two project objectives on the preparation of detailed analysis of strategic options for the provision of

upper airspace navigation services using CNS/ATM and promotion of private sector participation in

financing and operating regional air transport infrastructure and services were not achieved because

COMESA Member States were opposed to the unification of their airspace and involvement of the private

sector in its financing and management. The study on Transaction Advisory Services was therefore not

undertaken.

Achievement of project implementation based on “outputs delivered” against “resources used” based on

cumulative commitments at completion is fair at approximately 69%..

5. Lessons learned related to efficiency


1. Delays in Project start which resulted in

the project being extended.

1.1 In developing project plans, adequate time is

required for mobilising for such complex projects (

multinational with 19 countries by then was accounted

for in the project plan-- even much more, now Somalia

and Tunisia joined the REC when project is completed).

The Steering Committee should be be involved at the

beginning of the project.

1.2 Procurement processes delayed project completion.

There is need to strictly adhere to project milestones and

timings as per project design.

The Bank

The Bank and Beneficiary.

2.Joint Hosting of Workshops and

Meeting

2.Careful planning and coordination resulted in joint

hosting of workshops and meetings for the three

completed studies which had a positive impact on costs.

Cost savings resulted from these arrangements as the

consulting firms were sharing ticket costs, per diem and

conference package as opposed to standalone workshops

and meetings for each study. Savings made from each of

the three contracts were used to support training in Safety

Management Systems, Flexible Use of Airspace (Civil-

Military Cooperation) and Cost Benefit Analysis for

ANSPs.

COMESA, AfDB


3.Project Management

3.1 Weak follow-up by the PIU staff; inability to properly

hold responsibilities by the PIU in delivering their

mandate, led COMESA’s management occasionally to

take responsibilities for the activities that were meant to

be handled by the PIU unit. COMESA Secretariat had

strong positions in trying to rectify performance of PIU

staff, but its efforts was not consistent.

3.2 The project manager or PIU being in Kigali while

Executing Agency in Lusaka resulted into challenges in

implementation and coordination above mentionned. The

first coordination was not performing and after

assessment, the Bank team recommended of contract

termination. The acting coordinator was also poorly

evaluated in terms of performance.

The implementing

agency.

4. Comesa Secretariat count part

contribution

COMESA’s contributions designed to be originally and

have actually not disbursed 0%. Budgeting the contpart

funding for should be part a conditions for first

dirsbursment.

The Bank , and

Comesa

Secretariat

D Sustainability

1. Financial sustainability

Rating*


2 More resources will be required beyond the current project phase to finalise the draft Agreement establishing the

Regulatory Agency and its operationalization. Since COMESA members have rejected private sector

participation, resources will be coming from Government. However, government usually struggle to avail

resources given competing needs at their national level. Even though, a partnership with the Bank could continue

with new initiatives in line with the same objective, a COMESA will continue to secure necessary funds to

implement the project once agreement and regulations are signed and ratified.

There is a new program under development : Support to Air Transport Sector Development (SATSD) in the

Eastern Africa, Southern Africa and Indian Ocean region (EA-SA-IO), CRIS number: FED/2019/039-999

financed under European Development Fund and the programme will support activities aiming among others at:

Facilitating the provision of seamless operations in EA-SA-IO region to improve air navigation efficiency in a

liberalized and integrated air transport market. This new project was designed with one of its three objectives

being to ensure continuation of the current AfDB funded project. There is there synergy between the two

programs’ activities and objectives.

2. Institutional sustainability and strengthening of capacities

Rating*



3 This will follow the signing of the Multilateral Agreement establishing the Agency and its setting up. Capacity

building workshops on CNS/ATM, Safatey Management System (SMS), Flexible Use of Airspace (FUA) and

Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs) were conducted in the course of the

studies. All countries members regulary participated in the workshops/training conducted by the consultants.

3. Ownership and sustainability of partnerships

Rating*


3 The overall project underwent extensive consultation with all key stakeholders inclusive of government

ministries, the members of the civil aviation community in COMESA including Civil Aviation Authorities, Air

Traffic Service Providers, airport operators, and airline companies. The Project was guided by the Member States

through the Steering Committee comprising of Seven (7) countries and the validation workshops involving all

Member States.

4. Environmental and social sustainability

Rating*


4 This was not applicable to the component.

5. Lessons learned related to sustainability


Funding : Dependency on donor funding for the

implementation of similar initiatives and heavily

relying on consultants to undertake the technical

work.

5.1. Member States are opposed to the

collection and use of their en route charges to

support the Agency. Additionally, member

States are more concerned of their sovereignity

at the expense of private sector involvement.

Member States/ COMESA /AfDB

5.2. it is important for programmes to also

incorporate aspects of building inhouse

technical capacity to ensure continued accrual

of benenfits. There is need to incorporate a

clear knowledge and skills transfer to the RECs

and Member countries.

5.3. there is need for Member countries to

consider establishing sustainable financing

mechanisms and resource mobilisation for

respective or shared regional initiatives. The

Bank may also provide assistance to Member

countries in this regards.

Capacity Building

There exists skills gap among member States

relating to current and future technology which

will necessitate training various aspects of

Aviation.

Member States/COMESA/A

fDB

Member States cooperation Cooperation among Member States and mutual

trust is critical for the sustainability and

effective implementation of the project

Member States/COMESA


III Performance of stakeholders

1. Bank performance

Rating*

Narrative assessment by the Borrower on the Bank’s performance, as well as any other aspects of the project (both quantitative and qualitative). See guidance note on issues to cover. (indicative max length: 250 words)

3

The Bank had a close supervision of the project through regular supervision missions, meetings and guidance

helped a lot to reach the project purpose. The Bank disbursed funds as per project design. the Bank participated in

some Technical Committee meetings, and conducted scheduled supervisory missions. The project found these to

be helpful. When unanticipated events occurred, the Bank was helpful in resolving these issues, including

authorization of pre-financing to ensure a continuous flow of activities, Single external audit firm for all Bank’s

funded project and use of Comesa systems for the auditing report for the purpose of value for money.

Comments to be inserted by the Bank on its own performance (both quantitative and qualitative). See guidance note on issues to cover. (indicative max length: 250 words)

The Bank provided guidance to the project especially in ensuring that the project is implemented in line with

Bank rules as per the Grant agreement. The Bank carried out annual supervision missions. These helped in

ensuring that the project remains relevant to the Both the Bank’s and the Comesa strategies. An example is

whereby the Bank agreed to a request for extension of the project implementation three (3) times.

Key issues (related to Bank performance, max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned

To develop a stronger and more structured

system for managing regional projects. The Bank should develop a stronger and more-structure system for managing

regional projects that are low in value of lending/ grant, but high in impact

and require extensive resources. Efficient use of decentralized staff and

Countrries offices will go a long way in addressing this.

2. Borrower performance

Rating*

Narrative assessment on the Borrower performance to be inserted by the Bank (both quantitative and qualitative, depending on available information). See guidance note. (indicative max length: 250 words)

2 The COMESA Secretariat has provided very effective oversight and also contributed resources to ensure

continuation of activities. Towards the end of the project , COMESA Secretariat has shown leadership qualities in

implementation of the project. However ,at the beginning there was coordination issues due to weaknesses in

COMESA Secretariat and the PIU. Although COMESA managed contracts of the PIU staff well and ensured the

delivery of good quality support to the Secretriat , the use of the Legal Expert in the PIU ended up being on a full

time basis acting in Project Manager capacity to ensure that the project deliverables are achieved. However the

performance of the Legal Expert was not properly assessed and resulted in relying on her own willingness to

provide reports when needed ( such as final report of the project, progress report) as the project was at the end.

Comments to be inserted by the Borrower on its own performance (both quantitative and qualitative). See guidance note on issues to cover. (indicative max length: 250 words)

Locating the PIU away from COMESA Secretariat partly contributed to coordination challenges. Short term

extensions of the project Grant Disbursement period made it difficult to recruit a replacement for the Project

Manager resulting in the Legal Expert (whose expertise was mainly of a legal nature) acting for an extended time

from September 2017 to 30 June 2019. There were also issues beyond the control of COMESA Secretariat

especially Member States decisions such as change in Government views/ stances on the PPP issue during

implementation.

Key issues (related to Borrower performance, max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned


1. Variation between planned project approach and the

actual approach at implementation.

1. It is important that these kinds of variations are spelt out

clearly at supervision so that all the necessary adjustments

could be made especially to the project scope.

Use of performance contracts and assessing performance more frequently.

The use of a consulting firm to supervise the project may have led to better results than the use of the individual consultants to staff the PIU. It would have provided more accountability, and would have availed better qualified PIU staff.

3. Performance of other stakeholders

Rating*

Narrative assessment on the performance of other stakeholders, including co-financiers, contractors and service providers. See guidance note on issues to cover. (indicative max length: 250 words)

2 There is not good performance considering lack of approval by the Council of Ministers ( superior policy organ in the REC) of the Draft Multilateral Agreement and institutional framework for Unified Airspace Management

adopted which was all the way approved by other stakeholders including Attoney generals from the Memebr Countries. This deliverable was not met and was very criticaly to determine the fate of other outcome such as The fourth study on Transaction Advisory study (PPP) and the Regulatory Agency was not setup within the

project timelines as invisaged

Key issues (related to performance of other stakeholders, max 5, add rows as needed)

Lessons learned (max 5) Target audience (for lessons learned)

For such complex and

innovative projects, include a

program focused short-term

capacity building activities to

bring the participating decision-

makers up to a minimum level

of appreciating and understand

the topics addressed.

For projects with such technical studies, there should be detailed

discussions with the concerned countries (not only with

COMESA) to understand the capacities of these countries in

dealing (understanding and analyzing) with the subjects

covered. In cases of deficiencies the Program should included

focused short-term capacity building activities to bring the

participating decision-makers up to a minimum level of

appreciating and understand the topics addressed. Also the use

of secondees of the Member countries should be detailed at the

appraisal stage and not be left for the decision of the PIU/

COMESA Secretariat during implementation.

Bank and

Beneficiaries

IV Summary of key lessons learned and recommendations

1. Key lessons learned

Key issues (max 5, add rows as needed) Key lessons learned Target audience

1. Project staffing in the PIU: while projects staff in

the PIU were recruited through competiveness, their

delivrery and capacity in project management was

poor and resulted into some changes.

Increase due diligence in hiring a strong Project

Manager of such complex and magnitude

project involving many countries.

Bank and

Beneficiaries

Some components of the project could not be

delivered because the sensitivity and the project

realised later that some activities that involved

This required the use Economic Sector Works

(ESWs) in informing the design of similar

projects. It will help for a sensitisition of a

Bank and

Beneficiaries


private sector would require strong reaction from

some Member countries as touching on their

sovereignty .

group of Like-minded States may fast track the

process and establish a sub-regional area control

center for the upper airspace in line with the

concept of variable geometry as provided for in

the COMESA Treaty.

Decision making and obtaining consensus in RECs Decision making takes time due to national

interests preceding regional interests and

inclusion of the political dimension. These will

need to be addressed upfront otherwise they will

always delay projects.

2. Key recommendations (with particular emphasis on ensuring sustainability of project benefits)

Key issue (max 10, add rows as needed) Key recommendation Responsible Deadline

Provide provide shrt term training to ensure

that that skills gap in member States

relating to current and future technology are

reduced capacity building among Member

Staes in the REC

In conjunction with other specialized

organization , ensure that that skills gap in

member States relating to current and future

technology which will necessitate training

various aspects of Aviation. And enough

budget to be provided for such component.

Ban Bank and

Beneficiaries k,

RECs

Similar

futufutu

re

projects

projects

The project is an innovative and unique in

nature. This project presents a good example of a

regional project that only institutions like

AfDB and COMESA can cooperate to

deliver. The two institutions played a

remarkable role utilizing their comparative

advantage of being regional entities to bring

this project to realization. While the

outcomes were not fully achieved, the

experience should be replicated, taking into

considerations the lessons learnt, to yield

stronger results and higher impact for

regional integration.

Ban Bank and

Beneficiaries k,

RECs

Similar

futufutu

re

projects

projects

V Overall PCR rating

Dimensions and criteria Rating*

DIMENSION A: RELEVANCE 3

Relevance of project development objective (II.A.1) 3

Relevance of project design (II.A.2) 3

DIMENSION B: EFFECTIVENESS 3

Development Objective (DO) (II.B.4) 3

DIMENSION C: EFFICIENCY 2.67

Timeliness (II.C.1) 2

Resource use efficiency (II.C.2) 3

Cost-benefit analysis (II.C.3) N/A

Implementation Progress (IP) (II.C.4) 3

DIMENSION D: SUSTAINABILITY 3


Financial sustainability (II.D.1) 2

Institutional sustainability and strengthening of capacities (II.D.2) 3

Ownership and sustainability of partnerships (II.D.3) 3

Environmental and social sustainability (II.D.4) 4

DIMENSION E: PERFORMANCE OF STAKEHOLDERS 2.3

Bank performance

3

Borrower performance

2

Performance of other stakeholders

2

AVERAGE OF THE DIMENSION RATINGS 2.8

OVERALL PROJECT COMPLETION RATING 3

VI Acronyms and abbreviations

ACC Area Control Centre AFI Africa - Indian ocean area ADF African Development Fund APIRG Planning and Implementation Regional Group ASECNA Agency for the Security of Aerial Navigation in Africa

and Madagascar ATC Air Traffic Control ATM Air Traffic Management ATS Air Traffic Services CNS/ATM Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance / Air

Traffic Management COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa DME Distance Measuring Equipment ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment FIR Flight Information Region GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System GPS Global Positioning System (United States) ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization IFR Instrument Flight Rules ILS Instrument Landing System NDB Non-directional beacon NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development PIU Project Implementation Unit PPP Public Private Partnership RFP Request for Proposals TA Technical Assistance UACC Upper Airspace Control Center VHF Very High Frequency VOR VHF Omnidirectional Radio Range WGS-84 World Geodetic Reference System 1984

Required attachment: Updated Implementation Progress and Results Report (IPR)– the date should be the same as the PCR mission.


The phases of the project towards the Upper Airspace Traffic Control Company (UACC)


Documents

Project Completion Report (PCR) Template