Projects
A critically important modality for implementation
Projects are the dominant modus operandi in the relief and development
sector. My experience suggests that projects have had a big role in
constraining the relief and development progress, but they still remain the
dominant way in which all the major organizations in the sector operate.
There is not going to be an end to the use of “projects” in the immediate
future, but there can be a big improvement in the performance of projects.
Improving the performance of “projects” can have a big role in improving the
overall performance of the relief and development sector.
The project cycle can be tweaked
The project cycle can be improved in a few modest ways that will
substantially improve performance. Perhaps the most critical is to put more
emphasis on the implementation stage, and building into this step, much
more oversight with measurement, analysis, feedback and adjustment. The
basic World Bank project cycle is: (1) Identification; (2) Preparation; (3)
Appraisal; (4) Negotiation; (5) Implementation; and, (6) Evaluation. What
needs to be done is to ensure that implementation is optimized around the
realities that have to be faced operationally.
Oversight and measurement
The idea of oversight and measurement needs to be made an integral part of
the project operations. The sort of measurement needed is simple normal
rigorous accounting and timely reporting. The specifics will change from
project to project. Just as they do from department to department in the
corporate world ... but there should be timely accounting for all economic,
that is financial, transactions.
Every month, the oversight managers should get a simple report about what
has been spent and what it has been used for ... basic management accounts.
From time to time there should be reporting against key performance
benchmarks ... whatever is appropriate.
None of this is a change in project cycle and project design ... but it is a
change in the way things have been done. Much more attention needs to be
paid to accounting, to the professionals in accountancy and to the information
that the accountants are presenting. Rather than being an unusual part of the
oversight team, a professional accountant should be right in the middle of
most of the oversight process.
Mitigating shortcomings of the project cycle
Some steps can be taken to mitigate the shortcomings of the project form of
organization. Some of the issues include: (1) a short life; (2) issues of starting
up; (2) issues of closing down; (4) an impermanent artificial structure; (5) all
sorts of economic distortions, not least of which relate to personnel are pay
scales; and, (6) excessive complexity.
Some of the easy changes to make are: (1) make projects go on for a much
longer period of time, especially extending the duration of existing projects
that are demonstrating success (2) reorganize existing projects so that the
implementation is within the main framework of the government
organizations and civil service; and, (3) break down big complex projects into
multiple simpler projects where the organization and the activities can be
much better aligned.
Terminate non-performing projects
There are some great projects and some dogs. On average, relief and
development has failed, and this is because there have been too many dogs.
With decent oversight and accounting it is possible to identify the dogs, and
do something about it. There are two ways to go: (1) fix the problem, which
will often be a major change in personnel and maybe project design; or, (2)
eliminate the problem, that is terminate the project. Neither are good
options, but they are far better than continuing to use good money to do
nothing or worse than nothing.
Build on success
Some projects do very well. If the project is going well ... learn from it and if
possible extend it and replicate the model in other suitable places. When a
project is designed right, and the staff are good, the scale of success is
significant .. the socio-economic value is multiples of the cost.
Replication of Success ... or Failure
The Shenge Project (see Box page nnn) was a great success. But it ended because the
relief and development sector has a narrow view of sustainability and does not have
good projects that go on for ever. Everything closes down when the time is up.
When I was asked if the Shenge Project was sustainable my response was absolutely
yes at the community level, and no at the country level because nothing in Sierra
Leone was sustainable if it required any foreign exchange or government funding at
all.
The FAO and the UNDP allowed this project to close even though its contribution to
the community and the area was amazingly good ... I had the facts and the operational
costs and the economic benefits well presented. But this was NOT a factor. Decisions
were not going to be confused with these data about excellent performance.
Around the same time a project that was failing ... costing more than expected, and
doing much less than expected and totally falling behind in attaining its objectives ...
was extended and allocated more money.
The simplistic argument was that there was no need to extend a project where the
objectives had been met ... perfect bureaucratic nonsense.
In almost every project, there are things that are going well and adding to
socio-economic development value, and elements that are not doing so well.
By doing value analysis it is possible to improve implementation so that good
things are replicated, and bad things terminated. This is not being done
enough, and it has had devastating effect on performance over the years.
Oversight of the development project portfolio
Many countries in the “south” have development project portfolios that are
funded in part by the government budget and in part by development grants
and loans. The oversight of these projects can make a significant difference to
socio-economic performance.
Analysis of a Development Portfolio
Some years ago (around 1994) I set up a PC database system to provide oversight to
the development project portfolio of a “south” government. I was instructed to focus
on the 10 largest projects, and not to bother much about the 2,000 odd other projects
that were in progress. But, of course, a database system enables one to do simple
analysis of everything in the dataset rather efficiently while it does not do very well
with “deep” information about just a few items.
We were able to get quite a lot of simple information about all the projects, and do
this quite quickly based on various reports that the headquarters had asked of the
projects and were in the files.
There were all sorts of reports about the big projects ... favorable and unfavorable.
We had a lot of data.
Sadly the government did not have much money ... the big projects were consuming
all the money and more, and were being driven by external donors (World Bank and
bilateral lenders). There were cost overruns on the big projects and this was pulling
funds from the small projects ... but our little Project Administration Office had
absolutely no clout with anyone that mattered. The big projects were out of control,
but the World Bank and the bilaterals did not have systems to take control or
intervene in failing projects.
Almost all the 2,000 smaller projects were cut back in funding to levels that allowed
them to stay active, but ensured that they would take a very long time, if ever, to
complete. Every one had senior staff on the payroll, even if there was little or no
activity. Projects that were nearly completed were cut back the same as ones that
were just starting ... so the value was delayed. The big driver was senior staff on the
payroll and not how to get the most value from best use of resources.
It was an interesting piece of work. I worked with two government officers who were
academically bright and with considerable experience. They understood the analysis
and the conclusions that were emerging ... and while I saw no impact of my efforts
while I was working in the country, I think there will be prudent use of the analysis as
time goes on.
With strong value analysis and the database of project information referred to
above, a better use of scarce resources could have been accomplished. Some
projects generate value during their implementation, for example, a project
to provide educational supplies, but a project to build a bridge only has value
only when the bridge is complete and can be used. In this portfolio value could
have been maximized by completing almost complete projects and cutting
back on projects that were still in the study stage. This can be tough ...
because politics and allegiances are involved as well as just simple financial
analysis and economics.
Multi-year planning can be helpful in optimizing value. Rather than canceling
a project, adjusting the scheduling of projects can result in more value sooner,
and more cost later. This is usually advantageous, and result in very much
better results.
Project accounting and accountability
There also needs to be a strong framework of accounting and management
information for the project and for the government of the country. The area
of accounting has been a low priority, but it is the strongest tool available to
address the epidemic of corruption that pervades almost all areas of economic
activity. All projects funded and implemented through government should be
integrated into the national accounting mechanisms ... usually a single
treasury account system and be supplemented by good analytical accounting
for project performance.
The process of integrating projects into government structures and civil
services cadres will reduce the distortion caused by “projects” recruiting good
people out of the permanent government system.
Project financing
The rules of financing need to be made a lot more balanced, especially as
regards exchange risks. The practice of only financing in a basket of currencies
like the US dollar, the Canadian dollar, the UK pound sterling, Swiss franc,
etc. should be changed so that repayment is based on the local currency value
of the hard currency at time of negotiation. In this arrangement the economic
performance in the “south” and the value of local currencies then becomes a
matter of major concern to the lenders. This then becomes an incentive for
really constructive engagement so that there is overall economic performance
in the “south”.
Action plan to improve project performance
My immediate reaction to project performance was to advocate for a change
to a different implementing modality that did not use the project structure.
Reflection suggests that there will be more progress more rapidly merely by
having rather modest incremental changes. In fact, the changes are not
revolutionary at all, but merely practical application of what is ofter talked
about.
There needs to be improvement in the accounting so that all the stakeholders
in project performance can have a factual base for dialog and decision making.
Every good corporation can easily produce meaningful monthly accounts, and
relief and development sector projects should be able to do the same.
There needs to be improvement in the metrics about activities and results so
that it is possible to tell how much the various activities are costing and the
value of the results.
To the extent that there are questions about what value to assign to value, that
is, for example, what dollar value to assign to a child not dying from malaria,
there needs to be a public dialog and eventually a set of “standard values” that
anyone can use.
Where it is apparent that a project is not performing to an acceptable
standard, whether it is in respect of the accounting or relative to
performance, then the project should be terminated with the least possible
cost.
There also needs to be much more ability to change a project to improve its
performance. Every plan can be improved based on what one learns during
implementation, but this requires both a learning cultures and an action
culture.
|