82705 .INDIA COUNTRY PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE REVIEW FY .2.00I Joint R~port of . . _ Tbe Worfo Bank Ana Government of lnoia . October 2.001 · INDIA C01JNTRY PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE REVIEW FY 2001 Joint Report of Tbe Wor[o Bank Ano Government of Inoia Inoia Countr~ Department Department of Economic Affairs South Asia Region Ministr~ of Finance Tl?e w or[o Bank Government of Inoia INDIA COUNTRY PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE REVIEW FY 2001 Foreword The India Country Portfolio Performance Review (CPPR) is an annual report on the World Bank assistance program to India. It describes the composition and quality of the portfolio for the year, and reviews conducted jointly by the Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) and the World Bank with implementing agencies. The CPPR process represents a continuing commitment by the Government of India and the World Bank to find ways to improve the quality, implementation and sustainable outcomes of Bank-assisted projects in India. The attached report presents the findings and recommendations of the CPPR for the Bank fiscal year from July 2000 to June 2001. The quality of the portfolio improved considerably in FYO 1, with an historically high disbursement ratio and low proportion of problem projects. Actions required to sustain these improvements are given in Annex 1, and will be monitored closely by DEA and the Bank during the coming year. _fo Edwin Lim Adlarsh Kishore Country Director, India Additional Secretary World Bank Department of Economic Affairs Ministry of Finance, GOI Table of Contents Foreword Summary Report Page No. A. Introduction 1 B. Size ofthe Portfolio 1 C. Quality ofthe Portfolio 2 D. Overview of the Portfolio 4 E. Portfolio Action Plan : Summary of Conclusions and Agreements 11 Tables Table 1. Size ofPortfolio, 1997-2001 2 Table 2. Projects at Risk and Disbursement Ratio at end of Fiscal Year, FY96-01 2 Table 3. Composition of Portfolio in FY01 4 Table 4. Composition of the Portfolio by State in FY01 7 Table 5. Changes in the Portfolio in FY01 8 Table 6. New Projects Approved in FY01 9 Table 7. Projects Closed in FY01 9 Table 8. Development Outcome Ratings for projects closing in FY01 10 Table 9. Cancellations in FY01 (excluding cancellations at closing) 11 Table 10. Projects Extended in FY01 11 Figures Figure 1. Percentage of Projects at risk in the Portfolio 2 Figure 2. Trends in Disbursement Ratio, FY96-01 3 Figure 3.% of Satisfactory Development Outcomes (PSR, OED, and disconnect) 4 Figure 4. FYO 1 Portfolio -by sector 5 Figure 5. Allocation of Portfolio among States, FY97-01 8 Annexes Annex 1. Portfolio Action Plan 12 Annex 2. Status of agreed actions in FYOO CPPR 15 Annex 3. Problem Projects at start ofFY01 (as on June 30, 2000) 20 Annex 4. Problem Projects at start ofFY02 (as on June 30, 2001) 22 Annex 5. Trends in Commitments and Disbursements FY95-01 23 Annex 6. List ofiBRD Loans and IDA Credits in the Portfolio, June 30, 2001 24 Annex 7. CPPR Review Meeting with DEA October 5, 2001 26 Summary of Discussions, Recommendations and Agreements Annex 8. Minutes of Multi-sectoral Portfolio Reviews with States 29 Annex 9. Minutes of Sectoral Portfolio Reviews with DEA 31 INDIA COUNTRY PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE REVIEW FY 2001 Summary Report A. Introduction 1. The annual India Country Portfolio Performance Review (CPPR) is based on a continuous review of portfolio performance and implementation issues at the state and national levels. It involves, at different times, reviews conducted jointly with implementing agencies, officials ofthe Department of Economic Affairs (DEA), other central and state government officials and World Bank staff. The main features of CPPR discussions are: (a) project by project discussion of outcomes, implementation and technical, financial and administrative problems; and (b) development of these discussions into a review of systemic issues for further action. 2. For the CPPR for fiscal year 2001 (July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001), several review meetings were held with DEA and state governments. Some of these were: • Sector specific joint review meetings with DEA and implementing agencies : Transport, October 17, 2000, Urban Water and Urban Development, October 18, 2000, Forestry, September 4, 2000 and February 20, 2001, ICDS, March 26, 2001 and Highway, Railways, Telecom and Cyclone Rehabilitation, August 30-31, 2001. • State level multi-sectoral reviews: Uttar Pradesh, August 29, 2000, Karnataka December 13, 2000, Rajasthan September 11, 2000 and the Western Region, August 22, 2001. • Specific topics with DEA : Slow disbursement ofiDA projects (August 9, 2000) • The final review meeting was held on October 5, 2001 Minutes of some of these meetings are given in Annex 7-9. 3. This report discusses the status of the portfolio at the end ofFYOl and summarizes the main recommendations agreed with the Government oflndia for improving portfolio quality. B. Size of the FYOl Portfolio 4. Size and Composition. The FYOl portfolio at June 30, 2001 comprised 76 projects with loans/credits (net of cancellation) amounting to US$ 13.4 billion, of which approximately$ 6.3 billion was IBRD loans and$ 7.0 billion was IDA credits. Annex 6 gives a complete list of projects included in the FYOl portfolio. 5. Between 1997-2001, the overall portfolio size was fairly stable (Table 1). Net commitments rose from $ 13.3 billion to $ 15.1 billion, while the number of projects under supervision at some time during the year decreased marginally from 90 to 89. Country Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page 1 Table 1. Size of Portfolio, 1997-2001 (commitments net of cancellations for all projects supervised in the FY ) Year Number of IBRD IDA Total Projects (US$m) (US$m) (US$m) 1997 90 6,102 7,204 13,306 1998 87 5,638 7,542 13,180 1999 81 5,792 8,403 14,195 2000 86 6,032 7,956 14,133 2001 89 7,690 7,468 15,106 C. Quality of the Portfolio Problem Projects and Projects at Risk 6. Both projects-at-risk and commitments-at-risk declined sharply to 8% in FY01, as compared to 25% and 29% respectively in FYOO (Table 2, Figure 1). At the end of FYO 1 there were a total of 6 projects at risk, compared to 20 at the end of FYOO. The high number in FYOO partly reflected an unexpected fiscal crisis in a number of states, and the turnaround in FYO 1 was assisted by close attention of both the Bank and DEA to timely restructuring and close monitoring of projects at risk. Annexes 3 and 4 provide a summary of action status on projects at risk at the start of FYO 1 and FY02 respectively. Table 2. Projects at Risk and Disbursement Ratio at end of fiscal year, FY96-01 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FYOO FY01 Actual Problem Projects (Unsatisfactory DO/IP) 16 9 9 5 10 6 Potential Problem Projects (3 or more risk flags) 0 3 2 3 10 0 Total Projects at Risk (actual+ potential) 16 12 11 8 20 6 Commitments at risk as a% ofTota1 Portfolio 18.0% 14.7% 10.1% 15.4% 29:-J% 8.0% Projects at Risk as a% of Total Portfolio 20.8% 15.6% 14.9% 11.4% 27.0% 8.0% Disbursement ratio 13.9% 16.4% 16.4% 16.1% 17.9% 20.9% Figure 1 : Percentage of Projects at Risk in the Portfolio 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FYOO FY01 Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page2 Disbursements 7. New commitments in FY01 were US$ 2.5 billion, as compared to US$ 1.8 billion in FYOO, US$ 1.05 billion in FY99 and US$ 2.1 billion in FY 98. The disbursement ratio has risen steadily over the years from 14% in FY96 to 16% in FY97-99 to 20.9% in FYOl. This progressive increase represents a substantial improvement in utilization of World Bank funds in India and can be attributed to more early attention to restructuring and reallocations, tirriely cancellation where funds cannot be used, and improved project design to ensure readiness for implementation. Figure 2: Trends in Disbursement Ratio, FY96-01 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl Outcomes 8. The improvement in portfolio performance is reflected in the higher percentage of satisfactory project development outcomes reported in final Project Supervision Reports (PSRs), and assessed independently in the Implementation Completion Report and reviewed by the Operations Evaluation Department (OED) some time later. Historically, supervision teams were much more optimistic than subsequent reviewers, hence the high "disconnect" between the two. This disconnect appears to be reducing now. It is not expected that all projects can have satisfactory outcomes, but the Bank and DEA agreed on a target of more than 90% satisfactory as confirmed by OED. This will be pursued through closer attention to project ratings and clear and measurable action plans when problems are identified. Of the 13 projects that closed in FY01 (and the one ICR carried over from FYOO), OED ratings are available for eight projects (Figure 3, Table 8). The OED and PSR rating for all eight projects is the same, and there is no disconnect. Count!)' Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 3 Figure 3 : Percentage of Satisfactory Development Outcomes (PSR, OED, and disconnect) 100.0% -r------------------ 90.0% - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl [• PSR • OED D Disconnect I D. Overview of the Portfolio Analysis by Sector 9. In FYO 1, the three big sectors in terms of commitment value were Infrastructure, with loans and credits worth US$ 3.2 billion (24%), Rural Development with US$ 2.8 billion (21 %) and Health, Nutrition and Population with US$ 2.5 billion (19%). Table 3. Composition of Portfolio in FYOl (Commitments net of cancellations as of June 30, 2001, US$ million) Sector Number of IDA mRD Other* Total Percent of Projects total Infrastructure 13 283.0 2,900.1 3,183.1 24% Rural Development 21 2,338.2 489.1 2,827.3 21% Health Nutrition & Population 16 2,491.9 2,491.9 19% Energy 8 165.0 1,980.0 2,145.0 16% Education 7 1,244.9 1,244.9 9% Povetiy Reduction & 3 361.9 376.3 738.2 Economic Management 6% Finance 2 445.7 445.7 3% Environment 4 75.0 77.2 133.0 152.2 1% Social Development 2 76.4 76.4 1% TOTAL 76 7,036.3 6,268.4 133.0 13,304.7 100% *Other: Two Montreal Protocol (MPT) projects for the reduction of Ozone Depleting Substances. Count1y Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page4 10. Infrastructure. The largest sector in the FY01 portfolio, Infrastructure had thirteen projects with loans I credits amounting to US$ 3.2 billion, of which US$ 283 million was IDA and US$ 2.9 billion was IBRD. Although these projects represented only 17% ofthe portfolio in number, they amounted to 24% in terms of total commitments. Three new projects were approved in FY01 in the sector: Grand Trunk Roads (US$ 589 million), Kamataka Highways (US$ 360 million) and Gujarat Highways (US$ 381 million). The sector includes projects in transport, water supply and urban development. 11. Rural Development. The second largest sector in the portfolio, Rural Development had 21 projects in FYO 1, comprising 28% of the total number of projects and 21% of total net commitment. The sector includes irrigation and rural water supply, agriculture and forestry, sustainable natural resources and development of rural areas. In FY01, three new projects worth US$ 276 million were added to the portfolio and six projects worth US$ 420 million were closed. Figure 4 : FYOl Portfolio by Sector (Commitment value as percent of total) Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Education 6% 9% Rural Development 24% Social Development Population 1% 19% 12. Health, Nutrition and Population. The third largest sector in the portfolio this year, all projects in this sector are all IDA funded and have three focus areas: (a) disease control and health systems development; (b) nutrition projects linked with education, health and social welfare services; and (c) population-related projects to reduce unwanted fertility and to control fertility through education and employment opportunities for girls and women. The sector had 16 projects in FY01, comprising 19% in commitment value and about 21 %of total projects. One project was approved in FY01 (Leprosy II, US$ 30 million) and one project closed (Leprosy I, US$ 76.3 million). Count!)' Portfolio Perforrnance Review FY 2001 Page 5 13. Energy. The Bank's assistance strategy in India includes major state level reforms in the power sector as a key focus. At the central level, emphasis is on key central utilities, with ongoing certain projects seeking to address the problems of infrastructure bottlenecks. In FYO 1, Powergrid II (US$ 450 million) and Rajasthan Power I (US$ 180 million) were approved, and four projects worth US$ 974.8 were closed in the sector. This sector's share in the portfolio was 11% in terms of the number of projects and 16% in terms of commitment value. 14. Education. There were seven projects in the Education portfolio worth US$ 1.2 billion (all IDA) comprising 9% ofthe total number of projects as well total commitments. Two projects, Rajasthan DPEP II (US$ 74.4 million) and Technician Education III (US$ 69.4) were approved in FYO 1 and two projects amounting to US$ 224.4 were closed. 15. Poverty Reduction and Economic Management (PREM). In addition to two ongoing projects, the Karnataka Programmatic Structural Adjustment Loan worth US$ 150 million was approved in FYOI. The sector represented 4% in number and 6% in commitment value of the total FY01 portfolio. 16. Finance. This sector had two projects in the FY01 portfolio, amounting to 3% of total projects as well as total commitments. 17. Environment. The sector comprised four projects, which represented 5% in number and 1% in commitment value of the total portfolio. Of these, Montreal Protocol funded two projects - CFC Production Sector Closure ODS III (US$ 83 million) and ODS II -Consumption Fadeout (US$ 50 million). 18. Social Development. The Social unit managed two projects in FYOl that amounted to 3% in total number of projects and 1% in terms of total commitment value. Analysis by States 19. Among the states, as given in Table 4, Andhra Pradesh, with 14.5% of total commitments, continued to be the largest state in the portfolio. Uttar Pradesh (8.4%) and Orissa (6.4%) underwent a slight fall in their share, but maintained their positions as the second and third largest states in terms of total net commitments. Karnataka rose to 6.3% of commitments with the approval of three projects in FY01- State Highways (US$ 360 million), Watershed Development (US$ 100.4 million) and Karnataka SAL I (US$ 150 million). Rajasthan too saw a rise in its share with the approval of two projects this year- Rajasthan Power I (US$ 180 million) and Rajasthan District Primary Education Program II (US$ 74.4 million). Counliy Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page6 Table 4. Composition of the Portfolio by State (Percent of commitments net of cancellations) State 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Andhra Pradesh 3.6 13.9 15.7 19.4 14.5 2 Assam 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.5 3 Bihar 2.3 4.4 3.5 3.3 2.2 4 Gujarat 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.4 3.3 5 Haryana 3.4 3.9 4.3 3.9 2.6 6 Himachal Pradesh · 0.8 2 2.1 1.9 1.9 7 Karnataka 4.3 2.7 2.8 2.7 6.3 8 Kerala 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 9 Madhya Pradesh 3 3.7 3.3 3.9 2.9 10 Maharashtra 13.7 11 6.1 5.5 4.1 11 Orissa 7 7.7 7.8 8.25 6.4 12 Punjab 2.5 2.7 1.7 1.5 1.1 13 Rajasthan 2 2.6 2.7 1.8 4.1 14 Tamil Nadu 7.3 4.9 5.7 5.2 4.9 15 Uttar Pradesh 4.4 6.8 7.9 10.7 8.5 16 West Bengal 2.5 2.4 2.3 2 1.5 17 Other States 3.5 0 0.9 4.45 0.8 Subtotal: States 61.6 73 70.6 74.4 68.4 Private Sector 27.6 6.9 6.6 4.4 6.5 Government of India 10.8 21.2 22.8 21.2 , 25.1 Total 100 100 100 100 100 20. Of the 12 projects approved in FY01, eight were single state projects; ofthese, five projects went to non-focus states (Rajasthan, Gujarat, Kerala and Madhya Pradesh). The share of central projects, which had been stable in the past few years, rose to 25.1 %, mainly on account of the two large central projects that were approved in FY01- Grand Trunk Roads (US$ 589 million) and Powergrid II (US$ 450 million). Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page7 Figure 5: Allocation of Portfolio among States, FY97-01 (% of total commitments) 25.0 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "' ..... 20.0 t:: 'l) jiiiFY97 .FY98 DFY99 IIFYOO .FYOll e ..... ·6 15.0 e 0 u ] 10.0 0 ..... ..... 0 ?J2. 5.0 0.0 AP Tamil Nadu UP Karnataka Orissa Rajasthan Others Main Changes in the Portfolio 21. There were 77 projects in the portfolio at the beginning ofFYOl to which 12 new projects were added during the year giving a total of 89 projects under supervision during FYOl. 13 projects closed during the fiscal year and at the end ofFYOl there were a total of76 active projects in the portfolio (Table 5). Of these, two projects were funded under the Montreal Protocol Treaty. Table 5. Changes in the Portfolio (FYOl) {Number of projects) Sector July 1, Approved Total in Closed June 30, 2000 Supervision 2001 Education 7 2 9 2 7 Energy 10 2 12 4 8 Environment 4 0 4 0 4* Finance 2 0 2 0 2 Health, Nutrition & Population 16 1 17 1 16 Infrastructure 10 3 13 0 13 Rural 24 3 27 6 21 Social 2 0 2 0 2 PREM 2 1 3 0 3 Total 77 12 89 13 76 *Two Montreal Protocol (MPT) projects for the reduction of Ozone Depleting Substances. Country Portfolio PerformanceReview FY 2001 PageS 22. Twelve new projects were added to the portfolio in FYOl. These amounted to a total of US$ 2.5 billion, ofwhich US$ 2.03 billion was IBRD and US$ 520 million was IDA. Table 6. New Projects Approved in FYOl Project Closing Sector Project Name Board Date Net Commitment ($m) ID Date IDA IBRD Total 1 SASEI P071244 Grand Trunk Road 21-Jun-01 31-Dec-06 0 589.0 589.0 2 SASEI P070421 Karnataka Highways 24-May-01 31-Dec-06 0 360.0 360.0 3 SASE I P035173 Powergrid II 3-May-01 30-Jun-06 0 450.0 450.0 4 SASEI P038334 Rajasthan Power I 18-Jan-01 30-Jun-05 0 180.0 180.0 5 SASE I P010566 Gujarat Highways 5-Sep-00 31-Dec-05 0 381.0 381.0 6 SASHD P055455 Rajasthan Dist. Prim Education II 21-Jun-01 31-Dec-06 74.4 0 74.4 7 SASHD P067543 Leprosy II 27-Mar-01 31-Dec-04 30.0 0 30.0 8 SASHD P050658 Technician Education III 7-Sep-00 30-Jun-06 64.9 0 64.9 9 SASPR P055490 Karnataka SAL I 21-Jun-01 31-Dec-01 75.0 75.0 150.0 10 SASRD P067216 Karnataka Watershed Dev 21-Jun-01 31-Mar-07 100.4 0 100.4 11 SASRD P059242 MP District Poverty 7-Nov-00 30-Jun-06 110.1 0 110.1 12 SASRD P055454 Kerala Rural Water 7-Nov-00 31-Dec-06 65.5 0 65.5 520.3 2,035.0 2,555.3 23. Thirteen projects amounting to US$ 1.6 billion closed in FYO 1. On average, these projects had disbursed 93 % of total net commitments at closing. Table 7. Projects Closed in FYOl Net Cancell. at Total o;o Board Closing Project Name Commt. closing ($m) cancel. disbursed Date Date ($m) ($m) at closing I Coal Sector Rehabilitation 9-Sep-97 30-Jun-03 262.7 6.5* 269.2 89% 2 Haryana Power APL I 15-Jan-98 31-Dec-00 60 7.7** 7.7 87% 3 Northern Region Transm. 26-Jun-90 30-Sep-00 350.1 99.9 134.9 100% 4 Powergrid System 23-Mar-93 31-Dec-00 275 47.6 122.6 83% 5 Nat Leprosy Elimination 29-Jun-93 30-Sep-00 76.3 0.01 8.7 97% 6 UP Basic Education II 4-Dec-97 30-Sep-00 59.4 0.07 0.07 99% 7 UP Basic Education 10-Jun-93 30-Sep-00 165 0 0 99% 8 Agri Dev Project-Rajasthan 12-Nov-92 30-Sep-00 106 7.1 7.1 90% 9 AP Forestry 24-Feb-94 30-Sep-00 77.4 0.3 0.3 98% 10 Karnataka Water & Sanitation 20-Apr-93 30-Sep-00 92 0 0 99% 11 Rubber 2-Jul-92 30-Sep-00 55.4 6.2 42.9 87% 12 Shrimp & Fish Culture 14-Jan-92 31-Dec-00 35 9.8 59.8 75% 13 UP Sodic Lands 10-Jun-93 31-Mar-01 54.7 0 0 100% *Yet to be cancelled; undisbursed amount is $29.2 million, of which $22.6 million is for special commitments. **Yet to be cancelled; appearing as undisbursed balance. CounllJJ Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 9 24. Project Outcomes. Implementation Completion Reports (ICRs) for 14 projects have to be completed in FYOI- for the 13 projects that closed in FYOI and for UP Fiscal & Governance, which closed in FYOO but its ICR will be finalized in FYOI. Ofthese 14 projects, ICRs have been finalized for 13, and of these, 12 projects have been rated as Satisfactory and one as Unsatisfactory. OED evaluation has been carried out for 8 of these 14 projects, and 7 have been rated Satisfactory, giving 87.5% satisfactory outcome, with no disconnect. Table 8. Development Outcome Ratings for Projects closing in FYOl Project Revised LastPSR ICR OED Project Name ID Closing Date Rating Rating Rating P009979 Coal Sector Rehabilitation 30-Jun-03 u 2 P035160 Haryana Power APL I 31-Dec-00 u u MU 3 P009982 Northern Region Transm. 30-Sep-00 s s s 4 P010416 Powergrid System 31-Dec-00 s s s 5 P010424 National Leprosy Elimination 30-Sep-00 s s 6 P050638 UP Basic Education II 30-Sep-00 s s 7 P009955 UP Basic Education 30-Sep-00 s s 8 P010407 Agri Dev Project -Rajasthan 30-Sep-00 s s s 9 P010449 AP Forestry 30-Sep-00 s HS HS 10 P010418 Karnataka Water Supply 30-Sep-00 s s s 11 P009959 Rubber 30-Sep-00 s s s 12 P009921 Shrimp & Fish Culture 31-Dec-00 s s 13 P009961 UP Sodic Lands 31-Mar-01 s s 14 P065471 UP Fiscal & Governance* 30-0ct-00 s s s *Project closed in FYOO. ICR for all structural adjustment loans is 6 months from closure. HS: Highly Satisfactory, S- Satisfactory, MU- Moderately Unsatisfactory, U- Unsatisfactory 25. Cancellations (Table 9). Cancellation ofiDA and IBRD funds in FYOl was US$ 302.8 million from eight projects. In addition, there were cancellations at closure for ten of the thirteen projects that closed in FY01 (Table 7). Thus, in FY01, total cancellations, including cancellations at closing, were US$ 488 million. Counliy Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 PagelO Table 9. Cancellations in FYOl (excluding cancellations at closing) Project Name Original Cancellations Net Commitment o;o Commitment (US$m) (US$m) cancelled (US$m) IDA IBRD In FYOl Total to IDA IBRD date Industrial Pollution Prevention 25.0 143.0 64.2 65.8 23.4 78.8 39.2% Financial Sector Development 0 700.0 15.0 316.3 0 383.7 45.2% Blindness Control 117.8 0 10.0 10.0 107.8 8.5% ILFS- [nfrastructure Finance 5.0 200.0 168.9 168.9 5.0 31.1 82.4% Bombay Sewage Disposal 25.0 167.0 10.0 10.0 25.0 157.0 5.2% AP Emergency Cyclone 100.0 50.0 9.0 9.0 91.0 50.0 6.0% Hydrology 142.0 0 19.6 19.6 122.4 0 13.8% Coal Env & Social Mitigation 63.0 0 6.1 6.1 56.9 0 9.7% 26. Project Extensions (Table I 0). Ten projects were extended in FYOl. Table 10. Projects Extended in FYOl Original Project Board Closing Revised No. of ID Project Name Date Date Closing Date Extns P010410 Renewable Resources 17-Dec-92 31-Dec-99 31-Dec-0 1 2 2 P009870 Container Transport 9-Jun-94 31-Dec-99 31-Dec-01 2 3 P009946 National Highways II 12-May-92 30-Jun-01 31-Dec-02 4 P043310 Coal Env & Social Mitigation 16-M?y-96 30-Jun-01 30-Jun-02 5 P009963 Population VIII 18-Jun-92 30-Jun-01 30-Jun-02 2 6 P009977 Integrated Child Dev II (Bihar & MP) 9-Mar-93 30-Sep-00 30-Sep-02 7 P010455 Blindness Control 12-May-94 30-Jun-01 30-Jun-02 8 P009964 Haryana Water Restructuring 29-Mar-94 31-Dec-00 31-Dec-01 9 POI0448 Forestry Research Education 24-Feb-94 31-Dec-99 31-Dec-0 1 2 10 P010503 Agri Human Resource Devt. 30-Mar-95 31-Dec-00 31-Dec-01 E. Portfolio Action Plan : Summary of Conclusions and Agreements 27. A meeting was held with DEA on October 5, 2001 to review the portfolio and to develop a forward-looking action plan. The minutes of the meeting are given in Annex 7. Key issues that substantially impede project implementation and achievement of development objectives have been identified, and a joint action plan has been developed in Annex 1. A review of current status of actions agreed in the previous Portfolio Review is presented in Annex 2. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 200 I Page II Annex 1. Portfolio Action Plan for FY02 Issue and its effect on project performance Action Plan Improved project implementation progress Annual team supervision strategies with a special focus on problem projects. or expected achievement of development objectives Bank to prepare and share with DEA monthly reports on portfolio performance with action plans for problem projects and projects at risk Regular regional I sectoral project review meetings with implementing agencies to be convened by DEA. Next meeting to be held for Southern States (KE, KN, TN, AP) Foi problem projects, consider restructuring, reallocation and downsizing. Low disbursements in some projects, Monthly portfolio reports include disbursement ratio, disbursement lag and flags on especially in early years. projects with lags of over 24 months. For problem projects, consider downsizing or reallocation of funds away from components or implementing agencies that are not effectively utilizing funds. Review disbursement readiness of new projects. Flow of funds CAAA monitor elapsed time for processing of reimbursement claims within MOF, and Problems where implementing agencies are share information with DEA and the Bank. unable to start work, invite bids, pay contractors. Project implementation is slowed Further discussion will be held about the release of funds from state finance departments dovvn and funds often end up unused. to projects. Problems especially when state budgets are in crisis. The project's accountability for funds DEA has requested the Bank's advice on funds flow models used in other countries. flow and management of resources is a These will be discussed by October I November 2001. diminished. Discussions will be held between the Bank and DEA on LACI implementation and recommendations for changes. By end November 2001, the Bank and DEA will review projects for which LACI implementation is in progress, and discuss adaptation and monitoring of implementation plans. This would include identification of focus projects on which project reporting mechanisms will be piloted. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 12 Issue and its effect on project performance Action Plan Staff vacancies/ high turnover in key Broad-based civil service reform programs at state level include measures to reduce positions transfers. Project activities are often unable to start or to h...-.. rn1n+n.~ ..'\arl ;+D+n..f.f';o nrd- ; • ..., 1"'\lt:lr-t::l. ;...., t~mt:~ IJ.nrJ Ul,., .:)U.:)lallllr....-U l.l .:)lULl l.J llVL 111 _lJlU"'-'"'-' 1Ll t..l.Ll.lV' ULLU. State le\'el ~¥1edium Term Fiscal Framev·;orks ensure adequate funding for project decision-making can stall if senior positions expenditures including any new staffing positions required. are unfilled. Project level staffing problems that substantially undermine performance over a long period will be flagged for attention of DEA and Bank management. Delayed decisions on proposals for Identify needs for restructuring or allocation as early as possible. restructuring or reallocation Cancel unused funds where timely restructuring is not completed. Procurement delays Increased enforcement ofthe Bank's procurement guidelines on timely award of contracts Problem of major project components being will continue. This has led to the Bank declaring mis-procurement or declining to finance substantially delayed by slow procurement a number of contracts. While these represent a tiny fraction of contracts in the portfolio, process mg. they have affected many sectors and implementing agencies and have led to a noticeable improvement in processing times of other procurement actions. The ongoing Country Procurement Assessment Report discussions are highlighting further generic actions that could be taken up to reduce problems in future. Discussions will be held with the Department of Expenditure on possible use ofTA or grant to take this further. A workshop is proposed to discuss findings ad recommendations of phase 2 of the report on three state studies (TN, KN, UP). Audit Reports Meeting between Bank, DEA and CAG before end November 2001 to review issues and Delay in the receipt of audit reports led to identify next steps. suspension of disbursements against Statements of Expenditures in 14 projects in Projects will be encouraged to prepare annual financial statements and respond to and FY 01. resolve audit findings in a timely manner. Ineligible expenditures identified in audit A working group will be established within the Bank to review audit follow-up reports led to audit disallowances that resulted procedures, and findings and recommendations will be shared with DEA by end in subsequent recovery by the Bank. December 2001. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 13 Issue and its effect on project performance Action Plan F onnat and content of the annual financial The Bank will periodically share a summary of audit disallowances with DEA and will statements and audit reports do not provide discuss remedial measures. The Bank will shift towards request for repayment to increase sufficient comfort to the Bank on the use of transparency. project funds or adequacy of financial management. Periodically, a list projects with upcoming closing dates or subject to Bank remedies for late submission of audit reports will be shared with C&AG so that these audit can receive priority attention. Delays in claiming reimbursements for CAAA and the Bank to provide additional training to project staff on disbursement project expenditure leads to under-utilization procedures, targeting projects with delayed claim. of funds committed in loans and credits, especially under centrally sponsored projects. CAA&A to track this data in their system and generate and share exception reports for delayed submission of claims. Their system captures this information already but they are not using this information to generate this exception report. Bank staff will meet with Ci\AA to discuss whether they can take on a more direct role in working with projects through joint supervision of project disbursement activities. Project design and preparation Agreement ofDEA and key central ministries to make more use of up-front actions prior Many of the above problems can be reduced to loan approval, and to adequately finance project preparation e.g. through existing by more thorough project preparation, projects, grants, technical assistance loans, bilateral assistance, PPF or Standing Project ensuring implementation capacity and shared Preparation Credit on the lines of TA for Economic Reforms I TA for Roads Projects. ownership, and bringing forward key activities before project approval. Involve C&AG and Financial Advisors in project preparation. Increased focus on up-front actions before project negotiations on (i) clearances, (ii) advance preparation actions, (iii) procurement actions and (iv) establishment of project implementation capacity. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 14 Annex 2. Status of agreed actions in FYOO CPPR I Issue and its effect on project I Action Plan May 2001 I Status September 2001 I performance Unsatisfactory project Generic actions Annual team supervision strategies Completed and shared with DEA Sept 2001 implementation progress or with a special focus on problem projects. expected achievement of development objectives Quarterly reviews with DEA. Meetings held on Aug 22, 2001 on Western region projects and on Aug 3 0-31, 2001 for infrastructure and disaster management projects. Project-specific actions Monitor action plans for Bank reports shared with DEA each month. project improvement. Consider restructuring, More decisive actions being proposed and reallocation, downsizing. Non-performing funds should discussed. be cancelled where no convincing alternative use is put in place (consistent with project objectives) in a timely manner. I I i Low disbursements Generic actions Quarterly report on slow disbursing Disbursement table shared monthly, with I projects flags for disbursement lags of more than 24 months. Project-specific actions Consider downsizing or reallocation of funds away from components or implementing agencies that are not effectively utilizing funds. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 15 Issue and its effect on project Action Plan May 2001 I Status September 2001 performance Flow of funds Generic actions Monitor elapsed time for processing of CAAA is monitoring. Recent experience is Problems where implementing reimbursement claims. CAAA now monitoring time that there appear to be no notable substantial agencies are unable to start work, taken in MOF, and will share information with DEA and delays in allocations from Gol to the states. invite bids, pay contractors. the Bank. Next step is to monitor release of funds from Project implementation is slowed state finance departments to projects down and funds often end up unused. Problems especially State level public expenditure management reforms e.g. Under the UP Program Loan, check when state budgets are in crisis. track deviations between budget and actual whether counterpart funding for externally expenditures. aided projects is identified as 'High Priority Development Expenditure'. Problems still exist and no comprehensive solution has yet been identified. Project-specific actions State finance department was bypassed in a state sector project on a trial basis for Orissa Cyclone component. On review, DEA found this was not effective or appropriate, and there are no plans to continue this practice. Most countries establish Special Accounts directly at the DEA requested Bank advice on models used project level and the Bank replenishes to them. In India, in other countries. These will be discussed by this approach is used for direct lending to independent October I November 2001. project entities at the central level. This could be extended to state level, with appropriate state and Goi guarantees. Discussions held between Bank and DEA on Direct transfer to special accounts for other cases could LACI implementation and recommendations be considered as part of implementation of LAC I. for changes. DEA participated in a teleconference with the Bank's Financial Management Anchor, and provided detailed written comments Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Pagel6 Issue and its effect on project Action Plan May 2001 Status September 2001 performance Staff vacancies/ high turnover Generic actions Broad-based civil service reform Measures being developed to reduce in key positions· programs at state level include measures to reduce unnecessary transfers, e.g. Karnataka Project activities are often unable transfers. (e.g. UP, Kamataka) to start or to be sustained if staff is not in place in time, and State level Medium Term Fiscal Frameworks ensure decision-making can stall if adequate funding for project expenditures including any Being taken up for new projects e.g. in KN, senior positions are unfilled. new staffing positions required. UP,KE,MA. Commitment to project objectives is often diminished if there are Project-specific actions Project staffing problems that numerous successive changes in substantially undermine performance over a long period Specific cases being taken up with DEA in I key staff. will be flagged for attention of DEA and Bank. aide-memoires, follow-up letters and reviews. . Delayed decisions on Project-specific actions Identify needs for Both DEA and the Bank have been more restructuring or reallocation restructuring or allocation as early as possible. proactive with restructuring and cancellation proposals have substantially proposals. diminished opportunities for Cancel unused funds where timely restructuring is not I making better use of non- completed. performing or unused funds in a number ofp~ojects_._ --- ...... ' --- -----~ ··-------- -----·- L ... --- --------- Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 17 Issue and its effect on project Action Plan May 2001 Status September 2001 performance Procurement delays Generic actions An important remedial action has been The example effect of this has been very Problem of major project increased enforcement of the Bank's procurement positive. components being substantially guidelines on timely award of contracts. Between July delayed by slow procurement 2000 and April 2001 the Bank has declined to finance The ongoing Country Procurement processmg. about 15 contracts for this reason. While these represent Assessment Report discussions are a tiny fraction of contracts in the portfolio, they have highlighting further generic actions that could affected many sectors and implementing agencies and be taken up to reduce problems in future. have led to a noticeable improvement in processing times of other procurement actions. Project-specific actions More thorough assessment of This is being done for new projects. procurement capacity, preparation of procurement plans and up-front procurement actions during project preparation. Training regularly provided through courses Training on procurement procedures in Bank financed at ASCI and National Institute of Financial projects. Management. Two half-day trainings usually held for all projects during appraisal/ launch. Use of procurement agents Workshops also held on a case-by-case basis. Audit delays Generic actions Bank and C&AG to arrange Preliminary discussions held between Bank This led to suspension of workshops at state level on common audit issues. Bank and C&AG. Institutional Development Fund disbursements against Statements and C&AG to review Terms of Reference of audit for grant for C&AG was approved by the Bank in ofExpenditures under 10 projects Bank-financed projects. June. in February 2001 with a further four likely in May-June 2001. Bank will periodically share a summary of audit Last done in May 2001. disallowances with DEA and will discuss remedial Lack of response to audit measures. The Bank will shift towards request for disallowances for FY 1998-99 repayment to increase transparency. resulted in subsequent recovery by the Bank ofRs 129 crore ($28 Project-specific actions Projects will be encouraged to The Bank is following up through project million) under 28 projects. respond to audits. supervision reports and meetings with sector teams. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 18 Issue and its effect on project Action Plan May 2001 Status September 2001 performance Delays in claiming Generic actions After the initial budget allocation of reimbursements for project the fiscal year, some departments make subsequent expenditure leads to under- ,]]"""'t;Anc rl,.,-,,.nrl,.nt r.n cnhrr'l;.,.,inn nfrPirr'lhnr"PmPnt U.lJ.V\...IULJ.VJ.J.U UVl-'\,.;J..lUVJ...LL V..LJ. ._,UL/..LJ.J.J.UU..L'-'J.J. .._, _._....., ... ..._...__.._V'.._....._.__,_. ....... _.__._._..._~ utilization of funds committed in claims. This creates incentives for timely claims but can loans and credits, especially add new obstacles to timely flow of funds. under centrally sponsored projects. CAA&A to track this data in their system and generate Meetings held with DEA on streamlining exception reports for delayed submission of claims. processing of withdrawal applications. Their system captures this information already but they are not using this information to generate this exception report. Project-specific actions Consider downsizing or Examples : Environment Capacity Building reallocation of funds away from components or TA project. implementing agencies that are not effectively utilizing funds. Focus on the health sector. Project design and preparation Generic actions Agreement ofDEA and key central New projects being more closely monitored. Many ofthe above problems can ministries to make more use of up-front actions, and to be reduced by more thorough adequately finance project preparation e.g. through project preparation, ensuring existing projects, technical assistance loans, bilateral implementation capacity and assistance or Project Preparation Facilities. ,, shared ownership, and bringing forward key activities before Involve C&AG and Financial Advisors in project project approval. preparation. Project-specific actions Up-front actions before project negotiations on (i) clearances, (ii) advance preparation actions, (iii) procurement actions and (iv) establishment of project implementation capacity. Close attention to project design to ensure strong evidence of "ownership" Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 19 Annex 3. Problem Projects in FYOO CPPR (as on June 30, 2000) Name of Project and Status as on June 30,2000 Status as on June 30,2001 I Coal Sector Rehabilitation Project closed unsatisfactory following Gol Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; request for cancellation of$ 265 million. Implementation Progress: Unsatisfactory Flags : Effectiveness delays, Environment/ resettlement problems. 2 Haryana Power APL-I Closed, unsatisfactory. Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; Implementation Progress :Unsatisfactory Flags : legal covenants, Financial covenants, Project management, Critical risk rating 3 Environment Cai_:lacity Building T A Out of risk status following restructuring with Development Objective : Unsatisfactory; dropping of non-performing components and Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory cancellation of $30 million. Flags : Legal covenant, Slow Disbursements Flags: Procurement, Slow Disbursements 4 Industrial Pollution Prevention Development Objective : Unsatisfactory Development Objective : Unsatisfactory; Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory. Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory This long-standing problem project has been Flags : Counterpart funds extended for 12 months, with partial cancellation of$18 million, to finance an investment component that is showing improved performance. Project scheduled to close in March 2002. 5 Population IX Out of risk status. US$ I 0 million reallocated for Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; emthquake reconstruction in Gujarat. Implementation Progress : Satisfactory Flags : Procurement, Project management 6 Container Transport Out of risk status Development Objective: Satisfactory; Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory Flags : Procurement 7 Ecodevelopment Out of risk status following Mid Term Review in Development Objective : Unsatisfactory; May 2000. Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory Flags : Legal covenants, Counterpart funds, Monitoring & Evaluation, Project management 8 Coal Environment & Social Mitigation Out of risk status. Development Objective : Unsatisfactory; Flags : Environment/ resettlement problems, Slow Implementation Progress: Unsatisfactory disbursements Flags : Procurement, Environment/ resettlement problems, Monitoring & Evaluation Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 20 Name of Project and Status as on June 30, 2000 Status as on June 30, 2001 9 Reproductive Health 1 Out of risk status. US$ 30 million reallocated Development Objective : Satisfactory; for earthquake reconstruction in Gujarat. Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory Flags : Project Management 10 Women & Child Development Out of risk status following restructuring, Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; with reallocation of US$ 60 million for Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory earthquake reconstruction in Gujarat. Flags : Effectiveness delays, Project Management, Counterpart Funds, Monitoring & Evaluation 11 UP Diversified Agricultural Services Project Out of risk status Development Objective : Satisfactory; Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory Flags: Legal covenant, Procurement, Financial covenant, Project management 12 Orissa Power Restructuring Project Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; Flags: Counterpart funding, financial covenants Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory Flags : Counterpart Funds, Financial Covenants Downgraded to Problem status in June '01. 13 Blindness Control Out of risk status Flags : Counterpart funding, Slow disbursements Flags : Slow disbursements $20 million reallocated to Gujarat earthquake 14 Tuberculosis Control Out of risk status. Flags : Project management, Slow disbursements. Flags : Legal covenants, Slow disbursements 15 Agricultural Development Project- Raja;;than Closed, satisfactory. Flags : Counterpart funding, Slow disbursements. 16 Hydrology Project Out of risk status. $19m cancelled. Flags : Project management, Slow disbursements Flags : Procurement 17 Orissa Water Restructuring Out of risk status Flags : Legal covenant compliance, Procurement Flags : Legal covenants 18 Tamil Nadu Water Restructuring Out of risk status Flags : Legal covenants, Environment I Flags : Legal covenants resettlement problems, Slow disbursements 19 Rural Women's Development Out of risk status Flags : Project management, Slow disbursement 20 AP Economic Restructuring Project Out of risk status Flags : Counterpart funding, financial covenants Flags : Financial Covenants Coun{Jy Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 21 Annex 4. Problem Projects at start ofFY02 (as on June 30, 2001) Project Status as on June 30, 2001 Actions planned and Status Update, August 2001 1 Industrial Pollution Prevention This long-standing problem project was extended to Problem Project for 17 months at start of FYO 1. finance an investment component that is showing Development Objective : Unsatisfactory; improved performance. Project is scheduled to Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory close in March 2002. 2 Orissa Power Project was suspended on July 11, 2001. Future Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; success will depend on state commitment to timely Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory funds flow and policy decisions. Flags : Counterpart Funds, Financial Covenants 3 AP Emergency Cyclone Project was extended by one year to July 31, 2002 Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; to allow completion of important disaster Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory monitoring and forecasting activities. Project Flags : Legal Covenants, Management Problems upgrading I restructuring expected in early December 2001. 4 UP Health Systems Out of risk status Development Objective: Satisfactory; Positive actions taken by GoUP to achieve June 30 Implementation Progress : Unsatisfactory benchmarks led to project being upgraded in Flags: Procurement Problems July '0 1. 5 District Primary Education Project III {Bihar) Previously at risk- was downgraded in June '01. Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; Various remedial actions are being considered, and Implementation Progress: Unsatisfactory action benchmarks are being set. Flags: Legal covenants, Project Management, Slow Disbursements. 6 Malaria Control Project The mid-term review in October 2001 will be Development Objective: Unsatisfactory; important for resolving future direction for the Implementation Progress: Unsatisfactory project. The supervision plan for the coming year Flags: Monitoring & Evaluation, Management includes continuous attention beginning with early Problems, Slow Disbursements, Procurement. follow-up in August. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 22 Annex 5. Trends in Commitments and Disbursements, FY95-01 IBRD IDA Total Commlitments (US$ Million) FY95 1,119 945 2,064 FY96 777 1,301 2,078 FY97 627 903 1,530 FY98 1,068 1,074 2,142 FY99 400 655 1,055 FYOO 934 866 1,800 FY01 520 2,035 2,555 Total FY95 to FYOl 5,445 7,779 13,224 Disbursements (US$ Million) FY95 793 990 1,783 FY96 567 742 1,309 FY97 671 892 1,563 FY98 574 800 1,374 FY99 537 900 1,437 FYOO 749 949 1,698 FY01 613 1,031 1,644 Total :FY95 to FYOl 4,504 6,304 10,808 Repayments (US$ Million) IBRD IDA Total Interest Total Principal & Fees FY95 862 201 1,063 FY96 920 229 1,149 884 2,033 FY97 833 237 1,070 790 1,860 FY98 893 254 1,147 706 1,855 FY99 856 301 1,157 671 1,828 FYOO 1,165 336 1,501 646 2,147 FY01 723.8 385.3 1109.1 538.9 1,648 Total FY95 to FYOl 6,253 1,943 8,196 4,236 11,371 Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 23 Annex 6 : List of IBRD Loans and IDA Credits in the Portfolio, June 30, 2001 Sector Project Name Original Commitment Cancellations Net Commitments Disbursements Total Dis b. (US$m) (US$m) (US$m) (US$m) Percent ratio in IDA IBRD Other FY01 Total FY01 Total Disbursed FYOP 1 SASEI AP Emergency Cyclone 100.0 50.0 • 9.0 9.0 141.0 29.7 81.0 57% 31.6 2 SASEI AP Power APL I · 210.0 - • - 210.0 38.7 100.8 48% 26.1 3 SASEI AP State I--Iighways - 350.0 - - - 350.0 62.8 129.5 37% 22.2 4 SASEI Bombay Sewage Disposal 25.0 167.0 - 10.0 10.0 182.0 21.7 107.1 59% 20.8 5 SASEI Container Transport - 94.0 - - 15.0 79.0 5.0 39.7 50% 11.3 6 SASEI GrandTrunkRoads - 589.0 · • - 589.0 - - 0% na 7 SASEI Gujarat I--Iighways · 381.0 · - - 381.0 40.9 40.9 11% na 8 SASEI ILFS-In±rastructure Finance 5.0 200.0 - 168.9 168.9 36.1 0.1 25.9 72% 0.1 9 SASEI Kamataka I--Iighways - 360.0 - - - 360.0 - - 0% na 10 SASEI Madras Water Supply II - 275.8 - - 189.3 86.5 16.7 67.5 78% 46.7 11 SASEI Nathpa Jhakri Hydro - 485.0 - - - 485.0 20.7 425.2 .88% 25.7 12 SASEI National I--Iighways II 153.0 153.0 - - - 306.0 40.2 274.7 90% 48.9 13 SASEI National I--Iighways III - 516.0 - · - 516.0 43.9 43.9 9% 8.5 14 SASEI Orissa Power - 350.0 - - - 350.0 51.0 134.8 39% 19.2 15 SASEI Powergrid II - 450.0 • - - 450.0 - - 0% na 16 SASEI Rajasthan Power I - 180.0 - - · 180.0 17.0 18.5 10% na 17 SASEI Renewable Energy II 50.0 80.0 - · 130.0 3.0 3.0 2% 2.4 18 SASEI Renewable Resouces 115.0 75.0 - - 190.0 27.8 149.6 79% 45.6 19 SASEI TA±orStateRoads - 51.5 - - - 51.5 9.9 41.5 81% 49.8 20 SASEI Tamil Nadu Urban Development II - 105.0 - - - 105.0 54.7 70.1 67% 61.1 , 21 SASEI UP Power Sector Restructuring - 150.0 - - - 150.0 15.9 15.9 11% 10.6 i 22 SASES CFCProdt Oosure ODS III - - 83.0 - - 83.0 na 29.5 36% na 23 SASES Coal Env & Social Mitigation 63.0 - - 6.1 6.1 56.9 4.1 26.0 46% 12 24 SASES Env Capacity Building TA 50.0 - - - - 50.0 6.8 12.9 26% 17.9 25 SASES Industrial Pollution Prevention 25.0 143.0 - 64.2 65.8 102.2 7.5 31.1 30% 5.4 26 SASES Ozone Depleting Substances II - - 50.0 - - 50.0 na 19.5 39% na • 27 SASES Rural Women's Development 19.5 - - - - 19.5 0.3 2.1 11% 2 28 SASFP Financial Sector Development - 700.0 - 15.0 316.3 383.7 71.5 377.5 98% 77.1 29 SASFP Telecom Sector Re±orm TA - 62.0 - - - 62.0 3.8 3.8 6% 6.1 30 SASHD 2nd National HIV AIDS 191.0 - - - - 191.0 38.6 43.6 23% 22.3 31 SASHD AP 1st Referral Health 133.0 - · - - 133.0 17.1 93.2 70% 38.7 32 SASHD Blindness Control 117.8 - - 10.0 10.0 107.8 14.3 59.1 55% 21.1 33 SASHD District Primary Education Program 260.3 - - - - 260.3 22.9 169.2 65% 24.3 34 SASHD District Primary Education Program II 425.2 - - - - 425.2 82.0 257.8 61% 39.9 35 SASHD District Primary Education Program III (Bihar) 152.0 - - - - 152.0 7.7 30.0 20% 6.4 36 SASHD Integrated Child Dev Services II (Bihar & MP) 194.0 - - - - 194.0 52.9 146.0 75% 56.3 37 SASHD Immunization Strengthening 142.6 - - - - 142.6 29.6 29.6 21% 22.1 38 SASHD Leprosy II 30.0 - - - - 30.0 - - 0% na '' D1sbursement rauo: d1sbursements dunn g percentaf!e ot und1sbursed ba ance m bef!mnmf! ot vear. Not ava!la e tor the 12 oro1ects' pp ~"~' proJ ects 1 y '' ~ ty. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 24 Sector Project Name Original Commitment Cancellations Net Commitments Disbursements Total Dis b. (US$m) (US$m) (US$m) (US$m) Percent ratio in IDA IBRD Other FY01 Total FY01 Total Disbursed FYor:- 39 SASHD Maharashtra Health Systems 134.0 - - - - 134.0 4.9 8.3 6% 4.1 ; 40 SASHD Malaria Control 164.8 - - - - 164.8 15.0 36.6 22% 11.5 , A "7/ <;: 41 SASHD Orissa Health Systems 76.4 - - - - 76.4 J.'t I .0 10f}b ..J 42 SASHD Population IX 88.6 - - - - 88.6 12.7 56.0 63% 32.2 43 SASHD Population VIII 79.0 - - - - 79.0 14.5 48.8 62% 35.2 44 SASHD Rajasthan District Primary Education Program 85.7 - - - - 85.7 3.6 7.1 8% 4.7 45 SASHD Rajasthan District Primary Education Program II 74.4 - - - - 74.4 - - 0% na 46 SASHD Reproductive & Child Health 248.3 - - - - 248.3 46.4 96.3 39% 25.7 47 SASHD State Health Systems II 350.0 - - - - 350.0 58.6 176.2 50% 31.1 48 SASHD Technician Education III 64.9 - - - - 64.9 3.1 3.1 5% na 49 SASHD Tuberculosis Control 142.4 - - - - 142.4 20.4 26.9 19% 17.3 50 SASHD UP District Primary Education Program III 182.4 - - - - 182.4 36.0 36.0 20% 21.6 51 SASHD UP Health Systems 110.0 - - - - 110.0 2.9 2.9 3% 2.8 52 SASHD Women & Child Development 300.0 - - - - 300.0 28.1 38.1 13% 10.4 53 SASPR AP Economic Restructuring 241.9 301.3 - - - 543.2 68.3 204.3 38% 17.2 54 SASPR Kamataka SAL I 75.0 75.0 - - - 150.0 - - 0% na 55 SASPR TA tor Econ Reform 45.0 - - - - 45.0 1.5 1.5 3% 3.6 56 SASRD Agricultural Human Resources Development 59.5 - - - - 59.5 11.9 48.4 81% 67.5 57 SASRD AP District Poverty Initiatives Program 111.0 - - - - 111.0 4.2 4.2 4% 4.1 58 SASRD AP Irrigation III 150.0 175.0 - - 325.0 34.7 119.9 37% 14.9 59 SASRD Assam Rural Infrastructure 126.0 - - - - 126.0 25.9 51.2 41% 32.7 60 SASRD Ecodevelopment 28.0 - - - - 28.0 3.8 10.2 36% 20.4 61 SASRD Forestry Research Education 47.0 - - - - 47.0 7.1 39.9 85% 53.4 62 SASRD Haryana Water Resources Consolidation 258.0 - - - - 258.0 60.1 213.2 83% 61.3 63 SASRD H_Xdrology Project 142.0 - - 19.6 19.6 122.4 15.4 60.3 49% 21.1 64 SASRD Kamataka Watersheds 100.4 - - - - 100.4 - - 0% na 65 SASRD Kerala Forestry 39.0 - - - - 39.0 4.3 14.5 37% 15.9 66 SASRD Kerala Rural Water Supply and Sanitation 65.5 - - - - 65.5 2.5 2.5 4% na 67 SASRD MP District Poverty Initiatives Program 110.1 - - - - 110.1 3.5 3.5 3% na 68 SASRD National Agricultural Technology 100.0 96.8 - - - 196.8 32.5 41.6 21% 17.9 69 SASRD Orissa Water Resources Consolidation 290.9 - - - - 290.9 35.3 169.0 58% 28.6 70 SASRD Rajasthan District Poverty Initiatives Program 100.5 - - - - 100.5 3.7 3.7 4% 4 71 SASRD Tamil Nadu Water Resources Consolidation 282.9 - - - - 282.9 31.4 126.1 45% 22 72 SASRD UP Diversified Agnculture Project 50.0 79.9 - - - 129.9 11.1 23.7 18% 9.7 73 SASRD UP Forestry 52.9 - - - - 52.9 7.1 21.4 40% 19.8 74 SASRD UP Rural Water - 59.6 - - 7.2 52.4 9.6 24.5 47% 25.7 75 SASRD UP Sadie Lands II 194.1 - - - - 194.1 18.3 30.6 16% 11 76 SASRD Watershed Management Hills II 50.0 85.0 - - - 135.0 15.1 28.6 21% 12.7 TOTAL for India 7072 6964.9 133.0 302.8 817.2 13437.7 1482.3 4,887.2 36% 20.9 .,.......,r ...... n .,.. ''Dis bursement ratio: disbursements during year as a percentage of undisbursed ba ance at beginnmg ot year. got yc Not avauat e tor the 12 proJ pp proJ l y. ' ty. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 25 Annex 7: CPPR FYOl Review Meeting with DEA New Delhi, October 5, 2001 Summary of Discussions, Recommendations and Agreements 1. Dr. Kishore noted the significant improvement in the quality of the portfolio during FY01, and said all efforts must be made by DEA and the Bank to ensure that this satisfying per£ormance is sustained. 2. Mr. Garg highlighted some ofthe main achievements of the portfolio as listed in the FY01 CPPR. The projects at risk, in number and commitments, have declined dramatically during FYO 1; the disbursement ratio for the year is the highest on record; and there is no disconnect in outcome ratings. He noted the steady increase over time in total commitments and size of the India portfolio, with IDA lending being more or less stable in the last three years, while IBRD has been somewhat more volatile. He also noted the timeliness of this year's report, and that action has been initiated on every point listed in Annex 2. He said that Annex 1 has been jointly discussed by DEA and the Bank to target improvement in performance by ensuring that all existing weakness are incorporated. 3. Mr. Garg said that DEA has two concerns regarding portfolio composition. The first is sectoral lopsidedness, with three sectors - financial and private sector development, environment and social development- having very few projects compared to the rest of the sectors. Mr. Lim clarified that the sectoral division given in the CPPR is as per Bank administrative requirements, and in fact, sectors like social and environment have a component in almost every Bank project. DEA's second concern is regarding state lopsidedness. Mr. Lim said the Bank would like to expand the scope of its support in India, and requested assistance of DEA in identifYing suitable programs in states, keeping in mind that larger states like Maharashtra have a greater potential for Bank investment, and will also create a demonstration effect for the other states. 4. Mr. Lim noted that overall implementation progress is satisfactory, and the portfolio is performing well as per most Bank indicators like projects at risk, disbursements etc. He highlighted two areas of concern for the Bank. The first is the similarity between Annex 1 and 2, and that the same fundamental, systemic problems are persisting every year, suggesting that the symptoms rather than the disease are being addressed. Similarly, in Annex 4, there are a basic few projects that have been on the list of projects at risk for some time now. Mr. Hoban added that it is important to keep up with the close attention that was paid to the portfolio last year in terms oftimely supervision, restructuring etc, and also give close attention to projects under preparation. 5. Mr. Hoban went through Annex 1 and 4, and highlighted some important persisting issues that need further discussion and action. In Annex 1, he mentioned funds flow problems, which have been continuing in several projects in Rajasthan and in the DPEP projects; and the problem of staffing, which is acute in several projects in Bihar. In Annex 4, the status of projects at risk was discussed as below : • Industrial Pollution Prevention- seems to be moving; mission in end-Oct Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 26 • Orissa Power- problems are well know; not much can be done at the moment • AP Emergency Cyclone- needs immediate action; tripartite meeting was held last week between DEA, AP government and World Bank, and another meeting is scheduled for Oct 12 • UP Health Systems - out of risk status • DPEP III Bihar- good local level and weak at state level; downsizing is one option • Malaria control- Oct mission will take decision on project 6. On funds flow, Mr. Bhatnagar said the flow from central government to the states has improved and funds are being transferred quickly, and the flow from states to the projects now needs a similar level of attention. On the funds flow problem faced by centrally sponsored projects, he mentioned that DEA is closely involved this year in the discussions between the Planning Commission and the central ministries on budgetary allocation for externally aided projects. It was noted that the District Primary Education Program has had persistent funds flow issues identified in the previous two aide memoires. Mr. Shankar said that funds are supposed to be released within 15 days by the state to the project authorities, and CAAA is looking into ways this can be monitored. DEA reiterated their interest in discussing alternative funds flow arrangements, and said that they are awaiting the Bank's paper on the experience of other countries, which the Bank will send to them shortly. One idea put forward by CAAA was second generation special accounts (in rupees) held at the project level; the cash could flow directly from the central government to the project bank account, and the state would still be kept informed and involved; a similar arrangement is in place for ADB financing in Gujarat. 7. Dr. Kishore identified the need to address weaknesses in audits. Mr. Shankar said CAAA would like to start monitoring receipt of audit reports to better manage the discontinuation of the use of the Special Account and SOEs. CAAA would also like to monitor disallowances arising from audit reports, including following up with projects on the settlement of audit observations so that the findings do not have to be refunded to the Bank, and tracking the refunds/recoveries made by the Bank to ensure that funds are claimed when the observation is settled. CAAA mentioned that it might be useful to talk again about the use of private auditors. 8. Mr. Garg said that the average age of Bank projects is 7 years, and DEA and the Bank must jointly look into ways to reduce this. Mr. Lim agreed with Mr. Garg and said that shorter projects are most efficient ion allowing increased utilization ofiDA funding. Ms. Shah suggested that extensions should also be considered during restructuring. 9. Other issues • CAAA said that they are monitoring the time lag between the period covered by the claim and the date when the claim is submitted to CAAA, and they will start sharing these reports with the Bank. • DEA was pleased to hear that the Bank is planning to identify a few existing projects to implement PMR-based disbursements. • As suggested by Mr. Bhatnagar, it was agreed to incorporate disbursement ratios for projects in the FYO 1 CPPR. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 27 10. In conclusion, Dr. Kishore made the following points : • To sustain the FYOl portfolio performance, DEA to prepare a program for the country for discussion with the Bank within the next 3 months. • DEA to arrange joint meeting within the next three months with the state government and project authorities of the five projects at risk to take a decision on each project- close, restructure, accelerate etc. • DEA to give increased attention to de-bottlenecking of obstruction in smooth flow of funds, both from center to states and from states to project authorities, within next three months. • DEA to identify areas for Bank support for diversification ofbeneficiaries (sector and state) and a dispersal of benefits, not by bringing down lending to some, but by increasing it to others. • DEA to discuss its IDA13 strategy with the Bank, and also to ensure that as much as possible of IDA12 is utilized this year. • Dr. Kishore will review the persisting portfolio issues highlighted by the similarity between Annex 1 and 2. 11. It was agreed that DEA and the Bank would make a joint presentation on the FYOl portfolio to the Finance Minister by October 20, 2001. Participants DEA Adarsh Kishore, Additional Secretary K Shankar, Controller of Aid Accounts and Audit (CAA&A) Subhash Garg, Director Rahul Bhatnagar, Director Smljeev Kumar, Director Rachna Shah, Deputy Secretary Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary World Bank Edwin Lim Christopher Hoban Robert Saum Mandakini Kaul Counfly Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 28 Annex 8 : Minutes of Portfolio Reviews with States As agreed in the FYOO CPP R, the first regional review for states was held for the Western region on August 22, 2001 in New Delhi. Minutes for this meeting, prepared by DEA, are given below. The review meeting of World Bank assisted projects in the Western Region was coordinated by Director (FB), Department of Economic Affairs, on 22nd August, 2001. Officials from State Governments ofMaharashtra and Gujarat (except officials relating to Maharashtra State Health System Project) and sectoral officials ofthe World Bank were present. This list of participants is placed at FI A. 1. Gujarat State Highways Project: The Gujarat State Highway Project with the World Bank assistance ofUS$381 million became effective on 28.11.2000. It was reported that the project on the whole was progressing satisfactorily. The main issue related to diversion ofUS$97 million from Gujarat State Highway Project to Gujarat Earthquake Project Phase-I. The officials from GOG informed that the project would need the whole ofUS$381 million for the proper completion of the project. They also agreed that the recoupment of the diverted funds should be made from the Gujarat Earthquake Phase-II project funds. It was emphasized that eligible expenditure under Gujarat Earthquake Project may first be withdrawn from available IDA agreements and only when the IDA funds get exhausted, IBRD amount ofUS$97 million (diverted from State Highway Project) would be considered for withdrawal. The officials from GOG gave an assurance that the Institutional Development Study would be completed on time. 2. Gujarat Earthquake Project (Phase-!): It was indicated by Gujarat that till date Rs.267 crores have been spent on the earthquake relief. Rs. 104 crores has been disbursed by the World Bank and an amount ofRs. 44 crores has been claimed. Gujarat officials indicated that 18 months for completing Phase-! would be sufficient. The matter regarding allocation of funds between World Bank assistance and ADB assistance on housing will be worked out and the World Bank informed accordingly. It was emphasized by the World Bank officials that proper documentation between ADB and World Bank assistance needs to be maintained to avoid future complications. The World Bank officials flagged the slow progress of rehabilitation in the health and education component and the GOG officials promised that needful will be done. It was also apprehended by the World Bank officials the Phase- II loan may have to be downsized in view of some of the components being funded by other bilateral agencies. It was indicated by the Gujarat officials that by middle of September 2001 they may be able to bring out a clear picture of physical as well as financial progress achieved under Phase-I of the project so far. The matter regarding audit has to be decided by the Gujarat Government with the C&AG oflndia was agreed by the officials of the World Bank and Government of Gujarat. The representative from Gujarat were informed by Director (FB) that all matter regarding irrigation and dam safety component ofPhase-I ofthe project should be carried out in consultation with the Ministry Water Resources. Count1y Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page 29 3. Bombay Sewage Disposal Project: Representative from Mumbai Municipal Corporation informed that State Government has released the outstanding amount ofRs.SO crores to the Municipal Corporation of greater Mumbai (Project Authority). It was informed that project would disburse about $40 million during the current year as against DEA's target of $30 million. This would leave about US$34 million to be disbursed between 1.4.2002 and 31.12.2002 (Project closing date). Savings in the project would be exactly estimated only by November end, 2001. The World Bank also informed that a Mission would be fielded in November 2001 and additional activities to be taken up would be finalized at that time. The BMC official informed that out of 19 pending audit notes, 4 have been dropped and the rest 15 would be settled by October end, 2001. Revenue collection has increased from 60% to 90% as a result of computerization and decentralization of revenue billings. 4. Maharashtra State Health System Project: Director (FB-RB) in the absence of the State Government officials briefly summarized the status of the project. He indicated the disbursement ofthe project is not satisfactory and also felt that the backlog on disbursement may not be able to be covered up in the remaining period of the project. He expressed that he would be reviewing the project in September in detail to know about the exact position on the disbursement side as well as progress made in the completion of Super- Specialty Hospital as well as PMR-based disbursement and the extension to the consultant appoint for this purpose. 3. The meeting ended with Director (FB) expressing thanks to the state Government and World Bank officials who were present. Participants 1. Mr. P.K. Mishra, CEO, Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority (GSDMA), Government ofGujarat 2. Mr. M. Sahni, Additional CEO, GSDMA & Secretary (R&R), Government of Gujarat 3. Mr. H.P. Jamdar, Principal Secretary, Government of Gujarat 4. Mr. R.B. Panpit, Under Secretary (WB Projects), R&B DGH 5. Mr. S. Sarkar, Senior Sanitary Engineer, World Bank 6. Mr. Robert Maurer, Principal Urban Specialist, World Bank 7. Mr. Chris Hoban, Operations Advisor, World Bank 8. Ms. Mandakini Kaul, Operations Analyst, World Bank 9. Ms. Preeti Kudesia, Senior Public Health Specialist, World Bank 10. Mr. R.K. Bhatia 11. Mr. S.C. Garg, Director (FB), Department of Economic Affairs 12. Mr. Rahul Bhatnagar, Director (FB), Department ofEconomic Affairs 13. Mr. V. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB), Department of Economic Affairs 14. Ms. Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary (FB), Department of Economic Affairs 15. Mr. V. J ayaraman, Deputy Director (FB ), Department of Economic Affairs Country Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page 30 Annex 9 : Minutes of Sectoral Portfolio Reviews with DEA Several sectoral review meetings were held during FY01. Ofthese, the minutes of the following meetings are available in the FYOO CPPR document: Transport, October 17, 2000, Urban Water and Urban Development, October 18, 2000, Forestry, September 4, 2000 and February 20, 2001, and !CDS, March 26, 2001. Included here are the minutes, prepared by DEA,for the following meetings: Infrastructure and Transport, August 30-31, 2001 and Telecom Sector, August 31, 2001. I. Infrastructure and Transport, August 30-31, 2001 1. Container Transport Logistics Project (i) A meeting was held on 30111 August 2001 at 11.00 AM to review the disbursement performance of World Bank assisted Container Transport Logistics Project (Loan No.3753- IN). The meeting was chaired by Mr. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB) and attended by the officials of the World Bank, Container Transport Corporation of India Ltd. and CAA&A. (ii) World Bank has provided a loan of US$ 94.00 million for Container Transport Logistics Project (Loan No.3753-IN) being implemented by Container Corporation oflndia Ltd.(CONCOR). The Government of India has guaranteed the above loan. The loan agreement was signed on 29.8.94 and the project became effective on 31.1.95. The original closing date of the project was 31.12.99 and this was extended twice up to 31.12.2001. Out ofthe total loan ofUS$ 94.00 million, US$ 15.00 million has been cancelled due to savings. Now the loan stands at$ 79 million. The cumulative disbursement up to 31.07.2001 is US$ 39.66 million leaving an undrawn balance ofUS$ 39.34 million. (iii) On the issue of slow disbursement under the project. Mr. Birkhe Ram, Director (Finance) from CONCOR informed that this is due to delay in the supply of freight wagons by the contractors under Tranche-! and II. He informed that up to March 2001, 1455 wagons have been delivered by the contractor under Tranche-! and the remaining 270 wagons would be supplied by the end of September, 2001. He further informed that the company to which the contract is awarded for Tranche-II was able to deliver only 180 wagons when the contract was cancelled due to sickness of the company (SIMCO). CONCOR has now awarded the contract for remaining 1320 wagons to HEC in April2001. However, due to court cases, the company is not able to deliver the supply of wagons according to the agreed delivery schedule. The case is likely to be sorted out soon and the company would be able to commence the delivery of wagons by December 2001 and the delivery of all the wagons is expected to be completed by the end of December 2002 against the present loan closing date of 31.12.2001. Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 31 (iv) It was generally agreed by the World Bank, CONCOR and DEA that in spite of the delay the wagons supplied were of high quality and helped reduce the transport time substantially. (v) The CONCOR has informed that they would be able to utilize only$ 16.00 million during the current financial year of2001-2002 against the Budget provision of$ 27.00 million. (vi) CONCOR was asked to give details of their payments towards guarantee fee to Govt. of India. (vii) CON COR has stated that statutory audit was done and the audit certificates for the year 2000-2001 would be sent to the Bank shortly. (viii) World Bank team has informed that they would field a mission in October, 2001 to review the project and consider the further extension of the project as requested by CONCOR. List of Participants (i) Mr. V. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB), DEA- in chair (ii) Ms. Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary (FB), DEA (iii) Dr. (Ms.) G. Madhumathi, Section Officer (FB-VI), DEA (iv) Mr. Birkhe Ram, Director (Finance), CONCOR. (v) Mr. Harihamath, Accounts Officer, CAA&A (vi) Mr. Chris Hoban, Operations Advisor, World Bank (vii) Ms Mandakini Kaul, Operations Analyst, World Bank (viii) Mr. Alok Bansal, Senior Transport Planner, World Bank 2. Orissa Emergency Cyclone Project (i) A meeting was held on 30th August 200 l at 4.00 PM to review the disbursement , performance of World Bank assisted Orissa Emergency Cyclone Project. The meeting was chaired by Mr. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB) and attended by the officials of the World Bank, Govt. of Orissa and CAA&A. (ii) Orissa Emergency Cyclone project was signed as an amendment to the Orissa Water Resources Consolidation project with in IDA credit of US$ 46 million. An intermediate phase Orissa Emergency Cyclone and Reconstruction project is proposed in continuation to the immediate phase. (iii) 0/o CAA&A confirmed that an amount of$ 10 million has been drawn for special account an amount of 2.3 million claims have been submitted to CAA&A but the claim has been disallowed due to some procedural requirements. The expenditure till date is US$ 4 million. The full utilization ofthe amount is expected to be by September 2002. Country Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page 32 (iv) Out of a total of 586 packages tenders have been obtained for 408 packages and 253 have been finalized. The remaining would be finalized by end of September 2001. The Govt. of Orissa has informed that there had been no proper bidder for cyclone shelters due to the locational problems and requested World Bank that the qualifying criteria may be revised. World Bank has pointed out that the coordination between OSDMA and Line Departments needs to be improved. (v) Govt. of Orissa informed that the Disaster Management Framework has been prepared and send to the World Bank for approval. The implementation plan has been prepared. World Bank showed concern that the quality design and the social impact assessment have not been achieved. The World Bank reiterated that the environmental and social screening are the most activities and have to be achieved expeditiously to finalizedis the bid documents. (vi) Govt. of Orissa explained that the slow progress in the immediate phase was due to the recurring calamities in Orissa and the unique locational and environmental problems of the State of Orissa. The Managing Director, OSDMA assured that every effort would be taken to expedite the project. The World Bank and OSDMA officials agreed to have another meeting in World Bank Office to discuss other related issues. List of Participants (i) Mr. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB), DEA- in chair (ii) Ms. Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary (FB), DEA (iii) Mr. Chris Hoban, Operations Advisor, World Bank (iv) Ms. Mandakini Kaul, Operations Analyst, World Bank (v) Mr. Robert Maurer, Principal Urban Specialist, World Bank (vi) Mr. Sujit Das, Senior Highway Engineer, World Bank (vii) Mr. Aurobindo Behura, Managing Director, OSDMA (viii) Ms. Sucharita Sarangi, 0/o Resident Commissioner, Government of Orissa (ix) Mr. Ullas Kumar Das, Joint Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Orissa (x) Mr. Krishan Chand, Senior Accounts Officer, CAA&A. 3. State Road Infrastructure Technical Assistance Project (i) A meeting was held on 31st August, 2001 at 11.3 0 AM to review the disbursement performance of World Bank assisted State Road Infrastructure Technical Assistance Project. (Ln.4114-IN). The meeting was chaired by Mr. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB) and attended by the officials of the World Bank, Govt. of Kerala and Tripura only. Representatives from Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Manipur, Mizoram, Orissa, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh did not attend. (ii) The World Bank provided a loan of US$ 51.5 million to assist the State in preparation of high priority road investments and to promote the carrying out of the policy reforms by the participating State in the provision, financing and maintenance of Road Infrastructure. The Countly Portfolio Peiformance Review FY 2001 Page 33 loan closing date is 31.12.2001. The cumulative disbursement till 31.7.2001 is US$ 41.499 million. (iii) Govt. ofKerala has informed that the expenditure till February 2001 US$ 3.01 million. GOK projected an expenditure of US$ 5.09 million till December 2001 and requested for an additional amount of US$ 0.6 million above the allocated amount of US$ 4.5 million. World Bank assured that the project would be appraised as and when it is ready. (iv) Govt. ofTripura has informed that there are no pending claims for reimbursement. It requested for an extension of the project as only detailed feasibility studies could be completed by December 31 5\ 2001 and engineering studies can not be completed but the World Bank informed that the Govt. had taken a long time in the initial stages ofthe project and now it can not be extended as the project can not be taken up for a full-fledged project. (v) Department of Economic Affairs informed that it would consider World Bank's suggestion to hold a workshop on the project in January/February, 2002. List of Participants (i) Mr. Vurnlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB), DEA- in chair (ii) Ms. Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary (FB), DEA (iii) Mr. Chris Hoban, Operations Advisor, World Bank (iv) Ms. Mandakini Kaul, Operations Analyst, World Bank (v) Mr. Alok Bansal, Senior Transport Planner, World Bank (vi) Mr. Guang Zhe Chen, Senior Economist, World Bank (vii) Mr. A.K. Swaminathan, Senior Highway Engineer, World Bank (viii) Mr. N. Dushantha Kumar, Project Director, PWD, Government ofKerala (ix) Mr. B.N. Majumdar, Project Director, PIU, PWD, Government ofTripura (x) Mr. Harihamath, Accounts Officer, CAA&A. II. Telecom Sector, August 31, 2001 Telecom Sector Reform Technical Assistance Project (i) A meeting was held on 30th August, 2001 at 11.30 AM to review the disbursement performance of World Bank assisted Telecom Sector Reform Technical Assistance Project (Loan No.4555-IN). The meeting was chaired by Mr. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB) and attended by officials of the World Bank, Department of Telecom and CAA&A. The list of participants is attached. (ii) The World Bank has provided a loan of US$ 62 million for the Telecom Sector Reform Technical Assistance Project (Loan No.4555-IN). The loan agreements were signed on 11.6.2000 and became effective on 29.08.2000. The closing date of the project is Country Portfolio Performance Review FY 2001 Page 34 31.12.2005. The cumulative disbursement up to 31.07.2001 is$ 3.758 million. (iii) At the outset, DS (FB) enquired about the various components of the telecom reform project. DOT informed that the bidding documents for the procurement of equipment for upgrading the spectrum management capabilities ofthe Department of Telecom were issued in October 2000 and were sent to the Bank in June, 2001 for their approval. The final contract is likely to be awarded in mid-February, 2002 and the supply of equipment would be completed in 18 months. This is the major component ofthe project and the equipment is to be located in over 20 sites nations vide. The importance of ensuring timely completion of the procurement formalities and completion of site selection and preparation was duly stressed. (iv) DOT has further informed that they would be able to utilize only$ 5.59 million against the budgetary provision of$ 15.00 million for the current financial year of2001-2002. (v) Representatives of DOT were also advised to obtain prior clearance of Department of Economic Affairs for all training programmes as per existing norms of the government. List of Participants (i) Mr. V. Vumlunmang, Deputy Secretary (FB), DEA- in chair (ii) Ms. Geeta Narayan, Under Secretary (FB), DEA (iii) Dr. (Ms.) G. Madhumathi, Section Officer (FB-VI), DEA (iv) Mr. R.P. Aggarwal, Joint Wireless Advisor, DOT (v) Mr. M.L. Malhotra, Director (Finance), DOT. (vi) Mr. R.B. Singh, Deputy Wireless Advisor, DOT (vii) Mr. Chris Hoban, Operations Advisor, World Bank (viii) Ms. Mandakini Kaul, Operations Analyst, World Bank (ix) Mr. Harihamath, Accounts Officer, CAA&A Countly Portfolio Pe1jormance Review FY 2001 Page 35 For information contact: Tbe Worfo Bank 701 Looi Estate New Delhi - 110 0031 Inoia Tel: +91 II 4619491 Pax :+91 II 4619393 Il1terl1et: www.worlobank.org.in