PROJECT SUPERVISION REPORT (PSR)

Transcription

1 CARIBBEAN DEVELOPMENT BANK PROJECT SUPERVISION REPORT (PSR) Project Number: Loan Number(s): Borrower: Implementing Agency (IA): Sector: Related Operation(s): Contacts: Executing Agency: Team Leader: Date of Current Update: Date Validated by Representative or Division Chief: Environmental Months in Execution: *from approval: *from contract effectiveness: Appraisal Document, as approved by the Board: I. BASIC DATA (Amounts in US$) Title: Date of Board Approval: Date of Contract Effectiveness: Date of Eligibility for First Disbursement: Disbursement Periods: Original Terminal Disbursement Date: Current Terminal Disbursement Date: Cumulative Extension (months) Special Extension (months): Loan Amount(s): *Original amount: *Current amount: *Pari Passu: Disbursements: *Amount to date: *Percent: Total Project Cost: *Original estimate: Page 1 of 10

2 HISTORICAL AND CURRENT PSR RATINGS: Year Previous Year Current Year Implementation Progress Risk Development Objectives II. ACHIEVEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES (DO) If the operation has multiple purposes (DOs) then enter each one in a separate field. In such a case, each DO must have an individual DO rating. Progress towards achieving each DO should be rated individually based on the corresponding outcomes achieved. Development Objective(s)/Purpose(s) 1. Key Planned outcome Indicators 1.1 Description: Outcomes Achieved Baseline; End of Project Annual/Intermediate 1.2 Description: Baseline: End of Project Annual/Intermediate 1.3 Description: Baseline: End of Project Annual/Intermediate 1.4 Description: Page 2 of 10

3 Baseline: Annual/Intermediate End of Project Reformation: Was the objective(s) of this project reformulated? If yes, indicate date of Board Approval: Briefly describe the consequences of these changes. (If any changes were made to the outcome indicators/targets, describe them under the next section.): Were there any changes to the outcome indicators or targets? Briefly explain any changes that were made. Summary of Development Objective(s) Classification (DO): [ ] Highly Probable (HP) [ ] Probable (P) [ ] Low Probability (LP) [ ] I Improbable (I) Briefly justify the Summary DO Classification based on the degree that planned targets were met, explaining the difference between planned and actual outcomes, as well as any other relevant factors. Cite references for evidence that supports these results. Country Strategy: At the time of approval this project was expected to contribute to the following Country Strategy objective(s): Given the results above, briefly discuss how the project has contributed to or will contribute to the CDB s strategy in this country: Page 3 of 10

4 Hyperlink to Country Strategy: Sustainability [ ] Highly Probable (HP) [ ] Probable (P) [ ] Low Probability (LP) [ ] Improbable (I) Externalities: Component (Outputs): III. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS (IP) Component Title: Component 1: CDB Disbursement: Component Title: Component 2: CDB Disbursement: Component Title: Component 3: CDB Disbursement: Component Title: Component 4: Page 4 of 10

5 CDB Disbursement: Component Title: Component 5: CDB Disbursement: Key Indicators for Planned Outputs Actual Outputs 1. Description: 2. Description: 3. Description: 4. Description: In case of unsatisfactory or very unsatisfactory rating category for this component, provide comments on its status focusing on the problems identified in attaining planned outputs. Other pertinent information may also be entered here: Page 5 of 10

6 Restructuring: Indicate if this component was restructured - [ ] Yes [ ] No Component Title: Description: Total Cost of Component: Counterpart: CDB: Co-financing: CDB Disbursement: Key Indicators for Planned Outputs Actual Outputs 1. Description: 2. Description: 3. Description: 4. Description: 5. Description: 6. Description: Page 6 of 10

7 7. Description: 8. Description: 9. Description: 10. Description: In case of unsatisfactory or very unsatisfactory ratings for this component, provide comments on its status focusing on the problems identified in attaining planned outputs. Other pertinent information may also be entered here: Restructuring: Indicate if this component was restructured and approved: If yes, date: Briefly describe the consequences of these changes: Implementation Progress Summary [ ] Highly Satisfactory (HS) [ ] Satisfactory (S) [ ] Unsatisfactory (U) [ ] Very Unsatisfactory (VU) Briefly justify the Summary IP Classification based on the degree that planned targets of all components were met, explaining the difference between planned and actual outputs as well as any other relevant factors. Cite references to evidence that supports these results. Page 7 of 10

8 Check off critical factors/reasons for Unsatisfactory/Very Unsatisfactory IP Classification or Low Probability/Improbable DO Classification, and reflect in Section IV (Risk Profile), as needed: [ ] Legislative approvals [ ] Borrower/executing agency commitment [ ] Counterpart funding shortfall/fiscal ceilings [ ] Executing agency institutional capacity [ ] Community/political opposition [ ] Consultant services performance FIDUCIARY ISSUES PROFILE [ ] Inter-agency coordination [ ] Supplier/contractor performance [ ] Project/component design [ ] Bank efficiency (response delays) [ ] Environmental issues [ ] Cost overrun [ ] National policy changes [ ] Executing agency policy changes [ ] Bank policy changes [ ] Lack of monitoring/evaluation system [ ] Other: [ ] Contractual Condition Compliance Delays. List any delays and/or other problems in compliance with other important contractual conditions: [ ] Audited Financial Statements (AFS). List any important qualified options of the auditor presented in the AFS: Relevant Hyperlinks: Qualified opinions given by external auditors (AFS): Timeliness of AFS Submission: [ ] Procurement difficulties, if applicable. Briefly list any major procurement issues affecting implementation progress: Page 8 of 10

9 Any additional observations of Financial, Sector, Social, Environmental, or Procurement Specialist(s): Key Risk: Category IV. RISK PROFILE (a) Severity of Impact (b) Likelihood of Occurrence (a x b) Classification 1. Development effectiveness Fiduciary and operational Environmental or social Summary Risk Classification (R): [ ] Very High [ ] High [ ] Moderate [ ] Low Risk: Response: RISKS Responsible Date Action to be completed: Date Action Completed: Implementation Problem: IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS Action Plan: 1. Responsible Date Action to be completed: Date Action Completed: V. LESSONS LEARNT Add or fine-tune lessons learnt that can be used to improve programming, design, execution, as well as the monitoring and evaluation of other operations in the sector or country, as needed. Page 9 of 10

10 VI. MONITORING AND EVALUATION When was the baseline information gathered for at least one outcome indicator? [ ] Before Board Approval [ ] Other Date: When was the baseline information gathered for at least one output indicator, if applicable? [ ] Before Board Approval [ ] Other Date: Does the borrower have a defined data gathering system in place? Is the borrower maintaining performance data on agreed outcome indicators? Is the borrower maintaining performance data on agreed output indicators? Are there any issues or problems related to the quality, validity and timeliness of the data gathering system? Start-up Mission: If yes, date: Hyperlink(s) to relevant Aides Memoire(s): Administration, Portfolio or Other Relevant Missions: If yes, date: Hyperlink(s) to relevant Aides Memoire(s): Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE): [ ] N/A [ ] Planned [ ] Completed Date: Briefly describe the main findings and results, as well as the principal conclusions/recommendations of this evaluation: Hyperlink(s) to MTE: Final Evaluation: Is a final evaluation for this project foreseen? If yes, date: Hyperlink(s) to relevant Aides Memoire(s) and/or report: Ex-Post Evaluation: Is an ex-post evaluation for this project foreseen? If yes, date: Page 10 of 10