Project Performance Audit Report on Egypt Upper Egypt

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 7338

PROJECT PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT

EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECT (LOAN 1285-EGr; CREDIT 637-EGT)NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II PROJECT (LOANS 1439 & 1440-EGT; CREDIT 719-EGT)

June 30, 1988

Operations Evaluation Department

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

FISCAL YEAR

Until June 1979 - Calendar YearFrom July 1919 - July 1 to June 30

CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATE

Name of currency (abbreviation) Egyptian Pound (LE)Currency Exchange Rates: 1978 s 1.00 LE = 1.85 US$(commercial rates) 1979 s 1.00 LE - 1.43 US$

1980/81: 1.00 LE - 1.35 US$1981/82s 1.00 LE - 1.23 USS1982183: 1.00 LE = 1.16 US$1983184t 1.00 LE - 1.08 US$1984185: 1.00 LE = 0.93 US$1985186: 1.00 IE - 0.73 USS

FOR OMCIAL U ONyTHE WORLD BANK

Washmgton. D.C. 20433U.S.A.

01k 4d Dit.civGa1Olruuo Ivkutatku'w

June 30, 1988

MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT

SUBJECT: Project Performance Audit Report on Egypt Upper EgyptDrainage II Project (Loan 1285-EGT; Credit 637-EGT) andNile Delta Drainage II Project (Loans 1439 and 1440-EGT;Credit 719-EGT)

Attached, for information, is a copy of a report entitled"Project Performance Audit Report on Egypt Upper Egypt Drainage IIProject (Loan 1285-EGT; Credlt 637-EGT) and Nile Delta Drainage 1IProject (Loans 1439 and 1440-EGTI Credit 719-EGT) prepared by theOperations Evaluation Department.

Attachment

Yves Rovani

by Graham Donaldson

d

This document hss a restrcted distibution and may be used by recipients only In the perfomunceof their offci duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without Wodd Bank authoftion.

FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY


EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II (LOAN 1285-EGT; CREDIT 637-EGT)NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II (LOANS 1439 & 1440-EGT: CREDIT 719-EGT)

TABLE OF CONTENTSPa.e No.

Preface ..... ******* ........... .. iBasic Data Sheets ......... ¢-e*--s*X*-**vXXsv {itEvaluation Summary .............. ,,ix

PROJECT PERFORMANCE AUDIT MEMORANDUM

I. PROJECTS' BACKGROUND ....................... 1

II. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ............................ 3

III. FINDINGS AND 'SSUES ................ 6

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORTS AND OVERVIEW

Bank Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Upper Egypt Drainage II Project (Loan 1285; Credit 637) .............. 29Nile Delta Drainage II Project (Loans 1439 E 1440; Credit 719) ....... 113

This document has a resticted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Dank authorization.


EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II (LOAN 1285-EGTg CREDIT 637-ECT)NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II (LOANS 1439 & 1440-EGTI CREDIT 719-EGT)

PREFACE

This Isa performance audit of two Bank and IDA-assisted projectsin the Arab Republic of Egypt. The lending operations for the twoprojects, Upper Egypt Drainage II (UED II) and Nile Delta Drainage II (NDDII), totalling US$116.0 million (m), were approved by the Board in June1976, May 1977 respectively.l/ The loans/credits were closed respectivelyin June and December 1985. All loans and credits were fully disbursed.This audit consists of a zaemorandum prepared by the Operations EvaluationDepartment (OED) and two Project Completion Reports (PCRs). The PCRs wereprepared by r-AO/World Bank Coooperative Program (FAOICP) staff, accompaniedby an overview memorandum prepared by staff of the former EMENA ProjectsDepartment. The audit memorandum is based on a review of the AppraisalReports,21 the corresponding President's Reports ,31 the DevelopmentLoan/CrediF Agreements,41 and the PCRs. Correspondence with the borrowerand internal Bank memoranda on the projects contained in Bank files havealso been consulted and Bank staff associated with the projects have beeninterviewed.

An OED mission visited Egypt in December 1987. The mission helddiscussions with officials in the ministries and other agencies associatedwith the projects in Cairo and selected governorates. Field visits to arepresentative selection of project sites were also undertaken for thepurpose of familiarization and to interview staff responsible for$mpl_emntation and project beneficiaries.

The audit finds the two PCRs comprehensive and accurate withrespect to the projects' principal achievements and shortcomings. The wellwritten overview usefully supplements the PCRs by providing valuableadditional insights and clarifying certain issues from the Bank viewpoint.The points discussed by the audit have been selected because of theirrelevance to these and other agricultural sector projects in Egypt,including projects currently being implemented.

11 Loan 1285 - US$10.0 ml Credit 637 - US$40.0 ml Loan 1439 - US$27.0 m;Loan 1440 - US$12.0 m; and Credit 719 - US$27.0 m.

21 Dated May 27, 1976 and May 5, 1977.

31 Dated Nay 26, 1976 and May 18, 1977.

4i Dated June 11, 1976 and July 15, 1977.

- Il -

The draft audit report was sent to the Borrower for coment onApril 27, 1988. However, no comments have been received.

The valuable assistance provided by the Government of Egypt (GOE)officials and other individuals met during the preparatin of this reportIs gratefully acknowledged.

- III -

PROJEC-T PERF0RIMM AUOI-T REPQ

ARAB REPULIC OF EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECT(CREDIT 687, LOAN 1265-ECT)

BASIC DATA SHEET

KEY PROJECT DATA

Actual or Actual as IAppraisal Estimated of Appraalcl

Itom Estimate Actual Estmate

Total Project Cost (USSl millon) 2U2.1 1(A.91a 69.0Credit/Loan Amount (USS million)

- IDA Credit 40.0 46.6 100.#- IBRD Loan .166 10.0 160.0

Total U6.O 60.0 16.0Amount cancelled mUSS millon) - - -Cotinancier (USAID) (MSt mIIlIon) 80.ftl 19.0 08.4Date Board Approval - 6/66/76 -Dte of Loan Signature - 06611/76 -

Date Effectienl s 1/17/76 61/81/7? -Date Physical Components Completod 12/31/01 de/86/69 -Proportion then completd 9.0h -Cloeing Date 66/6/868 068/860/ -Economic Rate of Rturn (1) 29 14 -Institutional Performane - poor to fair -Agronomic Portormance - no direct mesure-

ments availableNumber of Diroot Benetlclarieo 682,066 882,666

STAFF INPUT (Staff Weeks)

FY72 FY78 FY74 FY75 FYC6 FY77 FY76 FY70 FY86 FY81 FY82 FY68 FY64 F 131 XOT1I

Preappralsal 38.5 8.Appraisal 41.7 41.?Negotiation 14.0 14.6Supe-vision .8 .2 .1 6.0 6.6 16.5 11.1 10.0 18.6 9.8 26.1 6.4 4.4 112.8Other .1 .1 .0 .1 1.. 2.A

TOTAL .8 .2 59.8 9.1 0.6 16.5 11.1 16.6 18.0 9.4 26.7 8.4 4.4 178.5

- iv -

CUYLAIVE DTS8I3SENENTS

FISCAL YEARS: 76)7? 77170 78/79 79/U 80/81 81)82 UPSl 68/84 84/8C 85

Appraisal Estiate(USS i11.) 8.4 22.6 88.8 40.8 46.7 60.0 - -

Actual (US$ aTI.) - - 7.8 18.9 27.6 88 8C5.6 89.6 45.5 SJ.Actual * X of Estimate - - 21.9 44.7 59.6 66.6 71.6 18. 91.0 190.0Date of Final Dlbursoment February 1, 1986

CWDJLATIVE DISBUtSEMENTS USAID FUNDS (LOAN 268 4084)

FISCAL YEARS: 77/78 78/79 79)69 80/81 81/82 82/88 8B/ 84/65 86/88

Appraisal Estimte(US$ ml.) 9.8 21.7 26.6 28.2 83.6 - - - -

ActusI (USS mlI.) - 8.8 12.9 12.9 18.0 18.2 16.8 18.8 19.0Actual as X of Estimat - 16.8 46.7 45.7 48.8 44.6 52.7 62.7 68.8Date of Final Disbursemnt n.e.

MISSION DATA

Spacializa-Date No. of tilona Prformance Type of

Mlsesion (so./yr.) Persons Reprwented Retina Trend Problems

L / k It

Appralsal 11/75 a * b,c - - -Post Appraisal 19/76 8 * b9c - - -Supervision 1 8V/77 1 c 2 1 F,MSupervision 2 11/77 1 c 2 2 MUOSupervlolon 8 04/78 1 c 2 2 MU0Supervision 4 e7/78 1 c - - MU0Supervision 5 11/78 2 e 2 - MUDSuperislon 6 68/79 2 *,e 2 1 O,FSupervislon 7 09/79 2 *,c 2 1 ML0Supervision 6 95/30 1 c 2 1 MLDSupervision 9 e9/U0 8 b,c*c 2 1 M.DSupervision 1i 64/81 1 c 2 2 M.DSupervislon 11 11/81 1 c 2 1 M,USupervision 12 84/82 1 c p 2 M.DSupervislon 12 11/82 1 c 2 2 USupervision 14 95/88 2 c,c 2 2 M,Tsupervision 16 19/88 2 c,e 2 - VSupervision 1S es/84 8 e c - - Channel main-

tenance missionSupervision 17 06/84 2 c*c 2 2 MSupervislon 10 89/6U 1 c participatlon panel mowtingSupervision 19 11/84 I c,c 2 2 MSupervision 20 a5/86 1 c 2 2 NSupervision 21 10/8C I c 2 2 MCompletion 22 07/80 1 a 2 - UB9iherazi Componrnt1g d - - -

O1H£R PMOJECT DATA

Borro.rs Arab Republlc of EgyptExecutlng Agecy: Egyptin Public Authority for Drainage Project. (EPROP)

Currency Exchange Rate Appraisal Year US91 * LE 9.39 (official rote used forproject cost estimates)

Intervening Years Average USI1 a LE 0.91 (comercial rate)Completion Year Average US21 a LE 1.3? (co_ relel rate)

Previous and Follow-on Projects Nile Delta I UaeDr Enoyt I Nil. Delta II DraInan V

Loan/Credit Number Cr. 181-UU Cr. 898-UAR Ln. 1489-49/Cr. 719-ICY Ln. 26629-1TLoan/Cradit Amount 26.0 86.0 66.9 6O.0Date Board Approval 03/24/70 96/98/7/ 87/1M/7? 91,/9/6

L Estimate of full project costa at time of PCR copleti-*n.lb Original allocet10n of US2BO million reduced to US220 million.

aS a = agricultura lst; b a economist; c a engineer; d * medical doctor; a f inancial advisor./c 1 * Pr-bl_m-free or minor problems; 2 * Moderate probl.e; 8 a Major problems.L. 1 a Improving; 2 a Stationary; 3 = Deteriorating./t F a Financial; U a Managerial; T = Technical; 0 a fther.Lg 17 separate misslons by Bilharia specialist. (including evaluation of the component).

- vI -

PROJECT PRWIMANCE AUDIT R1C

ARAB REWC wJF O

NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II PROJECT(CREDIT 719 LOANS 14S9/1446-EOI)

BASIC DATA SHEET

KEY PROJECT DATA

Actual or Actual as XAppinleal Estlmated et Appraisal

Item aEtimate Actual Estimat

Total Projeat Cost (US8 mlliIon) 207.6 192.2 98.6Credit/Loan Amounts (UI milion)- Crdit 719 Credit 27.o 27.6 156.6- Loan 1409 27.0 27.0 10.6- Loan Third Window 1440 12.0 12.0 l.OTotal (USM millIon) A.0 0.0Amount canc lled (USS millon) - - -

Cotinanclr Kfw (OM millon) 60.6 42.8 10.0Date of Board Approval - 065/81/77 -Date of Loan Signature - 07/16/ -

Date Effectiveness 10/18/7 04/17/78 -

Date Physical Components Completed 12/81/2 16/81/86,L -Proportion then completed 16C5 100o -Closing Date 12/81/68 12/81/8 -

Economic Rate of Return ) 28 28. -

Institutional Performnce - fair -Agronomi c Performance fair -

Numer of DireOt Benotictirles 1,060,00 1,6,000

STAFF IWUT (Staff Weeks)

FY75 FY76 FY77 FY76 FY79 FY86 F6F1 FY82 FY68 FY64 M Fhf TO1AL

Preeppraimal .4 .4 5.6 6.6Appralsal 68.7 5 7Negotiatlon 12.0 12.6Supervision .1 2.4 12.6 14.4 11.4 9.9 6.1 24.0 10.1 5.6 99.1Other .9 1.8 .4 .6 .1 . _ 2.6

TOTAL .4 1.8 77.1 2.4 18.2 14.4 11.6 10.6 6.1 24.6 10.1 5.8 170.5

- vii -

CUMULATIVE DISBURSEMENTS

FISCAL YEARS: nn/78 76/7 79/80 80/81 81/82 82/8J 63/84 04/8C5 3516

Appraeil Estimate 16.3 66.3 46.6 56.3 62.7 6.6 - - -

(USI oillIon)Actual (SI miliIon) - 9.e 14.3 22.3 26.7 36.1 46.6 509. 61.6Actual as X of Estimate - 31.0 32.0 46.0 43.0 W'.. 76.6 906. 196.0Dato of Final Disbursement August 22. 196

CUMULATIVE DISBURSEMENTS KfV FUNDS (LOAN 7765621)

FISCAL YEARS: 7/79 791SW 80/81 81/82 82/83 83/84 84/86 fi/E

Appraisal Estimate(DM millon) 6.6 19.8 32.6 44.3 60.0 - - -

Actual (DM milGlon) - - 9.02 o.ea 8.0 15.62 25.46 37. 81bActual as t of Fatimate 6.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 16.2 31.2 60.9 75.3Date of Final DOlburss_nt na.

MISSION DATA

Special is-Date No. of tiono Porfomanoe Type, of

Mission too./yr.) Persons Represented Rot.n Trend ProblemsA /d /- 1f.

Preparatlon*sisance 07/76 3 (FAQ/CP) a.b*c - - -

Appraislo 11/76 a *,b,c - - -Post Appralial 08/77 1 b - - -

11/77 2 c¢d - - -Superviston 1 64/78 1 c - - -

Supervision 2 O7/76 1 c - - -

Supervision 3 19/78 a 1,b,c 2 2 T,MSupervision 4 63/79 2 ecv 2 2 M,FSupervision 5 04/79 1 c - 1 -

Superision 6 69/79 2 *,c 2 1 O,M,FSupervision 7 OS/80 I a 2 1 O,MSupervision 6 09/80 3 b,c.¢ 2 2 O,MSupervision 9 64/61 1 a 2 2 O,MSupervision 10 11/81 1 c 2 2 O,MSupervision 11 62/62 1 c examination of EPAPD cost

accodnting systemSupervision 12 64/62 1 c 2 1 0Supervision 13 11/82 1 c 2 2 O,lSupervision 14 95/U3 1 c 2 2 M,TSupervision 15 03/64 2 c,c participation panel meetingSupervision l6e /64 1 c 2 - 1Supervision 17 6/64 1 c - 1Supervision 16 9/84 1 a participation panel metingSuperviolon 19 11/64 2 etc 2 1 NSupervision 2J a5/65 I a - - -

Supervision 21 1O/85 2 e,e 2 1 UCompletion 22 7/86 1 2 - -

Blinrzia Cooponsnta d -

- vill -

OnTER PROJECT DATA

Borrower: Arab Republic of EgyptExecuting Agencys Egyption Public Authority for Drainage Project. (EPADP)

Currency Exchange Rate Appraleal Year US81 a LE 0.67 (parallel market at timeof appraliol, ued In SAR)

Intervening Yero Average US31 * LE 0.88Completion Year Avorage US61 - LE 1.88 (coemmrclol rate)

Previous and Follow-on Project. Nil- Dolta I Upper Eayvt I UbpDr Egypt II Drainase V

Loan/Credit Number Cr. 181-UAR Cr. 3J8-WR Ln. 1285/Cr. 687-E1T Ln. 25620-ECTLoan/Credit Amount 26.0 86.0 66.0 86.0

Dteo Board Approval 68/24/70 16/06/78 66/66/76 06/86/65

/ Exe pt three pumping stations which ore expected to be cmpleted by mid-1989.Lb Expected to be totally disbursed by Deemober 81, 1986.

ac a a gsricultural st; b a ocnomist; c a engineer; d a medical doctor; * a financial advisor.Id 1 * Problem-f re or minor problems; 2 a Moderate problems; 8 a Major problems.le 1 a %sproving; 2 * Stationary; 8 a Deteriorating.it F a Financial; U * Managerial; T a Technical; 0 a Other.Lg 17 separate *tseions by Bllharala specialists (including evaluation of the component).

-ix -


EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II (LOAN 1285-EGT; CREDIT 637-EGT)NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II (LOANS 1439 & 1440-EGTt CREDIT 719-EGT)

EVALUATION SUMMARY

Introduction

The projects covered by this PPAR were the fourth and fifthagricultural sector projects in Egypt to be supported by the Bank/IDA. Thetwo projects have been combined in one report because of their similaritiesIn tenms of objectives and implementation experience.

Obiectives

Both projects shared the same basic objective of Increasingagricultural productivity in the irrigated agriculture subsector.Improvements were to be effec:ed through public sector investments intendedto benefit alm,st all irrigated farmers in the project areas.

Implementation Experience

Start-up and execution of both projects were delayed considerably.Construction delays were due to several factors, including Inadequateconstruction planning and mauagement by EPADP, time consuming procurementprocedures, cumbersome and rigid contract administration, below-parperformances by public sector contractors, local budget shortfalls, andcement shortage in the early years (Overview, para. 18). Additionally,much of the difference between appraisal end actual attainments is aconsequence of over-optimistic targetting end -nrealistic scheduling ofcivil works set at appraisal (PPAN, pare. 10).

Results

In spite of delays (see above) the two projects were successful,with economic rates of return (ERRs) of 191 end 24Z respectively (Overview,pares. 54-56).

The bilharIia control components were also successful in that theyeffected large reductions in intensity of infection at low cost rUED IIPCR S para. 4.30 and NDD II PCR, pare. 4.32).

Sustainabilitv

Sustainability of the civil works constructed under the projectsdepends to a high degree on the efficiency of operation and maintenance(O&M), which is problemtic in the absence of an effective monitoringsystem of drain performance (Overview, pares. 35-36).

Sustainability in the case of the bilharuia control program isheavily dependent on the effectiveness of the surveillance and screeningprocedures, and the maintenance of effieient snail control and bilharziatreatment services (PPAM, para. 26).

Findings

Both projects should have been more thoroughly prepared prior toappraisal (PPAM, paras. 49-51).

The Bank should have been more sensitive to the reluctance of GOEto use loanlcredit funds for hiring foreign consultants, and should havebeen more active in seeking technical assistance from bilateral orInternational grant aid sources (PPAM, paras. 52-53).

Civil works construction targets and schedules for the drainageprojects should have been based on a more critical assessment of theImplementation capacity of EPADP, and on a more realistic appreciation ofthe prevailing constraints to rapid progress (PPAM, paras. 54-55).

The very successful bilharzia control program reflects creditablyon the GOE, the Bank and the consultant concerned (PPAM, paras. 56-57).

PROJECT PERFORMANCE AUDIT MEMORANDUM

EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II (LOAN 1285-EGT; CREDIT 637-EGT)NILE DELTA DdAINAGE II (LOANS 1439 & 144O-E'U: CREDIT 719-EGT)

I. PROJECTS' BACKGROUND

Context

1. Agriculture in Egypt is virtually restricted to about 6.2 millionfeddans of irrigated land along the Nil, Valley and Delta. Overall growthof the sector accelerated sharply from the mid-1960s through the 1970s dueto cumulative benefits from the Aswam Dam and the introduction of highyielding crop varieties, but has stagnated through the 1980s due to limitedland availability, a decline in crop yields caused by inadequate drainage,labor shortage, and institutional weaknesses in applied research, extensionand marketing.

2. The two projects covered by this audit were identified and pre-pared in the mid-1970s as a response to the above problems.

3. The projects (UED II and NDD II) were designed as repeater proj-.ects to succeed two similar projects previously supported by the Bank inthe irrigated area.

Objlectiver

4. The projects aimed to halt a decline in land productivity due tolack of drainage through establishment of good drainage conditions withintheir respective areas. This was to be brought about through installationof buried field tile drains and drain collectors, construction of new openmain drains, remodelling of existing drains, and erection of pumping sta-tions. They also included support for extending an ongoing bilharxia con-trol program which had been commenced under an earlier drainage project.

Design

5. Identification and preparation was undertaken in the mid-1970s bythe Egyptian Public Agency for Drainage Projects (EPADP), with some assist-ance from an FAOICP mission in the case of NDD II. The EPADP preparationfor UED II was based on design standards and construction methods previ-ously used in the first two drainage projects, but these were modified atappraisal by a decision to invite field drainage construction bids fromforeign contractors, and to introduce polyvinylehloride (PVC) corrugatedplastic pipes in place of the concrete pipes used previously. These

-2-

changes were introduced in order to accelerate the iplementation rate ofthe drainage program. This program was running at an annual rate of around180,000 feddan in the late 1970s, and was to be increased by an additional140,00 feddan annually in each project area by 1979 and 1982 respectively.An aggregate annual drainage program total of around 370,000 feddan wasexpected for the years 1981 and 1982 as a result of the above improvements.

Estimated Project Costs

6. Bank and cofinancier loans and credits and total project costs atappraisal were as follows:

Proiect AppraisalLn./Cr. Ln./Cr. TotalAmount Amount CostUS$ m DM m US$ m

UED II Bank/IDA 50.0 282.1USAID 30.0

NDD II Bank/IDA 66.0 207.0KfW (DH m) 50.0

Total 146.0 50.0 489.1

7. The Bank/IDA loans and credits were fully disbursed and closed in1985 before either project was fully completed (see para. 16) and withdisbursements still continuing under the cefinanciers' aid programs. Indi-cations at the time of PCR preparation (end 1986-early 1987) were thatactual costs, then running at US$ 359.1 m, would be considerably lower thanthe US$489.1 m estimated at appraisal. The cost underruns in US$ can beaccounted for partly by revaluation of the US dollar during implementation,and by lower than estimated costs of drainage equipment, PVC pipe factoriesand PVC resin. In addition, local contract prices for civil works werealso lower than expected.

Pre-implementation Processinx

8. The projects were appraised respectively in November 1975 andNovember 1976; approved by the Board in June 1976 and May 1977; and becameeffective in January 1977 and April 1978.

9. Target setting and scheduling for civil works, especially fielddrain inatallation (see para. 6 above) during appraisal appears to haveSeea undertaken in an atmosphere of high optimism which was in marked con-trast with the physical achievements being recorded in the two earlierdrainage projects still ongoing at that time. Actual field drainageattainments in UED I and NDD I in 1975 were only 35,000 and 80,000 feddansrespectively. A December 1975 supervision report for these projectsreported slow progress in drainage programs, with NDD I four years behind

-3-

schedule due to procurement delays, cement shortage, poor performance onthe part of local contractors, and managerial weaknesses. Such optimism bythe appraisal mission apparently reflected considerable faith in the super-ior performance expected from foreign contractors using the proposed PVCpipe technology.

10. At negotiation for UED II, GOE representatives agreed to interna-tional competitive bidding (ICB) for field drainage contracts. The ICBprovision was repeated in the Project Agreement for NDD II.

11. Both projects were generally well received by the Board, but dur-ing the presentation of NDD II a Board member remarked that UED II, presen-ted only 12 months earlier, had encountered long delay before effective-ness, and wondered at the prospects for the present project. In reply,Bank staff explained that the situation had improved and that NDD II wouldmost likely be effective by October 1977 (in actuality, NDD II was notdeclared effective until April, 1978). Bank staff added that while previ-ous projects had suffered from management problems, inadequate staffing andinsufficient local currency between 1972-75, the problems had been reme-died.

II. PROJECTS' IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME

ManaRement

12. The Egyptian Public Agency for Drainage Projects (EPADP) had prim-ary responsibility for both projects. It suffered from an inadequate orga-nizational set-up and frequent changes in leadership in the early implemen-tation years, but organizational improvements effected in the early 1980'sand stability in leadership since 1981 have led to noticeable improvements.A shortage of engineers and frequent changes in technical staff due to lowwages is a continual problem which particularly affected design, construc-tion planning and contract supervision (UED II PCR, paras. 5.1-5.6 and NDDII PCR, paras. 5.1-5.6).

13. The bilharsia control components were carried out efficiently bythe senior staff of the Department of Endemic Diseases, Ministry of Health,and the health directorates of the concerned governorates.

Start-up

14. Both projects experienced slow start-ups due primarily to theheavy backlog of civil works to which EPADP was already committed under theongoing NDD I and UED I projects, end to the limited capacity of EPADP todesign and supervise additional works.

15. The late commissioning of the PVC pipe manufacturing plants was afurther cause of serious delay in UED II. GOE acceptance of cofinancing

4-

from USAID was only obtained a month or two before Bank/GOE negotiationstook place, which gave insufficient time for the cofinancier to finalizearrangements with GOE, conduct engineering feasibility and complete plantprocurement in conformity with the appraisal schedule.

Sequence

16. Implementation of drainage works ran far behind schedule in bothprojects. Delays occurred in all three main components, i.e. pumping sta-tions, open drains and, particularly, the field drains. Although UED IIand NDD II loans/credits were closed respectiv y in June and December 1985residual civil works related to both projects were still on-going at timeof audit in December 1987. Indications are that when finally completed UEDII will have taken at least 12 years for completion instead of an estimatedfive, while NDD II took nine years instead of five without including thestill outstanding work on the pumping stations (UED II PCR, paras. 3.7-3.15and NDD II PCR, paras. 3.8-3.14).

17. In general, the bilharzia control components in both projects wereimplemented more or less according to plan (UED II PCR, paras. 3.16-3.17and NDD II PCR, paras. 3.15-3.16).

Procurement

18. Procurement of equipment, materials and civil works was carriedout without any special problems, except that no foreign bidders were succ-essful in the case of field drainage tenders (UED II PCR, paras. 3.18-3.20and NDD II PCR, paras. 3.17-3.19), which dealt a severe blow to the apprai-sal case for accelerating the implementation rate of field drainage throughuse of foreign contractors.

Reporting

19. Both projects were supervised regularly and effectively, and quar-terly reports indicating mainly physical progress were submitted routinelyby EPADP. The introduction of a cost accounting system proved more diffi-cult than expected, and further improvement is necessary to make it aneffective tool for financial control purposes by project management. Annu-al audit reports were satisfactory, though usually presented later thanagreed (UED II PCR, paras. 3.21-3.26 and NDD II PCR, paras. 3.20-3.25).

Outcomes

20. Performance by the public sector civil works contractors, whichwere awarded the bulk of the drainage contracts, was a source of continualconcern to Bank supervision staff throughout the implementation period onaccount of both quality of workmanship and speed of accomplishment (UED IIPCR, paras. 4.1-4.8 and NDD II PCR, paras. 4.1-4.9). Supervision reportscatalogue a wide variety of construction faults and deficiencies, most of

- 5 -

which persisted throughout the implementation period simply because EPADPstaff in many instances appear to have been inhibited from imposine ade-quate performance standards on the contractors. Nevertheless, the workswere eventually completed to a passable standard and to the satisfaction ofmost farmer beneficiaries, to judge from the small cross section of farmersinterviewed during field audit and from local hearsay. Unfortunately,statistically reliable evidence in support of this contention is difficultto come by, in spite of considerable time and effort given to monitoringand evaluation (UED II PCR, paras. 4.12-4.25 and NDD II PCR, paras.4.14-4.27).

21. The bilharzia program showed excellent progress in controlling thedisease in Middle and Upper Egypt, to an extent that in many parts of theseareas bilharzia has ceased to be a public health problem. An independentevaluation undertaken in 1985 has shown the prevalence to have been reducedfrom 30 to 8X, but what is equally important the incidence of serious casesof the disease has become rare.lI

Economic Performance

22. Despite the uncertainties of crop yield response to drainage works'n the absence of reliable data from monitoring and evaluation (see para.22 above), economic rates of return (ERRs) have been re-estimated in thePCRs, using slightly different and more conservative assumptions of theeffect of project .. orks on yields than were used at appraisal (UED II PCR,paras. 6.1-6.6). While accepting the validity of the re-estimated ERR of14X as against an appraisal estimate of 29Z for the UED II project and23.6Z as against 231 for NDD II, the audit strongly endorses the recommen-dation in the UED II PCR (para. 6.5) for a strengthened monitoring and ex-post evaluation program to be undertaken in the ongoing fifth drainageproject. Such a program should provide more accurate data on the basis ofwhich more reliable ERRs could be reestimated for future drainage projects.

23. The 1985 evaluation has shown that the cost of control for thebilharzia control program was reasonable and that the program was wellmanaged.

Sustainability

24. The physical sustainability of the drainage projects is heavilydependent on the effectiveness of the operation and maintenance servicesprovided by EPADP and its maintenance contractors. A Bank assisted ChannelMaintenance Project, which was approved by the Board in June, 1986 isexpected to make a useful contribution in this area.

P1 Report of an Independent Evaluation Mission on the National BilharziaControl Proxram in Eavpt. 1985. Transactions of the Poyal Society ofTropical Medicine and Hygiene (1987). Vol. 81 Supplement, pp. 1-57.

- 6 -

25. The 1985 evaluation report on the bilharzia program emphasized theimportance of maintenance and reinforcement of control in Middle and UpperEgypt, with some modification in techniques.

Environmental Effects

26. The overall impact of the drainage components in eliminatingwaterlogging and reducing salinity levels in project area soils, and of thebilharzia program in reducing the incidence of bilharzia, was entirelybeneficial in environmental terms.

Human Resource Development

27. According to the PCRa (UED II PCR, paras. 3.34-3.35 and NDD IIPCR, paras. 3.33-3.34), training courses provided by EPADP were judged tooshort and their success limited, but overseas training in operation andmaintenance of equipment provided by suppliers was considered moreeffective. Training provided under the project was supplemented by Dutchbilateral assistance, which was judged to be very successful.

28. The engagement of foreign consultants to advise and assist localengineers in the design and use of PVC drainage systems, agreed atnegotiation, became a controversial issue during implementation when EPADPproved unwilling to accept such services (para. 32, and UED II PCR, para.3.33 and NDD II PCR, para. 3.32).

III. FINDINGS AND ISSUES

Overview

29. The projects were both successful in spite of long delays in exec-ution and a wide variety of problems. However, they showed evidence ofhaving been inadequately prepared and appraised in some haste, with theresult that several aspects crucial to smooth implementation were insuffic-iently explored prior to implementation. The inadequacy of preparation(para. 31), the much delayed start-up (para. 14-15), and the unrealisticimplementation goals (paras. 34-35), leads the audit to conclude that theprojects were appraised prematurely.

Related Experience

30. The projects were very similar to two earlier projetts in the sameregions, with which they overlapped. They were equally successful whilesharing many of the same problems. A Drainage V project covering parts ofboth Upper Egypt and the Delta, which became effective in 1987, is benefit-ing from the experiences of the earlier projects in several ways.

-7-

Issues Arising

A. Inadeauate Preparation

31. Both projects show evidence of inadequate preparation. This tookthe form of inadequate justification for selection of the project areas,reflecting a lack of information on soils, groundwater levels and salinitystatus at preparation (Overview, para. 6). As a result 125,000 feddan or25Z of the UED II area, and 70,000 feddan or 181 of the NDD II area had tobe changed in the course of implementation (Overview, para. 17). The samedeficiency in preparation was also inherent to the first two drainage proj-ects, but the lessons of experience from these earlier projects only becamefully apparent when their PPARs were completed, in 1982 and 1984, severalyears after UED II and NDD II had been appraised, and too late to be takeninto account in their planning. However, by the time the Drainage V proj-ect came to be prepared in 1984 the Importance of adequate preparation wasbetter understood, and adequate predrainage investigations based on appro-priate technical criteria were carried out to identify areas in need ofdrainage prior to appraisal, and thereby to permit more accurate planningand cost estimating at appraisal.

B. Consultant Services

32. Under NDD I, GOE had agreed at negotiation, but only with thegreatest reluctance, to a Bank proposal to engage foreign consultantsfinanced from the credit, to assist EPADP with the management and executionof the project. In the event the consultant team, as reported in the NDD IPPAR, were isolated and had little influence on the project, apparently,reflecting EPADP's reluctance to make use of them.21 In spite of this lessthan satisfactory experience the Bank persisted in its view that addittionalresident expertise was needed to help organize and manage the follow-on UEDI, UED II and NDD II projects. Funds were accordingly provided for 15 man-years of long and short-term consultant services under the UED I creditagreement, but were never used owing to continued reluctance on the part ofEPADP manegement. The EPADP view was that adequate technical assistance indesign and management was (and continues to be) provided under a Dutchtechnical assistance program that supports a high-level Dutch-Egyptianadvisory panel which meets once or twice a year and also provides residentexperts. For this reason EPADP management held the view that additionaltechnical or management expertise deemed necessary by the Bank should havebeen contributed by the Bank in the course of regular supervision ratherthan financed from loanlcredit funds.

33. It is the view of the audit that the impasse which resulted undou-btedly prevented the timely mobilization of appropriate consultant exper-tise in certain crucial areas during the course of project execution.

21 Nile Delta Drainage Project I, PPAR No. 3993, June 21, 1982, PCR paras.7-12.

- 8 -

Given the willingness of many bilateral donors and international aidinstitutions to provide technical assistance on s grant basis, and thereluctance of GOE to accept loan or credit finance from the Bank/IDA forthat purpose, the audit is surprisad that greater efforts were not madeduring appraisal of UED II or NDD II to regularize the technical assistancedeemed necessary through a co-financing arrangement with either the Dutchaid authorities or other bilateral or international donors.

C. Unrealistic Implementation Expectations

34. The civil works construction taLgets and schedules set at apprai-sal for both drainage projects were far in excess of actual attainments fora variety of reasons (Drainage Projects Overview, paras. 18-25). Many ofthe reasons advanced to explain the difference (inadequate constructionplanning and management by EPADP; time consuming procurement procedures;cumbersome and rigid contract administration; and shortages of local fundsand cement) had been recognized as constraints during supervisiov -f theearlier projects (NDD I and UED I) which were running well behiud theirappraisal expectattons3/ and are outside the area of responsibility of anycontractor, local or foreign. The audit is therefore led to setiouslyquestion the judgement of the appraisal missions for UED II and NDD II intheir estimates of the accelerated construction rates for field drainageexpected from foreign contractors using PVC pipe technology.

35. Unfortunately, as no foreign bidders were able to underbid theestablished local public contractors, the superior performance capabilityexpected of the former remains unproven. Given the circumstances prevail-ing in the mid-1970s, including the knowledge that local public contractorslacked normal commercial incentives in meeting construction standards andschedules, and EPADP's limited ability to supervise construction andenforce conditions of contract, the appraisal missions would have been welladvised to have been much more conservative in their targeting and schedul-ing of civil works. Also, they could have paid more attention to prequali-fication and tender evaluation procedures and to improving the terms ofcontract in ways which gave due recognition to civil works quality, and toadequacy of remuneration for timely contract completion, whether for ICB orLCB, rather than placing such heavy reliance on the expedient of changingthe tender process to ICB from ICB.

D. Bilharzia Control Program

36. Bilharzia, also known as schistosomiasis, a parasitic worm infect-ion common in irrigated areas, which is one of the most important publichealth problems of tropical and sub-tropical regions, has long been themost prevalent serious disease in Egypt. Prevalence of the disease began

31 Nile Delta Drainage Proiect I, PPAR No. 3993, June 21, 1982, PCR paras.4.04-4.10, and Upper Egypt Drainage I Prolect, PPAR No. 5146, June 27,1984, PCR paras. 4.04-4.10.

- 9 -

to decline in the early 1960s when relatively intensive chemotherapy ofinfected persons began to be practiced throughout the country. But rein-fection remained a problem in the absence of integrated control programscombining systematic ureatment of infected pacsons with adequate measuresto control the snail intermediate host and thereby effectively reducetransmission. The first such program, carried out in Fayoum Governorateunder a bilateral assistance agreement between tne Federal Republic ofGermany and the GOE, was successfully completed in 1968, and became theprototype for subsequent Bank-assisted extensions in Middle and Upper Egyptsupported under UED I (900,000 feddan), UED II (154,000 feddan) and NDD II(1,200,000 feddan).

37. The very successful bilharzia control components, which wereimplemented separately, are overshadowed by the larger drainage componentsin the PCRs and Overview, but deserve highlighting for the reason that theywere appraised and supervised independently by one consultant with minimalBank staff involvement. The audit was particularly impressed with the highlevel of understanding and trust which prevailed between the consultant,senior MOH officials and Bank staff througho-it the preparation and imple-mentation phases. The fact that the consultant involved was a professionalof high repute, and that he was able to provide continuity of advisoryservices to the program commencing with the appraisal of UED I in 1972right through to the final supervision of UED II and NDD II in 1986, areparticularly noteworthy features of this project experience.

l ~~~~~~~~~~~~- 11 -

ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPT

UPPER EGYPT II AND NILE DELTA II DRAINAGE PROJECTS(Loan 1285/Credit 637-EGT and Loan 1439-40/Credit 719-EGT)

IBRD Overview of Project Completion Reports

1. DiTRODUCTION

General

1. The Upper Egypt II (Ln. 1285/Cr. 637-EGT) and Nile Delta II(Ln. 1439-40/Cr. 719-EGT) were the third and fourth large-scale drainageprojects financed by IDA and the Bank in Egypt. The attached PCRs for theseprojects--called in this overview Drainage III and Drainage IV,

- respectively--were prepared by FAO/CP in collaboration with EPADP, theimplementing agency. Each PCR provides a comprehensive description of theproject origin and implementation, and covers adequately the results achievedto date and expected to be achieved at full developmant. The overviewmemorandum, based on these PCRs, comments on a number of points which requireelaboration, compares actual developments with appraisal estimates andhighlights the principal achievements and lessons learned. This overview hasbeen prepared by the staff of Agriculture I Division, EMENA ProjectsDepartment.

2. Agriculture continues to be an extremely important sector in theEgyptian economy, although its share of GDP has declined by about 10% sincethe appraisal of the Drainage III and IV projects. It employs about 37% ofthe active working population, generates about 20% of the GDP and provides abase for a large part of the industrial and services sectors of the economy.Most of Egypt's agricultural production comes from about 6.2 million-feddans(M fed) of land cropped annually under irrigation from the Nile River,utilizing the bulk of renewable water resources available to the country.This area represents about 3S of the land area of the country; the rest Ismainly arid desert. The arable area includes: 5.3 M fed of the more fertile"old lands" that lie in the Delta and along the Nile Valley (Upper Egypt) and

generate some 942 of the nation's total agricultural production; and 0.9 M fedof "old-new lands" that tiave been reclaimed since 1953 from the desert andmarshy lands and contribute only about 4-5% to the total output.

3. Despite limited arable land and equally limited opportunities forexpansion, the potential for improving the performance of the agriculturalsector is great and the rapidly widening gap between food production andconsumption can be reduced. This potential relates to the well-documentedcapacity for significantly increasing agricultural productivity on the oldlands. However, in the absence of adequate drainage facilities to complementperennial irrigation, agricultural production in these lands has been facingthe twin menace of waterlogging and salinity. The completion of the HighAswan Dam in 1968 enabled double cropping throughout the "old lands". Thus,the drainage problems were further aggravated by the much higher yearly water.applications and the low efficiency of irrigation at the subsystem level.Since then the Government has given increasingly high priority to improvingthe drainage conditions in the "old lands" to sustain and improve their

- 12 -

productivity. The method selected to drain these lands was by buried pipes,an effective but laborious operation. Drainage will eventually be needed onmost of irrigated lands in Egypt to permic not only continuation of highproduction but also introduction of new farming technologies which otherwisewould not be possible, or profitable.

MDA/Bank lnvolvement in Drainage

4. Works for providing efficient drainage systems in old lands werestarted by the Ministry of Irrigation (MlOI) in 1958 and have been supported byIDA and the Bank since 1970. The urgency to improve drainage conditions wasso great that it was felt that the preparation of an integrated, master planwas not needed prior to undertaking drainage works in individual areas.Projects were prepared and implemented virtually on a piece-meal basis. Todate, a total of five projects costing US$876 M have been supported by BankGroup financing totalling US$243 M, covering a total area of 2.6 M feti, ofwhich about 2.0 M fed have so far been tile-drained. Bank Group'sparticipation in Government of Egypt's (GOE's) drainage program has helpedattract support of several other donors (para. 15).

S. IDA first supported GOE's drainage program through Credit 181-UARwhich was approved by the Board on March 24, 1970 in the sum of USS26 .',signed on April 17, 1970 and declared effective on December 22, 1970. ThisNile Delta I (Grainage I) Project was to cover 950,000 fed, or aboutone-quarter of the area of the Delta. The project was implemented as plannedbut was delayed by four years. The Credit closing date, originally December31, 1976, was extended three times to December 31, 1980. Credit 393-UAR forUS$36 M, the second in the drainage subsector, was to improve drainageconditions on 300,000 fed in Upper Egypt. Drainage II was approved by theBoard on May 17, 1973, signed on June 8, 1973 and became effective on November28, 1973. The Drainage II Project completion took 3-1/2 years longer than theoriginally agreed period of about 6 years, and eventually completed in July1981. One of the reasons for delay in implementing these projects was thie1973 war and its inevitable influence on the allocation of manpower, and onfinancial resources and priorities. There were also serious organizationaland management problems. While EPADP was unable to manage the programrigorously enough, the delays related largely t-o the management weakness ofthe public sector contracting organizations. They lacked, and still lack,normal coumercial incentives to meet construction schedules, and EPADP has noeffective means of enforcing the conditions of contracts. The PPAR No. 3993for Drainage I and No. 5146 for Drainage II were issued idi June 1982 and June1984, respectively. These reports highlighted the difficulties encountered inthe installation of tile drains which proved critical to the completion ofboth projects. At the time of appraisal of Drainage III and rV Projects, tiledrains were to be installed on 346,000 fed under Drainage I and 215,000 fedunder Drainage II.

E. PROCESSNG OF PROJECTSAvvraisal and Description

6. Ln. 1285/Cr. 637-EGT for a total of US$50 M for Drainage III, andLn. 1439-40/Cr. 719-EGT amounting to US$66 M for Drainage IV represented acontinuation of Bank Group lending operations in Egypt's vital drainagesubsector. Appraisal of both projects was based upon a review of the basicassumptions made in the feasibility reports prepared by EPADP which were short

-13-

on some essential data and lacked economic evaluation. In particular,justification for selection of the project areas was inadequate. Thus, likethe first twc proje-ts, the areas -.-!_ded in :raina;e :'' and :V.' " r-fectsappeared to have been selected on practical considerations supported byinadequate information on soils, groundwater levels and salinity status.Furthermore, the implementatLon schedules proposed for the prolects were overoptimistic in terms of the extent of _:AZc's demions:rated capatili:y toimplement drainage works under the Drainage I and II Projects (para. 5).

7. The two projects, appraised in December 1975 and October 1976,followed closely the design of the first two drainage projects and consistedmainly of drainage infrastructure. No technical assistance component wasprovided because of EPADP's determined resistance to the use of consultants.While the appraisal reports presented a clear picture of the engineeringfeatures, procurement aspects, cost estimates, crop yields with and withoutproject(s) and cost recovery, the institutional points were insufficientlyemphasized. Unlike under Drainage I and II, EPADP agreed with the appraisalmission's recommendations to award contracts for field drainage on the basisof Int3rnational Competitive Bidding (ICB). This was a major issue during theappraisal of the first two projects and, in the end, it was agreed to let allconstruction contracts under Local Competitive Bidding (LCB). As recommendedby the appraisal mission.:, EPADP also agreed to use in Drainage IrI and IVprojects PVC slotted corrugated pipes rather than cement pipes for lateraldrains and pipe laying machines for installing both collector and lateraldrains. In restrospect, it appears that Egyptian authorities agreement to letfield drainage go to ICB was made on the presumption that local contractors,who had gained substantial experience during the implementation of the firsttwo projects, were favorably placed to compete and win contracts under ICBprocedures. It also appears t.4at their agreement to introduce other technicalimprovements was based upon the need for accelerating the drainage program andfor upgrading the quality of subsurface drains.

8. Following the appraisal mission, the scope, timing and period ofimplementation of each project were intensely debated in the Bank. WhileDreinale III had a relatively smooth passage through the Bank's reviewprocess, Drainage IV was subjected to severe scrutiny because the Drainage Iand II Projects were far behind schedule (para. 5). The Government's proposalto provide field draitnage on 1.0 M fed was much too ambitious. With theuncertainty which prevailed after the past experience of drainage projects inEgypt, and in view of the fact that no field drainage was expected .util 1980under Drainage IV, a quescion was raised whether the protect's scope andtiming were based on realistic assumptions. Other majoz issues were shortageof local funds exper1anced by previous projects and whether or not EPADP wouldbe over-extended in undertaking an expanded program. Based on these factorsand slow performance in implementing drainagc works, it was debated as towhether or not the Drainage IV Project should not be deferred until 1978.Alternative solutions of reducing or even eliminating tile drains fromDrainage IV were exten3ively discussed and, in the end, it was decided toaccept the project scope as finalized by the appraisal mission to include: therEmodelling of 1,565 km of open drains serving 810,000 fed; the installation

--of field tile drains on 400,000 fed; and the construction of four new and therehabilitation of two existing pumping stations. Also, included were aBilharzia control component to support the program in Upper Egypt, and acomponent to cover part of foreign expenditures for a UNDP project designed todraw up a "Master ilan for Water Resources and Development and Use" in Egypt.

- 14 -

9. Tlie project scope for Drainage III was accepted more or less asproposed by Government, i.e. the remodelling and constrtction of 1,572 km ofopen drains covering 300,000 fed, the installation of field tile drains onthis area, the construction of one pumping station and cne reclama:ion of12,000 fed of saline soils. It was a'so decided to include in this project acomponent to cover the cost overrun of the Bilharzia Control ?rogramestablished over 9CC,3CQ fed u-der Dra--age II and to extend ::- s ;rogran to a

further 120,000 fed.

10. The areas to be tile-drained under Drainage III and IV Projects andperiods of implementation in each case were determined on the assumption thatthe annual rate of tile drainage would be increased progressively from 200,000fed in 1976 to 370,000 fed in 1979 1/, and then maintained at that level forseveral years. The achievement of this target was considered feasibleprovided plastic pipes and foreign contractors were used in the implementationof field drainage. Installation of tiie drains under Drainage III wasestimated to proceed as follows: 10,000 fed in 1977, 70,000 fed in 1978 and140,000 fed annually in the succeeding three years, and accordingly scheduledto be completed at che end of 1981. These assumptions were intended to enabletile drainage to begin in the Draina,e IV Project area in 1980 and to completethe same at the end of 1982 by maintaining an implementation rate of 140,000

fed/year. This implementation program in general and for Drainage III and :Vin particular proved later to be unrealistically optimistic--based more on

hope than fact.

Negotiations

11. Drainage III was negotiated in Washington during the period May 7-11,1976, and Drainage IV from April 4-7, 1977. During these negotiations,agreement was reached on the scope of each project described above (paras. 8

and 9). Satisfactory assurances were also obtained on all terms andconditions of the Credit(s) and Loan(s), as approved by the Loan Committee,except for the recommendation on the review of cost recovery charges. Of the

issues on which agreement was reached, the most important were: tendering of

field drainage works through ICB (para. 7); setting up of an appropriate cost

accounting system by EPADP; and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the effectof drainage works.

12. In order to avoid the problem of shortage of local funds experiencedunder Drainage I and II, the Ministry of Finance was asked to establish a

"special fund", thereby to help ensure timely allocations of local funds forthe IDA/Bank-financed drainage projects. The Government's preliminaryreaction to the idea of the special fund was distinctly unenthusiastic. At

the time of appraisal of Drainage IV, it was felt that the overall situationwas unlikely to improve much in the immediate future. Therefore, duringDrainage IV negotiations, assurances were obtained from the Government that:

(i) local funds required for the fiscal year 1977/78 for the three priorprojects were included in EPADP's budget of this year; and (ii) local funds

required in future for the IDA/Bank-financed drainage projects were included

in the GOE Medium-Term Development Plan. The Egyptian delegation also agreed

1/ Based on these rates, Drainage I was expected to be completed at the end of1979 and Drainage II in 1980.

- 15 -

to the establishment of a "special fund" designed to help overcomedifficulties experienced in the past regarding availability of local funds,and that the special fund was to be applied for all the oneoingIDA/Bank-financed drainage projects.

13. As governed by Irrigatior, and Drainage Law No. 7 of October 9, 1971,Drainage III and the two preceding projects provided for recovery only ofinvestments in field tile drains, plus a 10% administrative charge, in annualinstallments over 20 years. Accore ng to the same law, such recovery was tobegin one year after completion of field drainage. The maintenance cost offield tile drains was to be recovered through land tax, which was to bereassessed within two years of the completion of drainage works. Suchincremental tax payments were considered an appropriate vehicle .or therecovery of maintenance costs because they are directly linked to increasedproductivity arising from field drainage.

14. As regards Drainage IV Project, it was proposed to obtain anassurance at negotiations that recovery charges would cover all costs of fieldtile drains, to be reviewed every four years ensuring that costs were fullyrecovered in real terms and reflected other factors such as farmers'incentives and ability to pay. Cost recovery was thus the maior issue to beresolved at negotiations, not only for Drainage IV but also for the threepreceding projects. The Egyptian delegation did not agree to such anundertaking because it was to contravene the provisions of the law governingcost recovery (para. 13). They explained that the recovery of all costs fromfarmers was not even financially feasible because of the artificiallydepressed prices for many agricultural products. The delegation, however,agreed to complete, by December 31, 1978, a study of beneficiaries' ability topay for the costs of field drainage. Bank finally agreed to accept thiscompromise.

Other Donors' Role

15. At appraisal and/or negotiations, the Bank was informed that theGovernment had requested assistance from USAID and KfW to finance equipment,materials and other foreign exchange costs for local production of PVC pipesfor Drainage III and IV, respectively. During negotiations, the execution ofUSAID agreement was made a condition of effc;ctiveness for Ln. 1285/Cr.637-EGT, and that of KfW a default under Ln. 1439-40/Cr. 719-EGT if it did notbecome effective by December 31, 1977 or by another date to be agreed uponbetween the Government and IDA/Bank. The agreement with USAID for cofinancingDrainage III with US$30 M was signed in July 1976 and with KfW for cofinancingDrainage IV with DM 100 M on July 30, 1979. According to the agreementbetween Government and KfW, the amount of DM 44.4 M was allocated for theproduction of PVC pipes while the remaining amount of DM 55.6 M was allocatedfor financing local costs.

ffU JMPLEMENTATION

Agreements and Effectiveness

16. The Loan Agreement, the Development Credit Agreement and the Project

- 16 -

Agreement were signed for Drainage III on June 11, 1976 and for Drainage IV onJuly 15, 1977. Four drainage subsector or project-specific side letterssigned with the Drainage III Agreements concerned implementation of drainageprogram, project implementation schedule, cost recovery study and collectionof field drainage costs. The two specific conditions of effectiveness for Ln.1285/Cr. 637-EGT and one for Ln. 1439-40/Cr. 719-EGT were met with soon aftersigning of the agreements in each case. However, they became effective cnJanuary 13, 1977 and April 17, 1978, about 7-1/2 and 9 months after signaturedate, respectively. These delays occurred mainly because the process o.translating, clearance through various committees, tabling documencs forratification and approval by the legislature was slow. Given the proceduralrequirements of the system, similar delays in loan effectiveness are stillcommon in Egypt (para. 17).

Chances After Appraisal

17. No changes in the scope, objectives, and basic design were madeduring the implementation of either of the projects . However, like DrainageI and II, the original selection of the areas had to be amended from time totime, excluding or reducing some and substituting equivalent new areas. Suchchanges involved a total of 125,000 fed or 252 of the Drainage III area, and70,000 fed or about 18Z of the Drainage IV area. All these changes in theproject areas became necessary due to inadequate proJect preparation and morespecifically because no detailed investigations were carried out prior to theselection of field drainage areas (para. 6). While it is believed that theserevisions helped to ensure that the drains were laid in areas in which themore severe drainage problems were emerging, it is not certain that this nasalways been the case, particularly in Upper Egypt. Because of the lessonslearned from these projects, predrainage investigations about soils,groundwater and salinity status were carried out to select areas for theDrainage V Project (Ln. 2562-EGT), which was signed on March 14, 1986 anddeclared effective on February 20, 1987.

Implementation of DrainaKe Works

18. Construction-delays were the most serious problem of projectexecution and resulted in time overruns of 140% for Drainage III and 802 forDrainage IV over the expected five year periods of implementation. There weremany factors that accounted for these serious delays, the principal onesbeing: unrealistic appraisal schedule(s), an initial delay of about two yearsin making arrangements for the production of PVC pipes for each project,inadequate construction planning and management by EPADP, time consumingprocurement procedures, cumbersome and rigid contract administration, sub-parperformance by public sector contractors and, during start-up period, shortageof local funds and cement. Most of these problems have been highlighted inthe PCRs; however, it should be pointed out that, as was anticipated by theEgyptians (para. 7), all contracts for field drainage and pumping stationsawarded through ICB were won by public sector contractors and, following theiraward, poor performance by every contractor was the single most serious causefor delay.

19. Of. the three main components viz open drains, tile drains and pumpingstations, the second and third presented the most serious problems and causedmajor delays in completion of the projects. Installation of tile drains

- 17 -

started almost three and two and a half years later than appraisal schedulesunder Drainage IUI and Drainage 1V, respectively. In each case, the mainreasons for this serious delav were: the .wo vear delav in arrangingcofinancing or procurement thereunder (paras. 15 and 18) and similar delays inthe awaid of contracts by EPADP; a year or more spent by contractors inimporting custom made pipe laying machines; and delay in contractors'mobilization.

20. The field drair.a7e wcrks sere built mw.0tly throl;&. se.e_ mna`orcontracts for Drainage III and five for Drainage IV none of which was carriedout on schedule. Because of the factors mentioned above, little progress wasmade in field drainage installation during the first three years of eachproject. But even subsequently, the rate of field drainage insta?:ation wasvery slow. For the five full years of activities, the average annual outputwas 52,000 fed for Drainage III and 76,000 fed for Drainage IV which was muchbelow the appraisal estimate of 140,000 fed for each project (para. 10).Although the use of PVC pipes and pipe laying machines made the wholeoperation of installing tile drains easier, the contractors did not takeadvantage of this because of their managerial weaknesses. II) dct, thecontractors' performance showed a poor utilization of resources made availableto them. For example, the utilization of pipe laying machines was *ar belowaccepted standards. On average, the collector machines were utilized 1i8 daysa year and the lateral machines 162 days a year. Even on a work day ofnormally 7 hours, the output-by a machine was seldom above 60% of its ratedcapability. Had the contractors increased machine utilization rate by 50%over actual, which is considered normal, the area tile-drained in a year wouldhave been more than 1OG,OvO fed for each project.

21. The construction of four new pumping stations under the Drainage IVProject was scheduled to be completed prior to the installation of tile drainsin their service areas. This requirement was not met with because of theextremely poor performance by a public sector contractor and the failure ofEPADP to enforce conditions of contract. While the contract for these pumpingstations was awarded in February 1980, civil works on three started in March1981 and on the fourth in May 1983. The equipment for all pumping stationsarrived in June 1981. As of March 31, 1987, two pumping stations werecofmmissioned; EPADP expected to complete the third in June 1987, and thefourth in December 1988. In summary, due to the combined inefficiency of thecontractqr and a lack of energetic action by EPADP, the four new pumpingstations instead of being completed by the end of 1979, as it was estimated atappraisal, will be completed by the end of 1988, i.e., nine years later. Thecase of the fourth pumping station at Abu Hommos is very unfortunate becausein the area served by this station, field drainage provided ii some 36,000 fedis not functioning properly because of high water levels in the main opendrain. The completion of the pumping station built under Drainage III, wasachieved in May 1987-some eight years after the award of contract and fiveyear behind appraisal schedule. Tile systems that are subjected to longsubmergence tend to develop sediment blockages; and when drain tiles are used,misalignment problems develop. Sediment problems can be corrected byjet-cleaning equipment, but misalignment problems can contribuce to systeminefficiency and less than optimum effectiveness for the life of a project.However, misalignment problems are not as likely to occur with corrugated PVCpipes as they are with rigid drain tile.

- 18 -

22. The reasons for public sector contractors' poor performance arerooted in the structure of the construction industry itself. Since itsnationalization in the 1960s, the industry has been basically :entro11ed yvthe Government. It has developed and operated without well defined rules andregulations; the Government has served as client, contractor and materialdistributor. Excessive Government dominance limits self-management andproductivity. The blurring of func:icns results in payment arrears,inadequate project supervision, and unfulfilled contractual obligations.Experience with public sector contractors involved in the IDA,'Bank-flnanceddrainage projects showed that poor contracting practices, shortage of skilledworkers, organizational inadequacies, inefficiencies in constructionmanagement, and lack of financing had adversely affected their performance.The costs to the economy, resulting from the lengthy construction period ofdevelopment projects, have been exceedingly high. Cognizant of the aboveproblems in the sector, the Government, with Bank assistance, intends toinitiate corrective actions in an effort to improve performance by publicsector contractors.

23. Drainage III is not expected to be completed before June 1989; thisproject, as of larch 31, 1987, required installation of field drainage in125,000 fed or one-fourth of the project area. On the original completiondate of June 30, 1982, 100 of civil works for the pumping staticn, 78f foropen drains and 182 for field drainage had been completed. All works underthe Drainage IV project were completed at the end of 1986 excepting theDelingat Extension and Abu Romos pumping stations which are scheduled to becomissioned in Junt 1987 and in December 1988, respectively. This shows howunrealistic were the assumptions made about implementation of each project atappraisal. Both projects were administered by EPADP and drainage works werebuilt by the same set of contractors; however, the performance of Drainage TVwas relatively much better than Drainage III, the difference explained mainlyby the difficulties involved in managing logistics from Cairo over longdistances in Upper Egypt and, compared to the Delta, lesser availability ofskilled labor in this region.

24. The options available to the Bank staff to improve rate ofimplementation were limited because the Bank had little leverage over theworking of the contractors. Control over project activities and decisions hadto be the responsibility of EPADP, and Bank staff influence could at best beindirect through advice and persuasion. When opportunities presentedthemselves, the Bank always acted promptly. For instance, when it becameobvious that there would be a long delay in the local production of PVC pipeswith USAID financing in Upper Egypt and KfW financing in the Delta, Bankagreed to import from the proceeds of the Credit(s)/Loan(s): 200,000 m ofready made PVC pipes for Drainage III; and three mobile PVC pipe making unitsand PVC powder for Drainage IV. Likewise, when shortage of cement and ironbars emrged, Bank agreed to finance such imports. Also, when shortage oflocal funds proved to be a significart delaying factor, the Bank stressed theneed for adequate funding to the Government. Finally, the Bank showedflexibility in accepting EPADP's proposals for the amendment of the fielddrainage artas in order to facilitate the implementation program (para. 17).

25. In summary, it can be said that the appraisal time schedule for eachproject was over optimistic. Progress in implementing Drainage III was veryslow since it will take almost seven years longer to complete the major

- 19 -

components than the originally agreed period of five years. Drainage IVexecution also ran far behind schedule and completion cock nine years, ̂ot theexpected five. The field drainage implementation rate of 140,000 fed/year foreach project proved to be unattainable with the use of local contractors. Andthe construction period assumed at appraisal for the pumping stations provedto be too short.

Implementation of BDharzia Control Program

26. In general, Bilharzia control components of the Drainage III and IVProjects were implemented more or less according to plan. Some problems faced.earlier with the snail control operations because of logistic difficultieswere resolved. An international evaluation mission visiced Egypt during1984/85 to evaluate the entire program, and its findings are incorporated inthe PCRs. While this mission appreciated the very substantial progress madein reducing the prevalence rate of infection and controlling disease over avery large area inhabited by 10.2 M people--mostly poor farmers--a clear needwas identified to maintain and reinforce control in Upper Egypt with somemodifications in techniques. As this program is vital to the health andwell-beirg of the inhabitants of the area and agricultural productivity,priority needs to be given to the maintenance and/or improvement of thisprogram and the protection of the large investments aiready made. At present,the program continues with Government's own resources but whether or not theachievements under the program could be sustained or improved is not known.

27. The major weakness of the program has been and continues to be thathealth education activities were neither targetted to srecific grouos--schoolchildren, farmers--nor timed and coordinated with Bilharzia controlactivities. The use of mollusciciding and the importance of full treatmentcourses were not effectively and convincingly communicated to the people.Also, the school children were not sufficiently exposed to the problems ofBilharzia. The television, radio and other media were not used to fulladvantage to stimulate community participation in the control program.

Procurement

28. Procurement of goods and works presented no major problems becauseEPADP handled this task always in accordance with the required procedures.However, delays in tender evaluation, award approvals and licens_ng impededproject implementation. Despite the efforts of IDA/Bank supervision missionsto shorten the delays, EPADP was unable to accelerate the process, given theprocedural requirements of the Egyptian system.

29. Civil works not financed by the Bank for open drains and for smallbuildings were procured through LCB in accordance with the normal proceduresof Government. The civil works of the pumping statiors and the supply anderection of pump units were combined in one contract and procured throughICB. The construction of all field drainage was carried out under contractswith local firms. These contracts were advertised according to the Bankprocedures for ICB but no foreign firm made a successful bid. The low pricelevels offered by local contractors made it infeasible for foreign firms tocompete for these contracts. All major items of equipment and imported goodswere procured by ICB, and such imports were made generally through localrepresentatives of foreign suppliers.

- 20 -

30. For Drainage I and II, EPADP basically followed a policy of limitingthe size of field drainage contracts to about 15,000 fed in order to reducethe risk of non-comoliance. The size of contracts for Drainage III and .Vvaried from 50,000 to 90,000 fed to attract foreIgn CQL6LLfiLULS. With noprequalification pcocedures having been followed, the main disadvantage ofthese contracts turned out to be that: local private contractors did notparticipate in bidding beca,es of a lack cf capacity to deal with lar,e sizecontracts; the required rav: cf inpl ementation proved beyond the capability ofsuccessful pub'lic sector contractors; and £?A?P -as u-nabDe to oance!

non-performing contracts.

QuaUty of Design and Construction

31. Both PCRs provide comprehensive discussion about quality of designand construction of field tile drains. The design procedures initiallyadopted for the Drainage III and IV Projects were the same as those used inthe first two projects. Two main features were controversial viz the spacingof lateral drains and the use of gravel envelop around them. Throughpersistent efforts made by the supervision missions the first was resolved inJuly 1983 when EPADP agreed to design spacing of laterals on site-specificconditions. While the new approach was a substantial improvement over vastattitudes, EPADP applied it only to the areas designed after this date. Asfar as the use of gravel envelop is concerned, EPADP continued to follow thecriteria laid down by the Dutch-Egyptian Experts Panel to omit the envelope incohesive clayey soils which had a clay content of 40% or more. EPADP,therefore, limited its use to laterals with a spacing of 60 m or more and, oninsistence by the Bank supervision missions, for lesser drain spacings whereneeded due to the presence of unstable soils at drain depth. The abovecriteria cannot be transferred to other situations because many arid soilswith clay contents of over 40% require gravel envelopes due to dispersioncaused by the salts. The clay content is thus a good indicator, but the realZactor is soil cohesiveness. On several occasions, Bank supervision missionsreported sub-standard quality of field drainage works and lack of adequatesupervision. Although in recent years standards of construction improvedconsiderably, the Bank missions maintained pressure on EPADP officials tobring about further improvements.

Revised Costs Versus Appraisal Estimates

32. , The FAO/CP mission made a re-estimate of full costs of each project,taking into account total project expenditure till July 1986 and likelyexpenditures on the completion of project works outstanding on this date. ForDrainage III, total project costs are expected to reach EE 155.9 M orUS$166.9 M compared to EE 110.2 M or US$282.0 at appraisal-an increase ofabout 41% in EE terms and being only about 59% of the appraisal estimate indollar terms. The full costs for Drainage IV would amount to EE 187.5 M whichis about 36% above the appraisal estimate of EE 138.0 M. In dollar terms, there-estimated cost amounts to US$192.2 M or about 93% of the appraisal estimateof US$207.0 M.

33. Cost analysis in each PCR is based on information provided by EPADPand from the Bank's disbursement records. In spite of some shortcomings inEPADP's bookkeeping at the central office, the FAO/CP mission has done a goodjob in re-estimating likely costs of these projects. In dollar terms, the

- 21 -

considerable reduction in the costs of the Drainage III Project can beexplained by several factors in addition to revaluation of the US dollar overa period of about eight years. The first of these is that the Egyptiancontractors offered very low prices for the installation of field tile drainsand that the adjustments made in their contracts for local inflation wereinadequate. Compared with US$440/fed at appraisal, the total estimated costamounts to US$316/fed representing a reduction of about 30% in ';S dollarterms. The second factor was the lower than estimated costs of drainageequipment due to keen international competition and considerab.- streng:h ofthe US dollar. A third factor responsible for reduction was the lower thanexpected foreign exchange cost of PVC pipe making factories and PVC resin. Asfar as the Drainage IV Project is concerned, the minor reduction in US dollarcost was due to the third factor.

Disbursements

34, For both projects, actual pace of disbursements fell far short ofappraisal expectations and the two year delay in closing is reflected in theextended disbursement period. The PCRs present a comparison of actualdisbursements versus appraisal estimates on a half yearly basis for the fullterm of the projects as well as by categories. Only about 722 and 62% of theLoan and Credit for the Drainage III and IV Projects were disbursed 'y theoriginal closing dates of June 30, 1993 and December 31, 1983, respectively.Drainage III and IV Loan/Credit accounts were fully disbursed on February 1,1986 and August 22, 1986, respectively.

Maintenance of Completed Works

35. * Partly due ta the Bank's request, EPADP took over from the MOI'sIrrigation Sector responsibility for maintaining all tile drains in 1977, andfor the open drains receiving effluent from tile drains, in 1979. The Bankhas also had a role in establishing EPADP's centrally controlled wellstructured maintenance organization, with lines of responsibility inaccordance with geographical units. It is difficult to appreciate fully thequality of field drainage maintenance; monitoring of the system based oncomplaints by farmers is not up to expected standard. The existing systemshould be supported by more direct monitoring of drain performance. Inaddition, more efforts need to be made to educate and motivate the farmerswithout whose cooperation the maintenance task becomes unmanageable.

36. The efficiency of a tile drain system in the basin of a collectoropen drain relies upon the water levels in it. In the past, maintenance ofopen drains in Egypt has not been of a satisfactory standard because of rapidand profuse growth of weeds. EPADP's efforts to improve cleaning of opendrains have been only partially successful and will therefore needstrengthening 'n order to utilize the investment in drainage works at maximumpotential. The Bank Channel Maintenance Project l/, approved in 1986, isdesigned to provide improved maintenance of open drains.

IV. COMPLLANCE WrIH COVENANTS

37. At one time or another during the course of the projects, EPADP wasin default on one or more of the following covenants. Repeatedly, the Bankdrew actention to unfulfilled conditions and set deadlines by which such

1i Appraisal Report No. 6044-EGT.

_ 22 -

conditions should be complied with, and the EPADP in turn took some action,though seldom to the extent and within the time frame agreed to.

Accountine. Auditins and Reportiny

38. EPADP was to design and install'by July 31, 1977 a cost accountssystem satisfactory to the 3ank. $ns;ead, it took two years to appcint anEgyptian firm of chartered accountants to design the system according to theterms of reference prepared with the Bank's assistance. The new system,implemented during 1980-81, is a typical government single entry system kepton a cash basis. The relevant agreements had to be amended several times toaccommodate the delay. The new system was reviewed by a Bank mission in April1982 and found to be generally adequate. The shortcomings noted in the PCRsregarding compilation of accounts at the central level will need to berectified for the ongoing Drainage V Project.

39. Auditing of EPADP's accounts including those of the projects wascarried out by the Central Audit Organization, an independent state agency, ona continuous basis. EPADP furnished the Bank regularly, though usually laterthan agrecd, with the annual audit reports prepared by this organization whichwere satisfactory to the Bank. These audit reports also contained comparisonof actual with budget figures, and the accounts formed part of the MO1'sconsolidated annual report presented by the Central Audit Orgaization to the*National Assembly.

40. EPADP furnished the Bank regularly with quarterly progress reportsfor each project, usually on time. These reports indicated mainly physicalprogress in the construction of open drp'ns, field tile drains and pumpingstations. For the Drainage V Project, the PCRs suggest to expand thereporting format to include - on proqureaent, equipment utilization bycontractors and summarized financial data. This would increase the usefulnessof quarterly reports.

Monitoring and Evaluation

41. The M&E covenants with respect to the impact of field drainage wererevised several times. It appears that, because EPADP officials and Projectstaff were uncertain about the methodology to be used, such changes were madeto improve the content of the program. Thus, the covenant under Drainage IVamended the one under Drainage III, which had earlier replaced the Drainage IIstipulation. When the MOI's Drainage Research Institute (DRI) started a newMLg program, with Dutch technical assistance in March 1979, the Drainage IVcovenant was modified, based on the expected output of this program.

42. The DRI's two-year crash program for M&E was completed in 1982 andhPADP's ex-post evaluation program continued throughout the course of theDrainage III and rV Projects. Each program and its results are discussed insufficient detail in the PCRs. Therefore, only a critical analysis of t:;_results achieved is presented here. The objective of the crash program was tofollow yield differences in three sets of twin villages-one with and onewithout drainage in the Nile Delta, by measuring them over a period of sixcrop seasons. Besides the fact that three sets of twin villages constitutedtoo small a sample to yield more than a rough estimate, the results, forseveral reasons, did not show a consistent trend. The aim of EPADP's

-23-

evaluation, contrary to the crash program, was to compare yields before andafter drainage in areas with and without drainage. The crop yields wereaggregated at the level of sub-areas over a n-umber of years. On average, thedata shows a modest improvement in yields, but the range of data is very widefrom one sub-area to the other, and also over a period of time within onesub-area. As no variables other than yields were measured, :he approachfollowed could not pinpoint the causes of yie:d differences cbserved. Theexperience with these programs highlights the need for direct monitoring oftile drain performance, based on systematic collection of groundwacer and soilsalinity data. The lessons learned were incorporated in the design of M&Esystem for the Drainage V Project.

Cost Recovery

43. EPADP took a long time to prepare a study of the ability of thebeneficiaries of the drainage works to pay for the costs of investment,operation and maintenance. According to the Drainage III side letter No. 3,this study was to be completed within a year of effectiveness of thisproject. This date was extended to June 30, 1978 by Section 2.07 of theDrainage IV Project Agreement and, through further arendments, till June1981. A first study was presented to the Bank in August 1980 which the Bankreview indicated was incomplete. Ultimately, in agreement with the Banksupervision missions, EPADP contracted the Agriculture Economic Institute ofthe Ministry of Agriculture, in 1982 to prepare a more substantive study.This institute prepared two studies, one for Upper Egypt and one for theDelta, which were made available to the Bank in 1984. These studies concludedthat, given the relatively high implicit taxation on agriculture due to low,controlled prices of farm produce, and the relative poverty of mostbeneficiaries, GOE's cost recovery rules are satisfactory, despite the elementof subsidy in the interest free recovery pattern (para. 13).

44. Cost recovery covenants, however, have not been fully enforcedbecause the mechanism is complex and slow-moving. Three agencies areinvolved-EPADP, which prepares the statement of actual costs; the SurveyAuthority of the MOI, which verifies the areas held by each beneficiary; andthe Land Tax Directorate of the Ministry of Finance, which prepares bills.Consequently, repayments are behind schedule, and records of what has beenspent, what has been recovered, and what is due, are often confusing. GOE haarecently revised the cost recovery procedures and introduced an incentivesystem. This has improved the annual rate of cost recovery from nominalamounts to about 252 of the total due. Nevertheless, progress needs to bemade in the areas of cadastral surveys to identify beneficiaries and taxcollections at the village level. The Government has agreed under Drainage Vto furnish the Bank with an action plan, by June 30, 1987, outlining measuresand procedures to be adopted to improve collection of field drainage costs,indicating an estimate of the expected annual collection.

V. JNSrITUtIONAI PERFORMANCE

Performance of the Implementiug Acencv

45. EPADP, a quasi-independent unit of MOt, was the executing agency forboth projects. With IDA's agreement, EPADP was created by a PresidentialDecree, issued in February 1973, which gave the new organization authority to

_ 24 -

undertake all drainage works in E;ypt. The sppraisal missions clearlyexpected that EPADP would be able to manage a greatly expanded drainageprogram. As it turned out, this was not the case. The appraisal repoztsdiscussed at some length the origin, functions and organization of EUALP butthere was no thorough analysis of its capability to impl'ement the projects.The tDA/Bank supervision missions generaily blamed the delays inimplementation on poor managempnt 'Dy EP..DP. A more objective view, based -nrdevelopments under the ptojte.ts, indicates that this was not altogether true,as there were many delays which were beyond reasonable control of EPADP. Itsperformance, therefore, should be judged against the reality of the situaticaas the projects evolved and not against the optimistic assumptions made atappraisal.

46. At the time of appraisal, EPADP was in its formative years andefficiency at that stage, as indicated by performance of the Drainage I and IIProjects, was low. In retrospect, therefore, it appears unjustified andperhaps counter-productive to have assumed that the EPADP management andeffectiveness would drastically change in a short time, given theinstitutional and bureaucratic constraints in Egypt. With identical design,almost equal scope and the same work environment, each project faced similarproblems from the outset. An initial delay of two years occurred inestablishing PVC pipe making factories which, to a great extent, was outsideproject control. When the delays became apparent, EPADP, with Bankconcurrence, postponed the issue of ICB tenders for installing the fielddrains. At the time this appeared to be a prudent decision. The installationcontracts were thus awarded in February 1980 for Drainage III and October 1980for Drainage IV, almost two years behind schedule. No foreign firms submittedsuccessful bids, negating the main assumpti- i made at appraisal of theprojects that the rate of field drains ins.e.lation would be increased. Thesuccessful local firms took more than a year to import pipe laying machines,despite the mobilization advances provided to import the equipment. Furtherdelays occurred because of problems with commissioning of the machines by thesuppliers, hence the construction of tile drains did not begin until the endof 1981. Following full mobilization the local contractors moved much moreslowly than the expectation of EPADP, the Bank or the Cofinanciers. Itshould, however, be mentioned that, between 1982 and 1986, the EPADP Chairmanmade sustained efforts to improve contractors' performance, includingprocurement of additional pipe laying machines; provision of funds andfacilities for the import of spare parts by contractors; accepting a modest-adjustment of old contracts unit prices due to inflation; institution of alarge-scale program, with assistance from Dutch experts, for on-the-jobtraining of engineers and machine operators of EPADP and the contractors; andmonthly review of progress and problem with the Cbairmen of the contractingcompanies and EPADP's field Directors. However, these measures did not resultin any dramatic improvement in implementation rates.

47. EPADP had continuous difficulty in obtaining from MOX or inrecruiting qualified civil engineers and technicians due to the low wagestructure, a feature which adversely reflected on efficiency. The specialallowances paid to the staff since 1977 on request from the Bank provedinsufficient incentive to attract and/or retain qualified staff in the remoteproject areas. This understandably affected both the quality of staff as wellas the intensity of construction supervision. Shortage in civil engineers wasparticularly felt in construction planning and control. Frequent changes by[OI in middle-management staff disturbed continuity in constructionmanagement. These staffing problems were also mostly outside EPADP's control.

- 25 -

48. There is no doubt, however, that EPADP had its own share ofresponsibility for the poor performance of the projects. There was noadeq'.ate planning an' su^er-'^iicn of dra-nage ;_rks, and E?ALP -roved to haveno means of enforcing the conditions of its contracts. Its field staff wasgenerally unable to foresee problems and take timely steps to resolve them.Ttie PCRs mention that the situation could have been different had EPAZP madeuse of three resident co,is-uta=:s, as provided in CraInage 'I, t ad-:ise onoverall planning and coordination of works and on technical matters related toworks. Whether this aooroacn would have been successfui is oy no meanscer-.-ir :hat s certain, however, is that, based on experience of Drainage I,reside,it consaltants would not have been acceptable by EPADP in a constructionmanagement functio.i.

_ It is general'y recognized that the planning and implementacion ofthe Drainage III and IV Projects had a strong influence in the earlydevelopment of EPADP. '1any of the procedures and methodology, which becaaestandards for drainage and MOI's other projects, emerged from the operationsand problems confronted on these projects. Many of the staff members wholater assumed more responsible positions in MOI received their practicaltraining while working in ErADP.

Performance of the Bank

50. In Egypt, investment in improving the drainage conditions of arablelands is a sound long-term investment and a necessary condition for attaininghigh levels of agricultural-production. The Bank, therefore, was right inselecting drainage for its priority lending activity in the agriculturalsector. However, given the poor performance of the Drainage I and IIProjects, the Bank was not justified in assuming that a greatly expandeddrainage program would be implemented rapidly or efficiently. At appraisal,the Bank placed too much confidence in the managerial capabilities of EPADPand underestimated the time required to implement each project. Nevertheless,the flexibility adopted by the Bank in various aspects, during theimplementation of the projects, proved to be correct and beneficial for theprojects (paras. 17 and 24).

51. Bank supervision of the projects was timely and adequate as 21missions visited the projects, starting in April 1977 for Drainage III andApril 1978 for Drainage rv, with'the last mission in 1986. Continuity ofstaffing on these missions should be considered adequate. One member of theBank staff was associated with the projects for a long period in the laterstages and played a significant role in supervision. This has led to animprovement in. the Bank's general understanding of procedures and constraintsof MOI in general, and EPADP in particular that is reflected in the appraisalof Drainage V, the latest drainage project in the series.

52. Throughout the implementation period, the Bank's supervision missionsmanaged to maintain a harmonious relationship with the Egyptian officials.The missions were instrumental in drawing early attention to potentialproblems and in assisting EPADP in finding appropriate solutions. Bank staffrepeatedly reminded the Government and EPADP of their obligations andencouraged them to improve the performance of the projects. However, itproved difficult to correct all the deficiencies which had not been addressedadequately at appraisal. Early supervision reports were sufficiently critical

- 26 -

of the weaknesses of EPADP but invariably ended on an optimistic note,implying that by the time of the next misshcn, things would have improved.Often, this optimism proved to be unjustified. However, the supervisicnmissions worked closely with EPADP and succeeded in arranging EPAPD'sagreement on some contentious issues leading to several qualitativeimprovements to the program. Such improvements included the new designprinciples for field tile drains, the better. organizaticn of maintenanceservice for drainage works, the upgrading of quality control on the productionand installation of slotted PVC pipes and the Aintroduczion oi privatecontractors in bidding for substituted areas. Of these improvements, thefirst was a major issue under the Drainage I and II Projects.

53. As far as the Bilharzia Control Program is concerned, the PCRs coverthe vital role played by the Bank's supervision missions which were valuablein simulating the necessary organization of control inputs, data collectilonand evaluation. The main supervision effort was carried out by a consultantin tropical diseases.

VL ECONOMIC EVALUATION

54. The economic evaluation of the Drainage III and IV Projects, based ondata currently available, is given in respective PCRs. During appraisal ofboth projects, it was assumed that without the projects production wouldgradually decrease due to increased waterlogging and salinity by 302 over a35-year project period. With the projects, yields were estimated to increasefrom existing levels by 15% to 35 for Drainage III and 12% to 25% forDrainage IV. Several consideratiors led the rAO/CP PCR mission to adopt moreconservative assumptions. Over the said 35-year period, yield declineswithout improved drainage conditions are now estimated to be on average about51 in Drainage III area and 102 for all crops and 52 for rice in Drainage IVarea. 1Icremental yields with drainage range from 71 to 151 for Drainage IIIand 5X to 151 for Drainage IV.

55. In calculating the ERR, the authors of the PCRs have shadow priceddomestic costs at 170 of financial costs. It appears, however, that foreignexchange has not been shadow priced; by 1985/86, the market exchange rate wascloser to US$0.5 a EE 1 than US$0.83 = EE 1. Shadow pricing of foreignexchange would somewhat increase the total costs given in the PCRs. Projectbenefits appear to have been calculated on the basis of increased productionmultiplied by domestic prices. To the extent that these prices have been heldbelow world border price equivalent (especially value'A at the shadow price offoreign exchange), the benefits will'also have been understated. On balance,the conservative technical assumptions in the PCRs, combined with theoffsetting nature of the possible corrections noted above, mean that therovised rates of return given in the PCRs can be taken to be realistic. Asshown in the PCRs, these rates of return are reasonably robust under changesin the assumptions.

56. As a result of the new assumptions, the ERR for Drainage III isestimated to be 141 versus 201 in the appraisal report, and for Drainage IV23.61 versus 231. Irn the Drainage IIr Project, lower realized benefits werecompensated for by lower project costs. Switching value analysis indicatesthat the ERR would aave remained above 121 unless benefits fell 11.61 belowthose estimated for Drainage III or 412 below estimated benefits for DrainageIV.

- 27 -

VYI. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

Proiects Justification

57. The Bank was undoubtedly right to provide priority support todrainage of agricultural lands in Egypt, this being a necessary condition :;allow additional investments in development of the agricultural sector. Onthe whole, both projects are making valuable contribucions towards increasedagricultural production on large areas by controlling depth to water table andby lowering soil salinity. In spite of long implementation delays, ex-postERR of 142 for Drainage III and 232 for Drainage IV are sufficient to justifyinvestments made.

Appraisal SchedUlng

58. It could be concluded that the proJects were appraised too early bythe Bank. At the time of appraisal of Drainage III and IV projects, fielddrainage under prior projects was to be installed in 215,000 fed in UpperEgypt and 346,000 fed in the Delta. Thus, the concurrent implementation offour projects for a period of more than three years over-extended themanagement capacity of EPADP and the construction capability of localcontractors.

Lack of Construction Management Capablity

60. EPADP, the implementing agency lacked an effective constructionplanning and monitoring system. This resulted in the lack of coordinationbetween various agencies and interacting elements, resultinig in undue delaysin project execution. The other main difficulty which affected the progressof drainage works was the EPADP's inability to enforce conditions of contractsand to terminate the poorly performing contracts.

Selection of Contractors

61. Most of the problems in project implementation arose fromcontractor-related issues and difficulties. The contractors ran intofinancial difficulties, had management problems, or faced shortage ofmaterials and skilled workers for construction. Therefore, management andfinancial capabilities of contractors should be evaluated through aprequalification process or, in the Egyptian context, be given proper weightin bid evaluation.

Chanzes After AvDraisal

62. The flexibility shown by the Government and the Bank in accommodatingdrainage needs, as they were identified during implementation, and not rigidlykeeping to the areas defined in the projects documents was most appropriate.

Lessons Learned

63. Many of the lessons "learned" from these projects, as fron othersimilar projects, may be valid only in the Egyptian context. However, itseems the following are fairly evident and should be taken into account in theformulation of future projects, as have been done in recent projects appraisedin Egypt:

- 28 -

(a) Drainage projects require careful preparation; failure to providerealistic estimates of the time required for completion and theabsence of predrainage surveys before appraisal can result indelays and may jeopardize the project's economic justification.

(b) Appraisal missions should be particularly careful to ensure thatthe executing agency selected has the ability to implement :hproject within the agreed time.

(c) Provision of counterpart funds is basic to timely implementation;failure to provide such funds should trigger effective action oythe Bank.

(d) Long delays in project implementation may result from prematureappraisal, leading also to a high degree of uncertainty in regardto cofinancing, technical issues, etc.

(e) Inadequate understanding of the capability of potentialcontractors allowed to bid and win contracts awarded through ICBcan cause serious implementation problems.

(f) A detailed design of M&E of project impact snou.d be made duringpreparation and appraisal to ensure a meaningful measure ofproject impact.

(g) Besides crop yield statistics, it is necessary to directlymonitor the performance of field tile drains, through systematiccollection of groundwater and soil salinity data.

(h) Efforts should be made to educate and motivate the farmerbeneficiaries to ensure their cooperation in the maintenance offield drainage.

- 29 -


PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECT

(CREDIT 637, LOAN 1285-EGT)

I. INTRODUCTION

General

* 1.1 This completion report for Upper Egypt Drainage II Project, gives afurther opportunity to record and evaluate the performance on the thirdproject in the largest multi-stage field drainage programme ever undertakenin the world. The project provided the substantive financial assistance tothe Government of Egypt's (GOE) policy of providing improved drainagethroughout most of the approximately 5.7 million feddans 1/ of thehistorically irrigated area ('the old lands") in the Delta and Upper Egypt.The project aimed to provide field drainage to some 9% of this area and,following the pattern set by the previous projects. The Bank extended itsprevious participation in the drainage programme .(Nile Delta I and UpperEgypt I drainage projects) by financing this and two further projects (NileDelta II and Drainage V projects) involving five IDA credits and three WorldBank loans totalling US$ 246 million. The project and its successors hasalso attracted significant amounts of aid from-other donors including USAID,KfW, the African Development Fund and Bank in the form of co-financing(three credit/loans totalling US$ 82 million). The World Food Programme hasalso *participated in the first drainage projects and the NetherlandsGovernment is supporting the drainage programme with technical assistance.The five projects together cover improvement of surface drains in about 2.84million feddans and installation of subsurface drainage in about 2.60million feddans (about 46% of the old lands irrigated areas). Annex 1presents salient features and stiatus of each of the repeater proje'ts. g/

le2 This loan/credit, the third in the vital agricultural sector,represented a continuation of Bank Group lending operations in Egypt. Credit637-EGT and loan 1285-EGT for USS 50.0 million %are signed on November 6,1976 and became effective on January 31. 1977. The Closing Date, originallyJune 30, 1983, was extended twice to June 30, 1985. The final disbursementfrom the credit/loan was made on February 1, 1986 bringing the total amountdisbursed to the original USS 50.0 million. On this date, the installationof field drainage, an activity critical to full completion of the project,was accomplished in 315,000 feddans out of the 500,000 feddans originallyplanned. Existing open drains were remodelled ard new drains excavated onthe 500,000 feddans as planned. Co-financing of USS 30.0 million wasobtained from USAID to cover installation of three PVC pipe factories andforeign production costs of PVC-pipes. The loan was subsequently reduced to20.0 million and disbursements to date are USS 19.03 million.

]1/ Or 2.4 million ha (1 feddan * 0.42 ha)

3J EPAPO installed 968,000 feddans with tile drainage independently beforeand during the WB projects. Hence the total area instaXTed will be about63% of the "old lands".

- 30 -

Agricultural Sector

1.3 Egypt's population, soon to reach 50 million, is large and growingat an annual rate of 2.5% almost half of this growth is concentrated in thegreater Cairo area. Arid desert land accounts for about 96.5% of the onemillion ku2 of surface area, leaving only 35,500 km2 of urban andagriculturally productive land with a population density of about 1,400/km2.Almost 50% of the population is rural, its proportion having steadilydeclined from 62% in 1960. Average per capita GNP estimate was US$ 644 in1984/8S.-

1.4 The high economic growth (8%-1O% in real terms) in the 1970s waschiefly the result of a surge in foreign exchange resources, based mainlyon external factors - concessional capital inflows, primarily from otherArab countries, earnings from petroleum exports and from the Suez Canal,tourism receipts and workers' ruuittances. While these resources enabledEgypt to achieve a high level of growth they also made the economy verysusceptible to outside Influences. The lesser flow of external resourcessince 1981 produced a slowdown of economic growth. The downturn wastriggered by a fall in oil prices, exacerbated by a decline in tourismreceipts, remittance earnings and a slowdown in Suez Canal earningsfollowing the general slowdown in the world economy. The prospects forgreater external resources are worsening. Therefore, the challenge thatEgypt now faces Is to make those difficult choices it was able to avoid whenexogenous resources were plentiful. They involve: the mobilization ofresource, raising the efficiency of investments, improving the capability ofthe domestic economy to absorb a growing la4our force; and earning foreignechange. Economic growth will depend on the pace and comprehensiveness ofthe pclicy reforms, which should be designed to eliminate the distortions inthe economy.

1.5 Acriculture in the economY. The land-JMase for agriculturalproduction consists of 5.7 million feddans (2.4 million ha) of mold lands"and 0.9 million feddans (0.4 million ha) of reclaimed lands - the so-calledmold-new lands". Only one-half of the latter is considered productive, duepartly to deficiencies in technical design and partly due to inappropriatemanagement. The per capita cultivated area, which was 0.19 feddans in 1960,is now only about 0.13 feddans. Theold lands include all of the morefertile areas in the valley of the Nile and the Delta where about 97% of thenation's total agricultural production is generated. The old-new lands weredeveloped from the late 1950s through the early 1970s, primarily on themarginal soils along the western edge of the Delta. Nearly all Egyptianagriculture is irrigated and, since completion of the HAD, all irrigation isperennial.

1.6 The importance of agriculture in the Egyptian economy changedsignificantly during the 1970s. Historically, agriculture was the dominantsector, providing the bulk of employment and output, being crucial toforeign exchange earnings and receiving substantial budgetary support. Thesector's vital role was reinforced by its strong performance during the1952/70 period. During the 1960s, agricultural production grew at over 3%annually - an exceptional performance, given the relatively high base level.

1.7 In the 1970s, the pace of growth declined to around 2%. Given thatthe high growth rates of the previous decader included the impact ofcontrolled releases from the HAD, this does not reflect a significant changein the underlying growth trend and is still an Impressive performance.However, other factors accentuated the slowdown in agricultural growth:first, population continued to grow at over 2.5%; second, per capita income

- 31 -

grew very rapidly; and third, consumer prices for foodstuffs held atextremely low levels compounded the demand increases generated by the firsttwo factors.

1.8 The net effect of the declining trends Is summarized in the tablebelow:

Aoricultural Sector Developments - Some KeU Indicators

1960 1974 1983 1990 A/

Share of agriculture in value added (%) 28 25 18 n.a.Agricultural exports as % of total exports 33 25 9 n.a.Agricultural trade balance (USS million.current prices) 255 300 -3,000 n.a.Self-sufficiency (i) in major products:

- wheat 70 37 23 28- rice 144 111 100 86- sugar 114 96 50 b/ n.a.- pulses 92 81 73 b/ n.a.- cotton 400 232 170 134- meat 95 99 63 56- milk 94 93 n.a. 44

Population index 100 138 180 n.a.

O_______________

a/ Projections from World Bank Report No. 4136-EGT, "Issues of TradeStrategy and Investment Planning', January 1983.

g/ 1982 data.

1.9 AgLricultural constraints. Aside from the very lim'ted availabilityof arable land, several maJor constraints have prevented agriculture fromperforming its potentially key role in the economy : (a) limitedinvestment in the sector; (b) the problematic situation wlth respect towaterlogging and soil salinity; (c) institutional weaknesses In agriculturalsupporting services; (d) deterioration of the water delivery and drainagechannels due to inadequate maintenance and inadequate water distributionsystems; (e) Government system of regulated cropping patterns and marketingat low fixed prices; (f) labour shortages at times of peak demand due tomigration both to cities and abroad; and (g) failure to develop and usetechnology needed for expanding agricultural production. Another majorconstraint to agricultural growth is developing, i.e. water availability inthe Nile System. If land reclamation is allowed on a disproportionatelylarge-scale and possibly also in uneconomic areas without parallel effortsin water conservation, re-use and improved management, then water shortagesin s;ummer are expected to become a general problem in many conmand areas ofthe Oold lands'.

Land Constraints and Importance of Improved Orainace

1.10 Good land for crop production is scarce in Egypt and development ofdesert/saline marshy lands identified by GOE for reclamation is costintensive with lengthy gestation periods. Therefore, the main source ofIncreases in agricultural production In the short run must be the old lands.On these lands productivity is still constrained even today by inadequatedrainage in about 1.5 million feddans. The priority thus lies in continuingdrainage programme under which some 3.1 million feddans will have beenequipped with field drains by mid-1987. This is justified since no inputpackage to Increase production will be fully successful until the drainageconstraint has been removed. While there is little evidence that land is

- 32 -

going out of production as a result of waterlogging and salinization causJdby high groundwater levels, it is clear that rising soil salinity in someareas is causing yields to decline. The reed for drainage arises from theoccurrence of waterlogging and high salinity levels in soil and groundwaterlevel. The position of the groundwater level is not static fluswates inresponse to irrigation, rainfall, evaporation and (natural) drainage.

1.11 Within the project area, the drainage conditions resulted incertain areas from the shift from basin to perennial irrigation that hasbeen made possible by the commissioning of the Aswan High Dam. Prior to theharnessing of the Nile, after the flood period, the water table wouldgradually become lower until it reached 2 m or more below the so,l surface.It would not rise again until the following year's fliod. During theinterim, farmers, except on a few farms with wells, never watered theirfields. However, with perennial irrigation, farmers now irrigate their landfrequently throughout the year. Since the clay soils in much of the projectarea generally have low permeability rates, the groundwater levels have beenrising over time especially in places where new outlets have not beeninstalled. The drainage system in existence in areas with basin irrigationprior to the changeover to perennial irrigation, has not been able to copewith this additional quantity of water. Moreover, seepage and deeppercolation from the new irrigation canals have also contributed to a risein the groundwater levels in many areas. The net result of the change ingroundwater level has been to create waterlogging conditions which haveserious deleterious effects on root growth and development.

1.12 Aside from waterlogging, there were indications that soil salinityhad also increased. Before the shift in water regime due to the control ofthe Nile floods, the annual inundation of the land would flush out the saltsthat built up in the soil profile during the year. The clay soils mostcomuonly found in the project area have a high capillary conductivitypotential.

1.13 Before designing and installing the tile drainage system detailedfield investigations were made in each catchment area by the DrainageAuthority to establish the constraints and need for drainage on the basis offour main parameters: depth of shallow groundwater table, soil permeability,soil salinity and water salinity. Results of detailed investigations wereplotted on detailed maps. Due to the unavailability in the Authority ofclear set of criteria for selection, delineation and priority ranking ofdrainage basins, the use of results of detailed investigations have not beenoptimal and some doubts have arisen on the ranking and selection of methodsused for certain catchment areas in Upper Egypt.

1.14 The Government has been giving high priority to the tile drainageprograms over the past 15 years. During the 10 years ending 1985/86, thecapital expenditures on all irrigation activities in Egypt totalled LE 1,883million. Out of this, drainage alone accounted for LE 661 million or 35%.Annex Z shows the Ministry of Irrigation's (MOI) recurrent and capitalexpenditure. The MOI current planning is to complete the Upper Egypt IIfield drainage project component and to start with the first phase of theDrainage V program covering about 0.47 million feddans by 1990. Draining theremaining 0.86 millio0 feddans of the Drainage V programme is likely to takeat least until 1996.

- 33 -

Bank's Agricultural Lending

1.15 Since 1970, the Bank has financed 19 projects in the agriculturalsector in Egypt. Initially the Bank's policy was to encourage the Governmentto maintain and increase production levels in the "old lands". This was donethrough the series of five drainage projects, of which 637/1285 EGT was thethird, and through the Agricultural Development Project (Credit 830-UAR).Over time there has been further diversification, in particular in agro-Industries with two projects, fruit and vegetable production and marketing,land reclamation with the New Lands Development Project. Other agriculturalsector support projects financed by the World Bank concerned cotton ginningrehabilitation, fertilizer productions, agricultural/industrial imports,rural electrification, technical assistance respectively to the Ministriesof Irrigation and Land Reclamation, Irrigation and Drainage Pumping StationsRehabilitation and recently Channel Maintenance. Details on these projectsare given in Annex 3.

Bilharzia Control

1.16 Bilharzia, a disease known in Egypt since hundreds of years, hascaused immeasurable misery to people, death and most certainly a marked lossof productivity; since the 1900's many a control scheme has been tried. TheGovernment of Egypt has, since many years, sponsored Bilharzia control andtried with pilot and large scale projects, given the respective tools ofeach period, to gain control of the disease. But only in the last few years,with the advent of efficient drugs and molluscicides as well as improvedstrategies and better basic health coverage have control measures succeededin producing and sustaining significant results in terms of a reduction ofmorbidity and reduction of infection.

1.17 Within Middle and Upper Egypt, particularly in the northern region,Bilharzia is endemic. In Upper Egypt Drainage I Project, a programme for thecontrol of Bilharzia, covering 900,000 f'eddans and about 3 million peoplehas been initiated. It consists of an integrated snail control programmecoupled with chemotherapy for infected persons. The Bilharzia projectcomprised the area controlled by the Ibrahimia and Bahr Yousef canalscommencing at the Dairut Barrage which is downstream of the head regulatorat Asyut on the Nile. About 120,000 feddans between Asyut and DairutBarrages were included in the programme to permit the whole area served fromthe Asyut barrage to, be treated, thereby reducing the possibility ofreinfecting treated areas. The Upper Egypt II credit and loan also includedprovislons for financing the cost overrun of the Bilharzia control componentof Upper Egypt Oralnage I Project.

- 34 -

II. MRWJECT FORMULATION

!S!Slt Ori01n

2.1 The Idea of a Bank financed drainage project in Egypt wasoriginated by a Bank economic mission which visited the country in Julyl9og. This idea was further advanced by a Bank agricultural mission whichvisited Egypt in September 1968. The mission proposed, as a first priority,a project which included installation of field drainage In part of the NileDelta together with remodelling and constructio0 of open drains and erectionof the drainage pumping stations required. This project, later called NileDelta Drainage I Project, was appraised by the Dank in December 1968 ind theCredit (181-WUAR) became effective on December 22, 1970.

2.2 In 1972 a request was made by the Goverment of Egypt for financingby IDA of a second drainage project in Upper Egypt, where waterlogging andsoil salinity incertain areas constituted mjor constraints to maintainingland productivity. This secord drainage project, the Upper Egypt Drainge Project, was appraised by the Bank in March 1972, and the Credit (393-EST)beme effective on November 28, 1973.

2.3 Up to the end of 1975, construction and remodelling of open drainsand erection of pumping stations had progressed satisfactorily. However,progress in installing field drainage was slow due to several problems thetw projects faced. Of these, the most serious were the lack of local fundsand the shortage of engineers due to the 1973 war, the shortage of cementfor the production of concrete pipes, the poor performance of local publicsector contractors and other managerial problems.

2.4 Sy the beginning of 1975 the Govermnt had made sufficientallocation of funds to the drainage projects and the shorte of -ngineerswas no longer a problem as most of thin had been released from the army.Encouraged by these improvmnts, the Ministry of Irigation made a newrequest to the Bank for financing a third drainage project in Egypt,covering the rmining areas in Upper Egypt which suffered waterlogging andsalinity.

Feasibility Report

2.5 EPADP undertook the responsibility of preparing the feasibilityreport for the proposed Upper Egypt Drainage II Project. The project worksincluded the construction or remodelling of open drains and installation offield drainage in selected areas totalling 500,000 feddans, all in UpperEgypt, the construction of a new drainage pumping station and thereclaation of about 12,000 feddans of saline soils. The feasibility reportwas receid by the Dank a few days before the departure of the appraisalmission.

2.6 The feasibility report was reasonably comprehensive as far as thedescription of project works was concerned but, as in previous feasibilityreports prepared by EPAOP, was short on justification for selection ofproject areas. The selection of the areas for field drainage was based on asoil survey covering about one half of the project area and a semi-detailedsoil survey covering the reaining portion. No detailed field Investigations(water table depth, hydraulic conductivity of soils etc.) had been conducttdprior to the selection of the areas. Thus, the areas included in the projectappeared to have been selected on practical considerations seconded by some

- 35 -

field observations. Furthermore, there was a complete absence in the reportof a justification of the project as a whole based on investments andexpected benefits. Finally, the implementation schedule in the report wasover optimistic.

Appraisal

2.7 The appraisal of the project was carried out in Oecember 1975 1/The appraisal mission reviewed the basic assumptions made in the FeasibTiltyReport and visited many areas proposed for field drainage. Special attentionwas given by the mission to the proposed implementation rate of the projectworks and to the estimation of project cost. The mission also, in an effortto make a better estimation of project benefits, collected and reviewed allthe available data on the effect of drainage on crop yields.

2.8 The procurement problem that faced the previous Bank drainageprojects concerning civil works for installation of field drainage wasresolved. EPADP had accepted the appraisal mission's recommendation thatconstruction of field drainage should go to ICB. Because of the need foraccelerating the drainage implementation program the appraisal missionproposed and EPADP agreed to use in this project PVC corrugated pipes fordrain laterals. For the installation of concrete pipes for collectors heavyduty laying machines were recommended.

2.9 Following the appraisal mission, the scope of the project and itsperiod of implementation were debated in the Bank. Because of financialconstraints and uncertainity about cofinancing, the project area wasinitially reduced to 350,000 feddans. Later, the Bank decided to increaseits allocation to the project to USS 50 million and USAID indicated its'ntention to participate in the financing of the proj2ct. In view of this itwas finally decided to accept Government's proposals on the scope of theproject, i.e. the remodelling and construction of open drains on 500,000feddans, the installation of field drainage on 500,000 feddans, theconstruction of one pumping station and the reclamation of 12,000 feddans ofsaline soils. It was also decided to include in the project a Bilharziacontrol component by which the Bilharzia programme was expanded by 120,000feddans, between Asyut and Dairut Barrages, and a provision was made forfinancing the cost overrun of the Bilharzia component under Upper EgyptDrainage I Project.

2.10 As far as the implementation period was concerned, it wasconsidered that (a) with the additional equipment provided under theproject, (b) the use of PVC plastic pipes (instead of concrete pipes used inthe previous projects) and (c) the opening of tenders for field drainage toforeign contractors, it would have been possible to increase theimplementation rate of field drainage to 140,000 feddans annually, startingfrom the third year. Therefore it was assumed that the project could havebeen completed within a five-year period. This proved later to be a veryoptimistic assumption.

2.11 The Bank was informed officially in April 1976 of the intention of,USAID to participate in the financing of the project. The matter was furtherdiscussed between USAID and the Bank in Washington and it was agreed topropose to the Government a parallel financing agreement by which USAID

1/ The appraisal of the Bilharzia Control component of the project wascarried out by a Bank Consultant in October 1975.

- 36 -

would finance all foreign costs required for the production of the PVCplastic pipes in Egypt by establishing three PVC factories and forprocurement of spare parts and PVC raw material. The Government agreed tothis proposal and a separate agreement was later signed between Governmentand USAID.

2.12 At the time of appraisal some issues became apparent, the mostseric'as being that EPADP had always refused to employ foreign consultants.M1ission's opinion was that the introduction for the first time in Egypt ofPVC pipes in drainage works and the proposed high rate of implementation offield drainage, made necessary the use of consultants to advise EPAOP'sofficials, on overall planning and management, on technical problems relatedto the installation of PVC pipes, on carrying-out field investigations fordesign purposes, etc. Other issues noticed were the lack of progress inmonitoring and evaluation of drainage works and their effect on crop yields,the inadequate accounting system of EPADP, the lack of coordination betweenEPADP and Extension Service of the Ministry of Agriculture and the poorrecovery of drainage cost from the beneficiaries. On all these issues theGovernment was advised before negotiations that its reipresentatives shouldbe prepared to reach necessary agreement with the Bank.

Negotiations

2.13 Negotiations took place between May 7-11, 1976. Agreement wasreached with the Government on most of the issues mentioned above. Thus:

a) Government accepted the Bank's recommenddtion to employ consultants(3 full time consultants for 3 years);

b) Government accepted the tendering of field drainage works throughICB;

c) Government undertook the responsibility to carry out and completethe evaluation of the effect of drainage works;

d) EPADP agreed to establish within six months after the EffectiveOate a cost accounting system;

e) Government agreed to ensure adequate coordinating between EPADP andExtension Service.

2.14 As regards, the cost recovery issue, the Borrower came tonegotiations prepared to resist on Bank's position that full recovery ofcapital and O&M cost of field drainage in real terms should be obtained fromthe beneficiaries. They explained that cost recovery of drainage works isgoverned by Law No. 74 of October 9, 1971 which provides for recovery onlyof capital cost for field drainage, plus a 10% administrative charge, inannual instalments over .20 years. They stressed that because of price,controls exercised by the Government on the principal crops, farmers makesmall profits and it is not fair to be charged with additional cost.Besides, they pointed out that the recovery of O&M cost for drainage isindirectly obtained through the land taxes which are revised periodically.The delegation, to show its support to Bank's position agreed to undertake astudy on the ability of farmers to pay recovery charges to cover capital andO&M cost of field drainage, taking into account inflation. Bank finallyagreed to the Borrowers' position.

- 37 -

2.15 During negotiations full agreement was reached on the scope of theproject as described below.

The ProJect

2.16 The primary objective of the project approved by the Bank Board onJune 8, 1976 was to improve drainage on 500,000 feddans in Upper Egypt at atotal cost of USS 282.1 million equivalent, with an IDA credit of US$ 40.0million and a Bank loan of USS 10.0 million. The project descriptionincorporated in the Development Credit Agreement is given in Annex 4. Theproject included the remodelling of 1,226 km of existing open drains and theexcavation of 346 km of new open drains, the installation of field drainageon about 500,000 feddans, the construction of one new pumping st.tion andthe reclamation of about 12,000 of saline land. A Bilharzia controlcomponent was included by which the Bilharzia program was expanded by120,000 feddans in the area between Asyut and Dairut Barrages and aprovision was made for financing the cost overrun of the Bilharzia Component(about USS 4.22 million) under the Upper Egypt Drainage I Project.

2.17 The agreement between Government and USAID for cofinancing theproject with USS 30 million was signed in July 1976. According to thisagreement USAID would finance all foreign costs required for the productionof PVC corrugated pipes in Egypt.

_ 38 -

III. IMPLEMENTATION

Prolect Agreement and; Side Letters

3.1 The Project Agreement, the Development Credit Agreement and theLoan Agreement were signed on June 11, 1976. On the same date the followingfive side letters were also signed:

a) Project Implementation Schedule.

b) Implementation of Drainage Programme.

c) Cost Recovery Study.

d) Cost Recovery.

e) External Debt of ARE.

Effectiveness and Start-up

3.2 In addition to the standard conditions of effectiveness there weretwo specific ones: (a) the Government will enter into a loan agreement withUSAIO for financing the foreign cost for the production of PVC pipes inEgypt; and (b) the Government will take all measures neccessary to provideadequate coordination between the Extension Service of the Ministry ofAgriculture and EPADP.

3.3 The first specific condition was met with the signature of a loangreement between Government and USAID in July 1976. The second spee44c4condition was met when EPADP furnished the Bank with a ministerial decree bywhich a Coordination Committee between Ministry of Agriculture and Ministryof Irrigation was established to coordinate the activities of the ExtensionService and EPADP in the execution of drainage programme and maintenance ofdrainage works. The Committee would formulate plans for joint activities andinitiate a programme to train extension personnel. The credit/loan- wasdeclared effective on January 31, 1977, 7 1/2 months after signature.

An Overview of Project History

3.4 The agreed implementation schedule projected completion of thedrainage component of the project by end of 1981. The closing date ofcredit/loan was set as June 30, 1983. No major changes were made on theproject's main objectives during implementation. However, many eventscontributed to a considerable delay in project completion. The closing datewas revised twice to accommodate delays in Implementation. The credit/loanwas finally closed on June 30, 1985 but its accounts were kept open for"making disbursements against commitments made before this date. The entiremount of the credit/loan of USS 50 million was finally di!bursed.

- 39 -

Revisions

3.5 No changes were made during the project execution in its scope, andobjectives. However, following detailed field investigations, some of theinitially selected areas, totalling about 85,000 feddans, were found not Inneed of drainage and have been deleted. Others of the selected areas,totalling about 30,000 feddans, were found in urgent need of drainage andwere shifted to Upper Egypt Drainage I Project for iimiediate implementation.An area of about 10,000 feddans was found not in immediate need of drainageand was shifted to the Drainage V program for later implementation. Allthese areas, totalling about 125,000 feddans, were replaced by areas outsidethe project, for which investigations showed that they are in need ofdrainage. As a result of all these changes the total area in which fielddrainage will be ultimately installed has been slightly reduced from 500,000feddans at appraisal to 493,420 'eddans. Annex 5 presents by catchment unitthe areas at appraisal, those revised during execution of the project andthe areas in which field drainage was installed as of October 31, 1986.Map 1 (a, b, c) shows the location of these areas.

3.6 It is believed that, in most cases, the above changes werebeneficial for the project, since they gave priority for field drainageinstallation to areas with more serious drainage problems and postponed orcancelled field drainage works in other areas not in immediate need. But insome cases the changes were simply made to give some flexibility to EPADP inthe implementation of its overall drainage program. The fact is that allthese chanc2s in the project areas became necessary because of theinadequate project preparation and more specifically because no detailedfield inyestigations were carried out prior to the selection of the fielddrainage areas. It should be said that*for this reason there is still somelack of confidence as to whether field drainage was really needed in all theareas that have been provided with it (para. 4.3).

Implementation Schedule of Drainage Works

3.7 In general the implementation of project drainage works ran farbehind schedule and the project is not expected to be completed before June1989. This shows how unrealistic were the assumptions made about projectimplementation at appraisal. Instead, of the expected five yearimplementation period the project will take more than twelve years to becompleted. Delays have occurred in all the three main components of drainageworks i.e. pumping station, open drains and field drainage but it is thethird one which caused the major delay for the full completion of theproject. On the original completion date of December 31, 1982, thecompletion rate was 100% on civil works for the pumping station (erection ofpumps had only started), 78% for open drains and 18% for field drainage. Todate (October 1986), the field drainage installation had not yet completed.There are some 160,000 feddans (approximately 1/3 of the project area) to beimplemented in the coming two years (Annex 5).

3.8 Many factors contributed to cause delays in project implementationthe main ones being the weaknesses in EPAOP's construct1on planning and,management as well as the low implementation capacity of the public sectorcontractors. The specific delaying factors for each drainage component areexamined below:

a) PumPinq station. The contract was awarded in April 1977, i.e.three months after effectiveness, but construction started In April1980, i.e. three years later. The reason for this long deTajy wasthe inefficiency of the local contractor to organize the work andto carry out the soil investigations required for the design of

- 40 -

civil works. Further delays occurred in the construction of civilworks (it took almost three years), in the construction of theelectrical transmission line, and in the erection and testing ofthe pumps. The station becae operational in May 1985 i.e. almostfive years behind schedule (Annex 7).

b) gDen drains. This activity presented the least problems in projectimplementation. Remodelling and construction of open drains starteda few months after effectiveness by using old equipment availableto the contractors. The execution of this component was keptintentionally slow because the work on open drains was far tooahead of field drainage Installation and the slower paced progresshelped to achieve, a better balance between these two activities.The component of open drains was completed by July 1985 i.e. fourand a half years behind schedule (Annex 6).

c) Field draina e. T is is the activity that presented the mostserious problems and caused the major delays In project completion.The implementation of this componert started In January 1981instead of September 1977 as expected at appraisal, i.e. more thanthree years later. The reasons for this serious delay were: (i) thetwo year delay in completion of the PVC pipe factories financed byUSAID (the factories of Beni Suef, Asyut and Qena becameoperational in April 1980, July 1980 and January 1981 respectively,almost two years behind schedule); (ii) the delay of EPADP in theaward of contracts for the execution of field drainage. The awardoccurred in February 1980, i.e. two and a half years behindschedule; (14i) shortages of cement required for structures andpipe collectors; (iv) delay in the procurement of equipment by thecontractors; (v) it should also be mentioned that during the firstthree years of the project some 23,000 feddans of the project areawere provided with field drainage using concrete pipes. Later, withBank's agreement, this area was exchanged for an equivalent area ofthe Upper Egypt Drainage I Project not provided with fielddrainage. As a result, no field drainage was shown to be installedduring the first three years under the Upper Egypt Drainage IIProject (Annex 5).

3.9 As Is shown above, during the first three years of the project, noprogress was made in field drainage installation, except a small pilot areaof 3,000 feddans in Beni Suef which was provided with field drainage withimported ready made PVC pipes. But even later, the installation rate offield drainage was slow, on average J2,000 feddans annually (maximum 76,000feddans in the year 1983/84) which was much below the expected 140,000feddans per year at appraisal. The reason for this slow progress was thepoor performance of the public sector contractors. It is unfortunate thatalthough the tendering of field drainage works was made through ICB, noforeign contractors presented a bid, obviously because they knew in advancethat they did not have a chance to compete with the low prices of the public.sector contractors. Another conclusion was that, although the use of plasticPVC pipes and heavy duty laying machines for the collector pipes made easierthe whole operation of installing field drainage, the contractors, becauseof their managerial weaknesses, did not take advantage of this. In fact thecontractors' performance showed a poor utilization of the resources madeavailable to them. For example the utilization of laying machines was farbelow accepted standards. On averaga the collector machines were utilized118 days a year and the lateral machines 152 days a year. These figuresshow clearly that the contractors' management of the machines was extremelyInefficient. If the contractors could have increased the machines

- 41 -

utilization rate by 50% (which is considered normal) the average drainagearea constructed in a year wauld have been 80,000 feddans. It has to be saidthat to some extent, the farmers' resistance to destroying partially maturedcrops (specially sugar cane in Upper Egypt) despite crop compensationpayments, and the heavy watering of the fields, disrupted smooth operationsin installation of field drainage.

3.10 But there is no doubt that EPADP also has a share of responsibilityfor the slow performance of contractors. There was no adequate planning andsupervision of drainage works and EPADP proved to have no effective means ofenforcing the conditions of contracts. The situation could have beendifferent if EPADP had made use of consultants as provided in the appraisalreport, to advise on overall planning and coordination of works and ontechnical matters related to the drainage works. Despite the efforts rade bythe supervision missions and the Bank to persuade EPADP to hire consultants,the refused to do so. They claimed that strict Governmental instructionsdid not allow them to use funds from the credit/loan for foreignconsultants. EPAD was getting some technical assistance for its drainageprogramme through a panel of Egyptian and Dutch experts sponsored by theDutch Bilateral Programme (Annex 8 shows overall implementation rate offield drainage in Egypt).

3.11 The work on amelioration of saline soils has been completed. Some12,000 feddans have been subsoiled in combination with application of 3 tonsper feddan on average of gypsum. The work was done by the Land AmeliorationAuthority of the Ministry of Agriculture. Due to the short time availablebetween harvesting and sowing crops the implementatibn of this programme wasslow and it took three years instead of two.

3.12 The options available to the Bank s.aff to do anything about slowimplementation were limited because the Bank had little leverage forinterference with the working of the public sector contractors. At therequest of the Bank's supervision mission of May 1984, a meeting wasorganized by the Vice Chairman of EPADP in which the Undersecretaries incharge. and the Chairmen of the main constructing companies involved withdrainage works in Upper Egypt participated . According to the Chairmen ofthese companies, the main problems faced by them were the procurement ofspare parts for the pipe laying machines and the old contracts unit pricesthat needed adjustment due to inflation, As a result of this meeting someaction was taken by EPADP to improve r-,*urement of spare parts and a modestprice escalation of the old contracts was adopted. However, these measuresdid not cause any dramatic improvement in implementation rates in thefollowing years.

3.13 It became clear to Bank staff that control over project activitiesand decisions had to be the responsibility of EPADP and that Bank staffinfluence could at best be indirect through advice and persuasion. Whenopportunities presented themselves Bank has taken fast action. For instancewhen it became obvious that there would be a long delay in the localproduction of PVC pipes, Bank agreed to import from the proceeds of thecredit/loan 200,000 m ready made PVC pipes from abroad to implement thepilot drainage project of Beni Suef. Likewise when shortages of cement andIron bars emerged Bank agreed to finance their import from abroad. Also whenshortage of local funds proved to be a significant delaying factor the Bankstressed the need for adequate funding to the Government and inserted acovenent into the next drainage project (Nile Delta Drainage II) requiringthe Government to establish a Special Fund from which EPADP could drawwithout restriction for implementing all IDA/Bank financed drainageprojects. Finally the Bank had correctly shown flexibility in acceptingEPAOP's proposals for the amendment of the field drainage areas in order to

- 42 -

facilitate the implementation prcgramme.

3.14 In summary it can be saia 0hat the time schedule at appraisal wasover optimistic. The implemerntation rate of 140,000 feddans per year offield drainage proved to be unattainable with the use of local contractors.And the construction period assumed at appraisal for the pumping stationproved to be too short.

3.15 Chart 1 presents the time schedule agreed at appraisal for the mainproject activities and the actual Implementation schedule of theseactivities.

Imolementation of Bilharzia Control Prowranmme

3.16 A Bilharzla Control Programme covering an area of 900,000 f:ddansand about 3 million people was initiated in 1976 under the Upper EgyptDrainage I Project. The programme which was implemented by the Ministry ofHealth, consisted of an integrated snail control programme combined withchemotherapy for Infected people. About 120,000 feddans located betweenAsyut and Dairut barrages have been included in the programme under theUpper Egypt Drainage II Project. Snail control operations in this areastarted in March 1977 (intensive phase), and continued for three years. Theconsolidation phase followed for another three years. Starting from 1984 thesnail control in this area was limited to local mollusciciding (maintenancephase). chemotherapy of infected people has been carried out in parallelsince 1978 and continues to be implemented based upon annual re-examination.

3.17 In general the Bilharzia contr)l component has been implementedmore or less according to plan. Some problems faced earlier with the snailcontrol operations because of logistic difficulties have been resolved. Atpresent the programme continues with Government's own resources. Aninternational evaluation mission visited Egypt from October 1984 to April1985 to evaluate the entire Bilharzia control programme. Annex 19 preserts asummary of the findings of this mission.

Procurement

3.18 Project equipment for drainage works (draglines and excavators,vehicles, workshop equipment, equipment for soil amelioration, flushingpumps for maintenance, spare parts etc) as welV as materials (cement, steel,PVC pUipes) were procured through ICB in accordance with Bank guidelines.Civil works for field drainage were also procured through ICB but allcontracts were awarded to local contractors since no foreign bids weresubmitted. Civil works not financed by the Bank for construction andreodelling of open drains, for soil melioration and for small buildingswere procured through local tendering In accordance with -the normalprocurement procedures of Government. The construction of the pumpingstation and the supply of pump units were combined in one contract andprocured through ICB.

3.19 Equipment for Bilharzia control(vehicles, etc.) was procuredthrough ICB. Molluscicide and drugs used in the Bilharzia control programmeare produced by only one manufacturer in West Germany. Their procurement wasmade from this manufacturer on the basis of negotiated prices.

3.20 In general the procurement of equipment, materials and civil worksunder the project was carried out with no special problems (except thedelays) and there were no misprocurement cases. Annex 20 shows the projectequipment as appraised and actually procured.

- 43 -

Accountinc. Auditinc and Reporting

3.21 According to Section 4.02 of the Project Agreement the Authoritywas to have its accounts and financial statements for each fiscal yearaudited by 1ndependant auditors acceptable to the Bank and to furnishcertified copies of financial statements and audit reports within a periodof four months after the end of each fiscal year. According to section 4.03of the Project Agreement, the Authority was to establish within six monthsafter project effectiveness a cost accounting system to determine relevantcosts of the works carried out by the Authority under the project.

3.22 EPAPD's Finance Department was responsible for the establishmentand maintenance of separate accounts for the project and the Central AuditOrganization (CAO), an independant auditing agency, was responsible fora-uditing the accounts of EPAPO including those of the project. The CAO haspresented regularly, though usually later than agreed, annual audit reportswhich were satisfactory to the Bank. These audit reports also contained acomparison of actual with budget figures and formed part of the MOIconsolidated report presented to the People's Assembly.

3.23 EPAPO has had considerable difficulties in establishing a costaccounting system. The project agreement had to be amended several times bysubstituting the date for its establishment ultimately to June 30, 1981. TheBank provided assistance to EPAPO by drafting terms of reference for thedesign, training of staff, and implementation of the cost accounting systemby a local consulting firm.

3.24 EPAPO recruited in 1977/78 21 accountants who were to form the costaccounting unit. In May 1979 a firm of c hartered atcountants had beencontracted to design the system as well as to. train four accountants ofEPAPO. Their report was submitted in May 1980 and the cost accounting syttemwas operational mid-1981. The cost accounting unit and system were reviewedby a Bank mission in April 1982 and found generally satisfactory. However,periodic shortages In accounting staff occurred subsequently.

3.25 While there is now considerable cost-accounting data available inthe Regional Offices (Directorates) classified by project, little systematiccompilation by project or by component and subcomponent is available at thecentral level. This leads to problems of overlapping accounts betweenprojects (Mile Delta I and II and Upper Egypt I and II). Efforts should bemade to further improve the existing cosc accounting system in such a waythat it can be used as an effective tool for project management at thecentral level in Cairo. The flow of financial Information to the Planningand Follow-up department in EPAPD 'should also be more systematic andsummarized financial data should be provided in quarterly reports.

3.26 The Authority's Planning and Follow-up department submits regularlyquarterly reports indicating mainly physical progress with field and opendrainage. These quarterly reports should be expanded in the Drainage Vproject to contain also data on procurement, equipment available with.contractors and summarized financial data.

Proiect Financing - Disbursements

3.27 Actual withdrawal of croceeds of Credit and Loan by category areshown in a summarized form in Arnnex 9a and annually in Annex 9b. Actualdisbursements on a half yearly basis for the full term of the project arepresented in Annex 10a. Some two years delay in completion of the project isreflected in the extended disbursement period. As shown in Annex lOa, onlyabout 72% of the Credit and Loan was disbursed by the original closing date

- 44-

of June 30, 1983. The Credit and Loan was finally fully disbursed onFebruary 1, 1986. Disbursements of USAID funds are given in Annex 10b. Outof an original allocation of USS 30.0 million, only USS 19.0 million wereactually disbursed to date and USS 10.0 million were reallocated to otherprojects in Egypt. Disbursements of USAID funds were basically lower due tolower than estimated costs of PVC pipe factories and PVC resin.

Actual Costs Versus ADvraisal Estimate

3.28 The project costs mentioned in this chapter and shown in Annexes 11and 12 are based on information provided by EPAPO's administration andfinance department and from World Bank disbursement records. As mentioned inpara. 3.25, EPAPO's project accounts do not make it possible to distinguishlocal expenditure by sub-component. Furthermore, no systematic compilationof foreign exchange costs is made according to sub-component (i.e. fielddrainage, open drain remodelling etc.) EPAPD also has difficulties inseparating costs of overlapping projects (i.e. Upper Egypt I and II andDelta DrainaCe I and II). Thus, cost analysis in this report will remainincomplete.

3.29 Total project expenditure till July 1986 amounted to LE 124.3million. This corresponds to a low cost overrun of 13% in terms of EgyptianPounds despite the important delays in project execution and slightly higherinflation than anticipated during the implementation period. Total projectin US dollars amounted to 140.6 million including USAID disbursements ofUSS 19.0 million. They are shown in Annex 11. More detailed costs by yearare given in Annex 12. Since the final project local currency disbursementsare not expected to be effected until June 1989, the total projectexpenditures will not be available before late 1989. However, a re-estimatewas made by the mission of the full project costs which are presentlyestimated at LE 155.9 million (41% above the appraisal estimate). To dateproject costs in US dollar terms 1/ tre -only about 50% of appraisalestimates despite the fact that most project components have been completed.Adding expenditure for the 165,000 feddans of field drainage still to beinstalled total project costs are expected to reach about USS 166.9 millionwhich is less than 60% of appraisal estimate in US dollar terms. The mainreasons for such considerable reduction in costs, besides the revaluation ofthe US dollar during the project period, are:

i) the very low local contract prices of the Egyptian Public Companiesselected in 1981 and the inadequate adjustments (price escalation)for local inflation (several public companies have been facinglosses in installation of field drainage);

ii) the lower than estimated costs of drainage equipment in US dollarterms due to fierce international competition;

iii) the lower than expected foreign exchange cost of PVC pipesfactories and PVC resin.

j/ Using commercial" exchange rates for convertintg US dollar costs into LEgiven in Current Economic Situation and Economic Reform program" Reportno. 6195-EGT of October 22, 19b6.

- 45 -

3.30 The lower overall project cost is reflected in the comparison ofthe average local cost of drainage works per feddan of the actual completedarea under the project with that estimated at appraisal. The totalexpenditures as of July 1986, for local cost of field drainage workscovering about 315,000 feddans was LE 41.1 million i.e. LE 130 per feddan.The total expenditures for local costs of open drainage covering some500,000 feddans was LE 17.6 million i.e. LE 35 per feddan. Thus the actuallocal cost of construction of the drainage facilities was about LE 165 perfeddan, which includes also crop compensation and land lost as a result ofthe project works. Foreign exchange cost amounted to LE 52.8 million orLE 106 per feddan. Thus, the total estimated cost per feddan for drainagewas LE 271 or US$ 316. Compared with USS 440 per feddan at appraisal, the,overall cost was about 30% lower in US dollar terms (see also Annex 13).

Use of Consultants

3.31 The appraisal report identified the need for three full-timeconsultants each for a period of three years to advise and assist localengineers in the design and use of PVC drainage pipe systems and fortraining purposes. The need for short-term consultants was also stated. Nofunds were provided under the Upper Egypt II project for consultantservices, as 15 man-years of consultancy were included already in UpperEgypt I drainage project but only a fraction of the agreed number ofconsultancy years had been used at the time of project appraisal.

3.32 There was further the availability of Dutch bilateral grants which,however, supplied most of their expertise to the Drainage Research Instituteand through the bi-annual Dutch-Egyptian prainage Panel meetings.

3.33 It is unfortunate that again under this project the opportunity forforeign advice, training expertise and assistance in supervision of drainageinstallation by local contractors, was lost. No doubt that the absence offoreign assistance was felt in the selection process of priority areas inEPAPO's field investigation and design office, in the quality of PVC pipeproduction, and in the quality of field drainage installation. The Dutchaid, except for the interventions by RYP staff in planning, training andmonitoring of drainage installation, however excellent, has had mostly anindirect impact by means of investigations reporting and recommendationscarried out in DRI and submitted to EPAPD. The Drainage Authority on manyoccasions has been reluctant in adopting, on a large scale, DRI or panelrecosnendations.

.Tra1ining

3.34 Provision was made at appraisal for training of engineers andtechnicians of EPADP in field drainage practices and of operators andmechanics in the proper operation and maintenance of equipment. A trainingprogram for agricultural staff employed by EPADP was conducted between Julyand October 1978. The total number of people trained was 250 divided into,five groups. The courses Included design, execution and maintenance of-drainage works, the irrigation and drainage law and field visits. Similartraining programs for about 140 Agricultural Extension district managers and400 village agents of the Ministry of Agriculture were conducted in all theGovernorates of Nile Delta and Upper Egypt. Other training activities inEPADP included on-the-job training of design engineers and field supervisorsand the training of new accountants for the Cost Accounting Unit. Theobjective of these training courses was the familiarization of the staffemployed by EPADP in the drainage activities. But the training period was

-46-

too short and the success was limited. More effective was the overseastraining of EPADP's mechanical engineers in the operation and maintenance ofequipment, provided by the suppliers.

3.35 An agreement was signed in 1983 between EPADP and the DutchGovermnent for training and technical assistance by the Lake Yssel PoldersDevelopment Authority. The training program was under the generalsupervision of the Egyptian-Dutch Advisory panel. The program, which expiredin December 1985, provided for training EPADP senior staff and instructorsIn Holland, for consultants to provide training in design of field drainageand In other specialized sL3Jects, and also for the Dutch experts' visits toEgypt for on-the-Job training of EPADP and contractors personnel. A total of500 staff of various levels, such as engineers, technicians, machineoperators etc., from EPADP and from public sector contractors have beentrained under this program. Subjects covered in the overall program includedfield investigations, design, construction planning and management,maintenance of completed works and machine operation and maintenance. Thistraining program was very successful and there is no doubt that it helped toimprove the implementation of the drainage program by EPADP. At the time ofthe visit of the completion mission in Egypt, EPADP was negotiating with theDutch Goverment representatives for the extension of this training programfor another two years.

- 47 -

IV. OPERATION PERFORMANCE

Design of Field Drainage Works

4.1 General. The design of the drainage systems is the responsibilityof the FiTeldInvestigation and Oesign Department of EPADP. The designcapacity of this Department is about 250,000 feddans per year. Pre-designinvestigations are carried out at gridpoints of 500 m spacing (i.e. one holeevery 60 feddans). The design album, usually prepared for a subproject of3,000-5,000 feddans, includes topographical survey, drainage layout,longitudinal sections, structural designs and a list of quantities. Once thedesign album is handed over to the construction department, the designengineer has no further involvement in the construction and operation ofworks he has designed. Therefore, no systematic performance feedback reachesthe design engineer from the field and no improvement in project design canbe expected.

4.2 Design of Upper Egypt Drainaqe II Project. Designs for the projectarea started in 1979 and was completed in February 1985. Of the totalproject area of 496,000 feddans, about 414,000 feddans were designed priorto July 1983, i.e. prior to the establishment by EPADP of the new designprinciples for lateral spacing (see para. 4.4). As mentioned in para. 3.7,there are sttill some 160,000 feddans under the Upper Egypt Drainage IIproject, in which field drainage has not been installed. Of this nonimplemented area, about 100,000 feddans have been designed with the olddesign principles. It is mission's recommendation that this area beredesigned and implemented according to the new design principles.

4.3 Review of the design albums for the remaining area of the Droect.The Project Completion mission had the opportunity *o review somie of thedesign albums of areas included in the programme-for-field drainage but notyet implemented. From the study of the field investigation data it was foundthat some of these areas have low water table and consequently they are notin immediate need of drainage. These areas are:

a) The entire area of El Rawi (approximately 10,000 feddans).

b) Part of the Tobhar Agameen area (approximately 2,000 feddans).

c) Half of the Abu Teeg II area (approximately 7,000 feddans).

For two more areas, namely Masanda South and Kakkab, the mission has somedoubts as to whether field drainage is required in the total remaining areafor implementation. Mission's rac=nendat1on is that before any decision ismade for the installation of field drainage in these areas new fieldinvestigations be carried out to determine the real drainage needs.

4.4 Laterals spacing. The appraisal report specified that lateral.drains spacing should be designed according to the physical property ofsoils determined by field investigations and that this spacing would varybetween 25 m and 80 m. However, the practice of EPADP was to design fielddrainage systems by converting the computed theoretical lateral spacing tostandard spacings of 40, 50 and 60 m. The reason given by EPADP for notfollowing the theoretical design criteria was that the narrower spacingwould entail a higher cost and more pipe-laying machine hours per unit area,therefore it would reduce the gross area on which field drainage could beinstalled. Supervision missions have questioned the rationale of this

- 48 -

approach nd suggested that if full benefit of field drainage were to beobtained, adjustments in lateral spacing should be limited to not more than20% of the coputed value and generally less than 10%. The issue was pursuedwith the Chairman of EPADP and the Minister of irrigation and by mid-1983the Chairman of EPAOP agreed that new design criteria would be applied todesigns carried out after July 1, 1983; designs carried out prior to thatdate have not been revised. This means that areas for which design wasprepared prior to the above date were built according to the old designpractices. While the new approach of EPADP was a substantial improvementover past attitudes, the fact is that this improvement will not affect largeareas with design made prior to July 1983. Bank supervision missions madespecial efforts to persuade EPADP to redesign all the non implemented areasusing the new design criteria. A letter was sent by the Chairman of EPAOP tothe Bank on May 22, 1983 summarizing the Authority's position on the issue.In this letter EPADP held some prooise for revising designs of areasrequiring lateral spacings of less than 40 a. This promise was not kept andto-date field drainage in areas with old design is installed with standardspacing of 40-50 and 60 . The Project CoWpletion mission was able toconfirm that in areas with new designs (e.g. Der-el-Sanquariya in the MiniehGovernorate) field drainage was installed with minimum lateral spacing of 30*. It is recommended that efforts should continue to persuade EPAOP to applythe new design criteria in the remaining areas for field drainage under theUpper Egypt Drainage II Project by revising the old designs as soon as

-possible.

4.5 Laterals death. The depth of laterals agreed in the appraisalReport was1.4 m at the upper end of the lateral and 1.8 m at its connectionwith the cellector drain. It was considered that this depth combined withthe proper lateral spacing would have been sufficient to provide for areduction of the water table to at least 1 m within 48-72 hours followingirigation. The depth of laterals was later neduced wi1th tho app .- o4the Nile Delta Drainage II Project to 1.50 m at the connection of thelateral with the collector drain. But, as mentioned in the previousparagraph, laterals are placed by EPADP not always at a spacing determinedby the soil investigations. A remedy of the so caused deficiency of thedrainage system would have been to increase the depth of laterals in orderto obtain the same drainage effect. But there were technical and economicconstraints in doing so, the most important being that a deeper fielddrainage system would have required deeper open drain collectors and deeperpumping. However, since the revision of the design criteria. when soilinvestigations showed a lateral spacing of less than 30 m, EPADP has adoptedthe principle to increase the laterals depth by 10 cm in order to compensatefor the minimum accepted spacing of 30 a.

4.6 Gravel envelove. The appraisal report assumed that a gravelenvelope wil1 be placed around all field drains to prevent sedimentation andto accelerate the entrance of water into the pipes. The size of gravelreconmended was between 2 and 10 m. It was further specified in the reportthat the general application of gravel filter will be revised later in lightof the results from field tests to be carried out during the first year ofthe project. However, the Egyptian-Dutch Advisory Panel for Land Drainage inEgypt decidet that gravel envelope could be omitted in soils which had aclay content greater than 40%. Therefore, contrary to the original intentionto equip all laterals with gravel filter EPADP had limited its use tolaterals with a spacing of 60 m or more. Bank consultants have continued toadvocate the use of gravel envelope around the laterals in all types ofsoil. Discussions with EPADP by various Bank staff who argued againstPanel's recommendation were ineffective. The argument of EPADP's experts wasthat Egyptian soil conditions are unusual in that the soil sepms to be morestable than normal arid region soil and therefore gravel filter is not

_ 49 -

required in soils of a high clay content. The Completion Report mission wasinformed that a recent ORI study indicated a reduced risk of sedimentationin corrugated PVC pipes as copared with concrete pipes due to the fact thatwith the PVC pipes better quality work can be achieved. Thus, DRI'srecomendatlon Is to adopt a clay content of 30% (instead of 40%) as a limitabove which no cover material for laterals is needed, provided that the soilis of good structure. The Issue of gravel envelope has not yet been resolvedand results are awaited for the completion of field investigations andtrials, carried out by the Drainage Research Institute. To date results ofthese trials are inconclusive. The appraisal report for Drainage V (May1985) specifies that the use of gravel envelope will be limited to lateralswith a spacing of 60 m or more and for lesser drain spacing where needed dueto the presence of unstable soil at drain depth.

4.7 Manholes. Over the years the manholes in their present form (witha cover above the ground) proved to be a cause of maintenance problems forthe covered drainage systems. Farmers often cut holes in the superstructureof the manhole to dispose of excess surface water and children drop rubbish,stones and earth. As a result the pipe collectors often are blocked throughthe manholes and the covered drainage systems need frequent flushing andmaintenance. Bank missions several times recommended to EPADP to replace thepresent above-the-ground type of manhole with a buried manhole which wouldnot be easily accessible, thus, abuse could be avoided. To date, no actionwas taken by EPADP to modify the manhole design. However, during appraisalof the Drainage V project it was agreed that the covered drainage systemswill be provided with buried manholes, except where open manholes arerequired. The Completion Report mission recommends the revision of thedesign of manholes in the remaining area for field drainage under the UpperEgypt Drainage II Project.

Quality Control of Drainae Works

4.8 On several occasions Bank supervision missions have reported poorquility of drainage works and lack of adequate supervision. Although inrecent years standards of construction have improved, due obviously to theexperience gaired by EPADP and the contractors involved, there are stillconstruction aspects that need improvement. They are:

a) Quality of PVC olasticipipes. Defects have been observed in thepast in the PVC pipes produced by the three factories. The problemsrelate to the position, size, shape and consistency of slots beingcut in the pipe. In the field it was noticed that very fewdefective pipes were rejected. This means that there were caseswhere.weak and inefficient pipes have been installed. The ProjectCompletion mission noticed that the situation has Improved and ingeneral the pipes currently used are of an acceptable standard.However, it should be stressed to the Chairman of EPADP thatadequate supervision in the factories and in the field should beprovided at all times in order to avoid production and installationof inadequate pipes.

b) Allisment and grade control of laterals. This aspect was sometimesneglected by the supervisor engineers. The aligmuent and grade oflaterals in general is arranged by the machine drivers throughmanual steering via a visual view finder. But no adequate controlwas applied by the engineers. In some cases no proper instrument(level) was available at the site to check the depth ofinstallation and grade. In the mission's opinion more attentionshould be paid to this in the future. A good solution would havebeen the automation of control by the use of laser equipment.

- 50 -

c) Back filling of trenches. Backfilling of trenchers after the pipesare laid was not always satisfactory. Trenches were filled withloose soils, often by the farmers themselves, without anycompaction. At the first irrigation water enters the pipes at highvelocity through the loose back-filling, carrying silt which isdeposited in the pipes and causes blockage. It is recommended thatthe backfill be placed Immediately after the pipe has been laid andthat it should be moderately compacted to avoid settlement.

d) Gravel enveloPe. In spite of all the Bank missions rramarks andrecommendations to EPADP, the quality and quantity of gravel usedas an envelope for the laterals continues to be inadequate. Theexcuse often given by the contractors for this is the low priceallowed for gravel in the contract and the fact that well gradedgravel is not easily found ln Egypt. Neither of these excuses arevalid. The price of gravel Is fixed by the contractors themselvesduring tendering and at least one huge deposit of excellent qualitygravel was seen by the mission on the east side of the Cairo-Alexandria desert road, near the south Tahrir area. One supervisionmission (November 1984) suggested to the Chairman of EPADP that adetailed study be carried out on gravel deposits in the country,including means and cost of transport and laying methods and thatthe conclusions of this study be generally applied on the ongoingdrainage projects. It was also suggested that EPADP should increasethe price allowed for gravel in the old contracts. Specialarrangements should also be made on the pipe laying machine toprovide a complete surround of the lateral at a thickness not lessthan 5 cm. To. date no action has been taken by EPADP on theserecommendations. The Project Completion mission recommends thatspecial attention should be paid by the Bank to this issue and thatcontinuous pressure should be exercised on EPADP for improvement ofthe quality of gravel in the remaining area of the project.

e) Manholes. It is: important that each manhole be provided with asilt trap of sufficient size by installing the base slab at least20 to 30 cm, below the invert of the outgoing collector. In fieldvisits it was often found that the silt trap is much less than 20cm. Attention should be paid by EPADP's supervision engineers onthis aspect.

f) Wrapping of collectors cement Pipes at the Joints. Another pointthat needs attention and Improvement Is the jolnts of the cementpipe collectors. At the Joints a wrapping of bitumen impregnatedcanvas is used. But in many cases the wrapping is placed only onthe upper half of the joint leaving the lower half exposed. Thismay cause sedimentation inside the collector pipe. Instructionsshould be issued by EPAOP to all supervision engineers to insist ona complete wrapping of the Joints in all drainage projects.

Operation and Maintenance of Drainage Works

4.9 EPADP is responsible for the OEM of all completed drainage works,both during the implementation period and after completion of the project.However, during construction and for one year following completion of acontract unit, the contractor is responsible for the maintenance of thesubsurface drains. He also is required to flush all laterals twice. Theresponsibility for O&M of subsurface drains and the associated surfacedrains was transferred from the Irrigation Department to the EPAOP in 1979.

-51-

This helped in establishing lines of responsibility in accordance withgeographic units and in structuring and enlarging the O&M organization tomake it more effective. The EPADP's existing organizational structure formaintaining both surface and subsurface drains is shown in Chart 2 and Annex14. The Undersecretary for maintenance controls eight field Directorates,five in the Delta and three in Upper Egypt. Under each Directorate are anumber of centers, each responsible for maintaining drainage works in anarea of about -40,000 to 50,000 feddans. Under the centers are subcentres,each responsible for about 5,000 feddans of subsurface drains. At present,there are in Upper Egypt 25 maintenance centres and 89 subcentres. Channelmaintenance, which is performed almost entirely by contract, is handled bythe directorates. The staff of the centres and subcentres are mostlyconcerned with maintenance of subsurface drainage which is now performedexclusively by force account.

4.10 Maintenance of open drains in Egypt have, in the past, not been ofa satisfactory standard due mainly to extremely difficult environmentalconditions (which result in very rapid weed growth in open drains), staffinglimitations, and technical shortcomings. Whilst EPADP has, in the last fewyears, improved maintenance of drains, further improvement is required. TheBank project, Channel Maintenance Project, appraised in May. 1986 1/ isdesignated to provide for improved maintenance of both irrigation canals andopen drains. The project will introduce modern channel maintenancepractices, replacing the traditional system of excavation with a balancedcycle of weed mowing, herbicide treatment and desilting. Maintenance offield drains was until recently done manually. But in view of the shortageof labour and to improve the efficiency of field drainage systems, flushingmachines have been purchased and used.

4.11 The operation and maintenance of the pumping stations, onceconstructed and tested, is the responsibility of the Electrical andMechanical Department of the Ministry of Irrigation.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

4.12 A reements. According to section 2.08 of the Upper Egypt IIDrainage Project Agreement th, Authority was, within two years after thedate of loan signature or any other date agreed, to complete the evaluationof the effect of drainage works under previous Nile Delta I and Upper EgyptI drainage projects on crop yields and soil properties, and thereaftercontinue to carry out or carry out. as the case may be. the evaluation ofsuch drainage works and those included in Upper Eqypt II drainage project.Th4is eiifTon was amended during negotiations of Nile Delta II project andEPAPO agreed to complete the above mentioned study for Nile Delta I by June,1978 and for Upper Egypt I by June 1979 and complete the evaluation of UpperEgypt II drainage project by June 1982 and of Nile Delta II by June 1984.EPAPD also agreed to furnish interim reports on evaluation by June 1981 forUpper Egypt II drainage project and by June 1983 for Nile Oelta II drainageproject and continue evaluation of each of the four projects referred to fora period of six years from the dates mentioned.

4.13 When it was realized during supervisions that existing crop yielddata, collected by cooperatives were not reliable due to the fact that theydid not account for factors other than drainage that affect yields (culturalpractices, inputs, pest problems etc.) it was agreed to initiate a new M&E

V The project is not yet effective.

- 52 -

pvograxie with an improved methodology. The new monitoring system wasstarted early 1978 supported by Dutch technical assistance and carried outmainly by DRI staff. It was devided into two distinct parts: (1) a two yearcrash programme aimed at providing *rough indications on effectiveness ofdrainage* and (1i) a five-year long range programme. The programme wasconducted by a newly created Division of project Appraisal and Evaluation inDRI with 20 to 25 persons headed by a Dutch consultant, resident in Egyptduring the programme.

4.14 Consequently section 2.08 of the project agreement was againmodified in March 1979, through another amendment, in which EPAPD agreed tofurnish by February 1979 an initial report, thereafter semi-annual progressreports until December 1980 on its on-going crash programme for evaluatingthe effects of completed drainagee works, by December 1980 an interim reportand by February 1981 a final report on the findings of the said programme.Furthermore, EPADP was to submit to the Bank an initial report, progressreports and a final report by November 1984 on the findings of the long-range programme for drainage evaluation.

4.15 Institutional chanQes. By decree 415 of i978 the DrainageAuthority re-established also the Evaluation Committee of Drainage Workscomprising five members of EPAPO and four members of the Ministry ofAgriculture. Monthly meetings were arranged.-

4.16 In September 1979 another Ministerial decree created aninterministerial OSupreme" comtittee to review all on-going drainageactivities and methodology to investigate the effect of drainage on relevantsoil parameters, water balance and production covered by the programme.Hoeuevers due to inaction of this co-wittee which mat only in Jure Rn fnr thpfirit time no substantial impact was made on the evaluation program. An"Executive Committee" was founded in 1982 to coordinate the variousprogrammes.

4.17 The ORI Crash Programme. The initial reports of the crashprogramme published mid-1979 covered results of two twin villages, one withand without drainage, all situated in the Delta I project area and indicatedsubstantial yield increases: berseem 18-36%, wheat 5-19% and rice over 50%.It was then concluded that the major effect of drainage was to reduce.salinity and that response can mainly be expected in salinity sensitivecrops. -

4.18 The crash programme was expanded late 1979 to include three pairsof twin villages to compare with and without drainage situation. Seventy-five observations were made for each village. Unlike the procedure followedin the EPADP ex-post evaluation programme, data on yields were obtained fromcrop cuttings made by ORI staff. Moreover, various other data such as inputuse, supply of irrigation water, and functioning of the drainage system werecollected. Data collection and analysis were conducted by seven juniorEgyptian engineers, one senior Egyptian scientist, and one Dutch residentexpert.

4.19 Generally the final results painted a moderately positive picturebut for at least three reasons they did not show a consistent trend:

- although soil salinity varied in all three sets of twin villages,it did not present a serious constraint on growth of the five maincrops (cotton, wheat, rice, berseem, maize) in any of them;

- 53 -

- in two of the three drained villages, a large proportion of thedrainage system appeared to be functioning poorly;

- contrary to a common belief that sufficient water is available forall the farmers in the Delta, and that they are responsible forhigh watertables by over-irrigating, it was found that in thesummer season several areas suffer from severe water shortages thusaffecting yields.

Gross value added/feddan increased or decreased compared to non-tile drainedareas for the different crops as follows:

Berseem - 2to + 40%Wheat 7 to + 31%Rice - 13 to + 80%Cotton - 30 to + 51%Maize - 14 to - 21%

Yield has been reckoned the determining factor for assessment of GVA asproduction costs did not differ much. The reasons for onegative values couldbe that there were other production constraints or the tile drainage systemwas functioning inadequately. Potential benefits from drainage were lostbecause in some cases pest control and not drainage was the limiting factor.In the three drained villages, yields were about 30% higher in the period1977/80 compared to a 17% increase over the same period in the threeundrained villages. Quite apart from these three factors it should beemphasized that the three sets of twin villages represent too small a sampleto yield more tan a rough estimate.

4,20 Because of certain methodological controversies doubt arose on theusefulness of crop yield response evaluation programmes in the MOI and theDutch Government decided to stop financial contribution for the regularprogramme. The Egyptian staff was reassigned and the Dutch resident engineerleft to wwrite-hi.s final report. DRI's evaluation work came to a halt in1982. Following a recommendation of the Advisory panel at its 12th meetingearly in 1983, a Workshop on Economic Evaluation of Drainage projects washeld in Lelystad (the Netherlands) on 2 September, 1983. The participants(including the Panel members and a representative of the World Bank) agreedthat the evaluation effort should be continued. This conclusion was endorsedby the 13th Panel meeting. In light of the experience gained, the renewedeffort should be carried out at a larger scale so as to enhance thesignificance of the results. A detailed proposal for M&E was proposed to theMOI by the Bank and FAO/CP project during the Identification of Drainage VProJect but despite initial agreement not enacted and staff of DRI wasreassigned to other activities.

4.21 EPAPO ex-cost evaluation croQramn. The evaluation division inEPAPO's Department of Planning and Follow-up created in 1970 produced aseries of nine reports'covering large areas of Nile Delta I and Upper EgyptI projects. Yields of four major crops were measured by the AgriculturalEconomic. Institute of the Ministry of Agriculture using random samplingtechnique. The aim of the evaluation, contrary to to the crash programmemethod, was to compare yields before and after drainage in areas with andwithout drainage using the followTng fomula:

- S4 -

o rn a (YIn - Ylo - YOn - YOo) x 100-YIoYOo

with YIo a Yield inside project area before drainage installationYIn a Yield inside project area n years after drainage installationYOo - Yield outside project area before drainage installationYOn * Yield outside project area n years after drainage installationDYn - percentage yield increase

Results of the data analysis carried out by EPAPO are given in the tablebelow and indicate relatively modest positive crop response five to tenyears after installation. Various reasons can be put forward to explain thesignificant differences between the invariably substantial increases foundin pilot areas (the latest being the Mashtul pilot area report, 1986) andthose from EPAPOs ex-post evaluation programme and also to explain the verywide scatter of data from one area 1/ or sub-area to another and from seasonto season. The main reasons are: maTntenance problems with open drains, dueto heavy weed growth giving rise to high watter levels in open drains,delayed construction in drainage pumping stations, field drainageconstruction problems, etc. World Bank supervision missions frequently urgedEPAPO to link yield results with depth of watertable.

Analysis of the Crop Yield :valuation in Some Drained Areas

Date of Crop Area Years after % Yield increaseReport year analysed drainage with and without drainage

-(feddans) instaation Wheat Cotton Maize Rice

Nile Delta I

Jul. 80 .1976M77 160,000 5 16 12 16 15Jul. 80 1977/78 350,000 6 14 13 17 n.a.Jun. 81 1978/79 485,000 7 12 15 19 10Jul. 82 1979/80 600,000 8 13 15 16 14Jun. 84 1980/81 600,000 9 13 15 14 14Jun. 86 1981/82 655.000 10 draft report

UppLer Egypt Jan. 83 1979/80 11,000 4 9 9 15 -Feb. 84 1980/81 130,000 5 9 13 18 -Jun. 86 1981/82 152,000 6 1 6 13 -

Source: EPAPO ex-post evaluation programe.

4.22 No data so far is available for the Upper Egypt II and Nile DeltaII projects and a considerable backlog of data analyses is developing in theunit for yield evaluation. Now that considerable efforts are made by EPAPO'to strengthen monitoring of soil and water salinity watertable a:dpermeability factors new initiatives in the evaluation of crop responseshould be taken in order to increase the credibility of the drainageprogramme. The recommendationos made by various WS supervision missions

j/ Catchment areas varied from 10,000 to 100,000 feddans and sub-areas from1,000 to 20,000 feddans.

- 55 -

should also be taken into account to improve the program. The results fromthe Mashtul project area are again a confirmation of the importance of tiledrainage.

4.23 Other M&E activities. Late 1982 a soil research unit wasestablished In EPAPDS's Field Investigation and design division which, incooperation with the SWI of MOA and ORI would study the effect of subsurfacedrainage on depth of watertable and improvement of soil salinity. Due to thelimited means of the unit,results of this effort so far have been modest. Inthe Mashtul pilot project area (260 feddans located in the Eastern Delta),the OR! is essentially concentrated on testing drainage techniques andeconomic aspects under controlled conditions. A routine program was executedfor data collection on water application, groundwater levels and salinity,farm management, pratices soil salinity and alkalinity, crop yields anddrainage outflows. Very encouraging crop yield response results wereobtained.

4.24 New initiatives. As agroed during the appraisal of the Drainage VProject (October 1984), EPAPO has strengthened its M&E Unit. It has alsorecruted, through the Project Planning Department of MOI, a short-termexpatriate consultant to assist in setting up the programme and training ofpersonnel. The programme is now focussing to investigating and reporting onthe impact of drainage on depth to water table, soil salinity and on suchother aspects as may be appropriate. In addition t* the Director General andhis deputy, this unit at present has four civil ngineers and fiveagricultural engineers. In order to maintain this new momentum it isproposed to have regular short visits by PPO financed consultants, tobackstop this new unit and to integrate also the work of the yield responseunit in this program_e. The Planning and follow-up unit has also beenstrengthened recently with Dutch assistance to inore effective' plan,coordinate and monitor the activities under the project in ter of bothtargets and budgets. At pr4sent, the unit has nine qualified engineers,including the General Director and his deputy. The implementation monitoringplan has been agreed that would include computerized data management forconsolidated reporting, identification of bottle-necks, providing inputs toimproved programme planning and budgeting, and for reporting to the IBRO.

4.25 Conclusions reqardirq Upper EqYPt Drainaqe II Project. From theabove it 1s clear that virtually no crop yield response data, salinity orwatertable measurements concerning the areas Implemented with tile drainagewill be available for this project since ORI has not developed any researchactivities in the Mile Valley and is not planning to do so. Further, due tothe backlog of work and under-staffing in EPAPODs crop evaluation unit it isunlikely that results of MOA Economic Research Institute will be timelyanalysed. Yield response required for economic re-evaluation of this projectcan therefore only be based on the results of EPAPO's ex-post evaluation forUpper Egypt Drainage I project.

Cost Recovery System

4.26 Aqreemert. The Development Credit Agreement (Section 3.05)requires EPAPO to ake arrangements for the recovery from users of irrigatedland of capital costs with interest and O&M costs for field drains capitalcosts would be recovered in a maximum of 20 annual instalments. According toArticle 23 of Law No. 74 of Irrigation and Drainage, issued in 1971 theMinistry of Irrigation should prepare a statement of expenditures ofconstruction of the Field Drainage, including all costs born by theMinistry, plus 1OX for the administrative expenses; then state the cost perfeddan in the area of the drainage unit. The farmer has to bear all thecosts of constructing the field drainage, whether he is the owner, or the

- 56 -

tenant or the usufructuary. Both the owner and the tenant have to bear thecost if they are using the land in farming. The assessment mentioned shouldbe paid either in cash or in instalments, so that-all costs should be paidin not more than 20 years. The money will be collected start1ng from theyear after execution. Further, according to article 23: (1) statements onvalues to be recovered are sent to Treasury which has to Issue a decreeconcerning the collection of the assessments and its sheduled time inconnection with the land tax and with the same priority; (ii) a list ofbenefic~.ry's share of the costs will be issued in an Egyptian Daily anddisplayed In the Main Office of the Agricultural Cooperation Committee, andthe Notice Board in the Markaz or Police Station; (iii) farmers may objectwithin a period of 30 days whereafter expenditures become final; (iv) theEstate Tax Department (ETD-MOF) is responsible for collection of theassessments according to lists prepared by the Egyptian Public Authority ofSurvey Services (EPASS) and Expropriation; (v) lists are thoroughly reviewedand corrected through the Issuing of decrees.

4.27 SYstem chanqes. Prior to 1981 costs were recovered through theInternal revenue tax collectors. The Council of Ministers decided in April1981, and order No. 62 was issued in 1981 by the Minister of Agriculture, tocharge tile drainage costs through the Principal Bank for Development andCredit through its village branches and deduct charge from proceeds fromcooperatively marketed crops. The latter system never fonctioned fully inpractice for many reasons, the two most important being: (i) the objectionfrom the Central Agency for Auditing to the collection of charges by thevillage banks and (ii) the decision that village banks should not beinvolved in marketing of basic crops. In November 1983 it was decided toreturn the collection operation to the ETD. This was confirmed in Irrigationand Drainage Law No. 12 issued in 1984. Executive orders.issued in October1984 restituted the 3% incentives to collect the charges amongst governmentagencies as follows: 0.5% to EPAPO, 1.0% for the EPASS and 1.5% for the MTD.

4.28 Results. The changes. of collection system during the mainimplementatoin period of both Upper Egypt 1I and Nile Delta II Drainageprojects has seriously affected the start of cost recovery operations forboth projects in these areas. During the period 1980 to present collectionof charges has been on average below 20% of the amount due. During the1983/84 financial year only LE 0.05 million was recovered for the four WorldBank financed projects. The situation markedly improved during 1984/85 and1985/86 with recoveries respectively of LE 0.26 million and LE 1.27 million.Still, the latter amount recovered was only 18% of the amounts due. EPAPOwas not able to provide records of cost recovery by project which make amore detailed analysis difficult. As part of the new monitoring andevaluition effort started under the Drainage V Project it is recomendedthat EPAPO keep systematic records of cost recovery by project and area andthat theese be shown in the quarterly reports to the Bank. EPAPO should alsoassess the total arrears by project which by now are considerable. Annex 18gives a total assessment of costs to be recovered and actual recoveriesduring 1980/81 to 1985/86. ,

4.29 According to side Letter No. 3 EPAPO agreed to undertake within ayear a study of (1) the possibilities and ways of recovering capital and O&Mcosts of field drainage works, (ii) to adjust these charges periodically and(iii) the ability of farmers to pay the said charges. A first incompletestudy was presented to the Bank in August 1980. Through successive_mndments to the Project Agreements the date of completion of the reportwas postponed till June 1981. EPAPO agreed to provide the bank with a moresubstantive study to be prepared by them in collaboratioon with theAgricultural Economic Institute of MOA. This report was made available tothe Bank in draft late 1984.

-57-

Achievements of the Bilharzia Control Programme 1/

4.30 Very substantial progress has been made in reducing prevalence-rateof infection and controlling disease in the Middle and Upper Egypt. It hasdemonstrated over a large area inhabited by some 10.2 million people in 1984that control by integrated measures of area wide mollusciciding andselective mass chemotherapy can be delivered and maintained over a time-spanof up to 8 years. The baseline information in 1977, first year of thecontrol operations, shows a prevalence of about 30% in Middle Egypt. Thishas been reduced to about 7.4% by the end of 1985. The reduction inprevalence has been accompanied by a large reduction in intensity ofinfection to low levels, consistent with the presence of low worm burdens.However, transmission still continues in the project area and significantreinfections, particularly among schoolchildren have been taking place.Thus, continuation of the control measures through the maintenance phase ofthe programme is necessary. The table below shows the overall prevalence ofBilharzia in Middle Egypt.

Year Prevalence (X)

1977 29.41983 10.51984 8.51985 7.4

The cost of the Bilharzia programme is surprisingly low. In Middle Egypt thetotal cost for the period 1977/84 was about LE 26 million. The averagepopulatioi covered by the programme in this area is abqut 5 million people.Therefore the average annual cost per person for the intensive andconsolidation phases of the programme was about LE 0.64. The Bilharziacontrol cost in 1984 was just over 8% of the budgeted per capita cost of allGovernment health services. Annex 1S shows the foreign cost for theprocurement of equlpment and-materials and Annex 16 the local expenditures.

1/ For more details see Summary of the International Evaluation Mission ofBilharzia Control Programme in Egypt in Annex 19.

- 58 -

V. INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE ANC DEVELOPMENT

EoYDtian Public Authority for Drainage ProJects

5.1 Pi'esent orqanization structure. In late 1972 the Nile DeltaDrainage Authority and the organizatlon responsible for drainage in UpperEgypt were merged. Accordingly, the Egyptian Public Authority for DrainageProjects (EPADP) was established by a presidential decree issued in February1973 with responsibility for executing all drainage works in Egypt. EPADP iseupowered to carry out all field investigations, planning, design.evaluation, procurement, construction, budgeting and operation of projectsaccounts. The present organization structure of EPADP is shown in Chart 2.

5.2 During the caurse of the project various changes were made toEPADP's organizatio'i. The two posts of Vice-Chairman were merged but sixdepartments were created, during the period from 1978 to 1980, each headedby an under-secretary. The mechanical and electrical division was upgradedto a department and a maintenance department was created. This former is nowresponsible for supervising the installation of (new) pumping stations,transmission-lines, maintenance workshops and mechanical equipment. Underprevious WB drainage projects, operation and maintenance of completeddrainage systems (open and buried) remained the responsibility of theirrigation departments of the MIO. In 1979, in order to improve theallocation of funds, supply of equipment and the organization of O&, GOErightly transferred responsibility for the O&M of surface and sub-surfacedrains in tiled areas to EPADP. So far, EPADP is responsible for 2.0 millionfeddans of tile drainage, the responsibility of the balance of the tiledrained area still lying with the contractors (about 1.0 million feddans).The total maintenance budget for 1983/84 was LE 8.0 million of which LE 6.0million was used for open drain maintenance by the four MOI PublicExcavation Companies. EPADP now has one under-secretary for planning andfollow-up, and two under secretaries for project implementation, one for theDelta and one for Upper Egypt. The latter are responsible for surveys anddesign for channel remodelling and construction of both open drains andfield drainage (supervision of construction). Upper Egypt is divided intoseven directorates, i.e. Beni Suef, which includes Giza and the Fayoum,Niniya, Assyut, Sohaq, Qena ahd Aswan. In charge of procurement Is theAdministration and Finance Department of EPADP. An ad hoc committeecomprising the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and head of the Technical Office ofEPADP approve specifications prepared by the design office.. It alsoevaluates bids and makes recommendations for contract awards.

5.3 EPAOP presently employs at its Cairo Headquarters and directoratesabout 3,600 permanent staff, of which 266 civil engineers, 101 mechanicaland 105 agricultural engineers. Casual labourers (mainly in the Delta andUpper Egypt) number about 2,500 and work particularly in the field of drainmaintenance. For design and supervision of construction, EPADP hasstrengthened the division and had in 1985 592 employees in four directoratesin the Delta and 1,412 in seven directorates in Upper Egypt. The number ofpermanent mechanics and labourers used for construction is Qn average threetimes higher in Upper Egypt than in the Delta, but the number of engineersis practically the same. For maintenance of existing drainage systems theAuthority employs 975 staff, of which 646 are working in the Delta and 284In Upper Egypt.

-59-

5.4 Performance of EPADP. While the Authority suffered during theinitial stages of the project from an inadequate organizational set-up andfrequent changes in leadership, many positive steps have been taken andstability and continuity in senior positions since 1981 have led tonoticeable qualitative and quantitative improvements. The relations withother governmental organizations involved in drainage (DRI, EALIP, MOA) haveimproved and the bi-annual meetings of the Dutch/Egyptian drainage panel area convenient forum for dialogue, exchange of technical information andinnovations.

5.5 EPADP has been suffering during the course of the project fromshortages of engineers and frequent changes in staff due to the low wagestructure in EPAOP in particular, and the MO' in general, and this despitethe special allowances paid to EPADP staff since 1977 on request from theBank. Shortages in civil engineers were particularly felt in the areas ofdesign, construction planning and control and reporting.

5.6 With the support of Dutch bilateral assistance, various groups ofsenior engineers' in EPADP and the contractors were trained in constructionmanagement, quality control, and operation and maintenance of drainagemachinery by the Lake Yssel Polders Development Authority in Holland. On-the-job training for junior engineers was also successfully organised by thesame organisation (see para. 3.35).

Contractors

5.7 Actual instaliation of tile drainage in Upper Egypt was contractedin 1980 to seven construction companies, of which six public-owned and oneprivate. Several public companies were attached to the General Authority forLand Reclamation, since recently integrated in the Ministry of Agriculture.The nublic companies often use small private enterprises as sub-contractors..Open drain remodelling was mainly executed by four MOI public excavationcompanies. A detailed analysis of performance of contractors involved inUpper Egypt II and Delta II Projects is given in the preparation report ofDrainage V Project prepared by FAO/CP. Likewise, an analysis performance ofthe four MOI companies in open drain maintenance and remodelling isavailable in the channel maintenance preparation report also prepared byFAO/CP. Both reports contain a series of recommendations for improvement ofcontractor performance, spare parts management, maintenance and repairswhich could result in a 10% reduction of down-time, an increase of 18% ofproductive days per year and an increase of daily productivity by 10%.Realistic tender prices (price of field drainage installation per feddan)were urged to enable contractors to pay sufficient labour wages to overcome'down-time caused by labour shortage..

Ministry of Health

5.8 The Bilharzia programme is carried out through four administrationlevels (i) Ministry of Health - Oepartment of Endemic diseases with theoverall responsibility for the execution of the programme; (ii) the healthdi-ectorate of the governorate where the director of Endemic diseases is theeExecutive Director in charge of the Bilharzia control activities; (iii) thedistrict manager w1,Q is responsible for the activities within the district;and (iv) the Rural Health Units (RHU). The workload of all concerned isconsiderable and on each level only a percentage of the total work time isbeing spent on Bilharzia control.

- 60 -

5.9 The present management system is appropriate. Procurement,logistics, storage and distribution of drugs and molluscicides areundertaken efficiently. The transport system is in good condition and wellsupervised. Personnel management is adequate, most positions are filled. Thepresent organizational structure is geared to execute area-widemollusciciding, and snail and human prevalence surveys. Chemotherapy ishandled through the RHU. In the future the emphasis will be more onchemotherapy and less on mollusciciding. These changes of strategy will havecobsequences on the management structure.

- 61 -

VI. BENEFITS AND ECONOMIC RE-EVALUATION

6.1 Benefits from oPen drain remodelling. The remodelling of opendrains on 500,000 feddans is a pre-requisite for a well functioning fielddrainage system but has also non-negligible indirect benefits which areeasily overlooked. While widening and deepening existing drains, oftenchoked with weeds because of the drain maintenance backlog, drains areautomatically deweeded and maintained, which represent a considerable savingin economic terms on the MOI maintenance budget. The average cost per feddanfor drain maintenance was LE 2,200/km in 1984-85. Hence at 1984-85 unitcosts the saving in drain maintenance on 1,226 km of open and branch drainswas LE 2.7 million. Direct benefits from the 346 km of new open drains andremodelling of the existing open drains are difficult to quantify but areconsidered in conjunction with those of field drainage system. Besides theevacuation of field drainage discharges deeper open drains also facilitatedirect drainage in a strip of land on both sides of the drain according tosoil permeability parameters.

6.2 Estimated crop yield benefits from the field drainaqesystem. Relief of the drainage constraint is essential if a progressivedeclTine in yields is to be arrested and significarnt Increases inagricultural production are to be achieved in the future. However, thedirect impact on which project benefits are calculated has been assessedonly on the basis of the limited changes in yield which are expected withoutany change in agricultural practices.

6.3 During project appraisal it was assumed that without the projectproduction would gradually decline due to increased waterlogging andsalinity by 30% over a 35 year project period. With the project, yieldswould rise from existing levels by4i6 to 35% (see table overleaf). Fourgeneral considerations lead to more caution on the effect of drainage inUpper Egypt:

1) the inconclusive results of EPAPO ex-post evaluation of Upper EgyptI Project shown in para. 4.21;

II) the unavailability at present of crop yield response data forUpper Egypt Drainage II project areas;

iii) the general impression from observations of detailed fieldinvestigation data, available in EPAPD, Indicating that constraintsin terms of soil salinity, soil permeability, watertable depth,etc. in certain project drainage basins were less severe than inUpper Egypt I catchments and than anticipated at project appraisal;

iv) part of the field drainage system is not fully operational due tocertain design-(wide spacing) construction or maintenance problems'(blocked collectors) not yet resolved.

- 62 -

Considering the above, yield declines without improved open and fielddrainage systems are now conservatively esttmated to be on average about 5%over the said 35 year period and incremental yields with drainage rangingfrom 7% to 15%. This conservative assumption is shown below:

Yield increases due to field drainaeCrop A1Dralsal PCR-re-es 5imate

Wheat 35 7Maize 25 10Cotton 25 10Bersim 25 1SSugarcane 15 15Legumes 35 15Onions 35 15Vegetables (tomatoes) 25 15

Incremental production at full development (1995) for major crops with theabove assumption would be:

Crop Production EstimatesBefore With Project Without Project IncrementalProJect (35 years) ProductionSAR SAR PCR SAR PCR SAR PCR

(..... tons'000) ... ........

gtMto-n (lint) 31 39 34 21 29 18 5Sugarcane 1,596 1,891 1,755 1,117 1,516 774 239Wheat 117 162 125 82 111 80 14Maize/sorghum 315 481 414 264 357. 217 57Onions 51 71 59 36 48 35 11Beans nd otherlegumes 53 74 61 37 50 37 11Vegetables 332 421 382 232 315 189 67

The net incremental benefits of the project resulting from the aboveproduction are given in Annex 17, table 1.

6.4 Proiect economic rate of return. The re-estimation of the.project's rate of return provides interesting Insights concerning the valueof the drainage program though care should be taken in its interpretationgiven uncertainties on crop yield response and local project costs. Localproject costs have been converted to.constant 1986 ecor.nmic values using thedeflators published by WB 1/ to give a total cost in LE of 326 million,including costs for 160,000 feddans still to be equipped with field drainage(see Annex 17, table 2). Local costs were increased with an averageaccounting factor of 1.7 (see Annex 17, table 3) to reflect subsidies inenergy, cement and other cost items. Calculated over a 30 year project lifethe basic ERR is now estimated at 14%. The appraisal estimate was 29%. Thislower ERR ts explained basically by the conservative yield responseestimates.

1/ ReDort No. 6195-EGT Current Economic Situation and Economic ReformProgram, October 22, 1986.

- 63 -

6.5 Switching values have been estimated (see Annex 17, table 4) toindicate that the minimum net benefits that would result in a minimumacceptable ERR of 12% would be 11.6% below those given in para. 6.3. It ishowever likely that benefits will exceed those assumed and a sensitivityanalysis in Annex 17, table 5 indicates that with increases in yields of 20%and 50% the ERR increases to 17 and 23% respectively . Further, someindications from aerial photographs taken in 1984/85 show crop response incertain upper Egypt catchments more rapid than the five years assumed inthis analysis. In conclusion, it would seem that despite the administrative,management and construction problems associated with this project it hasstill 'been a worthwhile investment for the nation. It is recommended thatduring the course of the fifth drainage project, EPAPD continues its ex-postevaluation program and collects technical soil and water parameters whichcould improve the present data base and reveal likely a better crop responsethan now assumed.

- 64 -

VII. BANK PERFORMANCE

1.1 Supervision of the project by the Bank was timely and satisfactory.The supervision missions were instrumental in drawing attention to potentialproblems and in assisting the Goveriment in finding appropriate solutions.In spite of some contentious subjects (use of consultants, design issues,monitoring and evaluation, etc.), the Bank staff succeeded in maintaining acontinued good relationship with the Egyptian officials. The flexibleposition taken by the Bank in various aspects, during the projecti1plementation, proved to be correct and beneficial for the project.

7.2 In evaluating Bank's performance, it is now obvious that too muchconfidence was placed on the managerial capabilities of EPA4P and on thecapacity of the public sector contractors. The proof for this are the longdelays in implementing the project. Efforts made during the course of theproject for accelerating the drainage programme have been unsuccessful.Equally unsuccessful were the efforts made by the Bank to improve certainaspects of quality control, to carry out adequate monitoring and evaluationof drainage works, to establish a good cooperation between Extension Serviceand EPADP, and to improve cost recovery. This completion report provides agood opportunity for the Bank to consider, first, whether remedial actionsshould have been taken during project implementation for compliance toBank's recommendations, and second what kind of action should be taken inon-going , and future projects. However, there are cases where Banksupervision missions succeeded in making-improvements. These cases are theIntroduction by EPADP of new design principles for field drainage, thebetter organization of maintenance service for drainage works, theImprovement in quality of PVC pipes produced in Egypt, etc.

7.3 There can be no doubt that the Bank made the right choice inselecting drainage for its priority lending activity in the agriculturalsector. Investment in drainage is a sound long-term investment and anecessary condition for attaining high levels of agricultural production.

7.4 As far as the' Bilharzia Control Programme is concerned, Banksupervision missions have been valuable in stimulating the necessary'organization of control inputs, data collection and evaluation.Consideration should, however, be given to greater direct involvement ofBank staff for supervisi0 in any future programme of this kind and scale,since the main supervision effort was carried out by a consultant intropical diseases, and little specialist support was provided by thePopulation, Health and Nutrition Department.

- 65 -

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

Project Justification and ObJectives

8.1 There is no doubt that investment to remove the drainage constraintin large areas of the Nile Valley was both timely and necessary to allowadditional investments in development of the sector. On the whole theproject is making a valuable contribution towards arresting waterlogging andsalinizat1on and towards increased agricultural production. Although fielddrainage has not yet been Installed on about one third of the planned area,all other components have been implemented including a highly successfulBilharzia control component. Farmers will be asst'red that their agriculturalland will remain highly pr-ductive and furthei yield increases from advancedtechnological packages can now be more safely promoted.

8.2 In terms of economic re-evaluation, the project does not appear tohave performed as estimated at appraisal. This is not due to cost overruns,but to the more conservative estimation of project benefits because of theabsence of sufficiently convincing crop response data from the project area.The ERR is nevertheless still 14% sufficient to justify the projectinvestments.

ProJect Content and Schedulina

8.3 The general concept of the project was sound and relatively simpleand its implementation took advantage of the experience gained from bothdrainage installation and bilharzia control under the previous projects.However, .experience showved that the estimation of time required to executesuch a large drainage programme was overly optimistic. In fact more thandouble ttme will be required to complete the project than--that planned atappraisal. The insufficient preparation of the project and inadequacy oftechnical data to substantiate the selection and delineation of projectdrainage basins led subsequently to frequent changes during execution. Theintroduction of a new drainage pipe material, a major innovation in Egyptwas delayed for almost 3 years and this was the major cause for late projectcompletion. Subsequently EPAPO reached an average rate of implementation of70 to 90,000 feddans annually which was substantially below the originaltarget of 140,000 feddans.

Lessons Learned

8.4 ProJect preparation and designs. The absence of a reasonablycomplete feasibility study (prepared with participation of internationaldrainage specialists) and field investigations (reconnaissance or semi-detailed level) led to frequent changes in priorities of selected areasduring project implementation. In addition, there is a feeling that thereare areas where drainage was installed without being necessary. What is,required is that field investigations at a reconnaissance level be carriedout in order to determine the areas where field drainage should beinstalled. To this effect clear technicaT selection criteria should beadopted as a guide in this process.

8.5 Timimn of appraisal. Droject effectiveness and oroJect start-UD. In Egypt, a long time usually elapses between-appraisal and actual fullscale commence of project implementation. for instance the Upper EgyptDrainage II project was appraised in may 1976 but full scale operations did

- 66 -

not start before 1980, i.e. almost four years later. Bank should keep thisin mind In future projects in Egypt and project implementetion schedulesshould be realistically proposed. Allowances should be maue for initial.delays in Assemby's approval of the project, compliance to conditions ofeffectiveness etc. as well as for carrying out preparatory arrangements forthe execution of the project, such as tendering, award of contracts,mobilization of contractors etc.

8.6 But in spite of the above delays the general conclusion is that theproject was appraised too eirly by the Bank. At the time of appraisalcompletion of field drainage under the ongo'ng Upper Egypt Drainage Iproject was only 27%. Becuase of the already known limited performancecapability of EPAPD .and contractors, Bank should have awaited at least untilhalf of the field drainage area of Upper Egypt Drainage I project wasimplem_nted before proceeding to the appraisal of the new project. Theargument that time should be allowed for the remodelling of open drainsprior to the field drainage is not valid since experience showed thatremodelling of open drains was implemented fast and well in advance of fielddrainage.

8.7 Technoloqical chanqes. The project proved that a majortechnological change I.e. the shift from concrete tiles to locally producedPVC pipes was feas'ble on a large scale and the drainage systems built withplastic pipes proved to be safer and more efficient. After initial problemswith cnntract negotiations and insv.ailation of equipment, production of PVCpipes in terms of quantity was adequate. Some quality problems (mainly pipeperforations) have been overcome and the three production units will alsosupply pipe required for the areas in the Nile Valley included in theDrainage V Project. Other technological successful change was thqtntroduction of collector pipe laying machines by which most of thecollectors were installed.

8.8 Construction delays. Contractors did not perform as well asexpected and contract completion took much longer than anticipated. There isclearly a need to strengthen the local construction industry and Governmentshould envisage the participation of the private sector companies. One ofthe reasons for the inadequate performance was the inappropriately low unitprice quotations of Public Companies during tendering and subsequently theinsufficient adjustments for price inflation. In future public companiesshould be urged to propose more realistic unit prices for contracts in orderto avoid financial problems and ultimately delays during projectimplementation. Managerial problems (planning of work, down-time ofmachinery, spare parts, etc.) are another cause of slow performancefrequently noticed during WB supervisions ard which can be remedied withmanag e nt training and support.

8.9 Technical improvements. The Drainage Authority has often beenconservatve tn adopting technical innovations proposed by ORI, Bankmissions and/or the Dutch Egyptian drainage panel. Lateral drain spacing wasthe major change adopted during the project and this certainly was.beneficial, but many other changes proposed (drain pipe envelopes, joints,manholes, etc.) have still not been implemented. EPAPO engineers arequalified and have the capabilities to try out Improvement quickly on largeareas and should be further encouraged to do so.

8.10 Cost recovery. The annual recovery of capital and O&M costs offield drainage works has been on average below 25% of amounts due. Therecovery system Is complex and the transPer of responsibility for collectionof charges from tax collectors to village banks led to insignificant amountsrecovered during 1982/83 and 1983/84. The Ministry of Irrigation has

- 67 -

reversed to the initial system and improved incentives for tax collectionrecently and recoveries improved. But there is nevertheless need for an indepth revision of the system, in order to Increase its efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

8.11 Other lessons which can be learned from the project are:

1) the need to have adequate maintenance not only of the fielddrainage network but also of the open drainage system and toestablish timely the required infrastructure. In this respect, thedecision to give EPAPO the responsibility for all maintenance ofdrains in tile drained areas appears to have been appropriate;

II) to insist on continuity in international training and technicalsupport such as the excellent Dutch-Egyptian cooperation(preferably through grants) in order to enhance the rapid adoptionand use of technical innovations, design, management informationand support systems. EPAPD's senior staff is aware that scopeexists for improvement of planning the methods and has called onassistance of the Netherlands Government to continue and expandtraining, and introduce compouterized planning, design andmanagement techniques;

iii) to further develop pilot areas with vertical drainage incollaboration with the Groundwater Research Institute as analternative/complement to subsurface drainage in certain areas ofthe Nile Valley and in view of reusing drainage water to supplementirrigation with Nile water;

iv) to encourage EPAPO to participate in integrated soil and watermanagement pilot areas and drainage re-use and irrigationimprovement projects.


PROJECT COWPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECt


Ioptementation Schedule: Appraised and Actual

9tre for? ,orr 1979 1980 l9Ot t9s2 s983 t9e t4 19S 108j!

ndrtatin ....... ...... .a * -...F- inccten.| -- .*.... - - ,- -. - 0

.Feddrainawe

.Aquip. #or "n dI- .. . . . ..... . .-... . -..

.lGulp. for min dro station . . . * .* *.

.1Oou4. for PVC factories | .- ......

.Aw _1010. ter f K ..-. ...... ................ ...... . ......... .....

Afqui. fur 11@td dre1r ___ .......p.* .. .-

.Vehicles, workshop, etc. . * * * * *** * , .

.Equ1p. for land reclaat1ion _. - *

I I3. COUSIUUCTUTI

b1i drains ....... ......

*Fu.mpnl statio. n ..... ... ........... * ..... - --.... ...... -.

MeAd drinaget ........... - .......... .... t,

.lad reclamatitoe - -. 4. ..... 4 .. l... .4444

0b co Atats er ;ted ta ln tr puj* I

S. T2AS I6 g - (2) ...... ...... -.

(it fKctd to be c ami W.- aisaai) aP training. *...... actut(S IraiaV udw bcAr fudnl; |kistaK.-

ARAB SItLlC Of t Pl

PROJECt CO@PLIEIO@ *tPORt - UPPER E6tPl ORASWAOE 11 PROJECT

EPAP - 19U Orgaigation Chbrt

USIOERSECREIARIES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CRAMU

ORIGDRGAISATIO esumuva | D6 jERtN |s |. us | ,mffE

|VICE CH^IRIUN fat EXEctiUII

TOiEmEahuS UPR EGElPt P ltOJ N IIANCE | ECK. AND ELECT. DELA N.OJE tlS fINANE AD rOLO-UP

DO_ EKECOION |C DE SlTRUCTRES p L stOEt woe | ~ ,, EC,Y,P,t F |DSC OLLOwOUP ODESIGNl EAST OELTA L DESPIG AND FOLLWU

DO DENS SUES 06 MINYA Dr, Soul"- 06 UPE a. CCl O DO ADMSIN. A040 OESIGU

06 ASSIU 06 SSONA 06 |jD61 WRININ6

ING6 OIEIUl I I t IE ml IC SUN I| DCSOUlN

2 06 ItOIIIIO 3 l OC lSOt LRI TORES | E DELTt MIDDLE DELIA

| 6 DC f EiII SOUlN-

r -t~~~~~~~~I Underseeretarles Iffytlo Is..... hl gowerwoorates providJe general supuovIsion o General irectora responsible tor t.nstnacIo Of drala yorbs.

:,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~GWS

ARAB REPUBLIC OF EGYPt

OOPLEIION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE 11 PROJECT

DRAINAGE AREAS IN UPPER EGYPT

FAYCUM AND BNNI BtEF *s511 GYERNVMTE

EL MINVAGOVERNORTE

C410Xs to oP Cd km~~%d ~ *

*. -beU*u - * Aupq - -

ARAO REP UBLIC OF EGYPTCOMPLETION REPRT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE If PROJECT

* DRAINAGE AREAS IN UPPER EGYPT

iOHAG GOVERNORATE

* ~~El Sdr

f f i Xk Q~~~~~~~~~~~~~ENA GOVERNORATE (MiONTH)1.~~~~~~~~~~~t

a S _ a f

S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

in

C4 h

ARA B R EPUe L IC OF E G Y PT

COMPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE 11 PROJECT

DRAINAGE AREAS. IN UPPER EGYPT

ASWAN GOVERNORATE

EOFU

lUENA GOVERNORATE (CENTRAL) l

-4

* A C - Egpt £I P*,d PAc m 0P)Ji \ N 1 Cmwd by Upff £o1106 SI Pv*d POAlw& Piscj

a~~~~~~~~*g rew M a~ r% W-

*Vi ao"

3.0 . * q~~~m3

To Aovw.n

- 74 -

A?Q:GX 1APAP PFPnBLIC OF MMYPT

PPo7EC'r r"4LEMTIC% ~P7' - TIPPER MAP" PPAINkM T! PMOTW"

(CcPEJ.1 637, LOAN 1285-EC!T)

Principal Features of Previous and Follow-on Bank frainaqe Projects

Descrilotion Nile er Nile Drainaaenelta I EFvDt T Delta II V

- Loan/credit No. Cr.181-EIA Cr.393-ECr Tn 1439-40/ Ln 25620Or 719-E T

- Sioning date 04/17/70 06/08/73 07/15/77 03/14/86- Effective date 12/22/70 11/28/73 04/17/78 non effective- Estimrted project

cowpletion at appraisal 12/75 06/79 12/82 12/31/90- Actual or expected prolect

comwletion date 12/80 06/83 10/R6 ] 03/31/91- Original loan/credit

closinq date 12/31/76 12/31/79 12/31/83 03/31/92- Extended/expected loan/

credit closinc date 12/31/80 07/31/81 12/31/85 -- Appraisal cost estinate

(tE$ million) 147.0 122.8 207.0 198.1- Actual/revised cost estimate

(TS$ million) 198.9 119.6 207.0 -- Loan/credit (USS million) 26.0 36.0 66.0 68.0- risbursement as of 09/30/86

(USS million) 24.0 34.9 66.0 -- Project area (feddans) 950,000 300,000 400,000 465,000

maior Project worksA. Remodellinq/Construction

of open drains:(i) area (feddans) 950,000 300,000 808,000 280,000

(ii) remodelling drains (km) 1,700 775 1,565 667(iii) new drains (km) - 865 - -

(iv) completion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 100 -

8. Field Drains (feddans) 950,000 300,000 . 400,000 465,000C7Oxpletion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 100 -

C. Pumping Stations No. 11 5 7 3/ -Conpletion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 75 -

D. Rclamution of salineland (feddan) - 22,400 -ComplUtion 09/30/86 (%) 100

Extension toP. Bilharzia control (feddans) 900,000 1,200,000 fed. incl.

Upper Egypt I & rr areas.

/ Ewet three piing stations shich they are expected to be cailetedon 4/87, 12/88 and 6/89 respectively.

y Pive new stations (one added in 1983) and two rehabilitations.

BRa AEPIU6LEC O0 EGYT

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - UP°ER EGYPT DRAINAGE tl PROJECT

(CRCOIT 037, LOAN 1265-CGT)

Annual Recurrent ond Capital Expenditures of t0t 1975-1985/50

Ulntantrv at irrlm-tlon I * 7 £fi I 9 7 6 I 9 1 7 I D 7 I a 7 * 9 R Oa 16 ma3a , £ani- Bm CaoJl hzt C£ol- R* AL aI clo £a e_ a-- R- e

current W current I± currOnt IAI urre 1 nt £Icurrent " currmnt ,... ,,,,(LE *000) . . . . .

rentral Administration 324 - 339 - 210 - 192 72 267 - 122 -I rigation Department 15.228 14.000 16.263 10.924 22. 073 15. 04 31.977 30.108 34.029 27.354 23.678 23.2961M rh.niCl and Electrical Dept. 9.606 1.064 13.100 1.082 10.492 1.440 12.343 10.344 15.23 15. 625 .3725 6.130

7.a4 n0g0 Authority 3.504 21.435 2.172 20.035 2.904 34.378 4.277 41.257 6.032 066.S5 3.285 20.707

*.e6o Research Center - - 3JS 95 6S6 607 800 1.208 941 2.3t2 505 505.. 0y AUL thorlty 4.143 * 233 4.996 200 5.195 260 4.066 362 7.185 371 3.766 .70

* swn Dam Aut ;orlty J.S38 .a4 ._JM 620 1741 1_952 1.21 12 424 1-922 14..640 n-x _L

Ttal*l 34.341 37.126 30.804 32.950 43.331 S4.441 56.983 95.775 66.219 120.777 37.731 59.094

Annual Total Expenditures* 71.467 71.760 97.772 152.751 192.995 96.025

Drainage as Percentage of 001Capital and Recurrent Funds 34.9 30.9 38.2 298. 37.6 33.1

_t

Annu-l Cxo nd1turo- tRecurrent and Capital IOt NOR 1960161 - 19151p6

Mini £ trw ot I rr I mat ton 19601iu 1981282 12M8203 1I83E84 iSal U leMstlM. .............. (LE-000 ...............

Central Administration 2.730 3.500 807 730 16867 2.495Irrigation Department 46.000 59.030 65.473 54.260 66.442 131.030Mechenicol and Electrical Dept. 24.300 29.000 20.763 38,725 21.333 34.000Dratnage Authority 79.740 80.000 50.444 17 69.285 70.000 77.000Water Research Center 1.9S0 2.000 .5610 5.320 2.749 3.900Survey Authority 600 950 1.295 1.050 967 2.500Asuan Dan Authority 0.550 5.700 5.060 4.664 7.903 11.100Sea Shores Protection Authority - - 3.553 3.608 4.066 16.000Compcni-c lO l]PaQ 9ii20 5L6i0 5-929 14625 10 e7s

TotIla 174.630 190.000 158.705 102.S7't 190.772 290.700

Dreinage as Pereentage of 301Capital and Recurrent Funds 45.6 42.1 31.6 37.4 37.1 26.5

11 Foreign currency repayments from Drainago Compenies. Local currency expenditure is low.

Sourcu O inistry of Irrigation.

AkAA REPUaLIC OF EGYPT

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE Il PROJECT(CREDIT 637. LOAN 1285-ECT)

Sank and/or IDA F1nanced Prolcta Other Than Tile Draina-e

P otAct Cradit±Loan i25R Effect i venos1 Estis*te Credit/ ReB-ri-Numbe o Sonsd Oria ginal Loan

Protect Cost Amount(USS million)..

1. Protects In A ricultur, SactorAgricultural Development I Cr. 930 07/24/79 02/21/79 45.8 32.0 To increase productivity in 2 GovernoratesAgricultural Development 11 Ln n.a. n.e. 359.0 139.0 by strengthening agricultural banking.

extension A coop. and providing tractors.ZerIcultural Implements and pumping units

Nes Land Development Cr. 1083 12/16/80 not yet IS3.0 60.0 To develop 24.000 feddons desert land In-(W. Nubarlym) cluding settlement of 4.000 smallholders

families and a component for BilbhralaControl Programme.

Fish farming Development Cr. Oil 04/24/81 not yet 26.3 14.0 Establish fish forms on 1.800 ted, In theDelta. Project also includes facilitiesb equipment for training, consultantsservices S programmes for strengtheningextension services 9 monitoring.

It. Aaroindustrv ProiectsFruit and Vegetable Development Ln. 1276 06/11176 12120/76 106.0 50.0 To develop a seed farm . associated act-

ivities A to provide credit to processors9 exporters of fruits 9 vegetables.

Agroindustries I Cr. 988 05/01/80 12/3/80 60.8 45.0 To establish small & medium sized agro-industries as well as replacement ofslaughterhouses at Alexandria S Cairo.

Agroindustries ll Ln 2243 n.a. n.s. 134.5 81.2 To establish small £ mediu sized agroindustries as well as replacement ofslaughterhouses at Alexandria L Cairo.

111.0th-r Support Pro1ectsCotton Ginning Rehabilitation Cr. 423 07/30/73 02/15/74 40.4 18.5 To finance the first of a three-phase

programme for modernizing cottonginning Industry.

Talka It Fertili er Cr. 484 06/24/74 01/22/75 132.0 20.0 To expand urea production capacity.

Agricultural/lndustrial Cr. 524 12220J74 03/19/75 - 15.0 To finance Imports of foodstufts, pest-Imports Ln. 1002 icides. tractors I machinery spare ports.

Regional Electrification Ln. 1453 07/15/77 02/06/78 70.6 48.0 To extend power facilities for multipleuses Including irrigation water puping. Z

Technical Assistance Cr. 1162 n.e. n.a. n.a. n.e. To *ssist Government to develop an minstitutional capacity in planning. Xfeasibility and engineering studios.

Irrigation Pumping Stotions Ln. 2270 na. n.e. 6.5 41.5 To prevent crop losses due toRehabilitation irrigation/drainage pump fallure.

Chnnsel tlntmnance In. 2S620 n.a. r.a. 127.0 .70.0 To ioprove thannel maintenance aadreduce its cost.

- 77 -

A!'NEY 4

APAR PEPr1BLIC OF EGYPT

PFPOnYT C PLE''Ct7 RPEPr - tUPP"I EGYPr MAINAEr 11 PPQCVT.

(COWMIT 637, riCN 1285-FGr)

Protect lr-iiicon from the revelopent rredit Acreement

'(he Project which is located in the Project Area consists of:

Part A

A drainage and reclamation procramme includinct:

(i) drainace of areas totallinq ahout 500,000 feddans bv theinstallation of ahout 50,000 km of buried field tile*drains of PVC corruqated oimes and about 6,000 km ofburied field collectors of cement oines, and theorovision of vehicles and construction and maintenanceeouipment reatiired therefor;

(ii) the imvrovement of about 1,226 km of existino opendrains and the excavation of about 346 km of new ooen-.rains, ane the nrovision of vehicles and equionentrecuired therefor;

(iii) the construction of one pzwiina station wyith Provisionfor an electric transmission lines

(iv) the reclamotion of about 12,000 feddans of severelysaline land bv avpsum treatment and leachino, and theprovision of tile enuipnent reouired therefor;

(v) the provision of eouipment and vehicles for theAuthority and for extension services; and

(vi) the provision of technical assistance for the traininaof the staff of the Authority in drainaqe works.

Part B

A bilharzia control prooramme includinq:

(i) snail control throuah a vroqragnu of regular area-wideaiplications of mnolluscicides in an area of about120,000 feddans in Asyut wovernorate;

(ii) provision of the oral druq niridazole to health centersand units within the 120,000 feddanst and

* (iii) provision of materials, eauipment and vehicles.

Part c'

Provision of molluscicides for Part B of the Uoper Egyotnrainaoe I Project.

no S WPKCo E6tPT

b dWEtl~~~~~~~m.c COWI.tET U MlFSOIR

UfflE 161T OSAINE It PtOJECt

eazl* 63?, Law 125-E1)

h*deW Sana Area - Aspialsea Bewised 1/

tpria d bk,sIA Iatip ... Actuit or E *timtd F X ........................ed .. ktA

AM AlB t w or Estited

Ctm b u AMes am am RIB3 no AS a15 am/ OrU am89 89/O lDate of

(att/SS - - qtuetl

_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I,0 %am 4b D bd

AU2 ~~. m.th IO~~10AW1 S,tll 4,44 - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _7

ft w rank .an 11,11I IO.1m - - - - _ _ - - - - 6/

lb-toUt: 33.1113 21,1W 25AW 2,000 $,000 4,5W 4,400 4*= 4,500 .ZD -

-m . *D 5,ID 5,t - - - - - - - - - - Ut12

R i1 *AD 310 3,73O - - - - - - - - - - t2

62561 5~~~~~,131 5,50D 5.4 - - - - - - - - - - UtSS

T__1ft M 6.Al 7,14 - - - - - - - - - - - 6/89

Namt t 2,13 t2,00 3, - - - - - - - - - - yU q

Smh-totd.: 40,111 - ,58O- 17,7SS 1.440 ' 1113 ,700 3,14 2pOW 2,570 3,11 6,4W 1,4tO _-

an SWDiii- !,Al *7,D 28,5tO3 - - - - - - - - - - 12t/U

lisa lest 7.113fl - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4/

th* _i liGt 8,013 - - - - - - - - - - - - . -

Vesleds 33.113 1^0 7,111 11,4- -5 - - - - - - - 6/87

5w SinAI WA 3Wm 35W0 - - - - - - - - 12/89 6/

Sibtdta: B5ADl 75,SD3 43,W)5 3,93 9,1113 9,113 7,5W wD 6,2(0 8,51 ¶2,5(1 12,4tO -

E;ii I 10,51) 16,4113 16,4Kl - - - - - - - - - - UtoS

1I - R 1 - 9,m11 9,5W - - - - - - - - - - t/86

ed1 li,m Z7AtDl 13,/lD tl3 - - - - - - - - - 12/8S !'

Sab bt _* 29,113 3y,4O 83.5W - - - - - - - - - - t2UII

ftu Arof ?ISSD !'3, D Ul,410 - - - - - - - - - - o/7

r" QS - 19,450 SA - - - - - - - - - - 68

lb-otal: 115,1W U03,130 46, 3,419 9D 14,5W 22,540 3 8,140 12SAM 18,m5 15 7,51

lEil U,alO 20,16113 63.*- -3-3- - - - - - - 12/8

amnt It u, 9,4GD 9,5W - - - - - - - - - 612/

Sao .' 29AM A,50 U ,5500 - 12/--

n Tag I - 21,40 21,1CO - --- - - - - 12 l

Wm Et Val s 61.4W0 91,2 96,353D 3201 hAD 6,11 11, 13 9, ,C 7, -

_ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_

am~~~~~~~ To

.4

iu11

*m~ ~ ~ IN

m 'f

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~21 IP, A , t

!~en w5 B...t;{m 8 * S .u; -I - S

N~~~~~~~~~~~ , , .i .... K U| Ut

i . ,m ,,,, E ... .

ea em m;s a e as,

mule,, simu ,,,, - .es, ..

'A ll gl0| lF; {IE

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.~~~ _

ANNEX 5

-~ ~~~~-0

I/ ALL areas in gross feddans. Net areas corespwond to 8SX of gross areas on average.Zi Abt in immediate need of drainage.I Nbt in inmediate need of drainage.Zi ImpLemnted under Lpper Egypt Drainage I Project.S/ Implemented under Loper Egypt Drainage I Project.X R maining area shifted to Drianage V Project.7T Area shifted from Govennmnt's drainage projects.V Approx. 10,C0 fedas impLemented urier Upper Egypt Drainage I Project.V/ Area shifted from Govennet's drainwae projects.1i/ Area shifted from Governnent's drainage projects.lTV Area shifted from Government's drainage projects.17/ The rermining area not in innediate need-of drainage.1/i Approx. 5,5M0 feddbns inpLenented under Lpper Egypt Drainage I Project.u/ Reamining area not in iemmdiate need of drainage.

11/ Mbst of the area not in immediate need of drainage.1T& Remining area not in imwediate need of drainage.17/ Remining area not in imnediate need of drainage.i Remining area not in immediate need of drainage.W/ The need for drainage wiLl be reexamined.M/ Area shifted from Governvent drainage projects.2Ti Area sh'fted fron Govennment drainage projects.Zf Area shifted from Governmnt drainage projects.Z2Y Area shifted from Govenmnnt drainage projects.I1 Area shifted fron Govenrrent drainage projects.

3/ Area shifted fron Governnent drainage projects.

ARAB REPUISLI( O EGYP'

POOJECT tO tPLllOlt RlPORI

PPAER EGYPT DRAUU6( It PROJECT

(CR0?IT 631, LOADS 1285-EGI)

Open Orains Areas - Appraised nd Actusity lplemmnted 1J

Catd Arma 1r d Actki.t Actul knus Wemwa1ac (tfd ktct*tAre Ct ted astae of

Name kme 7? 19 80 am aims 1/8 83/& am am Csttetion

25801 6o,0 - - -Am 2,- s. - - 2/nR_as 5l.,OAW 5,0) - Sta D - - - - m -

_ 9u Il 4,0D 41W - 4IID . 1 t - - -2. mgeO 55td S SAM - 2,0W 2,20 1, D - - - -12/Tdta-fmln 6AI 6,OM -- , 4,40D --- - - - Vpast I, ,tW IAD - --- - 12-- - 6/80

R 11 4,0W 4, - -,A - - - - - - - - I'

tota: tOAlD 12,41 - 11,0W 2,O2= 2,4) 16,4EO - - - -

TI s 6,DaD SSAD 1,2W -M S.?0 5,220 - - 8,- - - 6t_bsa At 1,?A '.AD 4- - - - - - - - 121t8

tnS-I O , 84W SAM 4W - - - - - - - -9ostuAs 20a 0,00 2D,0iA - ,30 3,10 1,8W2 6,240 2,l0 t, 12---

resanc South a0DW2(13 - 5.411 1,4W gm36W-- 28-tata 55,) 4535,W 13,2Wa 3B,2D 6,37 13,320 2,-0 - 8, - - 8

IOWA

msu hA" 30,1 19,6 4, - - - 6,10 6 2 - - 12/83Wm r 2P,0D t8,4, 11,50 W 1,85 3,D50 3-- - - - 91NN"-e-20D[t- Sout 29A 31, 150 - 9 D 1,8DD 13,31 2,2tO - /SKrs& 3, 3,0 1,2 OD - 250 10,24 2- 2,60D - - tV85

9hotat: XPB,U 15,600 15,20D No0 1,150 16,5Z0 62m O,R0 2076 23,48 2-

11 Al ae In Wmes ft8Z. DDt a1es cor -m to1 of m - -n a- 1ap.1/ fIed bwtttl tbtm tt * 1itiq is * reqAred i this area

-$27- - a *oz

Pe.2

Law, ee , siga. cl,i ci egg i

mmmi. . limmi am . ci m.

.~~~~~mc af .. m.m.., ., , 9 a,,,e,,| .. mum

. ~ ~~~~~~~~~ -i tcc cai, sem m c|t|t* N

- i 5E |,&||t s8e8$b| §''''''!@ v@

|~~~~~~~~~ E N .

- i ma ;a ga , e| tw g ^ * st 82§ .!

~~ff la mm sR .5s w r, § ^ 5@5 9

U: : 0 1

; ,11i 1X0 14l}l .lst

ARAU REPUBLIC OF EGYPT

PROJECT CONPLITION REPOET - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE It PROJECT

(CREOIT 637, LOAN 1ZJS-EGT)

Pumping Station: Appraised and Actuatty.lopLesented

e chnicat Dbat Stotus of toxpet ion (Z) bate of CostStation _Aralsat Actuat (9/30/86) pprAset ctual

Area Mm&i1itciiiY&A Area NUmber DiTschrge Totat Procur. Civit Instatta- Comen- Coupte- =ocaIiU1elgn TotiI Local foreipserved of per diduge served of per discrge of works tion cement tion LE .(USS sittion). .E 0S5(fed) pump unit 3/s (fed) pmp unit m3/s quip. mitlion 1/ mi*llin mttin

units .31, units dh/s

Nenshat-et- 3,=D 3 1.2 3.6 zi,000 3 1.6S 4.95 100 100 100 3/80 386 0.10 0.14 0.40 0.30 0.54

Pahab obcontingencies 0.07 0.07 0.2E - -

Total cost 0.17 0.21 0.65 0.30' 0.54

1/ Egyptian pounds converted in US dolatrs ping the exchange rate at appraisa of USS 1.00 LE 0.39.

1!1

AA REPUBLie Or E6YPTPOJECT COIPLIIOIi REPORT

UPPER EGYPT *RIWM 11 PROJECT

(CREDIT 437, LOANS l2S-E61)

Overall optleinetat1On Note of Field brainage in Egpt

.wiU

Taw t91 71 "a7 193 1975 M97 197 t91| 197 l9l "MI MM/8 MAR8 12/8 MM MMW Tt

kelect~~ ' EDSqat.. 1i

lo ktt Ias 40 t-- 1 0 t133 141 3 ID 1 1t 45 4 f - 93It* Mt if - - - - - - - - - - 2 9 S5 73 91 91 10 9 'd

bAdh Floect - - - - - - - - 4 7 18 10 5 - - -OASaiC 8 ' _ _ 477 - 17 S 19 26 15 1S 17 31 622

lb-totat: 1 ' l,212 w 59 10 91 93 16 u 11 2

U. 361Pt1

t ypt I - - - - - 35 46 39 4S 51 24 31 6 23 - - - - m4U r Egpt1 0 - -s- - - - - - - - 2a 51 10 76 63 52 *GAsi& iseR' 2f 1 a8 8 35 S. - - - - '

ota: 3' '-97- 3 42 32 4.2 Se 101 76 a 52 - 99

TOTIL 1,O09 a m 1 152 1 in 15 9 2,93

IJ bcbxs aty tOn palrd, from 1 Sww to 30 Ar, do to tin dIwmp ol fiSCal yaw.!I to to 3D Impraber, ML

- 85 -

ANNEX9(a)


PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE 1T PROJECT


Withdrawal of Proceeds of Credit and Loan by Category

t !Categorl Credit Actual Actual I

Agreement Withdrawal Withdrawals II Allocation as a S o i I

...... (US$5000) ...... allocation !I !I Part A (Drainage Component)

1 (1) Equipment for drainage & !

reclamation 20,950 21,870 104 11 (2) Equipment for offices & laboratories 200 - - I1 (3) Equipment for the extension service 250 6,240 / 2,496 1i (4) Civil works (Drain laying and I

I pumping station) 20,300 17,010 84 !1 (5) Unallocated 3,200 - -

I Sub-total: 44,900 45,120 100.5 I

I Parts 8 and C (Bilharzia Component)t

t (6) Equipment for Bilharzia control 80 10 12 11 (7) Holluscic.des for Bilharzia controlI (Part B(i) of the project) 730 150 21 !1 (8) Molluscicides for Bilharzia control II (Part C of the project) 4,220 4,720 112 11 (9) Unallocated 70 -I .I Sub-total: 5,100 4,880 96

I TOTAL: 50,000 50,000 100

The procurement costs (LE 6.0 million) of two mobile PVC pipefactories and PVC powder for the Nile Delta Drainage :f Projectwas charged under this category.

AAAP REPUBLIC Of ECIPT

PrOJECT COMPLETION IEFORT - UPPERS EvPT *RAINAUE It PROJECT

Vithdrawat of Proceeds ot Credit on Loans by Ctatoery

* a A I u A CE I S L n1 A a I A tOT 1 A L

E.ai.nt for Equmipmt *O, V Civit works Eq1ipmnt for .laAscicid.e for teuscicidrn for ProectLre1Nf 9 l_tsati f Eatenson Service! Silharali Control Silharafa Controt sitharati Controt 3W

--s LM DOW c tomtWO&Sn K lm iWIt iWeg tn CiWit GM Lon Cradit bitt b tat Clt ti id t Otw S 0t US e w iI av im AV us U w 1

....... ...... ...... ..... ..... ........ ... to ....... ...... 0 ........ ......... 4D .....

197617 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.29 1.20 - 1.20 1.20

19717_ - -. 42 2.42 2.42 2.42

1975179 - 3.". 3.68 - - - - - - 0.01 0.01 - - 3.6- 3.."

1979180 - 7.48 7.48 - 3.20 3.20 - - - - - - - - - - 0.03 0.03 - IO." O.n

1910J8 - 4.06 4.06 - 1.0 1.08 - 4.63 4.63 - - - - - - - - - - 9.7 9.77

198182 - 1.60 1.e0 - 0.3S 0.35 - 3.24 3.24 - - - - - - - - - - S t9 5 t9

1982183 - 0.34 0.54 - 0.97 0.97 - 1.3S 1.35 - - - - - - - - - - 2.86 2.6

983184 0.07 1.20 1.27 - 0.41 0.41 0.92 0.54 1.46 - - - - - - - 0.99 2.1S 3.14

1984185 0.42 0.m1 0.43 0.21 0.02 0.23 3.47 1.18 4.6S - - - - 0.15 0.S 1.07 - 1.07 5.17. 1.36 6.S3

1985186 2.38 0.43 2.81 - - - 1.46 0.22 1.68 - - - - - - - - - 3.84 O."5 4.49

t2.57 19.00 21.87 0.21 -.03 .24 5.85 11. s 1m - o.01 &BL - 0.15 O.1 5 .O 3.65 4.?2 10.00 40.00 o 50.00

to tOMt. CreHt lme aIlS 0.45 OAS 0.73 4.O2 SDL1

Source: EPAPo Ptuuniq fo1t1-tap atd Evatuation Oeparte nt.

U iA* f%=IM of ptuJ of PK paPr ad tme PscI PK 4a trKtie and for te tlle d*ait Pm Ot Wen.

21 lncdbidSL Z7 a un tts ct fY Cat emrru tw fw lo tIAct.

U.

- 87 -

ANNEX 10 (a)APAB REPTiLIC CP EGYP.P

PPOJFM CrCMPLI(w REP(T - tPPEP Er-YPr M.A.TqAWF II PRQJEC,(MPDUT fi37, LOAN 128; J.rIM

Avoraisal Pstinete and Actual Qmulative Disbursements

Piscal Years Ctmulative nishursements Actual r'isbursementsand Palves Acmraisal Actual Total as a vercentace.of

Estimate Pisbursements aporaisal estirete...... (tn$S million)

1976/77June 30, 1977 8.4

1977/78acemier 31, 1977 15.0 - -June 30, 1978 22.6 - _

1978/79recearber 31, 1978 29.6 3.6 12June 30, 1979 33.3 7.3 22

1979/80Decemb~er 31, 1979 37.1 13.9 37Jun. 30, 1980 40.3 18.0 45

1980/Bir arber 31, 1980 43.4 22.7 52June 30, 1981 46.7 27.8 60

1981/82recetber 31, 1981 50.0 29.1 58June 30, 1982 - 33.1 66

1982/83recenber 31, 1982 - 34.0 68June 30, 1983 - 35.8 72

1983/84Lrcesrber 31, 1983 - 38.0 76June 30, 1984 - 38.9 78

1984/85Dwecrber 31, 1984 - 41.7 83June 30, 1985 - 45S.5/ 91

1985/86rDeurber 31, 1985 - 42.30 85February 1, 1986 - 50.00 100

Closimq rate 30/06/1983 30/06/1985 3/

/ Includinq orocurement of weed control eouiPment amountinq to UBS2.7 million.31 The oriqinal closinq date of June 30, 1983 has been extended bv two years

to June 30, 1985. Proiect accounts were kept open for a neriod of sixmonths to allow disbursements aaainst cQmmitments made before closing.

ANNEX 10 (b)

-88 -


PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECT


Disbursements of USAID Funds a/

Year Absolute Disbursements Cumulative Disbursements(US$) (USS)

1978/79 3,313,166 3,313,1661979/80 9,542,390 12,855,5561980/81 8,355 12,863,9111981/82 1 169,428 13,033,3391982/83 145,744 13,179,0831983/84 2,577;839 15,756,9221984/85 3,029,444 18,786,3661985/86 200 18,786,566 b/

a/ USAID Loan No. 263 K034.b/ Out of an original allocation of US$30.0 million.

ANNEX 11-89-

AM, or _ GPT

PR4T CaSMPllON REPORT - MIPE EGYPT D2AM&l I PFQ R T(CRMIT 637, LON 1285-EGT)

AaDraisal and Actual Cost Estimte

Alraisal Actual Estinate(August 1986) at fu

local Foreign Total Local Fbreign b Tbtal coalietion(1986 prices)

(r.- $ million)A. Draina4e Works- Cpen drain remodelling 62.9 5.7 68.6 19.4 3 287.7 ¾03.8- Field drainage 40.7 23.6 64.3 29.9 J 3 i- Punping station 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.8 0.8- Land reclamation 1.2 0.4 1.6- Aqricultural extension V - 0.2 0.2 )- Administration and )11.7 0.2 j/ 11.9 19.2

training 0.4 0.2 0.6 )-Overheads (10% of local

costs) 10.6 - 10.6 3.0 - 3.0 4.4Sub-total: 116. 1 30.2 146.3 64. 39.1 10-3.4 128..2

PhiYIcalco'ntingencies: 17.4 3.6 21.0 - - - -

Price contingencies: 62.9 11.5 74.4 - -otal: 196.4 45.3 241.7 64.3 39 I03.4 IM2

B. Production of PVC vives- Equipnent for factories

and spare parts 3.7 3.7 ) 5.7 ). )- aw material - 14.3 14.3 )7.8 13.3 )26.8 )26.9- Installation 0.1 0.4 0.5 ) - ) )- Cperation and gaintenance 2.7 3.1 5.8 2.5 - 2.S 3.1Sub-total: 2.8 21.5 24.3 10.3 19.3 =29- 30.0

Physical contingencies: O.S 2.3 2.8 - - - -Price contingencies: 2.0 6.0 8.0 - - - -

Tbtal: 29f 2-. -I n. ./ 197.0 2/ 29.3 T8M_- m m _~

C. BiTharzia Control- Extension on Bilhar;ia

programue 0.2 0.7 0.8 n.a. 0.2 n.a. n.a.Physical contingencies 0.0 0.1 0.1 - - - -

Price contingencies 0.0 0.0 0.1 - - -Total: 0n .9 : n.a. 0. na. ..

Cost overrun of tper Egypt I - 4.2 4.2 n.a. .4.7 n.a. n.a.

Tbtai: 0.2 5.1 5.3 3.0 j/ 4.9 7.9 8.77btal Proiect: 201.9 80.2 282.1 77.6 63.0 140.6 166.9

- - - m V Direct foreign echn costs, correq=onding with disbursement categories.

sbwever, IE 6.0 million digbursemnts for costs of IEbile PVC factories andPVC powder for Nile Delta Drainage II project include with agriculturalextension have been deducted and LE 1.0 million of WSMD loan remainsundisbursed.

3 According to EPAPD records. Includes also collector pipes.y Disbursm_ents on WAID loan for PVC pipe factories and PVM powder up till

30 August 1986./ See Annex 16. Pro-rate for t1pper Egypt I.

costs of 325 tons of nolluscicides.

"Oil*£ "Oil &@*S 1904bg 19@Gt 00'i1 it'll SO£I C *L4 1;021 99 St101 -lt* 2oss 9003 'dm02 .0553039 03302 -was2 p**ejj*

96.0 s 0I0 PIt as1 *01 U t-l 09-1 'i1 Owi tl91O Ol- OS-Z'l "Or-t t9IAw*u 00- *t-s *"Ao - D*61 0s'.8 WsIt 9s*.t licSt Lt*St 9i*sZ w.u s*s S*t 3 3il as es * tl p 0so's *a. s* 3#301

"- OS*o WO WI-+ 6 109'S 0-t "-1 lVsO *"It-t 91-OZ nS0 o' s It' lb"settle a" #I2 .%* &ad 15s30

- _ - - £0*u - - - - fO-O - ti'*z oz-t *°lt-u ** - - -- *ua.--.- 3---- --- *J--- Olt-O is5 AIS' 69-0 1t-O 9t-0 2Z'0 *10 t1*0 tine - 'nillis al- 'duew e*,RJe.tt3 als easel

- - "o90 ol-e 10S £9 0 55 I? S Al#* il' £0.0 900 - 5011115 i1 **-)a .Igu". tq $*310 ro.ls

00*8 so*' 95*' 6*931 Ojt &,*15 "Is*9 9051 colts 5E.01 t£l-§ tell IS It 'sIWtl ogn - 3uewedoe2 *l9@JP SS,. tW160e.e......................... .... ...... toeane a...... e.e.ee.I.. . ..... .e..... .. ..... e e.. . ...... ewe .... ...

- - (InS 1*I IC's bolt 100' Ot'S 2it'l 0'9S - - o *$III* 0sn '4503 *09eUAJp 1*350 *IustI)30 WjaI*J 1t,l3

- - - S*no tO@( tSi? SlS *110 I-o nSL tf-l - -GEYSSn 50se2U PU, t Jun~od ^- - - - - - - - - ---- - -------- - ---- s--l

- - n-* 59'S QSI 51-1 51C te- - _ _ - Ie- tIASI

O - - - ts'a (S'0 tt- f'S .9'l 1' R.' t 1 - - *Stoumsl Poj I*uw4nbd

sogl-s usn - 353000 *SSSUwsiP 1310 *S's*)X. uSl.ae

9S*i £S§ IS'S 95'4 t 'S 9IS1 S0't £0.01 IIS 11t *I as'i S- 1111t vl 9 3tI ; 1110 I@t0lt 'O -0' I'@* n.. S -o li-l £1- OZ'9 9?' 04'? 59*1 9e'I 9.-I 03l, o9suXao Jet oT *n

_ ..... . _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--.-.-.-------------------------------------------------

**OttU leGs 3sn 6402 *$S's33 *v3102 U616

"Oi U03*0 U-'Ot U-lI A9'tl 9001 It?? I'S tS'S 9L6 gl t t L' N i *4m02 *S#539WI 2 1'm l 3SS2a;j *lso31A

SI'S S:'S St' "es ol-o sell Ioll SO'S S-S - - - -9S6 93 55 91i600 *4ax "Stop onOS'S OS'S 053 S *Z 19', sPi ;'0 n-oS - - - - 'sea^ . .G#** 1e. a. *25'5010301

- - - - ---- 0... --- S --- --*0S - - - ------- 1 u- - - 35'I %'3 £1 1 0'11O- n-t1 5'? ffIe U-I I*¢O 413 uI::lop.m. *IP1 'sdo- n-" "of "If "It IV's 090 II'S "l' - - - - 9PteWalol

- - t S' -o' s*e £e e-u Is'- 'u wo *, * 1 f'o *t' sin. wog ogyg sa*s *u360's 30201

s- - a', o'9 0'S 0'S IzS S'Ss *S1' 51 *0-0 - - *9gJ _____ p 002 U*IWIISIean

" tIi 3MUG0 05. * 3.39 - 33102 t*I'ssI 3.20

iIiii7~i g ole SC so / ls e sell fee/ia IS/oe SCO/IW 6116a *LILt L1/9161tisn-sii.e .il~Ttsi~iii:)~ii*tOi;- e'en e n e e n a . . n e n --- -

liOi38 Ltg §011 3"iliJd 1I *3ro8i'JO 31113 11d

siuoiu 3UI31 "iO 3i133r05d

ARA4 REPUBLIC OF EGyPT

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE 1i IRtst;T

(CREDIT 637. LOAN 1285 - ECT)

khit Cost for Field Drairag in Selectad Areas in 44rr Egpt Drainage 11

Ajrem Total Are. Ar-- Comoleted Contractors Cro n Toa 1Brona N G Cross Myn Caai Ppaa aCnai C9iam p,a±........... (feddans) ............. ....................... ..........................

I. MINYA

Abu Rehabilitation 1 16,400 14,847 13.361 12.096 6S4.456 523.7S7 137.166

Abu Rehaubiltution 11 9.500 8.749 9.435 9.669 473.900 376.234 68.923

JMb tqj&L$ 25,900 23.59 2ZM2f 20 ?85 1,128 356 99,]921 206,Q89 223,444 -7-8

Beni Mazer 13.000 10.038 12.384 9.504 489.113 411,5i3 107.773 100.841 1.109.250

South Monshu Ouheb 17.600 14.370 8.165 6.669 407.500 208.768 75.625 77.189 849.082

N ubkb ll_l9Q 24 555 21L47 4 I?1921 959453 639639 190S609 .182.970 2L012871IOer SanqurlYm 10,350 8.963 650 56t 26.300 24.291 6.362

* - 9.100 7.918 494 430 76.S00 18.19S --- ?6

5IM-tRL.OU ~194SU 16.I66 1.144 M 103.20 42.SD0 1JS238 i5.73L 173l au

Totals 1J9OL 30 I440 615.962 S3,8i78 L81.J3 L.UJ.L34 600-.17 L lL JU g-

Net aree as a percentage of gros:e 82.0% 92.0% 1

Cost per fed. gross: 46.81 35.37 8.61 9.10 100.09

Cost per feo. netS 57.31 43.30 10.79 11.14 122.54

It. ENI SUEF

Rah*wy North 7.000 6.046 7.000 6.046 1.070.234 iesl. 68.725 1ncl. 1,158.9S9

Ehnesi- (Amers-) 1.100 1.035 1.100 1.03S 158.033 8.082 - 166.115

(Talt) 2.400 2.102 2.400 2.102 351.193 24.297 37S,495

(Sultani) 2.100 1.829 2.100 1.629 274.123 23.862 297.995

(Komo Zuwi) 4.600 3.995 4.600 3.99S 642.506 5 14.028 * 696.536

Kosheash (Abu Sur) 3.000 2.498 3.000 2.498 437.408 44.859 - 462.267

(D-wod) 2.500 2.126 2.500 2.126 310.868 12.516 323 386

Tatg.ls 22,if Is 231 3,244A.J172 3SOO74LflL2

Not area as a percentage of gross: 80.6% 66.6%Cost per fed rosest 154.22

Cost per fed. nets 178.06

Total for Selected Ar,eus z

*n Upper Egypt 131.830 l09.101 Q i IAAZ 73537 .i.naa70 2

Net urea as a percentage of grosst 82.3% S2.9% 113.95% x

Cost per fed. grosss 137.38%

C3= rssaB3BasB=sesgaBaB-£saa--=D-B3-3------'3-'=-3n=3-----w---3--c';="--3----a--c 32=U=t23=C3,====t=DCCgt"I


PROJECT CONPLETION REPORT

UPPER E6YPT DRAINA6E II PROJECT

(Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)

Field Drainage Areas Under the Responsibilityof the Maintenance Department of EPADP and Existing Maintenance Facilities

(October 196)

Total Area Area mier the Ibinterave as Muier of Nuber of ...... Field Staff ......Revised Ccpteted fbintenwice Oept. a Percentage of Operating operating

Directorate Area of EIDP the copleted Ibintenice Vaintenace Engineers Techniciansarea Centres Sb-centres

(fed) (fed) (feD) C

BENI SUEJ 137,160 87,340 29,538 33.8 6 19 8 19MINIEH 123,130 68,900 14,320 20.8 4 9 10 19 aASYUT 79,Z50 65,350 27,755 42.5 5 14 7 12SOHA6 53,900 42,420 9,966. 23.6 3 13 6 13 aQENA 72,710 55,780 14,288 25.6 3 13 6 11ESNA 27,270 23,370 12,660 54.4 4 21 3 28TOTAL 493,420 342,880 108,527 31.7 25 89 40 102

------- ==-_______-=======

Source: Maintenance Dept., EPADP.

-a

- 93 -

h4!'UtEX 15

BPA aP tF*BLIC CT ErYP'

PMIRCX7! C24TWE.TIO PEPORT - UPPER EIYPT tPAThXLG I! PFOJECT

(CEr'TT 637, LCA.' 1285-=GT)

Bilharzia Control Cmoonent: Fbreion C.ost for Procurement2tEcuiPment and Materials

Item Appraisal Estinate Actual Year ofUnit Ouot_itt Value Unit (uantitv Value Procurewent

( 0$0oo0) aff$s'000)

Wolluscicide - - 4,880 - - - -

Naiscellaneousequipment - - 70 - - 19 1979

Drugs:- baylocide - - - - - 4,772 1977-1984- baylarcil - - - - - 145 1984

Microbus - - - No. 2 36 1978

Sub-totals 4.950 4,972

Contincencies 150

TOM_: 5.100 4,972

Source: Ministry of Health.

- 94 -

pYNEX 16

A-°At PEPtWIT' OF EGYP'

PPOMEC!' CaMPE'TrMa PEP(" - tWPER EGYPT PPAInGF TI PROJE

((PWT)T 637, LnNN 1285-EYE)

Bilharzia Control cnmvonent: Estinited Local Fxmendituresfor the Bilharzia control Programme in Fcvot 1/

Fiscal Year Fbr Stores, For TenPorarv staff Totalloca] waterials of snail control / Local

OWM staff allowances excenditure......... ................ Li). ....... ....... (E.'.....

1977/78 100,000 100,000 200,0001978/79 100,000 100,000 200,0001979/80 200,000 200,000 400,0001980/81 210,000 300,000 510,0001981/R2 210,000 400,000 610,0001982/83 500,000 500,000 1,000,0001983/84 1,222,500 800,000 2,022,5001984/85 851,200 1,200,000 2,051,2001985/86 700,000 1,400,000 2,100,00019.86/87 1,420,000 1,446,352 2,866,352

Tbtal: 5,513,700 6,446,352 11,960,052

ft/ hccluding salaries for reaular staff at Fealth Units and Centres.A Aproxitte ficures.

Source: Ministry of Realth.

95 - ANNEX 17


PRnJECT COMPLETION REPORT

Upper Egypt Drainage II Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)

Project Economic Return

List of TabLes

1. IncrementaL Economic Production VaLue

2. Economic Project Costs and Benefits FLows

3. Main Accounting Ratios for Costs of the Project

4. Base Case and Switching Values

5. Sensitivity AnaLysis

-96 ANNEX 17Table



upp_r Egypt Drainage II Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)


Incremental Economic Production Value

Farm Gate Incremental

Prices ProductionValue

(LE/ton) (LE million)

Cotton (Lint). 1,740 8.7

Sugarcane 50 12.0

Wheat 220 3.1

Maize/Sorghum 205 11.7

Onions 100 1.1

Beans and other Legumes 350 3.9

VegetabLes 150 10.1

50.6

s:AS REfUBLIC OF EGYPT


Upper Egypt Drainage 1l Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285EGT)

Project Economic Rate of Return - Economic Project Costs and Benfits Ftows

PROJECT COSTS PROJECT BESEFITSTotal Deflated Area Benefits Benefits

subtotal foreign Total econ. equipped streas LE Mittionfinancial exchange econ.* costs with in X 1986 const.local costs costs drainage tite pricescosts drainage as drainage COUP. drainagedrainage comp. dollar co-ponent 1986coup. LE USO exchange In LE cost. .

PER'OOS miltion million rate million Deflators values

1976/77 1.79 0.00 1.96 .305 3.40 10-35 - _ _1977J78 1.*46 0.00 1.96 2.49 2.60 6.46 - _ _1978179 2.30 6.99 1.64 8.18 2.70 Z2.07 - _1979/80 1.96 17o22 1-39 15-T3 2.*0 37.73 - _ _1980181 6o.5 Soto 1.29 17.71 2.09 37.02 23 - -1981/82 8.37 5.01 l.ZO 18.41 1.81 33.32 51 1 0.51982183 12.53 Z.04 1.12 23.13 1*60 37.00 70 5 2.61983/84 10.05 5*31 1.O0 2Z.35 1.37 30.61 76 12 6.11984185 11.65 8.11 0.83 29.58 1.lT 34.61 63 23 11.71985/86 _ 11.39 4.73 0.83 25.007 100 25.07 52 35 _7.81986/87 1O027 0.00 0*83 17.46 1.00 17.46 0 47 24.01987/88 10.20 0.00 0.83 17.34 1.00 17.34 50 59 30.11988J89 2.94 0.00 0.83 5.000 0O 5-00 SO 71 36.21989190

- 82 41.81990/91 91 46.41991929 97 49.9 5 01991/93

- 99 49.51993_94 100 51.0onwards

Note: Local costs increased by 702 due to accounting factors (see Table 3 ).

ANNEX 17

- 98 -

APAe REPUBLIC OF EGYPT


Upper Egypt Drainage It Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)


Main Accounting Ratios for Costs of the Project

Averageitem Sk illed Diesel/ Onient Others Accounting

Labour Gasoil .atios

Accounting ratios 1.25 6.5 2.2 1.0

$. Civil w4rks.% of Total bsts . . . . .

a. Field Drainage 55 17 20 7 2.35

b. Open Drain Reniodellirg

- excavation 75 10 - 15 1.74- structures 45 10 10 35 1.78

C. Field Drain taintenance 55 - 25 20 1.74

$I. Caoftal machinery - - - - 0.965

IU. Cavital Vehicles - - - - 0.910

! ~~~~~~r

- 99 -

ANNEX 17Table 4


PROJECT COtPLETION REPORT

Upper Egypt Drainage Ii Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)

Project Economic Rate of Return

Base Case and Switching Values

Incremental totalbenefits costs Incrementaldrainage draInage net

YEARS PERIODS component component benefits

1986/87 1 38.70 2TZ720 -233.501987/88 2 24.00 17.46 6.s41988/89 3 30.l0 17.34 12.761989/90 4 36.20 17.34 18.861990/91 5 41.80 5.00 36.801991/92 6 46.40 5.00 41.401992/93 7 49.50 5.00 44.501993/94 8 50.50 5.00 45.501994 onwards 9-30 51.00 5.00 46.00

SWrTCHING VALUES AT 12S

APPRAISAL SWITCHING PERCENTAGESTREAH VALUE VALUE CHANGE

STOT 345.60 305.41 -11-63S

CTOT 305.41 345.60 1391.6

Net Present Value at OCC iZX a 40.2Internal Rate of Return u 14.SSCoupon Equivalent Rate of Return a 137t%


i OJECT COMPLETION REPORT

Upper Egypt Drain ge II Project (Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)

Project Economic Return - Sensitivity Analysis

PRESENT VALUES Of NtE SraeANs At A DISCOUNT ATE Of 1i1

ltO UP Rlot UP 20 UP SO0 owN tot oaw 200 DOWN Sot LAS I YEAR LAC I TEARS SAG 3 VfEA.

ClOT 40.2 14.6 109.4 Zto.0 SO7 -29.0 - tuZ. 3.2 -29.9 -59.)UP 10% 9.1 44.* 10.6 i2.5 -25.0 -59.S -163.1 -2714 -o0.S -90.0UP 204 -20.9 33.? 48.3 IS2.0 -5S.5 -90.1 -193.1 -58.0 -91.0 -120.5Up 504 -112.6 -76t. -43.4 40.3 -141.1 -161.7 -2es.. -149.6 -152.6 -212.2OaWN otO 10.o IOS.3 139.9 243.6 g.2 137 -102.1 l3l1 0.7 -20.9

DOWN *04 101.3 135.9 170.4 27*41 66.6 32.2 -71.6 64.3 31.2 o1?0O0 50x 192.9 221.S 262.1 36S*. 1s5.4 123.6 20.1 t55.9 122.6 93.3LAG I tEAR - - - - - - - 35.9 2.9 -2407

LAS 2 YEARS - - - - - - - - 32.1 Z.6

LAC I WEARS - - - - - - - - - 28.1 1

INTERNAL RAlES OF RETURN OF NEr STREAMS

151o0 UP lOt UP 20S UP SO Ova" 1Ot 0OII 200 DOWN 50 SLAG 1 IEAl LA tC I VES LAC 3 TEARS

crta 14.021 t15.1%? 1T.4* 22*616 12.266 10*513 4.612 12.1f1 10.179 9.t71

UP 10t 12.446 1.026 15.591 zo.2z8 10.639 9*167 3.650 10.813 9.104 0.793

UP 20t 1tt109 12.So 14.026 te.314 9.606 O.0SO Z. 40 9.113 063 7.*96SUP SO 6.0)0 %299 10.511 1%0026 6.753 5.38o 0.526 7.181 6*507 5.-95DOON 104 i5.930 17.04 t9.76-2 Is.661 14.('26 Izo2.t 5.651 a 3.641 12.029 10.31-

OU.2;N 20. ie.324 zc.fadf 2'. .e Z9-.2t 16.IT6 11.(1b T.246 1s5.4$0 1I3.509 2. 01

'4.S $0j; 1.sId 55.Z9% .(-2 54.664 28.116 24.45? 14b.'206 724.5S 20.S'C6 1. 34.

LA.; I IL-AR tJo - -.. 0Ut 3.4 10.11'.LAG 2 ScA"S - - - - - - - - .02 t1.41

LAG 3 VCARS b - - - - 0J - - - 1.026

ri

- 101 -

ANNEX 18

ARAB REPBLIC OF EGYP'

PM7EC~T CThPLETON SP'Rr '- TPPEP T EGPT DPAfnlM I! PF23ECT

(CREDIT 637, U)AN 1285-EGT)

Assessment of costs of field drainaqe to be recovered(Area in thousand feddans and costs in. LE million)

* Zovernorate From 1964 - 1°85 1986 Tbtal from 1964-1985

Area Costs to be Area Costs to be Area Costs to berecovered recovered recovered

West Delta 189 12.2 12 1.9 201 14.1-Middle Delta S. 351 21.0 98 12.2 449 33.2Middle Delta N. 89 5.5 - - 89 5.5East Delta 566 26.1 - - 566 26.1Beni guef 159 8.4 - - 159 8.4Minia 50 3.3 6 0.6 56 3.9Assuit 49 4.3 - - 49 4.3Souhaq 85 7.1 - - 85 7.1Esna 36 1.7 - - 36 1.7Ram Ombo-Asswan 23 1.6 - - 23 1.6(uena 38 2.5 -38 2.5

1 635 93.7 116 14.7 1 751 108.4

-Soure: EPAPD: Planninq and Fvaluation Department.

Field drainage cost recoverv - 1980/si to 1985/86

(LE '0oo)

Year Property Taxes Develcmnient Bank ____L

1980-81 273 2731981482 300 3001982-83 48 481983-84 79 72 1511984-5 145 111 2561.7.1985 to 30.6.1986 1 253 12 1 265

Swree APWD: Plarming and Evaluation DePartment.

103- ANNEX 19Page 1

ARAB REPUOLIC Of EGYPT


UPPER EGYPT DRAINAGE II PROJECT

(Credit 637, Loan 1285-EGT)

Bilharzia Controt - Summary of the InternationaL Evaluation Mission Report

3hZARuIA* a dim"s hawn In gpt since bcdred of years, hacausd iaaurable misery to people, death and mot certainlya

ked loss of perdutivity; sice the 1900s m a cotrolscheme ba bess tre. no goverinmnt of Egyt t, sice mayyears, spnsore bihursia control and tried with pilot and l esale projects. give the respective tools of each period, togapl cowtrl of the diseae. ut nly in the lat few yeas,with the advent of effcent dr*usad inlluacicides so well. asImprove stcategies *d bette basic health coverage have controlmeur-e succeeded In producing ad us%-4-4- sign.ticatresults La term of ALreductio of nrbidity ad reuctio ofinfection.

4 * Ol T hNIOPREU !gm Smm

* J x 197n With# ite of the orld Bank. Tb romwalate aded to'Z_p e c. The Kiddle pt area covers

.. see; eSmi Silt, MayW Mdt Aismit (North) witht,050,000 feddae . a population of owe 5 dillo. 20 4itrictswith 590 vilarge 347 R3W., 210 snai contol its and 33,.450W lingth of water oaa. Zno his area Cemsive waterIeSMIANSWt Cd la r -eclation schos bhave boe impliemnted.

S. aMetobim ha boe0 the Ly species in the area. TeIrogm ba tbgee 4cu11 phtses actiAe Ite11eni"o,c_nslidation d si_ 1* 984 started.

Control activities comprised llc d c withtaw, ain to causierably redo the pramssemc of bilbarta and'omtmoi itsieAs MUietatton. The esults achieved durigt

enind s ca cosolidation with apparent reddtio oftredoasion, preVaLence sad laetM&terof ifAetion 1e to thebegimia of tW 4niss ce phae with a reduction Jpf the &rewid U thu ecoomisiag ane iniat and te

iset of th mliusciided.

to view of the ennoru areas ad distancs invo3ved La the0ide and Uper ggpt PoSjects, th logistic problm of

tEmpeSt, drugs end slluscicide supply, 1 th mmens__migm taks reuire, th tol regards te PrFoge of theproject to-date as reinkable and highLy camendable. te t_mha witm_se minrous examlee of sold achievement at alllove"s central M"Iistry of Kes,th, Coverorate, Diatrict andRua Kelt Uii.

- 104 -ANNEX19

Pa-ge ~2

W WASON FOrt UENST MISSION

Followin a recomdation ofthe World Bank. th MoE decidedthat a revie of tho present achievement of t centrol prograMswould be warrantod, to cosider, in light of ne controLtecoologies a cost effective strateg for maintainin presentachiewts and for epamui of control operations Intoother area. Subsequstiy an international evaLuation missionwas fielded during the period of October 1984 to Apri 1985. Thetm worked in clos- cooperation with the counterpat of the Nag

d4 the guveruorates. The missio eamluatad the various asPoectsof the grogrm.

1.4 KWUMAsimz 0F C osmIistDPUZIOLOGLCAL MM AND crwIOUUA DfLXVU

The_ two basic aspects of the Mddle sd Upper Egpt bilharxiacontrol projects were evaluated sing three mis methodologies:

CL) Exbmiatio of ata present la Miistry of leslth progresrports, and its carison with governorate and health unitdata.

(U) A rdo. sampLe surve of Middle Egypt carried Out LaNovwer- Decber 1984, invlving the -.aatim of 33,985persons La 20 ditricts nd 60 villages.

(LL) A progr_e of 63 visits by th tamm to a total of 53 helthmits In S goverurate s, d to rateabot.

eSe visits served the purpos of qualitycontcol, croscheckin of reported data an obeCvatio of thes_nitration of cmothesy.

Tre In the ant lmoatmt epidmiological prmter havbeam genealy dowurds sice the 4-ititaton of theproject. and a good masuo of diseae control a beach_eved. Th baselim fozutio Lu 1977 shov aprevaLenceoo f abot 301 Lu the Midle Eat project are.thi bad been redued to about 8.5S by the 1 of 1984.Thi is a r*emrkable redutionL the a_mt of Sa3bieoinfection ad ha been -o1Penie by a l*e reductio Laintensity of Luectios to low levls cansistent with thepremwee of low mom burden. bweves tramis"sio stillcotiue Lu the project area A siificnt reufectious,partijularly smug boolcv be takiA place. A*u er of serious fooi of infectio 4 disee still ne4e

furthe contol. The techoqus mp_loyed Lu screeing ane

- 105 -ANNEX 19Page 3

very well-performed, but have a tandauy to edrsatate trueprevalsoce-rates of infection, ad this shold be bogus In 1nd

whe pilsng future modifications of control strateie.Si'aLuly, intenities of infectio w*rsaed " geomtric man.*a* output an be obtaLe meore efficiently by the use ofsiVIer, qtckecr a4 cheaper techIquas.

Becae dta recor,ding trasmisi and analysis ae slow, andsubject to ievitable eors, te beath unit arwu - a eorsro"ap te onit tha the governorate for futur aaca trend

presetatio ad compariso.

Littead wtochthwouo tranalia io of Schistosema mumgontInfectio nox occurs is the project Ar"; futur controlstratea atllow for ths.

NMtrifouste complia rates Wre genelly disappointingly low,ao the us of ths drug hs been devalued Lu the minds of helthstaff ad sm intbra of the pulic by the Introduction ofsingle doe prasiquantel La mso S.hamtobium ares.

1.3 OLMG?CAL AqtS OF SCaIZSTO ISSU. §SIWI AM CMiONo

no prest mthod of snail sampling was oberved and evaluatedIn te of senitivity La detecting trnsmission potential by

depeent snail sapilng. Assessmit of the compaisorevel that the present snall smpling strateg usd by thesnaly saplng wdts Ls not sensitive Lu -finding Inected snails.

Iegarding the snail control work, ode area-wide mlluscicidingopeatim ins observe at St Obaayla, South Assitg a radiuscontrol opeation wa osed at [S ya; ad focal wollusccidingvw wituesed at th Nle liver in I loction LuAssut ad atthe Ihrahimiya Cana Lu Aeiut

_ecase mt of the Period oi thi evaluation isio co3neided-with the low tramisi seaon, wafh of the eatul appraisal ofth present apeatioa Lu rAddle ad Upper Zapt bad to be asd

* by nspbecetio of p"et data, on mts of uicloas e used,.t4-4n of aplicAtion, ad 1Ly, pli4ioclcgicalo tshedding ligt on ce-Infectio rates in schoo chidre by semaso.

In the pet, meluscciding In H4dle and pper Igypt helped bywmithamy, ha redued hn leels of S. _amtobiInfection quickly; bowaver, the pgeset area-wide

elluscicide once a yeai Lddle IMt an4d-tt4e a yew.laUppe yt longes1 to be coat<fet . zt

for future umlli~scisidIng in Upper gpt, as wal asthe Nile Delta are srised In another eq section of ths

'*port nd are given. detail Is the chaptew n snail cottrol.

-106- ANNEX 19

t.4 QSS_

-be totaL cost of tw Middle Kapt prject which ha beedalU studied Wa: 1977 to 1984 LE 26,079,865; the total

poplatio covered In 1977 was 4.5 million and in 1984 5.85mi*Lon. The tabulation presented by Mao indicates a prevaleucerate of 30S La 1977 ad 9.21 La 1984. The total amber ofinfected pons found in the 1977 to 1984 period La 6,314,000persn. LX 26,000.000 : 6,314,000 persoa * LE 0.50 cost perepisode of it ection.

Asamin a *sa popuation of 5.040 million and an annual_eaditure of LE 3,2.0,000, the per capita cost of this .progm La LX 0.64 per person per yea. Assuinig a popuationof 4.28 ilion at risk. th cost per person is LO 0.76 per yea.

l Pcetage c _onpnt costs for the poject have - sna control 69.1S1- ehmtke y30.

100.O0

Percentage l costs for the project have bee:- p_so. 42.61- inllue4c4cde 49.01_du 3.5S.- tsprt sd miscellanea" coats 4.9.

100.00

VA ME budget for all puroses be increase frm 1970 LI 1.26to 1984 TX 7.96 pe capita. Te bilbwrU control cost in 1984wa just overS of the budgeted pr capita cost it alGovernmet health. services.

1.7J Moiu I. 0RCANSttA _0

Mhe bilbria progra s four lovel: M-4itry of Reslth -Deper~t of Endemic disases with the overall responsibility

for ths excio of the progran; th health directorate of thegOywte wher the diretor of ladmic diseaues is theIcutive Director La chare of, amg other dutie, thebilharsia cotrl activities together with the snal Controlserrvie sd uervisig the district activities ude theguidauco of th dtstrict Smnager who is to Oversee thes ZWs Luhis district. h workload of all concerned Ls comiderable adon each lel oly a percentag of the tota work tim is beingspent an bbmia control.

T preset ng t system a appropriate. ptlogistics. storage sd tributi f _dag ad llucicare umdertake efficetly. Th trapot syst_ to la goo*co-dition ad well suerised. P 1arel igs as de.uta*-st positions we filld. The preent organliationa stzctreL g eare to excute area-wide lMltUciding, snai ham nen preVUlence survey. CCbmtherw La handled thogh the gm.

- 107 -ANNhX 19Page 5

In the futue the epbhss will be mno an ohamothera#y aft les-an mllueciciding. Thea. changes of strategy wi hamecosequences an the migmut structure.

1.8 EZAL EDUCATON - COMWIN-CATFON - 2MR-MAOR

ere" Is no structured helth education - nfaomtics progra forchstoaso.ais. It was not possible to evaluate the Impact the

halth educatio activities hd in chAngin the baviouralpattern of the people in the Middle gpt Program area. feoplogenrally we awa*e of bilkarxsi, the cause of the diseesw sadits -transission. Th people do kow thAt tee ia tteatmetreadily available in the R's but the treatmnt compliance Lsnot very "tisfactory.

Thee ae mayrecasons which m be identified why healtheduatio in the past dd. not gretl Ly luen the people in theareas at risk. It seam that tbere is a definite lack ofpeCeVed Importace in the minds of met people. People samnot to take bilbaria a a seriou disease.

Th different health education approacbes 4 not take-Intoca esdertio the peopleIa bebavior: s chooL chdAre wilL gt.s.imdng contazy to advice - w il do their laumdry is thecali since they combine ts work with a social fimtltn -f'crs are In frequet water-contact in the cours of woring inthe fields.

keith education a:tivities ver not targetted to either specificgrops - school 411idre, - fazr - nor tmd and coordiatedwith bilharxs, control activities such as c"e f4nd4in -verybody should have his urine eami;ned at leat once a year.

am us of iqjii4 sd the mortnce o of l tre.tcourses we ot offectively a cv ly cat to thepeople. School hildrenr not suffently cxposed to thepoblim of bilharsia. The *.di&, television mnd cadio wer notvAed to ful advatage to stimulate coinity participatio Inthe coletol progro.

1.9 RSONIATOK

Th recomendations for futuce actio me by the evlution teamIn the present report ar objective a indepedet; the-r we, ofcours, entirely open to egreamet or rejectio by the C mtof gyt. Th recommendations mad fall iato G categorie.

1.A futue P-riorities and Strattgies

Within the fioncia ad insgmt resources available,prioritie han to be asignd to two o dptio

1.9.L.1 Thk mSteineaae,dlor Irwmt. of. preSGO ahivq.en#a.ld'le ad Uppe gypt. to protect the larg asting Inveset.

- 108 -

ANNEX 19Page-6

1.9.1.1 2h extenin of bilbarxia comtrol. to the Nile Delta.

aing aLlocated priority to thee* two options, or baring decAdedto procee with both, two further decisions out be sede:

1.9.1.3 TM setting of targets on araz basis for prevaLence - cat..md intleLties of inefction.

1.9.1.4 %. cbolce of screening technque to be adopted and the balaceto be achievd La control between e6dcatiou, cb.thapy admllus4Lciding.

L.9.2 Surveillance Procedures

TM tesu recoinds that epideiolgica surveLllce data bepresnted by defined Health unit area rather then byGove.uorte. Although thi my seem to be a forwidable task, itwould not Lu fact produce a indigestible asa,of Information.and it ia essential if the necessary flexbility sd speed inapplying Intensification and diversification of concrol *ffort toprobl vilages La to be acheved. Mm translation of data

'treds Lto rapid and offective executive action dde thatGavo orate Scutive Directors of Bilbarsia Conutrl:

1.9.2.1 So fully tratned Lu.Lepid Loa ad mnagt activities.

1.9.1.2 Be releaed fCm theLr may othur heavy and tim consuming 4utiesto conentrte oan endec diswe problem.

1.9.3 Screening TecnLm;es

_ team recdm that screening techique use Lu thebilbazzis programs. and any futue tensions df the be andifiedas follows:

1.9.3.1 lrsaitolgicat, screeing reqmu

Sediintatil. cantruf'gation. dirct microscopy should beretalna4 for urLasry ecreemiag.

A qultitatLve 50 mg rAto-Kats technique shouLd be introduced fortafcl screenin lu th tHll. ad the necesary trainin programs

Singe-us, stained ?trelO fiter ad syringes should be used-for egg-output coutIng Lu urie, and the ncesawy trainingproceduresshud be instituted.

1.9.3.2 Heml Screening techques

A _ustine re-training of snai sapling wrkers, saltechiclanseg..d their agricaltual-megtseer supervisors becarried out so that all future snal sapting be conductedcPeIN ril1 Lu vtillag hMM 1 ter contact Points.

- 109 -

ANNEX 19Page 7'

*-:I.9.A UCmt@l Stragies

Thbe tesam h reco _nedatios on eL-se aspects of future control-strategies:

1.9.A.L Th Rl1e of lnowation/Zducation

In order to better the people's andssta-du of biharsia adits cntrol, the mjor recomadat2ons are:

* M use of TY and RAM broadcasts, using specially produced,attractive and sti=datiag film nd radio tapes.

Addres target groups; school childre, pregnant W'OM, fagurs.

Coordinate comication efforts %th molluscicidiug activitis.

Sti3.ate people to hav their urie ecamlued regularly.

make people aware that coplete treatnt compliance Ls of auust* mportnce to improve their health.

1.9.4.2 Snail Control

For the Kiddie Egypt Project in the intenance phase, thepresmt once-a-year area-wide malluscici4ing operations ad'back-up sp*ring of infested water courses should be stopped atthe end of 1985. A ACh NOre cost-effective Strateg ofulluscicidlng could the be Implented in 1986. Thi strategy-rcails nitial era wde mllusciclding in oly the few

reimmi4g aes were there ax bigh nd homogeneous %lunpreYslnce rates (selective area uolluCicidng). an alsomo3l11seciding In indvidual vllages scattere throughoutditricts with wmcceptably high prevelenc ratak. Prevalencerates (especially ong school childres). rather the snai datashold be the ds4" Initial crLte0 of whether to olluccidinga 'vllge or grops of villages. SecodI, the whole

mlus-cdg phould slowly evlve towards focal ecectolas fewer ed fevr villages &ae radius control. Any futurefocal mollusciciding should onctrteu vulago foci _.

4nfected snails ar found In or tear water contact points.

In the Upper gt project, the prset timing of the area-widemollouiciding operations nee to be m iodfe. Instead of thefirst aplicatio scheduled to begin May, it should be mdforward to ealy April as was done L previoU years (to preventthe first peek of transmission). Istea of the scecapplcation to begin Ls Septebr. Lt should be timd to begin inealy Augut (to pre~t the scoed peak of transmission). by1967 when the ance phase begins, all ftu wollsciidingshould be dastically reduced, ad the future strateg shoulthe follow thw recinendatious givwr s for thet. MIe EgyptProject.

- 110 - ANNEX 19Page 8

: For mny bilarua control proj et to begin sk the Nil. Delta.* total area-wide inolLus:cidLng should not be considerd as a

* .. . . serious optiw for snail control. Any future mlLascicidiag La a.project framuok in tbe Delta shold initially adopt selective

* . . ar .llwciciding and radlus control, tsrgetted to gittransmisslo-high prevalence area" and viles ony, Tha latereoluticn of usllum4iciding towards more focal control would becotingent upon M ass being mde on reducing levls of baninfection.

1.9.4.3. Ch.theer

Iosr efficient delivey of chmtherMW reaqires that health tuntphLiclam should serve for a perio of 3-5 years La a ruralhealth mit, and require good perfoimco report fran theirsupervisors befW being allod to procee to nLuUst of saith

i4 training pogram.. Ta shoud also be requied toproduc brief -m l reports of their =Lt activities, includingvefiuble evidenc. of blbaria detectin rcate and drgclace rated.

ealth unit.mast be reguLarly supervise and auitore for drugeLivery activities.

Netuifonate should be progressLcIy pbased out of use. sadrplad all over Egpt by prasiquatel, wed in a single dose at40 m per kg body4 weigbt. following bi-mual screening of sc*oolstudets sd _t screenAng of the rest of the population.

. 1.9.5 r e r

Due to the increasing work loa a staff latreme at the *tc isrecemade.ftysicianS bawing field emerience end specia

tranig la epidolo ad amagusu sboud be selected. raiswoud allow mor frequntt supervisiAn of field activities. Meecutive director at * oexuarate leve hobld be anoepidologit with umugegmt _ ezprianc. 'T dLitrLct managershold be a full tim staff _br vith a stalla backgr.md asthe deutive director at go_verte levl.

The doctors at th RIM levl shuld be posted for extended9eriods of duty (thre years). furthemre it is highlyreeinded to organize courses with practICAL cotents for the'rul heL;th physians- to su-ble thu to efficietly operate aa".

l.9.A £oat r.._in

TheAme.-mded strteW for the aintensnci phae in Middleg-t doe Mt require major staf chages. nu persoel costswil ema mom or less the sam. ept psibly "m ewest.bUs. e t posts for sv s doleg at centralUinitry of Welth and governorate leel.

- l1 -ANNEX 19

Te cots for joortd : ?ra_- quPr at. 40 ml/KS - avecagebody weigt S0 Kg a W000 mg *4 tblets 600 as eah for t A-trCatZt CoursI Seach costing 4PProtX W.e 6 (exchange rate 17,marh 1985 ON 3.41 * $. 1.-) $1.73 per teatmt course perperson. Asaiinig tht 500.000 persona hAve to be tretedn t.ly the cost is $873.000 peersu per yew.

TM cost for milluacilding in Kiddle Zapt foi the mantecancephse La estimted to cequLzu 31 metdrc toues of niclossuide perYea, 1 mtric toue costing $18,000. TM yeArly needed amomtof 31 toone costing $558,000.

gtit. for chtherap La upper gypt La 000,00 treatmemtspe yea costing appn*. S*1050,000.

rer the i4tenance phase in Upper £gypt the s"dd amout ofmolluscicid a istieated to be 56 metric tooes per yea costi4$1,006,000.

1.10 t

Very substant4al progress bas been made i reducingptsvalosn-rate of Infection ad concrellug -ese ia theKAdd- ad pipoer gapt project are" an lt bs been demontratedowx a ver LLrg ama inhabited by so_ 10.2 million people La1964, that control by integated masutes of area wide

hluscicadAdg ad selective mes* chemotherapy cn be deliveredand, -4-ad ve r time-span of up to 8 years.

A clea nee he be1 ldentified to 4-taia and reinforccontol ia Nid4le .d Upper gpt with some dfictioma Lutachni .-

It is highly dslrale that the ae of cotrol operations sholdbe =tewde to thos prt of tue Mil Delta which are at prstSmiontrolled.

The evaluation toon stronwly tecom s that the e proposals a&propriate subject toe fidiag by the at a. for

Reco trwctio and Deelopmt, a" tat these proposalt sholdbe treatea a mttor al the greatest urgwec by the UMD.

- 112 -

ANIEX 20Page 1

ARAB PEPM1LI OF EGYP!

PRQ7ECT COMPLETICN REPOCR' - tIPPER EGYPT DrA4% C II PP01EC'

(CREDIT 637, lOAN 1285-EaT)

Proiect Ecruipvnent - Appraisal Estinate and Actual

TescrrPtion Appraisal Estinate ActualUnit ouantitv Cost 5Gantitv cost

ns$'000 USS '0001. Production of FMC oies

Pipe production units No. 3 3,000 2 1,084PVc powe-er tons 16,000 12,800 2,000 2,678Miscellaneous-evare parts sum - 2,232 - -Sub-total: 18,032 3,762

2. Excav. 2 Remndel1inq coen drainsI'raolines 1.5 m3 12 1,080 39 4,334rraglines 1.0 m3 17 1,190 )Hydraulic excavators 12 720 22 2,419T.ransporters 6C tons 6 45G 86Extra tractor 1 50 - _Trucks 7.5 tons 15 225 15 408Pick-ups 15 90 - -.eeps 15 90 18 114Workshop eouirment sum - 30 - 200Miscellaneous-spare parts sum. - 1,787 - -Sub-total: 5,712 7,561

3. uMaing StationPwrps and notors No. 3 60 3 67Power line sum - 50 -

Miscellaneous-spare parts sum - 13 - 58Sub-total: -

4. Field DrainageGravel crushers No. 4 600 3 535Tile laying nachines No. 33 2,640 18 2,261collector layinq machines No. 10 1,150 28 3,504Transporters NO. 4 300 - -Trailers No. 200 200 18 116Wheel tractors NO. 100 1,000 68 918Backhoes No. 10 350 - -4-wheel tractors-graders No. 30 450 10 235Trucks & trailers PO. 20 360 17 853Pick-ups No. 50 300 65 )Station wagons No. 12 72 12 ) 1,334Jeeps NO. 50 300 6 )Motorcycles NO. 30 1S - -Mobile cranes NO. 4 160 1 116NorkshoP eauipoent sun 100 - 297Spare parts su 1,837 -Miscellaneous sun 1,180 --

Sub-total: 11,014 10,168

- 113 -


PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II PROJECT

(CREDIT 719, LOANS 1439/1440-EGT)

I. INTRODUCTION

General

1.1 This completion report for Nile Delta Drainage II Project, gives afurther opportunity to record and evaluate the performance on the fourthproject in the largest multi-stage field drainage ;rogramme ever undertakenin the world. The project provided the substantive financial assistance tothe Government of Egypt's (GOE) policy of providing improved drainagethroughout miost of the approximately 5.7 million feddans I/ of thehistorically irrigated area ("the old lands") in the Delta and Upper Egypt.The project aimed to provide field drainage to some 7% of this area and,following the pattern set by the previous projects. The Bank extended Itsprevious participation in' the di'a1nage programme (Nile Delta I and UpperEgypt I and II drainage projects) by financing this and one further project(Orainage V project) involving five IDA credits and three World Bank loanstotalling USS 246 million. The project and its successors has also attractedsignificant amounts of aid from other donors including USAID, KfW, theAfrican Development Fund and Bank. in the form of co-financing (threecredit/loans totalling USS 82 mtilion). The World Food Programme has alsoparticipated In 'the first drainage irojects and the Netherlands Governmentis supporting the-drainage programme with technical assistance. The fiveprojects together cover improvement of surface drains in about 2.84 millionfeddans and installation of subsurface drainage in about 2.60 miiionfeddans (abiut 46% of the old lands irrigated areas). &nnll_1 presentssalient features and status of each of the repeater projects. 2/

1.2 This loan/credit, the third in the vital agricultural sector,Aepresented a continuation of Bank Group lending operations in Egypt. Credit719-EGT and loans 1239/1440-EGT for USS 66.0 million were signed on July15, 1977 and became effective on April 17, 1978. The Closing Date,originally December 31, 1983, was extended twice to December 31 1985. Thefinal disbursement from the cred't/loan was made on August 22, 1986 bringingthe total amount disbursed to the original USS 66.0 million. On this 'date,the installation of field drainage, an activity critical to fu l completionof the project, was accompi'.hed in 391,000 feddans out of the 400,000feddans originally planned. Existing open drains were remodelled and newdrains excavated on the 810,000 feddans as planned. Co-financing of OM 50.0million was obtained from KfW to cover installation of two PVC pipefactories and foreign production costs of PVC-pipes. Disbursements to dateare DM 42.3 million.

/ Or 2.4 million ha (1 feddan a 0.42 ha)

O EPAPO installed 968,000 feddans with tile drainage independently beforeand during the WB projects. Hence the total area installed will be about63% of the "old lands".

-114-

Aoricultural Sector

1.3 Egypt's population, soon to reach 50 million, is large and growingat an annual rate of 2.5% almost half of this growth is concentrated in thegreater Cairo area. Arid desert lnd accounts for about 96.5% of the onemillion km2 of surface area, leaving only 35,500 km2 of urban andagriculturally productive land with a population density of about 1,400/km2.Almost 50% of the population is rural, its proportion having steadilydeclined from 62% in 1960. Average per capita GNP estimate was IJSS 644 in1984/85.

1.4 The high economic growth (8%-10% in real terms) in the 1970s waschiefly the result of a surge in foreign exchange resources, based mainlyon external factors - concessional capital inflows, primarily from otherArab countries, earnings from petroleum exports and from the Suez Canal,tourism receipts and workers' remittances. While these resources enabledEgypt to achieve a high level of growth they also made the economy verysusceptible to outside Influences. The lesser flow of external resourcessince 1981 produced a slowdown of economic growth. The downturn wastriggered by a fall in oil prices, exacerbated by a decline in tourismreceipts, remittance earnings and a slowdown in Suez Canal earnings

following the saneral slowdown in the world economy. The prospects forgreater external resources are worsening. Therefore, the challenge thatEgypt now faces is to make those difficu't choice, it was able to avoid whenexogenous resources were plentiful. They involve: the mobilization ofresource, raising the efficiency of investments, improving the capability ofthe domestic egonomy to absorb a growing labour force; and earning foreignexchange. Economic growth will depend on the pace and comprehensiveness ofthe policy reforms, which should be designed to eliminate the distortions inthe economy.

1.5 Apricilture in the economy. The land base for agriculturalproduction consists of 5.7 million feddans (2.4 million ha) of 'old lands'nd 0.9 million feddans (0.4 million ha) of reclaimed lands - the so-called"old-new lands". Only one-half of the latter is considered productive, duepartly to deficienciee in technical design and partly due to inappropriatemanagcment. The per capita cultivated area, which was 0.19 feddans in 1960,is now only about 0.13 feddans. The old lands include all of the morefertile areas in the valley of the Nile and the Delta where about 97% of thenation's total agricultural production is generated. The old-new lands weredeveloped from the late 1950s through the early 1970s, pr'marily on themarginal soils along the western edge of the Delta. Ne-irly all Egyptianagriculture is irrigated and, since completion of the HAD, all irrigation isperennial.

1.6 The importance of agriculture in the Egyptian economy changedsignificantly during the 1970s. Historically, agriculture was the dominantsector, providing the bulk of employment and output, being crucial toforeign exchange earnings and receiving substantial budgetary support. Thesector's vital role was reinforced by its strong performance during the1952/70 period. During the 1960s, ogricultural production grew at over 3%annually - an exceptional performance, given the relatively high base level.

1.7 In the 1970s, the pace of growth declined to around 2%. Given thatthe high growth rates of the previous decade Included the impact ofcontrolled releases from the HAD, this does not reflect a significant changein the underlying growth trend and is still an Impressive performance.However, other factors accentuated the slowdown in agricultural growth:first, population continued to grow at over 2.5%; second, per capita income

- i', -

grew very rapidly; and third, consumer prices for foodstuffs held atextremely low levels compounded the demand increases generated by the firsttwo factors.

1.8 The net effect of the declining trends is summarized in the tablebelow:

Agricultural Sector Oevelopments - Some Key Indicators

1960 1974 1983 1990 /

Share of agriculture in value added (X) 28 25 18 n.a.Agricultural exports as % of total exports 33 25 9 n.a.Agricultural trade balance (USS million,current prices) 255 300 -3,000 n.a.Self-sufficiency (%) in major products:

- wheat 70 37 23 28- rice 144 111 100 86- sugar 114 96 50 b/ n.a.- pulses 92 81 73 b/ n.a.- cotton 400 232 170 134- meat 95 99 63 56- milk 94 93 n.a. 44

Population index 100 138 180 n.a.

I/ Projections from World Bank Report No. 4136-EGT, 'Issues of TradeStrategy and Investment Planning', January 1983.

bl 1982 data.

1.9 Agricultural constraints. Aside from the very limited availabilityof arable land, several major constraints have prevented agriculture fromperforming its potentially key role in .the economy : (a) limitedinvestment in the sector; (b) the problematic situation with respect towaterlogging and soil salinity; (c) Institutional weaknesses in agriculturalsupporting services; (d) deterioration of the water delivery and drainagechannels due to inadequate maintenance and inadequate water distributionsystems; (e) Government system of regulated cropping patterns and marketingat low fixed prices; (f) labour shortages at times of peak demand due tomigration both to cities and abroad; and (g.) failure to develop and usetechnology needed for expanding agricultural production. Another majorconstraint to agricultural growth is developing, i.e. water availability inthe Nile System. If land reclamation is allowed on a disproportionatelylarge-scale and. possibly also In uneconomic areas without parallel effortsin water conservation, re-use and improved mandgement, then water shortagesin summer are expected to become a general problem 'n many command areas ofthe "old lands".

Land Constraints and Importance of Improved Drainage

1.10 Good land for crop production is scarce in Egypt and development ofdesert/saline marshy lands identified by GOE for reclamation is costintensive with lengthy gestation periods. Therefore, the main source ofincreases in agricultural production in the short run must be the old lands.On these lands productivity is still constrained even today by inadequatedrainage in about 1.5 million feddans. The priority thus lies in continuingdrainage programme under which some 3.1 million feddans will have beenequipped with field drains by mid-1987. This is justified since no inputpackage to increase production will be fully successful until the drainageconstraint has been removed. While there is little evidence that land is

- 116 -

going out of production as a result of waterlogging and salinization causedby high groundwater levels, it is clear that rising soil salinity in someareas is causing yields to decline. The need for drainage arises from theoccurrence of waterlogging and high salinity levels in soil and groundwaterlevel. The position of the groundwater level is not static but fluctuates inresponse to Irrigation, rainfall, evaporation and (natural) drainage.

1.11 In the project area, most of the soils are non-saline soils (EC-Saturation Extract less than 4 mmhos/cm). However, in the north.ern sector ofthe East Delta and in parts of the West Delta there are fairly large andnumerous patches of moderate, strongly and even very strongly saline soils.In the Central Delta, small parcels of moderately saline soils are found. NomaJor alkali problems were in the project area. The frequent high watertable in the project area was causing waterlogging and prevented leaching ofincoming salts from the root zone. If the productivity of the area was to bemaintained, accumulated salinity had to be removed and the high water tablelowered. The installation of sub-surface field drainage on a massive scalethus became a prerequisite for preserving this productive area of Egypt.Field drainage, as proposed for the project, was an appropriate method teextract excess groundwater and control its level.

1.12 In spite of the fact that high-yielding strains of main crops:cotton, rice wheat and maize had been introduced, fertilizer applicationsincreased, disease and insect control improved and support servicesexpanded, the yields of rice, wheat and maize have remained constant on.average over the decade since 1965. Cotton yields, on the other hand,decreased markedly since 1969. Also, in certain areas yields of all themajor crops have already declined. The major reason for this situation Isattributed to the constant deterioration of the cultivated lands due towaterlogging and salinity. In the 26 districts, which were scheduled forfield drainage under the project, the 1972-75 avc;age yields on those soilssuffering from waterlogging and salinity show as much as a 46% reduction inyield for maize, 50% for cotton and wheat and 30% for rice, below theaverage yields on soils in the same district which are not seriouslyaffected by waterlogging and salinity. Without adequate drainage facilities,it was estimated that average crop yields in the project area would declineby at least 30% over the next 35 years.

1.13 Before designing and installing the tile drainage system detailedfield investigations were made in each catchment area by the DrainageAuthority to establish the constraints and need for drainage on the basis offour main par2meters: depth of shallow groundwater table, soil permeability,soil salinity and water salinity. Results of detailed investigations wereplotted on detailed maps. Due to the unavailability in the Authority ofclear set of crit3ria for selection, delineation and priority ranking ofdrainage basins, the use of results of detailed investigations have not beenoptimal and some doubts have arisen on the ranking and selection of methodsused for certain catchment areas in the Delta particularly in areas withunstable or problem soils.

1.14 The Government has been giving high priority to the tile drainageprogramme over the past 15 years. During the 10 years ending 1985/86, thecapital expenditures on all irrigation activities in Egypt totalled LE 1,883million. Out of this, drainage alone accounted for LE 661 million or 35%.Annex 2 shows the Ministry of Irrigation's (M¢1) recurrent and capitalexpenditure. The MOI current planning is to complete the Upper Egypt IIfield drainage project component and to start with the fir;t phase of theDrainage V program covering about 0.47 million feddans by 1990. Draining theremaining 0.86 million teddans of the Drainage V programme is likely to takeat least until 1996.

- 117 -

Bank's Agricultural Lending

1.15 Since 1970, the Bank has financed 19 projects in the agriculturalsector in Egypt. Initially the Bank's policy was to encourage the Governmentto maintain and increase production levels in the "old lands". This was donethrough the series of five drainage projects, of which 637/1285 EGT was thethird, and through the Agricultural Development Project (Credit 830-UAR).Over time there has been further diversification, in particular In agro-industries with two projects, fruit and vegetable production and marketing,land reclamation with the New Lands Development Project. Other agriculturalsector ,upport projects financed by the World Bank concerned cotton ginningrehabilitation, fertilizer productions, agricultural/industrial imports,rural electrification, technical assistance respectively to the Ministriesof Irrigation and Land Reclamation, Irrigation and Drainage Pumping StationsRehabilitation and recently Channel Maintenance. Details on these projectsare given in Annex 3.

Bilharzia Control

1.16 Bilharzia, a disease known in Egypt since hundreds of years, hascaused immeasurable misery to people, death and most certainly a marked lossof productivity; since the 1900's many a control scheme has been tried. TheGovernment of Egypt has, since many years, sponsored Bilharzia control andtried with pilot and large scale projects, given the respective tools ofeach period, to gain control of the disease. But only in the last few years,with the advent of efficient drugs and molluscicides as well as improvedstrategies and better basic health coverage have control measures succeededin producing and sustaining significant results in terms of a reduction ofmorbidity and reduction of infection.

1.17 Within Middle and Upper Egypt, particularly in the northern region,Bilharzia is endemic. In Upper Egypt Drainage I Project, a programme for the.control of Bilharzia, covering 900,000 feddans and about 3 million peoplehas been initiated. It consists of an integrated snail control programmecoupled with chemotherapy for Infected persons. The Bilharzia projectcomprised the area controlled by the Ibrahimia and Bahr Yousef canalscomiencing at the Dairut Barrage which is downstream of the head reguiatorat Asyut on the Nile. Abouat 120,000 feddans between Asyut and DairutBarrages were included in the programme to permit the whole area served fromthe Asyut barrage to be treated, thereby reducing the possibility ofreinfecting treated areas. The Upper Egypt II credit and loan also includedprovisions for financing the cost overrun of the Bilharzia control componentof Upper Egypt Drainage I Project. Under the Nile Delta II project, thecontrol componint in Upper EqYvt was to be expanded by 1.2 million feddanthereby instituting a control programme over the entire cultivated area fromGiza to the Aswan High Dam.

- 118 -

II. PROJECT FORMUIATION

Prolect Orioin

2.1 The Idea of a Bank financed drainage project in Egypt wasorig4nated by a Bank economic mission which visited the country in July196%. This idea was further advanced by a Bank agricultural mission whichvisited Egypt in September 1968. The mission proposed, as a first priority,a project which included Installation of field drainage in part of the NileDelta together with remodelling and construction of open drains and erectionof the drainage pumping stations required. This project, later called NileDelta Drainage I Project, was appraised by the Bank in December 1968 and theCredit (181-UAR) became effective on December 22, 1970.

2.2 In 1972 a request was made by the Government of Egypt for financingby IDA of a second drainage project in Upper Egypt, where waterlogging andsoil salinity in certain areas constituted major constraints to maintainingland productivity. This second drainage project, the Upper Egypt Drainage IProject, was appraised by the Bank in March 1972, and the Credit (393-EGT)became effective on November 28, 1973.

2.3 Up to the end of 1975, construction and remodelling of open drainsand erection of pumping stations had progressed satisfactorily. However,progress in Installing field drainage was slow due to several problems thetwo projects faced. Of these, the most serious were the lack of local funds,the shortage of engineers due to the 1973 war, toe shortage of cement forthe production of concrete pipes, the poor performance of local publicsector contractors and other managerial problems.

2.4 By the beginning of 1975 the Government had made sufficientallocation of funds to the drainage projects and the shortage of engineerswas no longer a problem as most of them had been released from the army.Encouraged by these improvements, the Ministry of Irrigation made a newrequest to the Bank for financing a third drainage project, covering theremaining areas in Upper Egypt which suffered waterlogging and salinity.This project, the Upper Egypt Drainage II, was appraised by the Bank inDecember 1975 and the Credit/Loan 637/1285-EGT became effective on January31, 1977.

2.5 The Government requested further IOA/Bank assistance to assure thefinancing of the continuatfon of the drainage programme which was stillconsidered of first priority. The proposed fourth drainage project wasdesigned to provide In the Nile Delta four new pumping stations, two more tobe rehabilitated, remodelling of open drains over an area of about.800,O00feddans, and installing field drainage on 1,000,000 feddans.

Feasibility Report

2.6 An FAO/IBRO CP mission visited Egypt in July 1976 to assist EPAOP1n the preparation of the proposed Nile Delta Drainage II Project. The FAOmission was presented with a short report which was much too general, andwithout tables. The mission discussed this report with EPADP and leftdetailed guidelines for finalization of project preparation. Subsequently,EPADP submitted to the Bank the feasibility report in September 1976.

- 119 -

2.7 The feasibility. report was reasonably comprehensive as far as thedescription of project works was concerned but, as in previous feasibilityreports prepared by EPADP, was short on justification for selection ofproject areas. The selection of the areas for field drainage was based on asoil survey covering the Lower Delta, conducted by the Ministry ofAgriculture in 1971. No detailed field investigations (water table depth,hydraulic conductivity of soils etc.) had been conducted prior to theselection of the areas. Thus, the areas included in the project appeared tohave been selected on practical considerations seconded by some fieldobservations. Furthermore, there was a complete absence in the report of ajustification of the project as a whole based on investments and expectedbenefits. Finally, the implementation schedule in the report was overoptimistic.

Appraisal

2.8 The appraisal of the project wds carried out in October 1976. Theappraisal mission reviewed the basic assumptions made in the FeasibilityReport and visited many areas proposed for field drainage. Special attentionwas given by the mission to the proposed implementation rate of the projectworks and to the estimation of project cost. The mission also collected andreviewed all the available data on the effect of drainage on crop yields inan effort to make a better estimation of project benefits.

2.9 Following the appraisal mission, the scope of the project and itsperiod of implementat10n were debated in the Bank. It was considered thatthe project scope, as originally proposed by the Government, was much tooambitious. Taking into account the implementation capacity of EPAOP and thefinancial constraints, it was decided to iiclude in the project theconstruction of four new pumping stations and the rehabilitation of two-more, the remodelling-of open drains on an area of 810,000 feddans and theinstallation of field drainage on 400,000 feddans (instead of 1,000,000feddans proposed by the Government). It was also decided to include in theproject a Bilharzia control component to cover the area between Asyut andAswan in Upper Egypt. Finally, it was decided to cover part of theexpenditures for the UNOP Master Plan for Water Resources Project,represertitng Government's foreign exchange contribution.

2.10 As far as the implementation period was concerned, it wasconsidered that (a) with the additional equipment provided under theproject, (b) the use of PVC plastic pipes (instead of concrete pipes used Inthe previous projects) and (c) the opening of tenders for field drainage toforeign contractors, it would have been possible to reach an implementationrate of field drainage of 140,000 feddans annually, starting from the thirdyear. Therefore it was accepted that the project could have been completedwithin a five-year period. This proved later to be a very optimisticassumption.

2.11 Tht. Bank was informed In January 1976 of the intention of KfW 1/ toparticipate in the financing of the proje-t. The matter was furtherdiscussed between KfW and the Bank in Washington and it was agreed topropose to the Government a parallel financing agreement by which KfW wouldfinance all foreign costs required for the production of the PVC plastic

1/ Kreditanstalt fOr Wiederaufbau of the Federal Republic of Germany.

- 120 -

pipes in Egypt as well as part of local costs for the installation of fielddrainage. A separate agreement was later signed between Government and KfWon this subject.

2.12 At the time of appraisal, three issues became apparent. The firstwas related to the recovery of field drainage -cost including maintenancefrom the beneficiaries, the second to the establishment of a special fund tohelp overcome difficulties experienced in the past regarding readyavailability of local funds, and the third to the evaluation of drainageworks and their effect on crops. On these issues, the Government was advisedbefore negotiations that its representatives should be prepared to reachnecessary agreement with the Bank.

Negotiations

2.13 Negotiations took place in Washington during the period April 4 to8, 1977. Agreement was reached on the following main issues:

a) Cost recovery: In order to overcome the issue related to therecovery of maintenance costs of field drainage, EPADP undertookthe responsibility to furnish to the Bank not later than June 30,1978 a report on the ability of farmers to pay for drainage works,including maintenance cost.

b) Special fund: The delegation agreed to the establishment of aSpecial Fund designed to help overcome difficulties experienced inthe past retarding ready availability of local funds.

c) Evaluation of drainaqe works: The delegation agreed to completeevaluation of drainage works alreajy completed in areas under NileDelta I Project on June 30, 1978, complete such evaluation in areasunder Upper Egypt I Project on June 30, 1979, and completeevaluation in areas under Upper Egypt II and Nile Delta II Projecton -June 30, 1982 and June 30, 1984 respectively.

2.14 Ouring negotiations full agreement wes reached on the scope of theproject as described below.

The ProJect

2.15 The primary objective of the project approved by the Bank Board onMay 31. 1977 was to improve drainage on 1,000,000 feddans in Nile Delta at atotal cost of USS 207 million equivalent. An IDA credit of USS 27.0 million,a Bank loan of USS 27.0 million and a "third window" loan of USS 12.0million were allocated to cover foreign expenses of the project. The projectdescription incorporated in the Development Credit Agreement is given inAnnex 4. The project included the remodelling of 1,565 km of existing opendrains covering an area of 810,000 feddans, the installation of fielddrainage on about 400,000 teddans and the construction of four new pumpingstations and the rehabilitation of two more. A Bilharzia control componentwas included by which the Bilharzia programme was expanded by 1,200,000feddans in the area between Asyut barrage and Aswan dam, and a provision wasmade for financing part of the foreign cost for a UNDP-financed projectdesigned to draw up a Master Plan for Water Resources Development and Use,for which the Bank was the executing agency.

- 121 -

2.16 The agreement between Government and KfW for cofinancing theproject with OM 100 million was signed on July 30, 1979. According to thisagreement, the amount of OM 44.43 million was allocated for the productionof PVC pipes for the project while the remaining amount of OM 55.57 millionwas allocated for financing local cost.

- 122 -

III. IMPLEMENTATTON

ProJect Aareement

3.1 The Project Agreement, the Development Credit Agreement and theLoan Agreements were signed on July 15, 1977. At the same date was alsosigned the side letter on External Debt of ARE.

Effectiveness and Start-up

3.2 In addition to the standard conditions of effectiveness there wasone specific condition: that the Government will establish a "special fund"for the previous and proposed IDA/Bank-financed drainage projects for timelyallocation of local funds. This specific condition was met when assuranceshad been obtained that the Special Fund had been established. Thecredit/loans were declared effective on April 17, 1978, about 9 montns afterthe signature date.

3.3 As far as the cofinancer's loan was concerned, a specific conditionwas included in the Development Credit Agreement that "the failure of theagreement with KfW becoming effective by December 31, 1977 or by anotherdate to be agreed upon between tne Government and IDA/Bank will be acondition of default unless the Government will be able to secure theadditional funds required from other sources."

An Overview of ProJect History

3.4 The agreed implementat"'" schedule arojected completion of thedrainage component of the project by end of 1982. The closing date ofcredit/loan was set as December 31. 1983. Many events contributed to aconsiderable delay in project completion. The drainage works were completedon September 30, 1986, i.e. almost four years behind schedule. There arethree pumping stations not yet completed of which one, included in theproject in 1983, is expected to become operational in September 1989. Theclosing date was revised twice to accommodate delays in implementation. Thecredit/loans were finally closed on December 31, 1985 but the accounts werekept open for making disbursements against commitments made before thisdate. The entire amount of the credit/loans of USS 66 million was finallydisbursed.

Revisions

3.5 No major changes were made during the project execution in its"ope, and objectives. However, some changes were made in the areas of fieldorainage and in pumping stations. Thus, an area of 41,000 feddans (Bahr SaftExt.) was excluded from the project and shifted to the Dutch-financeddrainage project and an area of 20,000 feddans (Belbis) was implementedunder the Mile Pelta I project. Another area of 15,000 feddans (Darawa) wasexcluded because of special soil problems requiring additionalInvestigations. In exchange, areas totalling 70,000 feddans that originallywere planned to be executed with Government's own resources, were includedin the project. Annex 5 presents by catchment unit the areas at appraisaland the areas actually implemented. Changes also occurred in the pumpingstations. The pumping station of Darwa was substituted by the larger one ofBilad-El-Ayed and one more station, El Arin, was added in 1983. Annex 7shows the changes in the pumping stations and their status of completion.Most of the above changes were beneficial to the project and gave some

- 123 -

flexibility to EPADP in the implementation of its overall drainageprogramme.

3.6 Amendments were also made to projects agreements by which theoriginal dates for the submission to the Bank by EPAOP of the study on theevaluation effect of drainage works and the study of the ability of farmersto pay were postponed. Also amendments were made on the date for theestablishment of the cost accounting system and on the training programme.

3.7 Revisions made during the execution of the project on theallocations of project funds by category are shown in Annex 9(a).

ImPlementation Schedule of Drainage Works

3.8 In general theimplementation of project drainage works run farbehind schedule and these works were completed in September 1986. This showshow unrealistic were the assumptions made about project implementation atappraisal. Instead of the expected five-year implementation period, theproject took nine years to be completed (without completion of pumpingstations). Oelays have occurred in all the three main components of drainageworks i.e. pumping stations, open drains and field drainage. On the originaltarget completion date of December 31, 1982, the achievements were 40% oncivil works for the pumping stations (erection of pump units had notstarted), 72% for open drains.and 20% for field drainage.

3.9 Many factors contributed to cause delays in project implementation.The specific delaying factors for each drainage component are examinedbelow:

a) Pumvinq stations. This is the activity, that presented seriousproblems and caused the major delays in project completion. Thecontract for the rehabilitation of the two pumping stations wasawarded in November 1979 and for the construction of the four newstations in February 1980 (almost two years after effectiveness).The equipment for all pumping stations arrived in June 1981. Civilworks on three of the new pumping stations started in March 1981and on the fourth one in May 1983. This shows the inefficiency ofthe local contractor in mobilizing and in organizing the work. Thefifth new pumping station (added in early 1983) was tendered inMay 1983 but the contract was awarded in October 1984 because ofsome disputes over terms of payment. The rehabilitatton of the twostations was completed in December 1984 (five years after the awardof the contract) while erection of puFOs started in three of thenew stations in early 1985. To date (Octooer 1986) two new stations(Bilad-El-Ayed and Mehala-El-Kobra) are completed, one is expectedto be completed in April 1987 (Dellngat Extension), and the fourthone (Abu Hommos) in December 1988. The contract for civil works forthe fifth station (El Arin) was cancelled and now EPAOP is in theprocess of retendering. This station is not expected to be readybefore September 1989. In sumary, due to the combined inefficiencyof contractors and slow performance of EPAOP, the four new pumpingstations instead to be completed by the end of 1979, as it wasestimated at appraisal, will be completed by the end of 1988, i.e.nine years later. The case of the station of Abu Hommos is veryunfortunate because in the area served by this station, some 36,000feddans have been already provided with field drainage notfunctioning properly because of the high water level in the mainopen collector (Annex 7).

- 124 -

b) Open drains. This activity presented the least problems in projectimplementat1on. Remodelling and construction of open drains starteda few months after effectiveness by using old equipment availableto the contractors. The execution of this component was keptintentionally slow because the work on open drains was too farahead of field drainage installation and the slower paced progresshelped to achieve a better balance between these two activities.The component of open drains was completed by June 1985 i.e. threeand a half years behind scnedule (Annex 6).

c) field drailnage. This activity also presented problems and causeddelays in project completion. The implementation of field drainagestarted with a small contract of 10,000 feddans in January 1981.The major contracts for the execution of work were awarded inOctober 1980 but work started by the end of 1981, i.e. two yearslater than appraisal estimate. The reasons for this delay were:(1) the long time elapsed between effectiveness and the signatureof the agreement with the cofinancer KfW as well as the delay formaking arrangements for the production of PVC pipes for theproject; (ii) the delay of EPADP in the award of contracts for theexecution of field drainage; (the award occurred in October 1980,i.e. two years behind schedule); (iii) delay in the procurement ofequipment by the contractors and (iv) delay in contractors'mobilization. But even later, the annual installation rate of fielddrainage was slow, on average for the five years of full activities.76,000 feddans (maximum 91,000 feddan, in the. year 1984/85)compared to appraisal estimate of 130,000-140,000 feddans. Thereasons for this slow progress was the poor performance of thepublic sector contractors. It is unfortunate that although thetendering of field drainage works was made through ICB, no foreigncontractors presented a bid, obviously because they knew in advancethat they did not have a chance to compete with the low prices ofthe public sector contractors. Another conclusion was that,although the use of plastic PVC pipes and heavy duty layingmachines for the collector pipes made easier the whole operation ofinstalling field drainage, the contractors, because of theirmanagerial weaknesses, did not take advantage of this. In fact thecontractors' performance showed a poor utilization of the resourcesmade available to them. For example the utilization of layingmachines was far below accepted standards. On average the collectormachines were utilized 118 days a year and the lateral machines 162days a year. These figures show clearly that the contractorsmanagement of the machines was extremely inefficient. If thecontractors could have increased their utilization rate by 50%(which is considered normal) the drainage area constructed in ayear would have been more than 100,000 feddans. It has to bementioned that, to some extent, there were operational difficultiesin areas planted with rice.

3.10 But there is no doubt that EPADP also has a share of responsibilityfor the slow performance of contractors. There was no adequate planning andsupervision of drainage works and EPADP proved to have no effective means ofenforcing the conditions of contracts. The situation could have beendifferent If EPADP had made use of consultants as provided in the appraisalreport, to advise on overall planning and coordination of works and ontechnical matters related to the drainage works. Despite the efforts made bythe supervision missions and the Bank to persuade EPADP to hire consultants,they refused to do so. They claimed that strict governmental instructionsdid not allow them to use funds from the credit/'oan for foteign

- 125 -

consultants. EPAO was getting some technical advices for its drainageprogramme through a panel of Egyptian and Outch experts, sponsored by theDutch Bilateral Programme. Annex 8 shows the overall implementation rate offield drainage for all projects.

3.11 The options available to the Bank staff to do anything about slowimplementation were limited because the Bank had little leverage forinterference with the working of the public sector contractors. At therequest of the Bank's supervision mission of May 1984, : meeting wasorganized by the Vice Chairman of EPA')P in which the Undersecretaries incharge and t!!e Chairmen of the main constructing companies involved withdrainage works participated. According to the Chairmen of these companies,the main problems faced by them were the procurement of spare parts for thepipe laying machines and the old contract unit prices that needed adjustmentdue to inflation. As a result of this meeting some action was taken by EPAOPto improve procurement of spare parts and a modest price escalation of theold contracts was adopted. However, these measures did not cause anyaramatic improvement in implementation rates in the following years.

3.12 It became clear to Bank staff that control over project activitiesand decisions had to be the responsIbility of EPADP and that Bank staffinfluence could at best be indirect through advice and persuasion. Whenoppertunities presented themselves Bank has taken fast action. For instancewhen it became obvious that there would be a long delay in the localproduction of PVC pipes, Bank agreed to import from the proceeds of thecredit/loan three mobile PVC pipe factories and PVC powder. (Two of thefactories and certain quantities of powder were purchased under Upper EgyptII Drainage Project). Likewise, when shortages of cement and iron barsemerged Bank agreed to finance their import from abroad. Also when shortageof local funds,proved to.be a significant delaying factor the Bank stressedthe need for adequate funding to the Government. Finally, the Bank hadcorrectly shown flexibility in accepting EPADP's proposals for the amendmentof the field drainage areas in order to facilitate the implementationprogramme.

3.13 In summary, it can be said that the time schedule at appraisal wasover optimistic. The implementation rate of 140,000 feddans per year offield drainage proved to be unattainable with the use of local contractors.And the construction period assumed at appraisal for the pumping stationsproved to be too short.

3.14 Chart I presents the time schedule agreed at appraisal for the mainproject activities and the actual implementation schedule of theseactivities.

Imnlementation of Bilharzia Control Programme

3.15 A Bilharzia Control Programme covering an area of 900,000 feddanswas initiated in 1976 under the Upper Egypt Orainage I Project. Theprogramme, which was implemented by the Ministry of Health, consisted of anintegrated snail contro:l programme combined with chemotherapy for infectedpeople. About 120,000 feddans located between Asyut and Oariut barrages havebeen included in the programme under the Upper Egypt Drainage II Project.This programme was further extended under the Nile Delta Drainage II Projectto cover an additional area of 1,200,000 feddans between Asyut and the AswanHigh Dam, with a total population of about 5 million people. Chemotherapyand snail control operations in this area started in March 1980 (intensivephase), and continued for three years. The consolidation phase followed foranother three years. Starting from 1986 the snail control in this area is

- 126 -

limited to local mollusciciding (maintenance phase). Chemotherapy ofinfected people continues to be Implemented based upon annual re-examination.

3.16 In general the Bilharzia control component has been implementedmore or less according to plan. Some problems faced earlier with the snailcontrol operations because of logistic difficulties have been resolved. Atpresent the programme continues with Government's own resources. Aninternational evaluation mission visited Egypt from October 1984 to April1985 to evaluate the entire Bilharzia control programme. Annex 19 presents asummary of the findings of this mission.

Procurement

3.17 Project equipment ^or drainage works (draglines and excavators,vehicles, workshop equipment, flushing pumps for maintenance, spare partsetc) as well as materials (cement, steel, PVC powder) were procured throughICB in accordance with Bank guidelines. Civil works for field drainage werealso procured through tCB but all contracts were awarded to localcontractors since no foreign bids were submitted. Civil works, not financedby the Bank, for construction and remodelling of open drains, and for smallbuildings were procured through local tendering in accordance with thenormal procurement procedures of Government. The construction of the newAumping stations and the supply of pump units were combined in one contractand procured through ICB.

3.18 Equipment for Bilharzia control (vehicles, etc.) was procuredthrough ICB. Molluscicide and drugs used in the Bilharzia control programmeare produced by only one manufacturer in West Germany. Their procurement wasmade from this manufacturer on the basis of negotiated prices.

3.19 In general the procurement of equipment, materials and civil worksunder the project was carried out with no special problems (except thedelays) and there were no misprocurement cases. The list of equipmentprocured is given in Annex 20.

Accounting. Auditing and Reporting

3.20 According to Section 4.02 of the Project Agreement the Authoritywas to have its accounts and financial statements for each fiscal yearaudited by independant auditors acceptable to the Bank and to furnishcertified copies of financial statements and audit reports w'thin a periodof six months after the end of each fiscal year. According to section 4.03of the Project Agreement, the Authority was to maintain a cost accountinguistem established within six months after effectiveness of the Upper EgyptII project (31 January 1977) to determine relevant costs of the workscarried out by the Authority under the project.

3.21 EPAPO's Finance Department was responsible for the establishmentand maintenance of separate accounts for the project and the Central AuditOrganization (CAO), an independant auditing agency, was responsible forauditing the accounts of EPAPO including those of the project. The CAO haspresented regularly, though usually later than agreed, annual audit reportswhich were satisfactory tc the Bank. These audit reports also contained acomparison of actual with budget figures and formed part of the MOIconsolidated report presented to the People's Assembly.

- 127 -

3.22 EPAPO has had considerable difficulties in establishing a costaccounting system. The project agreements of the Upper Egypt II and NileDelta II projects had to be amended several times by substituting the datefor the establishment of the system ultimately to June 30, 1981. The Bankprovided assistance to EPAPO by draftinc terms of reference for the design,training of staff, and implementation of the cost accounting system by alocal consulting firm.

3.23 EPAP" recruited in 1977/78 21 accountants who were to form the costaccounting unit. In May 1979 a firm of chartered accountants had beencontracted to design the system as well as to train four accountants ofEPAPO. Their report was submitted in May 1980 and the cost accounting systemwas operational mid-1981. The cost accounting unit and system were reviewedby a Bank mission in April 1982 and found generally satisfactory. However,periodic shortages in accounting staff occurred subsequently.

3.24 While there is now considerable cost-accounting data available inthe Regional Offices (Directorates) classified by project, little systematiccompilation by project or by component and subcomponent is available it thecentral level. This leads to problems of overlapping accounts 6etweenprojects (Nile Delta I and II and Upper Egypt I and II). Efforts should bemade to further improve the existing cost accounting system in such a waythat it can be used as an effective tool for project management at thecentral level in Cairo. The flow of financial information to the Planningand Follow-up department in EPAPO should also be more systematic andsummarized financial data should be provided in quarterly reports.

3.25 The Authority's Planning and Follow-up department submits regularlyquarterly reports indicating maiply physical progress with field and operdrainage. These quarterly reports should be expanded. in the Drainage Vproject to contain also data on procurement, equipment available withcontractors and summarized financial data.

ProJect Financing - Disbursements

3.26 Actual withdrawal of proceeds of Credit and Loan by category areshown in a summarized form in Annex 9a and annually in Annex 9b. Actualdisbursements on a half yearly basis for the full term of the project arepresented in Annex lOa. Some two years delay in completion of the project isreflected in the extended disbursement period. As shown in Annex lOa, onlyabout 62% of the Credit and Loan was disbursed by the original closing dateof December 31, 1983. The Credit and Loan was finally fully disbursed onAugust 22, 1986. Disbursements of KfW funds are given in Annex 1Ob. Out ofan original allocation of OM 50.0 million, only 0P' 42.3 million wereactually disbursed to date. Disbursements of KfW funds were basically lowerdue to lower than estimated costs of PVC resin and the purchase of onemobile factory instead of the two factories initially planned.

Actual Costs Versus Appraisal Estimate

3.27 The project costs mentioned in this chapter and shown in Annexes 11and 12 are based on Information provided by EPAPO's administration 'andfinance department and from World Bank disbursement recoras. As mentioned inpara. 3.24, EPAPO's project accounts do not make it possible to distinguishlocal expenditure by sub-component. Furthermore, no systematic compilationof foreign exchange costs is made according to sub-component (i.e. fielddrainage, open drain remodellUfng etc.) EPAPD also has difficulties inseparating costs of overlapping projects (i.e. Upper Egypt I and II andDelta Drainage I and II). Thus, cost analysis in this report will remainjprrr *llatr.

- 128 -

3.28 Total project expenditure till July 1986 amounted to LE 170.4million. This corresponds to a cost overrun of 23% in terms of EgyptianPounds relatively low, given the important delays in project execution andslightly higher inflation than anticipated during the Implementation period.Total project in US dollars amounted to 178.1 million including KfWdisbursements of DO 42.3 million. They are shown in Annex 11. More detailedcosts by year are given in Annex 12. Since the final project local currencydisbursements are not expected to be effected until pumping stations arecompleted in June 1989, the total project expenditures will not be availablebefore late 1989. However, a re-estimate was made by the mission of the fullproject costs which are presently estimated at LE 187.5 million (36% abovethe appraisal estimate). To date project costs in US dollar terms 1/ areonly about 86% of appraisal estimates despite the fact that most projectcomponents have been completed. Adding expenditure for the pumping stationscompleted total priject costs are expected to reach about USS 192.2 millionwhich is only 93% of appraizal estimate in US dollar terms. The main reasonsfor such considerable reduction in costs, besides the revaluation of the USdollar during the project period, " e:

i) the relatively low local contract prices of the Egyptian PublicCompanies selected in October 1980 and the inadequate adjustments(price escalation) for local inflation (several public companieshave been facing losses in installation of field drainage);

ii) the lower than estimated costs of drainage equipment in US dollarterms due to fierce international competition;

iii) the lower than expected foreign exchange cost of PVC pipesfactories and PVC resin.

3.29 The lower overall project cost is reflected in the comparison ofthe average local cost of drainage works per feddan of the actual completedarea under the project with that estimated at appraisal. The totalexpenditures as of July 1986, for local cost of field drainage workscovering about 391,000 feddans was LE 46.1 million i.e. LE 117 per feddan.The total expenditures for local costs of open drainage covering some810,000 feddans was LE 17.6 million i.e. LE 25 per feddan. Thus the actuallocal cost of construction of the drainage facilities was about LE 142 perfeddan, which includes also crop compensation and land lost as a result ofthe project works. Foreign exchange cost amounted to LE 61.9 million orIE 120 per feddan. Thus, the total estimated cost per f-eddan for drainagewas LE 262 or US$ 271. Compared with USS 156 per feddan at appraisal, thetotal cost for field drainage at USS 197 per feddan was about 26% higher inUS dollar terms (see also Annex 13 for detailed costs of field drainage).

] Using comuercial" exchange rates for converting US dollar costs into LEgiven in "Currenti Economic Situation and Economic Reform program Reportno. 6195-EGT of October 22, 1986.

- 129 -

Ue of Consultants

3.30 The appraisal report identified the need for consultants to adviseand assist local engineers in using PVC pipes for field drainage and fortraining of local staff in the new techniques involved. No funds wereprovided under the Nile Delta II project for consultant services, as 15 man-years of consultancy were included already in Upper Egypt I drainage project(effective till 1981), but only a fraction of the agreed number ofconsultancy years had been used at the time of project appraisal.

3.31 There was further the availability of Dutch bilateral grants at thetime of appraisal which, however, supplied most of their expertise to theDrainage Research Institute and through the bi-annual Dutch-EgyptianDrainage Panel meetings.

3.32 It is unfortunate that again under this project the opportunity forforeign advice, training expertise and assistance in supervision of drainageinstallation by local contractors, was lost. No doubt that the absence offoreign assistance was felt in the selection process of pricrity areas inEPAPO's field investigation and design office, in'the quality of PVC pipeproduction, and in the quality of field drainage installation. The Dutchaid, except the installation of drainage in 40,000 feddans in the Delta forthe interventions by RYP staff in planning, training and monitoring ofdrainage installation, however excellent, has had mostly an lndirect impactby means of investigations reporting and recommendations carried out in DRIand submitted to EPAPO. The Drainage Authority on many occasions has beenreluctant in adopting, on a large scale, DRI or panel recommendations.

Training

3.33 Provision was made at appraisal for training of engineers and.technicians of EPAOP in field drainage practices and of operators andmechanics in the proper operation and maintenance of equipment. A trainingprogramme for agricultural staff employed by EPADP was conducted betweenJuly and October 1978. The total number of people trained was 250 dividedInto five groups. The courses included design, execution and maintenance ofdrainage works, the irrigation and drainage law and field visits. Similartraining programs for about 140 Agricultural Extension district managers and400 village agents of the Ministry of Agriculture were conducted in all theGovernorates of Nile Delta and Upper Egypt. Other training activities inEPADP included on-the-job training of design engineers and field supervisorsand the training of new accountants for the Cost Accounting Unit. Theobjective of these training courses was the familiarization of the staffemployed by EPADP in the drainage activities. But the training period wastoo short and the success was limited. More effective was the overseastraining of EPADP's mechanical engineers in the operation and maintenance ofequipment, provided by the suppliers.

3.34 An agreement was signed in 1983 between EPAOP and the DutchGovernment for training and technical assistance by the Lake Yssel PoldersOevelopment Authority. The training programme was under the generalsupervision of the Egyptian-Dutch Advisory panel. The programue, whichexpired in December 1985, provided for training EPADP senior staff andinstructors in Holland, for consultants to provide training in design offield drainage and in other specialized subjects, and also for the Dutchexperts' visits to Egypt for on-the-job training of EPADP and contractorspersonnel. A total of 500 staff of various levels, such as engineers,technicians, machine operators etc., from EPADP and from public sectorcontractors have been trained under this programme. Subjects covered in theoverall program included field investigations, design, construction planning

- 130 -

and management, maintenance of completed works and machine operation andmaintenance. This training programme was very successful and there is nodoubt that it helped to improve the implementation of the drainage programmeby EPADP. At the time of the visit of the completion mission in Egypt, EPADPwas negotiating with the Dutch Government representatives for the extensionof this training programme for another two years.

- 131 -

IV. OPERATION PERFORMANCE

Design of Field Drainage Works

4.1 General. The design of the drainage systems is the responsibilityof the Field Investigation and Oesign Department of EPADP. The designcapacity of this Department is about 250,000 feddans per year. Pre-designinvestigations are car-ied out at gridpoints of 500 w spacing (i.e. one holeevery 60 feddans). The design album, usually prepared for a subproject of3,000-5,000 feddans, includes topographical survey, drainage layout,longitudinal sections, structural designs and a list of quantities. Once thedesign album is handed over to the construction department, the designengineer has no further involvement in the construction and operation ofworks he has designed. Therefore, no systematic performance feedback reachesthe design engineer from the field and no improvement in project design canbe expected. Design for field drainage in the project area started in 1980and was completed by December 1983. Design preparation was always well aheadof the installation of field drainage.

4.2 Laterals spacing. Until July *983 the practice of EPADP was todesign field drainage systems by converting the computed theoretical lateralspacing to standard spacings of 40, 50 and 60 m. The reason given by EPADPfor not following the theoretical design criteria was that the narrowerspacing would entail a higher cost and more pipe-laying machine hours perunit area, therefore it would reduce the gross area on which field drainagecould be Installed. Supervision m'ssions have questioned the rationale ofthis approach and suggested that if full benefit of field drainage were tobe obtained, adjustments in lateral spacing should be limited to not morethat 20% of the computed value and generally less than 10%. The issue waspursued with the Chairman of EPADP and the Minister of irrigation and bymid-1983 the Chairman of EPADP agreed that new design criteria would deapplied to designs carried out after July 1, 1983; designs carried out priorto that date have not been revised. While the new approach of EPADP was asubstantial improvement over past attitudes, the fact is that thisimprovement did not affect large areas with designs made prior to July 1983.Bank supervision missions made special efTorts to persuade EPAOP to redesignall the non implemented areas by using the new design criteria. The Chairmanof EPADP in his letter of May 22, 1983 held some promise for revisingdesigns of areas requiring lateral spacings of less than 40 m. This promisewas not kept and as a result large field drainage areas of Nile DeltaDrainage II project were implemented according to the old design criteriai.e. with minimum lateral spacing of 40 m. Only in three areas (Zarqoon,Upper No. 1 and Beni Abid) which were designed after July 1983, fielddrainage was partially installed with lateral spacing of 30 m (in about19,000 feddans).

4.3 Laterals depth. The depth of laterals agreed in the appraisalReport was . m at the connection of the lateral with the collector drain.It was considered that this depth combined with the proper lateral spacingwould have been sufficient to provide for a reduction of the water table toat least 1 m within 48-72 hours following irrigation. But, as mentioned inthe previous paragraph, laterals were placed by EPADP not always at aspacing determined by the physical properties of soils. A remedy of the socaused deficiency of the drainage system would have been to increase thedepth of laterals in order to obtain the same drainage effect. But this wasnot done because of technical and economic constraints, the most important

- 132 -

being that a deeper field drainage system would have required jeever opendrain collectors and deeper pumping.

4.4 Gravel enveloPe. The appraisal report assumed that a gravelenvelope will be placed around all field drains to prevent sedlmentati3n andto acceler"te the entrance of water into the pipes. The size of gravelrecommendea was between 2 and 20 m-, It was further specified in the reportthat the general application of gravel filter will be revised later in lightof the results from field tests to be carried out during the first year ofthe project. However, the Egyptian-Dutch Advisory Panel for Land Drairage inEgypt reconmnended that gravel envelope could be omitted in soils which had aclay content greater than 40%. Therefore, contrary to the original intentionto equip all laterals with gravel filter EPADP had limited its use tolaterals with a spacing of 60 m or more. Bank consultants have continued toadvocate the use of gravel envelope around the laterals in all types ofsoil. Discussions with EPADP by various Bank staff who argued againstPanel's recommendation were ineffective. The argument of EPADP's expe-:s wasthat Egyptian-soil conditions are unusual in that the soil seems to be morestable than normal arid region soil and therefore gravel filter is notrequired in so:ls of a high clay content. The Completion Report mission wasinformed that a recent DRI study indicated a reduced risk of sedimentationin corrugated PVC pipes as compared with concrete pipes due to the fact thatwith the PVC pipes better quality work can be achieved. Thus, DRI'srecommendation is to adopt a clay content of 30% (instead of 40%) as a limitabove which no cover material for laterals is neeced, provided that the soilis of good structure. The issue of gravel envelope has not yet been resolvedand results are awaited for the completion of field investigations andtrials, carried out by the Drainage Research Institute. To date results ofthese trials are inconclusive. The appraisal recort for Drainage V (May1985) specifies that the use of gravel envelope will be limited to lateralswith a spacing of 60 m or more and for lesser drain spacing where needed dueto the presence of unstable soil at drain depth.

4.5 Manholes. Over the years the manholes in their present form (witha cover above the ground) proved to be a cause of maintenance problems forthe covered drainage systems. Farmers often cut holes in the superstructureof the manhole to dispose of excess surface water and children drop rubbish,stones and earth. As a result the pipe collectors often are blocked throughthe manholes and the covered drainage systems need frequent flushing andmaintenance. Bank missions several times recommended to EPADP to replace thepresent above-the-ground type of manhole with a buried manhole which wouldnot be easily accessible. To date, no action was taken by EPADP to modifythe manhole design. However, during appraisal of the Drainage V project itwas agreed that the covered drainage systems will be provided with buriedmanholes, except where open manholes are required.

4.6 Field drainage in rice areas. During the rice growing season,water management in rice fields is different than in fields with other crops(cotton or maize). Rice fields need to be kept submerged for most of thetime but the presence of a pipe drainage system causes continuous loss ofwater and difficulties in keeping the rice fields flooded. Farmers deal withthe problem by plugging the collectors with straw, clay etc. in order tomaintain a certain water level in the fields. But if other crops are grownin the area served by the same collector (which is the normal case) thecrops upstream of the rice fields will have no subsurface drainage at all,so that damage due to waterlogging will result. If the practice of pluggingthe collectors were to be prevented, the amount of water for the rice cropwould have been much higher. This was confirmed recently by results of anintensive programme of measurements and monitoring by DRI staff at three

- 133 -

experimental stations in the Nile Delta 1/ . Considerable savings of water(up to 40%) could be achieved if the modified layout is applied on a largescale. These results explain clearly the farmers rationale in plugging thedrainage system. The conclusion is that rice and other crops should beserved by drainage units that can be operated separately and independently.

4.7 The on-going practice of crop consolidation applied by the Ministryof Agriculture (in which summer crops are concentrated into fairly largeblocks), facilitates the implementation of a "modified layout" of drainagesystem. The system consists in designing subcollectors each one serving ablock of rice or other summer crops. When rice is cultivated in one blockthe subcollector serving this block is plugged by using adequate plugs,while the subcollector serving the other summer crops is left open. With thecrop rotation, the reverse is been done in the following year. It is obviousthat the design of the modified layout required additional fieldinvestigations and full collaboration with the Extension Service of theMinistry of Agriculture, while the operation of the system requires fullcollaboration of the farmers. According to engineers of 3RI, the differencein capital cost between the conventional and the modified field drainagesystem is minus/plus 10%.

4.8 To date, an area of about 5,000 feddans in East Bahr Saft (Dutchproject) has been provided with field drainage with the modified layout.Another area of 5,000 feddans is under implementation in the Nashart areawith Government's own resources as a pilot area. Finally, a third area of5,000 feddans in Beheira Governorate is in the design stage. Agreement wasreached during appraisal of the Drainage V project that where large areas ofrice are grown-'and crop consolidation maps have seen prepared by MOA, themodified layoyt of field drainage system will be diplied. In the completionmission's opinion, the general application of the modified layout in riceareas should be adopted without further delays by EPADP as it is the onlysystem that allows optimum water management of all summer crops. It shouldbe added that-due to the appropriate water management, a considerable savingin water quantities (up to 40%) for irrigation of the rice field can beachieved.

4.9 Conclusions. In summary it can be said that the design of fielddrainage in the project area was not always adequate. It is estimated thatin about 116,000 feddans the 40 m spacing of laterals installed was widerthan the required; the depth of laterals was not increased to compensate forthe wider spacing; gravel envelope has not been applied in all laterals asassumed in the appraisal report; above ground manholes have been installedin all cases, in spite of the maintenance problems that this type ofmanhole may cause; and finally the field drainage system applied in ricegrown areas does not allow proper water management.

Quality Control of Drainage Works

4.10 On several occasions Bank supervision missions have reported poorquality of drainage works and lack of adequate supervision. Although inrecent years standards of construction have improved, due obviously to theexperience gained by EPADP and the contractors inviolved, the quality ofcertain Items of work still leaves a lot to be desired.

j/ MOI-ORI Technical Report No. 48, February 1986 "Water Management in RiceFields under Conventional and Modified Drainage Concepts."

- 134 -

a) Quality of PVC plastic pioes. Defects have been observed in thePVC pipes produced by the three factories. The problems relate tothe position, size, shape and consistency of slots being cut in thep1p^. In the field it was noticed that very few defective pipeswere rejected. This means that there were cases where weak andinefficient pipes have been installed. The Project Completionmission noticed that the situation has improved and in general thepipes currently used are of an acceptable standard. However, itshould be stressed to the Chairman of EPAOP that adequatesupervision in the factories and in the field should be provided atall times in order to avoid productinn and installation ofinadequate pipes.

b) Ali9nment and grade control of laterals. This aspect is sometimesneglected by the supervisor engineers. The alignment and grade oflaterals in general is arran-ed by the machine drivers throughmanual steering via a visual view findet; But non adequate controlis applied by the engineers. In some cases no proper instrument(level) was available at the stte to check the depth ofinstallation and grade. In the mission's opinion more attentionshould have been paid to this aspect. A good solution would havebeen the automation of control by the use of laser equipment.

c) Back fillino of trenches. Backfilling of trenchers after the pipesare laid was not satisfactory. Trenches were filled with loosesoils, often by the farmers themselves, without any compaction. Atthe first irrigation water qnters the pipes at high velocitythrough the loose back-filling, carrying silt which is deposited inthe pipes and causes blockage. It is recommended that the backfillbe placed immediately after the pipe has been laid and that itshould be moderately compacted to avoid settlement.

d) Gravel enveloPe. In spite of all the Bank missions remarks andrecommendat7ons to EPADP, the quality and qL.antity of gravel usedas an envelope for the laterals was inadequate. The excuse oftengiven by the contractors for this Is the low price allowed forgravel in the contract and the fact that well graded gravel is noteasily found in Egypt. Neither of these excuses are valid. Theprice of gravel was fixed by the contractors themselves duringtendering and at least one huge deposit of excellent quality gravelwas seen by the mission on the east side of tne Cairo-Alexandriadesert road, near the south Tahrir area. One supervision mission(November 1984) suggested to the Chairman 'of EPAOP including that adetailed study be carried out on gravel deposits in the country,means and cost of transport and laying methods and that theconclusions of this study be generally applied on the ongoingdrainage projects. It was also suggested that EPADP should increasethe price allowed for gravel in the old contracts. To date noaction has been taken by EPADP on these recommendations. Special:arrangements should have been made on the pipe laying machine toprovide a complete surround of the lateral at a thickness not lessthan 5 cm. The Project Completion mission recommends that specialattention should be paid by the Bank to this issue and thatcontinuous pressure should be exercised on EPADP for improvement ofthe quality of gravel in the coming Drainage V project.

e) Manholes. It is important that each manhole be provided with asilt trap of sufficient size by installin; the base slab at least20 to 30 cm, below the invert of the outgoing collector. In field

- 135 -

visits it *at often found that the silt trap was much less than 20

cm. Attenticn should be paid by EPADP's supervision engineers on

this aspect in the fiture.

f) WraDDina of collectors cement pipes at the joints. Another point

that needed attention and improvement was the joint of the cement

pipe collectors. At the joints a wrapping of bitumen impregnated

canvas was used. But in many cases the wrapping was placed only on

the upper half of the joint leaving the lower half exposed. This

may cause sedimentation inside the collector pipe. Instructions

should be issued by EPADP to all supervision engineers to insist on

a complete wrapping of the joints in all drainage projects.

Operation and Maintenance of Drainage Works

4.11 EPADP is responsible for the O&M of all completed drainage works,

both during the implementation period and after completion of the project.

However, during construction and for one year following completion of a

contract unit, the contractor is responsible for the maintenance of the

subsurface drains. He also is required to flush all laterals twice. The

responsibility for O&M of subsurface drains and the associated surface

drains was transferred from the Irrigation Department to the EPADP in 1979.

This helped in establishing lines of responsibility In accordance with

geographic units and in structuring and enlarging the O&M organization to

make it more effective. The EPADP's existing organizational structure for

maintaining both surface and subsurface drains is shown in Chart 2 and

Annex 14. EPAPO has generally been: complying with Section 2.01 of the

project agreement. However, the transfer of areas frnm contractors to the

Authority is slow. The Undersecretary for maintenance controls eight field

Directorates, five in the Delta and three in Upper Egypt. Under each

Directorate are a number of centers, each responsible for maintaining

drainage works in an area of about 40;000 to 50,000 feddans. Under the

centers are subcentres, each responsible for about 5,000 feddans- of

subsurface drains. At present, there are in Nile Delta 40 maintenance

centres and 183 subcentres. Channel maintenance, which is performed almost

entirely by contract, is handled by the directorates. The staff of the

centres and subcentres are mostly concerned with maintenance of subsurface

drainage which is now performed exclusively by force account.

4.12 Maintenance of open drains in Egypt have, in the past, not been of

a satisfactory standard due mainly to extremely difficult environmental

conditions (which result in very rapid weed growth in open drains), staffing

limitations, and technical shortcomings. Whilst EPADP has, in he last few

years, improved maintenance of drains, further improvement is required. The

Bank project, Channel Maintenance Project, appraised in May 1986 1/ is

designated to provide for improved maintenance of both irrigation canaTs and

open drains. The project will introduce modern channel maintenance

practices, replacing the traditional system of excavation with a balanced

cycle of weed mowing, herbicide treatment and desilting. Maintenance of

field drains was until recently done manually. But in view of the shortage

In labour and to upkeep the efficiency of field drainage systems, flushing

machines have been purchased and used.

1/ The project is not yet effective.

- 136 -

4.13 The operation and maintenance of the pumping stations, onceconstructed and tested, is the responsibility of the Electrical andMechanical Department of the Ministry of Irrigation.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

4.14 Aqreements. According to section 2.08 of the Upper Egypt IIDrainage Pro ect Agreement the Authority was, within two years after thedate of loan signature or any other date agreed, to complete the evaluationof the effect of drainage works under previous Nile Delta I and Upper EgyptI drainage projects on crop yields and soil properties, and thereaftercontinue to carry out or carry out, as the case may be. the evaluation ofsuch drainage works and those included in Upper Eqyot II drainage Prolect.This section was amended during negotiations of Nile Delta 11 project andEPAPO agreed (Section 2.06 of Project Agreement) to complete tae abovementioned study for Nile Delta I by June, 1978 and for Upper Egypt I by June1979 and complete the evaluation of Upper Egypt II drainage project by June1982 and of Nile Delta II by June 1984. EPAPO also agreed to furnish interimreports on evaluation by June 1981 for Upper Egypt II drainage project andby June 1983 for Nile Delta II drainage project and continue evaluation ofeach of the four projects referred to for a period of six years from thedates mentioned.

4.15 When it was realized during supervisions that existing crop yielddata, collected by cooperatives were not reliable due to the fact that they'did not account for factors other than drainage that affect yields (culturalpractices, inputs, pest problems etc.) it wis agreed to initiate ,a new M&Eprogramme with an improved methodology. The new monitoring sXstem wasstarted early 1978 supported by Dutch technical assistance and carried outmainly by DRI staff. It was devided into two distinct parts: (i) a two yearcrash programme aimed at providing "rough indications on effectiveness ofdrainageO and (ii) a five-year long range programme. The programme wasconducted .by a newly created Division of project Appraisal and Evaluation inORI with 20 to 25 persons headed by a Dutch consultant, resident tn Egyptduring the programme.

4.16 Consequently section 2.08 of the Upper Egypt II project agreementwas again modified in March 1979, through another amendment, in which EPAPOagreed to furnish by February 1979 an initial report, thereafter semi-annualprogress reports until December 1980 on its on-going crash programme forevaluatlng the, effects of completed drainagee works, by December 1980 aninterim report and by February 1981 a final report on the findings of thesaid programme. Furthermore, EPADP was to submit to the Bank an initialreport, progress reports and a final report by November 1984 on the findingsof the long-range programme for drainage evaluation.

4.17 Institutional changes. By decree 415 of 1978 the DrainageAuthority re-established also the Evaluation Committee of Drainage Workscomprising five members of EPAPO and four members' of the Ministry ofAgriculture. Monthly meetings were arranged.

4.18 In September 1979 another Ministerial decree created aninterministerial "Supreme" committee to review all on-going drainageactivities and methodology to investigate the effect of drainage on relevantsoil parameters, water balance and production covered by the programme.However, due to inact'on of this committee which met only in June 80 for thefirst time no substantial impact was made on the evaluation program. An"Executive Committee' was founoed in 1982 to coordinate the variousprogrammes.

- 137 -

4.19 The DRI Crash Proqramme. The Initial reports of the crashprogramme published mid-1979 covered results of two twin villages, one withand without drainage, all situated in the Delta I oroJect area and indicatedsubstantial yield increases: berseem 18-36%, wheat 5-19% and rice over 50%.It was then concluded that the major effect of drainage was to reducesalinity and that response can mainly be expected in salinity sensitivecrops.

4.20 The crash programme was expanded late 1979 to'include three pairsof twin villages to compare with and without drainage situation. Seventy-five observations were made for each village. Unlike the procedure followedin the EPAOP ex-post evaluation programme, data on yields were obtained fromcrop cuttings made by ORI staff. Moreover, various other data such as inputuse, supply of irrigation water, and functioning of the drainage system werecollected. Oata collection and analysis were conducted by seven juniorEgyptian engineers, one senior Egyptian scientist, and one Dutch residentexpert.

4.21 Gererally the final results painted a moderately positive picturebut for at least three reasons they did not show a consistent trend:

- although soil salinity varied in all three sets of twin villages,it did not present a serious constraint on growth of the five maincrops (cotton, wheat, rice, berseem, maize) in any of them;

- in two of the three drained villages, a large proportion of thedrainage system appeared to be functi'ning poorly;

- contrary to a common belief that sufficient water is available forall the farmers in the Delta, and that they are responsible forhigh watertables by over-irrigating, it was found that in thesummer season several areas suffer from severe water shortages thusaffecting yields.

Gross value added/feddan increased or decreased compared to non-tile drainedareas for the different crops as follows:

Berseem - 2 to + 40%Wheat - 7 to + 31%Rice - 13 to + 80%Cotton - 30 to + 51%Maize - 14 to - 21%

Yield has been reckoned the determining factor for assessment of GVA asproduction costs did not differ much. The reasons for negative values couldbe that there were ccher production constraints or the tile drainage systemwas functioning inadequately. Potential benefits from drainage were lostbecause in some cases pest control and not drainage was the limiting factor.In the three drained villages, yields were about 30% higher in the period1977/80 compared to a 17% increase over the, same period in the threeundrained villages. Quite apart from these three factors it should beemphasized that the three sets of twin villages represent too small a sampleto yield more than a rough estimate.

4.22 Because of certairn methodological controversies doubt arose on theusefulness of crop yield response evaluation programmes in the MOI and theDutch Government decided to stop financial contribution for the regularprogramme. The Egyptian staff was reassigned and the Dutch resident engineerleft to write his final report. DRI's evaluation work came to a halt in1982. Following a recommendation of the Advisory panel at its 12th meeting

- 138 -

early in 1983, a Workshop on Economic Evaluation of Drainage projects washeld in Lelystad (the Netherlands) on 2 September, 1983. The participants(including the Panel members and a representative of the World Bank) agreedthat the evaluation effort should be continued. This conclusion was endorsedby the 13th Pane, meeting. In light of the experience gained, the renewedeffort should be carried out at a larger scale so as to enhance thesignificance of the results. A detailed proposal for M&E was proposed to theOI by the Bank and FAO/CP project during the Identification of Drainage VProject but despite initial agreement not enacted and staff of DRI wasreassigned to other activities.

4.23 EPAPO ex-cost evaluation Programme. The evaluation division inEPAPO's Department of Planning and Follow-up created in 1970 produced aseries of nine reports covering large areas of Nile Delta I and Upper Egypti projects. Yields of four major crops were measured by the AgriculturalEconomic Institute of the Ministry of Agriculture using random samplingtechnique. The aim of the evaluation, contrary to to the crash programmemethod, was to compare yields before and after drainage in areas with andwithoit drainage using the following formula:

O Yn (YIn - Ylo - YOn - YOo) x 100YIo5- YOo

wwth Ylo - Yield inside project area before drainage installationYIn = Yield inside project area n years after drainage installationYOo = Yield outside project area before drainage installationYOn - Yield outside project area n years after drainage installation

DYn - percentage yield increase

Results of the data analysis carried out by EPAPO are given i-n the tablebelow and indicate relatively modest positive crop response five to tenyears after installation. Various reasons can be put forward to explain thesignificant differences between the invariably substantial increases foundin pilot areas (tne latest being the Mashtul pilot area report, 1986) andthose from EPAPOs ex-post evaluation programme and also to explain the verywide scatter of data from one area 1/ or sub-area to another and from seasonto season. The main reasons are: maintenance problems with open drains, dueto heavy weed growth givirg rise to high watter levels in open drains,delayed construction in drainage pumping stations, field drainageconstruction problems, etc. World Bank supervision missions frequently urgedEPAPO to link yield results with depth of watertable.

/ Catchment areas varied from 10,000 to 100,000 feddans and sub-areas from1,000 to 20,000 feddans.

- 139 -

Analysis of the Crop Yield Evaluation in Some Drained Areas

Date of crop Area Years after X Yield increaseRePort year anaiYsed drainage with and without drainage

(feddans) 1nstalation Wheat Cotton Malze Rice

Nile Delta I

Jul. 80 1976/77 160,000 5 16 12 16 15Jul. 80 1977/78 350,000 6 14 13 17 n.a.Jun. 81 1978/79 485,000 7 12 15 19 10Jul. 82 1979/80 600,000 R 13 15 16 14Jun. 84 1980/81 600,000 9 13 15 14 14Jun. 86 1981/82 655,000 10 draft report

UPper EgyptJani.83 1979/80 11,000 4 9 9 15 -Feb. 84 1990/81 130,000 5 9 13 18 -Jun. 86 1981/82 152,000 6 1 6 13 -

Source: EPAPO ex-post evaluation programme.

4.24 No data so far is available for the Upper Egypt II and Nile DeltaII projects nd a considerable backlog of data analyses is developing in theuni for yield evaluation. Now that considerable efforts are made by EPAPOto strengthen monitoring of soil and water salinity watertable andpermeability factors new initiatives in the evaluation of crop responseshould be taken in order to increase the credibility of the drainageprogramme. The recommendations made by various WS supervision missionsshould also be taken into account to improve the program. The results fromthe Mashtul pr6ject area are again a confirmation of the importance of tiledrainage.

4.25 Other M&E activities. Late 1982 a soil research unit wasestablished in EPAPOS's Field Investigation and Design division which, incooperation with the SWI of MOA and DRI would study the effect of subsurfacedrainage on depth of watertable and improvement of soil salinity. Due to thelimited means of the unit results of this effort so far have been modest. Inthe Mashtul pilot project area (260 feddans located in the Eastern Delta),the DRI activities supported by Dutch technical assistance are essentiallyconcentrated on testing drainage techniques and economic aspects undercontrolled conditions. A routine program was executed for data collection onwater application, groundwater levels and salinity, farm managementpractices soil salinity and alkalinity, crop yields and drainage outflows 1/Very encouraging crop yield response results were obtained as is shownoverleaf:

jj MOI-ORI technical report No. 51 "Crop Yield and Soil Salinity in TileDrained Lands at Mashtul Pilot Area", January 1986.

- 140 -

Total Yield of whichIncrease due to reduction due to draianoe

in salinity and aeration

Wheat 100 30 - 40 60 - 70Maize 50 10 - 20 30 - 40Long berseem 36 14 -18 18 - 22Rice 9 9

The average soil salinity before drainage was 2.0 to 5.0 mmhos/cm anddecreased after drainage installation to l.0 - 2.0 mmhos/cm.

4.26 New initiatives. As agreed du4rng the appraisal of the Drainage VProject (October 1984), EPAPO has strengthened its M&E Unit. It has alsorecruted, through the Project Plann4ng Department of NOI, a short-termexpatriate consultant to assist in setting up the programme and training ofpersonnel. The programme is now focusstigrto 1nvestigating and reporting onthe impact of drainage on depth to water table, soil salinity and on suchother aspects as may be appropriate. In addition to tne General Oirector andhis deputy, this unit at present has four civil engineers and fiveagricultural engineers. In order to maintain this new momentum it isproposed to have regular short visits by PPO financed consultants, tobackstop this new unit and to integrate also the work of the yield responseunit in this programme. The Planning and follow-up unit has also beenstrengthened recently with Dutch assistance to more effectively plan,coordinate and monitor the activities under the project, in terms of bothtargets and budgets. At present, the unit has nine qualified engineers,including the General Director and his deputy. The implementation monitoringplan has been agreed that would include computerized data management forconsolidated reporting, identification of bottle-necks, providing-inputs toImproved programme planning and budgeting, and for reporting to the IBRO.

4.27 Conclusions reqardinq Nile Delta Drainage II ProJect. From theabove it Ts clear that at present virtually no crop yleld response data,salinity or watertable measurements concerning the areas implemented withtile drainage are available for this project since DRI has not initiated anylarge scale M&E activities in Delta II areas. Further, due to the backlog ofwork and under-staffing in EPAPO's crop evaluation unit It is unlikely thatresults of MOA Economic Research Institute will be timely analysed. Yieldresponse required for economic re-evaluation of this project can thereforeonly be based on the results of EPAPO's ex-post evaluation for Nile OeltaDrainage I project, ihe results of the ORI crash-programme and some o.herresearch studies.

Cost Recovern System

4.28 According to Article 23 of Law No. 74 of Irrigation and Drainage,issued in 1971 the Ministry of Irrigation should prepare a statement ofexpenditures of construction of the Field Drainage, Including all costs bornby the Ministry, plus 10% for the administrative expenses; then state thecost per feddan in the area of the drainage unit. This was essentiallyagreed to be applied under Section 3.05 of the Development Credit Agreement.The farmer has to bear all the costs of constructing the field drainage,whether he is the owner, or the tenant or the usufructuary. Both the ownerand the tenant have to bear the cost if they are using the land in farming.The assessment mentioned should be paid either in cash or in instalments, sothat all costs should be pa1d in not more than 20 years. The money will becollected start'ng from the year after execution. Further, according to

- 141 -

article 23: (1) statements on values to be recovered are sent to Treasurywhich has to issue a decree concerning the collection of the assessments andits sheduled time in connection with the land tax and with the sameporiority; (ii) a list of beneficiary's share of the costs will be issued-inan Egyptian Daily and displayed in the Main Office of the AgriculturalCooperation Comm1ttee, and the Notice Board in the Markaz or Police Station;(iii) farmers may object within a period of 30 days whereafter expendituresbecome final; (iv) the Estate Tax Oepartment (ETD-MOF) Is responsible forcollection of the assessments according to lists prepared by the EgyptianPublic Authority of Survey Services (.PASS) and Expropriation; (v) lists arethoroughly reviewed and corrected through the issuing of decrees.

4.29 System changes. Prior to 1981 costs were recovered through theinternal revenue tax collectors. The Council of Ministers decided in April1981, and order No. 62 was issued in 1981 by the Minister of Agriculture, tocharge tile drainage costs through the Main Bank for Development and Creditthrough its village branches and deduct charge from proceeds fromcooperatively marketed crops. The latter system never fonctioned fully inpractice for many reasons, the two most important being: (i) the objectionfrom the Central Agency for Auditing to the collection of charges by thevillage banks and (ii) the decision that village banks should not beinvolved in marketing of basic crops. In November 1983 it was decided toreturn the collection operation to the ETO. This was confirmed in Irrigationand Drainage Law No. 12 issued in 1984. Executive o-ders issued in October1984 restituted the 3% incentives to collect the charges amongst governmentagencies as follows: 0.5% to EPAPD, 1.0% for the EPASS and 1.5% for the ETD.

4.30 Results. The changes of collection system during the mainimplementation period of both Upper Egypt II and Wile Delta II Drainageprojects has seriously affected the start of cost recovery operations forboth projects in these areas. During the 1983/84 financial year only LE 0.05millioti was recovered for the four World Bank financed proJects. Thesituation markedly improved during 1984/85 and 1985/86 with recoveriesrespectively of LE 0.26 million and LE 1.27 million. Still, the latteramount recovered was only 18% of the amouots due. EPAPO was not able toprovide records of cost recovery by project w.iich make a more detailedanalysis difficult. As part of the new monioring and evaluation effortstarted under the Drainage V Project it is recummended that EPAPO keepsystematic records of cost recovery by project and area and that these be'shown in the quarterly reports to the Bank. EPAPO should also assess thetotal arrears (which by now are considerable) by project. Annex 18 gives atotal assessment of costs to be recovered and actual recoveries during1980/81 to 1985/86.

4.31 Study of the ability of beneficiaries to nay-off investment and O&Mcosts. According to side Letter No. 3 to the Project Agreement of UpperEgypt II project EPAPD agreed to undertake within a year a study of (i) thepossibilities and ways of recovering capital and O&M costs of field drainageworks, (ii) to adjust these charges periodically and (iii) the ability offarmers to pay the said charges. During appraisal of Nile Delta Drainage IIproject it was agreed (Section 2.07 of the project agreement): (i) topromptly complete the study for Upper Egypt Drainage II project and expandits scope to include beneficiaries of Nile Delta Drainage II project, and(0i) to furnish the bank a report of the study before June 30, 1978 or anyother date agreed between GOE and the Bank. A first incomplete study waspresented to the Bank in August 1980. Through successive amendments to theProject Agreements the date of completion of the report was postponed tillJune 1981. EPAPO agreed to providi the bank with a more substantive study tobe prepared by them in collaboratioon with the Agricultural EconomicInstitute of MOA. This report was made available to the Bank in draft late1984.

- 142 -

Achievements of the Bilharzia Control Programme 1/

4.32 Very substantial progress has been made in reducing prevalence-rateof infection and controlling disease in the Middle and Upper Egypt. It hasbeen demonstrated over a large area inhabited by some 10.2 million people in1984 that control by integrated measures of area wide mollusciciding andselective mass chemotherapy can be delivered and maintained over a time-spanof up to 8 years. The baseline information in 1980, first year of thecontrol operations, shows a prevalence of about 23.3% in Upper Egypt. Thishas been reduced to about 13.7% in the year 1983 and 11.0% by the end of1985. The reduction in prevalence has been accompanied by a large reductionin Intensity of infection to low levels, consistent with the presence of lowworm burdens. However, transmission still continues in the project area andsignificant reinfections, particularly among schoolchildren have beentaking place. Thus, continuation of the control measures through themaintenance phase of the programme is necessary. The cost of the Bilharziaprogramme Is surprisingly low. The average annual cost per person for theintensive and consolidation phases of the programme was about LE 0.64. TheBilharzia control cost in 1984 was just over 8% of the budgeted per capitacost of all Government health services. Annex 15 shows the foreign cost forthe procurement of equipment and materials and Annex 16 the localexpenditures.

AJ For more details see Summary of the International Evaluation Mission ofBilharzia Control Prcgramme in Egypt in Annex 19.

- 143 -

V. INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE AND DEVELOPMENT

EgYPtian Public Authority for Drainage Projects

5.1 Present orqanization structure. In late 1972 the Nile DeltaDrainage Authority and the organization responsible for drainage in UpperEgypt were merged. Accordingly, the Egyptian Public Authority for DrainageProjects (EPADP) was established by a presidential decree issued in February1973 with responsibility for executing all drainage works in Egypt. EPADP isempowered to carry out all field investigations, planning, design,evaluation, procurement, construction, budgeting and operation of projectsaccounts. The present organization structure of EPAOP is shown in Chart 2.

5.2 During the course of the project various changes were made toEP40P's organization. The two posts of Vice-Chairman were merged but sixdepartments were created, during the period from 1978 to 1980, each headedby an under-secretary. The mechanical and electrical division was upgradedto a department and a maintenance department was created. This former is nowresponsible for supervising the installation of (new) pumping stations,transmission lines, maintenance workshops and mechanical equipment. Underprevious WB drainage projects, operation and maintenance of completeddrainage systems (open and buried) remained the responsibility of theirrigation departments of the MOI. In 1979, in order to improve theallocation of funds, supply of equipment and the organization of O&M, GOErightly transferred responsibility for the O&M of surface and sub-surfacedrains in tiled areas to EPADP. So far, EPADP is responsible for 2.0 millionfeddans of tile drainage, the responsibility of the balance of the tiledrained area still lying with the contractors (about 1.0 million feddans).The total maintenance budget for 1983/84 was LE 8.0 mi'lion of which LE 6.0million was used for open drain maintenance by tile four MOI PublicExcavation Companies. EPADP now has one under-secretery for planning andfollow-up, and two under-secretaries for project implementation, one for theDelta and one for Upper Egypt. The latter are responsible for surveys anddesign for channel remodelling and construction of both open drains andfield drainage (supervision of construction). The Delta is divided into fivedirectorates i.e. North-East and South-East Oelta, North-Middle and South-Middle Delta and West Delta. In charge of procurement is the Administrationand Finance Department of EPADP. An ad hoc committee comprising theChairman, Vice-Chairman and head of the Technical Office of EPADP approvespecifications prepared by the design office. It also evaluates bids andmakes recommendations for contract awards.

5.3 EPADP presently employs at its Cairo Headquarters and directoratesabout 3,600 permanent staff, of which 266 civil engineers, 101 mechanicaland 105 agricultural engineers. Casual labourers (mainly in the Delta andUpper Egypt) number about 2,500 and work particularly in the field of drainmaintenance. For design and supervisicn of construction, EPADP hasstrengthened the division and had in 1HUB 592 employees in four directoratesin the Delta and 1,412 in seven di-ectorates in Upper Egypt. The number ofpermanent mechanics and labourers used for construction is on average threetimes higher in Upper Egypt than in the Delta, but the number of engineersis practically the same. For maintenance of existing drainage systems theAuthority employs 975 staff_of which 646 are working in the Delta and 284in Upper Egypt. -

- 144 -

5.4 Performance of EPADP. While the Authority suffered during theinitial stages of the project from an inadequate organizational set-up andfrequent changes in leadership, many positive ,teps have been taKen andstability and continuity in senior positAons since 1981 have led tonoticeable qualitative and quantitative improvements. The relations withother governmental organizations involved in drainage (DRI, EALIP, MOA) haveImproved and the bi-annual meetings of tbe Outch/Egyptian drainage panel area convenient forum for dialogue, exchange of technical information andinnovations.

5.5 EPADP has been suffering during the course of the project fromshortages of engineers and frequent changes in staff due to the low wagestructure in EPAOP in particular, and the MOI in general, and this despitethe special allowances paid to EPADP staff since 1977 on request from theBank. Shortages in civil engineers were particularly felt in the areas ofdesign, construction planning and control and reporting.

5.6 With the support of Dutch bilateral assistance, various groups ofsenior engineers in EPADP and the contractors were trained in constructionmanagement, quality control, and operation and maintenance of drainagemachinery by the Lake Yssel Polders nevelopment Authority in Holland. On-the-job training for junior engineors was also successfully organised by thesame organisation (see para. 3.34).

Contractors for Field Drainage and Open Drain Remodelling

5.7 Actual installation of 300,000 feddans tile drainage in the Deltawas contracted in October 1980 to four construction companies, all public-owned (General Company for Land Reclamation, El-Nasr Co., El-Abd Co., ElArabia Co.). Four other Companies of which two private obtained fielddrainage installation contracts. Several public companies were attached tothe General Authority for Land Reclamation, since recently integrated in theMinistry of Agriculture. The public companies often use small privateenterprises as sub-contractors. Open drain remodelling was mainly executed.by four MOI public excavation companies. A detailed analysis of performanceof contractors involved in Upper Egypt II-and Delta II Projects is given inthe preparation report of Drainage V Project prepared by FAO/CP. Likewise,an analysis performance of the four MOI companies in open drain maintenanceand remodelling is available In the channel maintenance preparation reportalso prepared by FAO/CP. Both reports contain a series of recommendationsfor improvement of contractor performance, spare parts management,maintenance and repairs which could result in a 10% reduction of down-time,an increase of 18% of productive days per year and an increase of dailyproductivity by 10%. Realistic tender prices (price of field drainageinstallation per feddan) were urged to enable contractors tc, nay sufficientlabour wages to overcome down-time caused by lebour shortage.

Ministry of Health

5.8 The Bilharzia programme is carried out through four administrationlevels (i) Ministry of Health - Department of Endemic diseases with theoverall responsibility for the execution of the programme; (ii) the healthdirectorate of the governorate where the director of Endemic diseases is theExecutive Director in charge of the Bilharzia control activities; (III) thedistrict manager who Is responsible for the activities within the district;and (iv) the Rural Health Units (RHU). The workload of all concerned isconsiderable and on each level only a percentage of the total work time isbeing spent on Bi-harzia control.

- 145 -

5.9 This management system proved to be appropriate. Procurement,logistics, storage and distribution of drugs and molluscicides wereundertaken efficiently, although some delays had occurred. The transportsystem faced minor problems. Personnel management was adequate, and mostpositions were filled. The organizational structure was geared to executearea-wide mollusciciding, and snail and human prevalence surveys.Chenotherapy was handled through the RHU. Currently the emphasis is more onchemotherapy and less on mollusciciding. These changes of strategy will needadjustment on the management structure.

- 146 -

VI. BENEFITS ANO ECONOMIC RE-EVALUATION

A. Assumptions of SAR and PCR

6.1 At project appraisal (SAR) three types of project benefits wereidentified:

a) Prevention of 30% yield decline over 35 years and increases inyields In the area of 400,000 feddans installed with fielddrainage. Only for the main crops (cotton, rice, maize, wheat)covering 55% of the cropped area were yield declines and increasestaken into account;

b) prevention of 30% yield decline for the main crops over 35 years in600,000 feddans where only open drains are remodelled and pumpingstations installed;

c) increases in yields for the main crops in land strips along theremodelled open drains (30,000 feddans).

In this Project Completi'on Report (PCR) the following slightly different andmore conservative assumptions were adopted:

a) reduction in costs of open-drain maintenance as a result of open-drain remodelling on 810,000 feddans;

b) prevention of 10% yield decline (5% on rice) over 35 years and moremodest yields increases in.the area of 400,000 feddans installedfor field drainage. Contrary to SAR assumptions all crops wereconsidered.

c) prevention of 10% yield decline (5% for rice) over 35 years in600,000 feddans where open drains are remodelled and pumpingstations installed.

B. Re-estimated ProJect Benefits

6.2 Savinqs in drain maintenance due to open driin remodellina. Theremodelling of open drains on 810,000 feddans is a pre-requisite for a wellfunctioning field drainage system but has also non-negligible indirectbenefits which a-e easily overlooked. While widening and deepening existingdrains, often cne.3d with weeds because of the drain maintenance backlog,drains are automatically deweeded and maintained, which represent aconsiderable saving in economic terms on the MOI maintenance budget. Theaverage cost per feddan for drain maintenance was LE 2,200/km in 1984-85.Hence at 1984-85 unit costs the saving in drain maintenance on 1,565 km ofopen and branch drains was LE 3.4 million. Direct benefits from the 346 kmof new open drains and remodelling of the existing open drains are difficultto quantify but are considered in conjunction with those of field drainagesystem. Besides the evacuation of field drainage discharges deeper opendrains also facilitate direct drainage in a strip of land on both sides ofthe drain accordinq to soil permeability parameters.

- 147 -

6.3 Estimated crop Yield benefits from the field drainage system on400,000 feddans. Relief of the drainage constraint is essential if faprogressive decline in yields is to be arrested and significant increases inagricultural production are to be achieved in the future. However, thedirect impact on which project benefits are calculated has been assessedonly on the basis of the limited changes in yield which are expected withoutany change in agricultural practices.

6.4 During project appraisal it was assumed that without the projectproductior would gradually decline due to increased waterlogging andsalinity by 30% over a 35 year project period. With the project, yieldswould rise from existing levels by 12% to 25% (see table below). Threegeneral considerations lead to more caution on the effect of drainage inNile Delta II Project areas:

i) the results of EPAPO ex-post evaluation and ORI crash programme ofNile Delta I Project shown in para. 4.23;

ii) the unavailability at present of crop yield response data for NileDelta Drainage II project areas;

iii) part of the field drainage system is not fully operational due tocertain design (wide spacing) construction or maintenance problems(blocked collectors) not yet resolved.

Considering the above, yield declines without improved open and fielddrainage systems are now conservatively estimated to be on average about 10%(5% for rice) over the said 35 year period and incremental yields withdrainage ranging from 5% to 15%. Increases of yields are now assumed tobuild up over a five year period, while at appraisal it was as follows: 40%in the first year, 30% In the second and 30% in the third year. Thisconservative assumption is shown below:

Yields and yield increases due to field drainage

Crop Appraisal PCR-re-estimate(t/fed) (X increase) (t/fed) (% increase)

Wheat 1.49 18 1.49 12Maize 1.75 25 1.75 15Cotton (lint) 0.30 20 0.30 '2Berseem - - 20.00 10Rice 2.30 12 2.30 5Vegetables - - 6.00 10

Incremental production at full development (1990) for major crops with theabove assumption would be:

- 148 -

Crop Production EstimatesBefore With ProJect Without ProJect incrementalProject 35 years) ProductFEonSAR SAR PCR SAR PCR 3-A R

............. .... (tons'000) ..

'Utt-on (lint) 85 93 61 60 54 33 7Rice 594 626 827 416 770 210 57Wheat 341 368 379 238 335 130 44Maize/sorghum 436 484 450 306 394 178 56Berseem - - 11,120 - 9,926 - 1,194Vegetables - - 1,743 - 1,555 - 1E8

The net incremental benefits of the project resulting from the abovepviduction are given in Annex 17, table 1.

6.5 ProJect economic rate of return. The re-estimation of the rate ofreturn of the drainage component provides interesting insights concerningthe value of the drainage programme though care should be taken In itsinterpretation given uncertainties on crop yield response and local projectcosts. Local project costs have been converted to constant 1986 economicvalues using the deflators published by WB j/ to give a total cost in LE of233.7 million, including costs for 9.000 feddins still to be equipped withfield drainage (see Annex 17, table 2). Local costs were increased with anaverage accounting factor of 1.7 (see Annex 17, table 3) to reflectsubsidies in energy, cement and other cost items. Calculated over a 30 yearproject life the basic ERR is now estimated at 23.6%. The appraisal estimatewas 23.0%. Thq effect of lower and delayed project benefits were generallyoffset by lower and delayed project costs, hence the almost identical ERR.

6.6 Switching values have been estimated (see Annex 17, table 4) toindicate that the minimum net benefits that would result in a minimumacceptable ERR of 12% would be 41% below those given in para. 6.3. It ishowever likely that benefits will exceed those assumed and a sensitivityanalysis In Annex 17, table 5 indicates that with increases in yields of 20%and 50% the ERR increases to 30% and 42% respectively. In conclusion, itwould seem that despite the administrative, management and constructionproblems associated with this project it has still been a worthwhileinvestment for the nation. It is recommended that during the course of thefifth drainage project, EPAPD continues and intensifies its ex-postevaluation programme and collects technical soil and water parameters whichcould improve the present data base and reveal likely a better crop responsethan now assumed. It should be emphasised that the project benefits assumedabove are only valid if the drainage network is kept continuously in goodworking condition. This is subject to a dependable maintenance service byEPAPD.

j/ Report No. 6195-EGT Current Economic Situation and Economic ReformProgram, October 22, 1986.

- 149 -

VII. BANK PERFORMANCE

7.1 The frequency of field visits was adequate, but the average timespent on each mission only 7 days. Supervision of the project by the Bankwas generally timely and satisfactory. The supervision missions wereinstrumental in drawing attention to potential problems and in assisting theGovernment in finding appropriate solutions. In spite of some contentioussubjects (use of consultants, design issues, monitoring and evaluation,etc.), the Bank staff succeeded in maintaining a continued good relationshipwith the Egyptian officials. The flexible position taken by the Bank invarious aspects, during the project implementation, proved to be correct andbeneficial for the project.

7.2 In evaluating Bank's performance, it is now obvious that too muchconfidence was placed on the managerial capabilities of EPAOP and on thecapacity of the public sector contractors. The proof for this are the longdelays in implementing the project. Efforts made during the course of theproject for accelerating the drainage programme have been unsuccessful.Equally unsuccessful were the efforts made by the Bank to improve certainaspects of quality control, to carry out adequate monitoring and evaluationof drainage works, to establish a good cooperation between Extension Serviceand EPADP, and to improve cost recovery. This completion report provides agood opportunity for the Bank. to consider, first, whether remedial actionsshould be taken in the future for compliance to Bank's recommendations, andsecond what kind of action should be taken in future projects. However,there are cases where Bank supervision missions succeeded in makingimprovements. These cases are the introduction by EPAOP of new designprinciples for field drainage, the better organization of maintenanceservice for drainage works, the improvement in quality of PVC pipes producedin Egypt, etc.

7.3 There can be no doubt that the Bank made the right choice inselecting drainage for its priority lending activity in the agriculturalsector. Investment in drainage is a sound long-term investment and anecessary condition for attaining high levels of agricultural production.

7.4 As far as the Bllharzia Control Programme is concerned, Banksupervision missions have been valuable in stimulating the necessaryorganization of control inputs, data collection and evaluation.Consideration should, however, be given to greater direct involvement ofBank staff for supervision in any future programme of this kind and scale-,since the main supervision effort was carried out by a consultant intropical diseases, and little specialist support was provided by thePopulation. Health and Nutrition Oepartment.

- 150 -

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

Project Justification and ObJectives

8.1 rhere is no doubt that investment to remove the drainage constraintin large areas of the Nile Celta was both timely and necessary to allowadditional investments in development of the sector. On the whole. theproject is making a valuable contribution towards arresting waterlogging andsalinization and towards increased agricultural production. Althouyh two outof five pumping stations have not yet been installed, all other componentshave been implemented including a highly successful Bilharzia controlcomponent. Farmers wl'l be assured that their agricultural land will remainhighly productive and further yield increases from advanced technologicalpackages can now be more safely promoted.

8.2 In terms of economic re-evaluation, the project appears to haveperformed as estimated at appraisal, despite the more conservativeestimation of project benefits because of the absence of sufficientlyconvincing crop response data from the project area. This is due to projectcosts which are lower than those estimated at appraisal. The ERR of 23% islargely sufficient to justify the project investments.

Project Content and Scheduling

8.3 The grneral concept of the project was sound and relatively simpleand its implementation took advantage of the experience gained from bothdrainage installation and bilharzia control under the previous projects..However, experience showed again that the estimation of time required to.execute such a large drainage programme was overly optimistic. In fact morethan double time will be required to complete the project than that plannedat apraisal. The insufficient preparation of the project and inadequacy oftechnical data to substantiate the selection and delineation of priorityproject drainage basins led subsequently to frequent changes duringexecution. The introduction of a new drainage pipe material, a majorinnovation in Egypt was delayed for almost 3 years and this was the majorcause for late project completion. Subsequently EPAPO reached an averagerate of implementation of 70 to 90,000 feddans annually which wassubstantially Delow the original target of 140,000 feddans.

Lessons Learned

8.4 ProJect greparation and desiqns. The absence of a reasonablycomplete feasibility study (prepared with participation of internationaldrainage specialists) and field investigations (reconnaissance or semi-detailed level) led to frequent. changes in priorities of selected areasdpring proJect implementation. What was required was that fieldinvestigations at a reconnaissance level be carried out in order todetermine the areas where field drainage should be installed as a priority.To this effect for future projects clear technical selection criteria shouldbe adopted as a guide in this process.

8.5 Schelulinq of execution. Not enough consideration has been givento scheaGTing of execution, resulting in delayed benefits. This isparticularly true in three drainage basins where the field drainage systemis unable to function due to the absence of new pumping stations. During theDrainage V projects care should be taken that no contracts are awarded for

- 151 -

field drainage installation without reasonable assurance on the condition ofthe pumping station of the corresponding drainage basin.

8.6 Technological changes. The project proved that a majortechnological change i.e. the shift from concrete tiles to locallj producedPVC pipes with mobile factories was feasible on a large scale and thedrainage systems built with plastic pipes proved to be safer and moreefficient. After initial problems with contract negotiations andinstallation of equipment, production of PVC pipes in terms of quantity wasadequate. Some quality problems (mainly pipe perforations) have generallybeen overcome and the three production units will also supply pipe requiredfor the areas included in the Drainage V Project. Other successfultechnological change was the introduction of collector pipe laying machinesby which most of the collectors were Installed.

8.7 Construction delays. Contractors did not perform as well asexpected and contract completion took much longer than anticipated. There isclearly a need to strengthen the local construction industry and Governmentshould envisage the participation of the private sector companies. One ofthe reasons for the inadequate performance was the iunappropriately low unitprice quotations of Public Companies during tendering and subsequently theInsufficient adjustments for price inflation. In future, Public Companiesshould be urged to propose more realistic unit prices for contracts in orderto avoid financial problems and ultimately delays during projectimplementation. Managerial problems (platining of work, down-time ofmachinery, spare parts, etc.) are another cause of slow performancefrequently noticed during WB supervisions and which can be remedied withmanagement training and support.

8.8 Technical improvements. The Drainage Authority has often beenconservative fn adopting technical innovations proposed by DRI, Bankmissions and/or the Dutch Egyptian drainage panel. Lateral drain spacing wasthe major change adopted during the project and this certainly wasbeneficial, but many other changes proposed (drain pipe envelopes, joints,manholes, etc.) have still not been implemented. EPAPO engineers arequalified and have the capabilities to try out improvement quickly on largeareas and should be further encouraged to do so.

8.9 Modified layout in areas cultivated with rice. The area cultivatedwith rice in sumer (106,000 feddans) covered about 27% of the total areainstalled with field drainage. Only in a minimal part the modified layoutwas used and consequently farmers are plugging the drainage system toprevent water losses. In future projects. given the emerging generalscarcity of Egyptian water resources, and taking into account recentresearch results the modified rice layout should be mandatory. For rice,crop consolidation should also be continued in the Northern Deltacatchments.

8.10 Cost recovery. The annual recovery of capital and O&M costs offield drainage works has been on average below 25% of amounts due. Therecovery system is complex and the transfer of responsibility for collectionof charges from tax collectors to village banks led to insignificant amountsrecovered during 1982/83 and 1983/84. The Ministry of Irrigation hasreversed to the initial system and improved incentives for tax collectionrecently and recoveries improved. But there is nevertheless need for an indepth revision of the system, in order to increase its efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

- 152 -

8.11 Other lessons whtch can be learned from the project are:

1) the need to have adequate maintenance not only of the fielddrainage network but also of the open drainage system and toestablish timely the required infrastructure. In this respect, thedecision to give EPAPO the responsibility for all maintenance ofdrains in tile drained areas appears to have been appropriate;

1i) to insist on continuity in international training and technicalsupport such as the excellent Dutch-Egyptian cooperation(preferably through grants) in order to enhance the rapid adoptionand use of technical innovations, design. managemen. informationand support systems. EPAPD's senior staff is aware that scopeexists for improvement of planning the methods and has called onassistance of the Netherlands Government to continue and expandtraining and introduce compouterized planning, design andmanagement techniques;

1ii) field allowances and houses paid to EPAPO staff were generallyinsufficient to attract a sufficient number of young engineers andto motivate existing staff;

iv) to further develop pilot areas with vertical drainage incollaboration with the Groundwater Research Institute as analternative/complement to subsurface drainage in certain areas ofthe Nile Valley and in view of reusing drainage water to supplementirrigation with Nile water;

v) to encourage EPAPO to participate in integrated soil and watermanagement pilot areas and drainage re-use and irrigationimprovemeht projects.

ARAB REPU9LIC Of EGYPT

PROJECT COMPLEISON REPORT - NILE DELTA DRAINAGE It PROJECT

(tCredit 719 Loans 143911440-EGt)

Implementation Scbedule: Appraised and Actual

1977 1071 197 I 19080 1981 1982 193S 1984 1985 1986

A C t I V I t T

-pin station ... ........ ..

.Nasin drains ...... ...... ..... ....... ................

JIe drainw ...... a.e.............. .. ...................... ......

2.t PKOCURENES?ez owI

.Equip. for pumping stations __._. . .* ..... ...

.Equip. for main drains ...........

.Equip. for PVC factories . . . (11)

.Rau materiat for PVC . . .. ...... ... .........

.Equip. fr feltd drainage .............. ........... .........

.Vehicees. workshops, etc.

~. CWSSEIOSTRIOUI

.Pumping stations ......... ........... ........ n. .................... ......

.1bin d ns .. . .... ............ . .......... ......

MMet drstw *...... ........ .... ....... ...... .. **.... .... *¢.*-... .*.. .........

4.- - COUSIS__IANIS .Oib tw at a wts er e sd ucsr th projet)

5. I*-INItS ..... (4D

a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-4

f1Oty cm 0111 wt Posnd talr tie i HltWo sT ti1e ,iitataI ad to mm statism tpleted. U tore i r nlq mm s m (tetts ( d in "Oi)

am *nm*e tots In leted tr AM, WU ad UID stity. * * . tu tVW tai1.- .. . -r

) t- Wr aicutl t0 .

"As WPUELIC at O6VnI

PROJEtC CCOPLEIION REPOHl - IILE DELIA *RAINAtE 11 PROJECT

(PAP - 19t orinITatIon Chart

[|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f E|A O| tONUTS | EI

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"" I" .6LI

VitE CHAIRMAN t1o EXECUlION

WIOERS(CSE?AUIES j

UalkA"to" IN I to ECI AREIASt U I ESECRETARE IUCtRSttRETARY I |NDERSECREiARV | us ACNIN. 1 [us PlA.A_ GI

OV(UNOORtIS 1/ UPER ft EGYPI PROJt | MAINTENANCE NECtH. AltO ELECt.| OLDI PRO L AHD f INI AN AloN t LOWI-UP JGOON. V ._1 I .iJJ(f

r~~~~~~~C SIG r L rAl CE. i t t-1... . ... |:n .R-LI (f tI' EINAtlt.l(t:l'JI.,

o_.____ _ ¶ _~ ~ 'Z L.j. . _ _._ __ [_ __ _ __-_ OG aEHa~ ~~D fAlRMIE t- ttDOt Er11| C OUFt

t~~~~~~~~~~~S t40 TvortuEt--- | | ADC6 2iE5 4 |-4 OU.s- |T,~~~ ~ OC! EIEN L_ |A Al! SOUIH

OGASSIUT (.. SOHAG | U fI tl%('le i ..- -.--. J I.. LI 16516.66IA AJIII V.

ASSI- UARENA CGSOU~~~~~~~l IA ISOI N- MDI'A

fACUORIES IBLE IALASI DELTA

011 NIOL . CELIA .t" . pow

-- --E -- rrK OU1 rtN- o eealtetn ei

F E F NICOLE CELIA06 KOOM 06~~~~ WESV K ESDELTA~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~OLT

[iGASSIUT a FACTORIES

L s4. I 4.NR 1/ IMd.rsecr.tari.s Orrepas same .n gowernaorles Provide

general supervlisoot GOi .neral *ifectirs responsiblerfor construltmot o drAinage works.

AlED IrERRANEAN S E 4

COMPLETION REPORT |r-.:- ,'/ ] X -NILE DELTA DRAINAGE 11 PROJECT' -a

DRAINAGE AREAS IN NILE DELTA i_... H=77 m__m1h i/,-. , ovms f

r7 7 I'M bW .t_ ",b Oft I. fd.," t .

O~~ °-. *w S c.Ue V gso\-s/

*~~~~~~~ so_ 100O9c

- 3mon C".

o a at A.

- 156 -

ANNEX 1ARPAB REflBLIr O' FGYPT

PpOJE . C mPE-TICr WMPORr - NILE ELA DRAINA(M II PROEC"!

(CPFDIT 719, LOADS 1439/J440-EGMR

Princilal Features of Previous and Follow-on Bank 1rainace Projects

rescriDtion Nile Ubrer Drainagerelta I Eovot I Eovot II V

- Loan/credit No. Cr.ll-UAP Cr.393-EGT Tn 1285/ Ln 25620Cr 637-EGT

- Sianina date 04/17/70 06/08/73 06/11/76 03/14/R6- Effective date 12/22/70 11/28/73 01/31/77 non effective- Estimated project

completion at appraisal 12/75 06/79 - 12/81 12/31/90- Actual or expected proiect

conDletion date 12/80 06/83 06/69 03/31/91- Oricinal loan/credit

closing date 12/31/76 12/31/79 06/30/83 03/31/92- Extended/expected loan/

credit closing date 12/31/80 07/31/81 06/30/85 -- Appraisal cost estlTBte(tS$ million) 147.0 123.8 282.0 198.1

- Actual/revised cost estimate(tM$ million) 198.9 119.6 166.9 -

- Loan/credit (US$ million) 26.0 36.0 50.0 68.0- Disbursement as of 09/30/86(US$ million) 24.0 34.9 50.0 -

- Project area (feddans) 950,000 300,000 500,000 465,000

faior Prolect VbrksA. Remodellinq/Construction

of qoen drains:(i) area (feddans) 950,000 300,000 500,000 280,000(ii) remodellinq drains (km) 1,700 775 1,226 667(iii) new drains (km) - 865 346 -(iv) completion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 100 -

B. Field 1rains (feddans) 950,000 300,000 493,000 465,000Completion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 70 -

C. Pumping Stations No. 11 5 1-OCmpletion 09/30/86 (%) 100 100 100 -

D. Reclamation of salineland (feddans) - 22,400 12,000 -COmpletion 09/30/86 (%) (fed.) - 100 100 -

E. Bilharzia control (feddans) - 900,000 120,000. (ext.) -

LIAR REPUDLIC or ECYPT

PROJECT COmPLETION REPORT - NILE DELTA DRAIAGE It PROJECT

(CREDIT 719. LOANS .1439/1440-EGT)

Annual Recurrent and Caoitel Expenditures of NON 197S-108518D

Ministrw of Irri1ation I 9 7 5 I 9 7 6 I 9 7 7 t 9 7 0 9 7 9 1 9 * a la atat- Caa±z BAo £ani- I* £**iz I* Cln± - R--- C&Ui±

current k curren't * current 1± curranit ±± current lol current Ila............................................ L 0 0 .............................................. IE'0)

. ~L .O..)..

Central Administration 324 - 339 - 210 - 192 72 267 - 122 -I.rigntion Department 15,228 14.000 16.2S3 10.924 22.073 15.804 31.977 30.108 34.629 27.354 23.678 23.296Mechanical and Electrical Dept. 9.606 1.064 13.100 1.082 10.492 1.440 12.343 10.344 15.238 15.525 6.375 6.130lDralsage Authority 3,504 21.435 2.172 20.035 2.964 34,378 4.277 41.257 6.032 66.568 3.285 28.787watet Research Center - - 385 95 656 607 807 1.208 941 2.312 505 505Survey Authority 4.143 233 4.996 200 5.195 260 6.066 362 7.185 378 3.766 376Aswan Ona Authority 1 536 39 li559 620 1I741 A _ _.92 __IL_ 12-424 t1926 14640 p . -- _ --

Totals 34.341 17.126 36.604 32.956 43.331 54.441 56.983 95.775 66.218 126.777 37.731 59.094

A,,nual Total Exoenditureat 71.467 71.760 97.772 152.758 192.99S 96.t2SDrainage as Percentage of NotCapital and Recurrent Funds: 34.9 30.9 38.2 29.0 37.6 33.1

Annual Exoenditures (Recurrent and Canitel) of NOI 1980/81 - 1986tH6

Ministrw of Irr1rat10n (LE/Ei "Ali" 1982Jj ]J1L83/84 124M 1935t86............... (LE'000)...............

Central Administration 2.730 3.500 807 730 1.,67 2.495Irrigation Department 46.000 S9.030 65.473 54.260 66.442 131.030Mechanical and Electrical Dept. 24.300 29.000 20.763 38.725 21.333 34.000Drainage Authority 79.740 80.000 50.444 it 68.285 70.800 77.000Mater Research Genter 1.950 2.000 5.610 5.326 2.749 3.900Survey Authority 800 950 1.295 1.050 967 2,500Aswan Dam Authorlty 8.550 5.700 5,080 4.664 7.903 11.100Sea Shores Protection Authority - - 3.5S3 3.606 4.086 18.000Companies I0,76 9820 5LfiH0 5 929 14625 ii0I

Total: 174.830 190.000 158.705 182.575 190.772 290.700

Drainage a& Percentage oF MOICapital and Recurrent Funds 45.6 42.1 31.0 37.4 37.1 26.5

I/ Fooeign curretn.y .epayments from Dralriage Coepanles reduced tIse ludguet requItementt lot 1982/83.Local currency expenditure is low.

IQCQt Ministry of Irrigation.

ARAM R*E!ULIC OF EGYPT

PIOJIC COMPL*TIOt REPDR?T MILE DELTA DRAINAG II OJECTx&(CREDIT ~ ~ I.LOS 401440-EGI)---

nak And/or IDA Fin-ned Prot-cts Other Th-n TIII Oratinsa

P ' A i-t Cradit.LI.*L Doat Effect d Cr-c1t RemarksHMMUsL hJhqad~ 31 LRf Loonpro1*s-ct nU Aaunk

.(USST I111ion).I. Protects 1n L trieulture Sector

AgriculturSi DevoIopment I Cr 630 07/24/78 02/21/79 45.6 32.0 To increase productivity in 2 Governorat-sAgricultural Oevelooment 11 Ln ... na. n.e. 3S9.0 139.0 by strengthening agricultural banking.

extension & coop. and providing tractors.agricultural iepl---nts end pumping units.

mew Land Oevelopment Cr. 1083 12/16100 not yet 193.0 60.0 To davelop 24.000 *eddans desert lond *n-(W Itubarlys) cluding sattleent of 4.000 smallholdersfamilias a*d a component for BhthariasControl Programme.

fish Faroing Development Cr. Its 04124/SI not yet 26.3 14.0 Estcblish fith farms on 8.600 fed. tn theDelta. Project lsao includ-s facilities& equipment for training. consultantsservices & programmeas for strengtheningextension services & monitoring.

£1. Aorpinduatrv Prot-ctsfruit *nd V -geta.lo Dev-lopment Ln. 1276 06/11/76 12/20/76 106.0 50.0 To develop a ased frm A associated act-

ivities & to provide credit to processors& oxporters of fruits & vegetables.

Agroindustries I Cr. 986 05/01/80 12/3/80 00.8 45.0 To establish small L medium sited ogro-industries as well as replacement ofslaughterhouses at Alexandria t Cairo.

Agroindustries It Ln 2243 n.a. n.a. 134.5 81.2 To establish small 6 medium sized *groIndustries ss "wel as replacement ofslaughterhouses at Alexandria & Cairo.III other Suooort Prot cts

Cotton Cinning Rehabn1iittion Cr. 423 07130/73 02/15/74 40.4 18.5 To finance the first of a three-phaseprogramm for modernizing cottonginning industry.

Talka 11 Fertilixzr Cr. 484 06/24/74 01/22275 132.0 20.0 To expand urea production capacity.

Agricultural/industrial Cr. 524 12/20/74 03/19/75 - 15.0 To finance imports of foodstuffs, pest-Imports Ln. 1002 icides. tractors . sachinery spare perts.

Regional Electrification Ln. 1453 07/15/77 02/06/76 70.6 49.0 To extend power facilities for multipleuses Including Irrigation water pumping.

Technical Assistance Cr. 1182 n.. n.a. n.e. n.. To aseist Government to develop an Di1nstitutional capacity in planning. zfeasibility and engineering studies. m

Irrigation Pumping Stations Ln. 2270 na. n.a. 66.5 41.5 To prevent crop loasss due toReh-bilitation irtgation/dretnage pump failure. I

Channel Maintenance Ln. 25620 n.e. na. 127.0 70.0 To improve channel maintenance and reduceIts cast.

- 159.-

Att 4

ARA P-re M er C '

I PPC aYrw p-rRE T TIW rILTh FAWW IR MbPW'TLEOIT 719, L 1439/440-.

Pr6 4 ect rwecriotion fran the flevelonent Ctredit Aareeuent

fie Proiect Which is located in the Proiect Area consists of:

Part A : A drainaqe arorarwie includina:

Mi) construction of four drainace pumzinq stations withprovision for amp units and electric transmission linesof about 19 km in length to ,onnect said stations tonational arid, and other eaiutynent reauired therefori

(ii) provision and installation of ten owo units to revlaceDWV units in the two existinq oumpin stations locatedat Rahr Saft and Rassahy;

(iii) improvement ox about 1,565 Ion of existinq open drainsover an area of 810,000 feddans with provision forimrovemnts of existino hridQes, syvhons, flumes andother structures, and the orovision of vehicles andequipment requirtd therefor;

(iv) field drainace of areas totalling about 400,000 feddansby the installation of about 32,400 km of buried field-rains of PWC corruqated pipes, about 3,600 km ofburied cement pipes for orchards and about 4,800 km ofburied cement collectors, and the provision of vehiclesand construction and maintenance eauipeent requiredtherefor; and

(v) provision of buildinqs, materials, vehicles andlaboratorv and office evuirment for the Authority.

lFt: A bilharuia control prooramme including:

(i) snail control throuah a programme of regular area-wideanplications of molluscicides;

(ii) provision of the oral drug for the treatment ofbiTharzia to health centers and units; and

(iii) provision of usterials, eauipment and vehicles.

Yart C A technical assistance proqramme incldinq thedevelopment and izplementation of irriqation andArainage proarammes for extension service personnel andtrainina of sich personnel in such programmes.

Part nS Assistance in connection with the OWI Study consistingof the provision of funds to enable the Borrower tofinance a part of the foreign exchange cost of the UNWIStudy.

AM aFlD lZt Of EG6P

NtICT CUTION UPOtT

NIlE iLTA 8UIAU6 11 PAWET

(CEAITl719, 0LANS 1439114 E-61)

fietd braira 1 s - teraled acd tuaUt I latnted

Catd t km Dwaised _ t,at kent Arnmal bpitatius (tab acbtd

Name .~~~~~Ar CamIlted 01/U at. rn 1a/ma C,tietim

(us (too

7 Wei Soft Edt. 41,AD -- *_ IGEII BoEb 2DA,M --. ------- - 1iai0 Itiom FS 45,G1 45,tXD -A 1,aD l,Z 16,5M 1,t1 ? --m

.. d sal 5I - 9,MD 2 6, ,M - - - - -12

4111 El ued 2I,va,D 1 - - - 8,Wm 15,0A3 4,5D 5m 091/b au12 lbs _ lfor _ _ _ ; 214 4,4W 3,5 7 D WS 41

mm3) 7,5M 9,53 16,SM m35 04 ,3 uM

IV PS lb. 5 2SA, 41,0D - 1,13 10,33 9,Sm 6,S 633 7?IW 5m 09/36la * _b t 1,m0M 72,33 - SW U,7DD 19,13m 15s, z 12,s90 TDV3D NO WID S~r lb. 9 A 25s5 15,T3D - - - 1m4W 6,m * 4,21 6,4T D 09/W3) l4sr ML. 9 8 253 24,ZOM - - - 5,m s,m ,IWm s,m an W/ 03)1 lbiart-ulbre A 21,5D 24,a - - - 2,mO 8,M 83 53 330 m1/Wm)l Iaa.girgra 822L, 15,109 - - -2,53 2, 2C 4.3 1.m5 - 1V2853)1 .a 1s5teD - - - - - - - - - - 5IMO e . -MLtrD - - - - 2,mW 11,4 3,D a3 098 I

ts .: z",3am z4,33 - Z,aD zz,ED ,sn 51,7W MAN D,m Z,XD

lEsige SETA

MN lipt ad.U,33)V ktfrpt Eat. 14S,5 - 9,33 14,e3D 9A, 9, 9,4W 1,03) 096

. d. w IS 2 12,M- - - - 4,03D 7,43 gm0 - am85 7/.a. p 1 a2 - 21,W - - - - 1,70D 3m 12,a 4,5 (8 e. Aron ' i- 15,03) - -MM5 1.5 - - - - 1282

- Sdbtoatd: 3,) 1W-W 155W 19,17W 22,3W 5,4(D

TO11: 397 48,03D 2, 9,3 ss,m 73,1M r04W3 91.1M 70,4WD $,m

11 Ake" boamatediaihr the oil. elt*. I 6ro..st.II I. we of Nd FPS ws extd with this are.ti AM shifted fn 6ment dra e arc je;:s.

t kA eutuiad d to prtwar sait zmte-s.& ka shfted fte tevst draag prjects.71 bo shifted fen Gntt draing projects.It7 had shifted fep Geevu. *ais projects.lb W Sft 2,3W fegd, Enat Art Saft (1,5 fed), S tla i (1,D fed), t$pw lb. 8 .CW too, ed, bsahit (4A,0 ed f Iareas ib cGecrete tIlIs).T Aes shifted feo Nle Blt. Araha I Project.

ARA REPUSLIC IF EGYPI

- PlROJECt COPLEWtIOU IEPORT

MILE KLA DRAINAU II PROJECT

(CREDIT 719, LOANS 143911440-E6t)

Open brains Areas - Appraised wd Actualty Ipetented(all aaesa.I. gros IFdda.s)

Jodw Au a dis ktuAt kcbst bn t W oseulm kfiJArme Area ob ateo

Name 11C* eted 75 79 791/ /1 Vl /3 82/5 eu3e 85116 Cqltetio(teD (ftD

M4 NW Rft Fs 3ff3m 5D,C1 - - - 170 7?A 12,AW 12,2( - I 6& J/CE5 hAs*y 49,813 49,C) - 3,= 10t,91 6,1( an S,0S 5,Slw - (131W.CE6 El Arin o03m 44050 - - 1,14 22,4W I0= 6,710 - - 55 t/IE We Saft Et. 41,0I 41,0 41,50 - - - - - - - 1UE bibis 20, D, 1 5s - - - - - - WmE9 ObS*a 22,AU 22,A-NM -. m "m OW lICE10 ldz PS 4SCMa *S, - 4 ,4 ,0 2,a 2m 4,tOD 21.O - 0am

(MI EL Ape 28,10 M3,I= - - 4,53 tZ,ZD 3,0 - 1/Et2EU n E~b1d 53,3 53,000 - 7,730 8o 5,48) - 8,ea3 24,200 ,s,m 06/85

Em: 318,0) to.,o 56m 4, 11,213 56,0O 25,53 68,10 5,13 e,III

mttE IELTA 1'

IV FSb.S zsrD - - - - - - - - --

a lir MbL 9 ad Wart 1W,0M 120,m - - - 55,93 35,AW 2s,m - - ouU !IOmt ls ML 1 45,0m 45,MD 1,0 - - - 1,m ti,im 1,03 15,a0 06sR

ome FS lb. 4 49,mD 49,D - S,AM1 12,8 210 1tm3 - - - o0S

U1t ft"a-t-ecra 43,0M 43,03 - 19AM u,mo 4*,s 1,1W8 - - - 0941DI Sar.15 t,0 - - - - - - - - - - s/

9b-totd: 297,aUD 87,mo 1aMD Z4,113 3W,1n e,sm 9,4W 43,OM 11,30 1t 5.

IRU SELTA

ie hp 43,0 73,1 8o 16A,M No - 31,m 24,83 - - 091U !las Sldi it 36*,G 36A, - - - 26,10 9s,m - - - W2m/VA Sldi IU Ed. 330 3O - - - - 303M - - - 0/UV Seligt Edt. 10,03 tO,03 - - 7,0 2,70D - - - - 12/0Sl u l~a 46,0); 46,C03 - 41,33 S03 ao L7tD S0 - - 12/3

k-tata: 1S,0m 195,C0 4 1 7,n03 3,3 730 2s,t01 --

W8AL: I1,III 393,03 55,0w 124A SS,D t77,070 11,03r 136t,0 3,0 2ml=

Ilhd am VI,AM fed, Of sAid. SAM1 Cmetded sad.r Nile Oetta 1; rlnlng 9,03 fed. umUd1id in Sell. it.11 b t of s cel,dem bdraue by wwity to Bab S-lt drain.it bat of UMs a ra *aiedd by gdity.; It h bag red.tld awhr Mi utat rainp I wF ject.11 halcde de to field asttw .

Ent1ir catd*t os iaiLdud.

* .- MIS" KSEltC 0 161T

PiECt COftETI0U KEPOIT - iILE DELIA DAItU U PlCEtT

(ca011 ns, is..loam m.am,s.o.u,sg

IECHNIICAL DATA StAR1S COGtET1(te,l* ME 0 t O S I

........... Mm ......... .A a...RMW t m lmlAr df Mmdl' Tobt Am kx*r of 0isdtJg btat Pnucn. Civit tlatal- C_in CaqAe ..... 1STAlTIO Smid R4p per Otmimrl Saad fP p Di" of Wrs lati tn t tiV l ocalbrami mtg Lac: ForW

thits wit hits wtit EwIit Aktual " OSS an 05 $ 1Ja) 0.£ " a) a(laf) %S) (.) () (V) 3) ' tiete

"Am 3 1.0 3.0 - - - - - - - 2 2 -

.Mlwt bImimn 14m 3 2.5 7.5 wam s 30. 9.0 Ui 93 a 97I0 4/6 0.42 0.51A 1 m 46*m S 5O 6)0 46,A1 6 5.0 3.0 t 5 X . wI 3m6 i21S 0o.1 0693JWH ad-rbro 4u3cm * LS 10.0 43U,t * 3.S 14.0 U Um 95 UO 11/86 0.51 0.57Sita-ed - - - - 2, 3.s 14.0 u Um am u ss 7/6 0.49 0.59.Et Arh - - - - '0,3m 4 3s 14.o Um m (m 3 6/3- 0.70 O.

iiMMUIITAUI OF

fl 5N*r d SJ?,OM 6 7.5 45.0 ?SM 6 T.J 45.0 U Um U 9/U 12/ o .Emmmtv 65.0S 4 7.5 3.0 MM 4 7.S 3.0 U I imU 9/0 126 .1 ,O.2a

318.6361 i.(5 3.63 5.2 2.1i9 3.31

0.64 1.86 L3l - -

ti8. 1.64 5 a.68 L4 2.1m 3.Si

=

V Ee*m pmt51 amwted 5bto Ut. dli ,bt the dgoe tiM rwidat ot t65 i,a tE 0La7.7i shstib* 1 V ta*l*ei.i Mmtsutitn fbosrmmPs.

I I fn ftrch ML

ARAB PEPUBLIC Of EGYPTPROJECT CONPLETION REPORIT - NILE DELIA DRAINAGE II PROJECT

(CREDII 719, LOANS 1039/1440-EG6)

_!erall_lofI!aeetat1on Rate of field-Dra inal! InEjtel

(in '000 feddans)

: 10 Wf 192 193 1974 19s 1976 19M 191 199 trwe 1J8 512 88 3 BUS w5/86 8/22 bta

*. Sot., 1mAreact *ct

,Gau smIA

fteSsUa I G 0o I D 10 aO to 135 II 1 12 45 4 - - -15ML.kUaII(85) - - - - - - - - - - 2 9 SS n 9 9 70 9 AMadbFwttj - - - - - - - - -*4 7 i 10 S -O.atsibW * * ________ _ 477 ' . 17 S 19 26 IS IS a? 31 622

Sib-toutd # ' 1,212 - -147 59 so 93 W 10 101 9 2 a i. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0~

4a 2""l X - - - - . 83 46 39 4 51 24 31 o 3 - - - - m 4atsr.g"ifG) - - - 23 51 10 76 a 5*.- 35Otsid * - 1 8 35 2. - - - -

lb-total: 391 ' *2 - '42w 92 101 76 63 S - 93

Wtt t .*- 1,-- 6-0g9 'i~ 9 aW1M 152 183 19 1me 1n 153 2,9S3

V Inat hs aoy tt, 6 *b period, f I JNwitoo U Am* i. to ti. dwt of'ftira yw.7/ to to 3D stptor, MLSource: EPAPO.

- 165 -

~X(a)ARAC I'It6' '0 .r c.

PFrlIEtCT CflMF IETT(IN REPrIRT -- tI OELTA nf.liANA nr 'I PraOJECT

(CREDIT 719. LOANS 1431/-:40 Z.GT

Withdrawal of I'roi;-d:. *.f Credit .;rod Lt.anI hI Catt;jorv

Catecory Cregit Actual ActualAgreom.r,ft Wi thdawal WithdrawalsAllct.ati si asL a I ° f...... .... GOOO)...... allocUtin).

Part A (Drainage Component)

(1) Equipment for drainage (exLludingPVC pipes) and for offices andlaboratories 9.400 22,480 239

(2) Civil works (pumpintg stations,field drainage, structures inopen drains and buildings) 40-.GQO 31 740 7B

.Sub-ttal: 50.000 54.220 106

Part B 18ilharzia Component)

(3) Equipment 700 850 121(4) Molluscicides and other drugs B.850 10 080 114

Sub-total: 9,550 10.930 114

Part C (Extension Service)

(5) Equipment. materials and vehicles 350 - V/ -

EartLD (UNOP Study)

(6) Masser Plan for Water Resources U50 850 100(71 Unallocated 5.250 -

TOTAL: 66.000 66.000 100

J/ The procurement o*tsome equipment for the Extension Service wascharged under category (1).

AM Ufmtc of asiGI

mUu LTa mA:uA 11 Ojict(CUSIE 719, LOAt 143911440461)

*lltba* at of -2 Proet*d of tIie Credit, Loans nd th. Entersedloa fere Loan by Cateory

"US AGE all__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______

bmm b , tCi bt4_e F t arbs _awmt clcs mmStu* _18.edlim ed i&.wjee s S A - for *dabw __er O er Pla") fe

gMepll Credit Cedi i on I Credit Crdit 1am Tti Cedt Laet torn J., Credit Crtdit Lm 1MM Cdt Crdit Lan 1MM Credt Credit tar otANW -Y- Mr -W- W -W VWl T4w -7w uT uw -7r RN iuu- -w lu13 - - 3.6 - 33 _ - 0.29 - 0.29 - 9.9? 9.97 0.3S - 0.35 - 1.27 - l.2V

- 2.L - 2.1M - an - 4Jn - O.D - 0.3D - _ _ - 0.2o - 027 - sOb - aesSliM O.25 2. Qs7? 3.03 0.Qt 0. 0.22 UP - - - - - - o0. - u.14 0 0D 1 L.0.93 4.32win3 2.12 0.23 n .17 7.12 0.5o 0.41 1.0 2.31 - - - - - - .69 0.30 6.O 9.43s3o o OAR0 2L M3Y 3. 12 - Z.03 5 - - - - - 3.23 0.0 7.2Z ?3.52SM 0.48 OMS 1.07 1.40 3.3 - .5 3s . _95 - - 0.11 - 0.11 _ _ _ .211, 0.16 5.22 12.6MM 0.62 LO0 1.41 2.0) 0.M Li 1.52 1.74 - - - -- 0.6? 0.3 .93 3.18NW 0.59 - 1.32 1.91 o0.0 0.63 0.11 .19 0O. - 0.18 0.26 - - - 0. o 0.63 .1 2_-1MM: 4.17 .93 9.35 22.48 7.69 6.75 1-.3 313.4 00t 0.59 0.18 0.85 - 3.08 - 3.0 0 0.65 .14. 0.65 17.W6 ?.CD 21.06 66.O0= = = = 3 == 0

to f.t 9.40 0.40 0.J L.OS 0.85 66.011t wt

b

U' buiadb_ US L. .uatlcated ard 0WU 0.35 *ategWy 5) tw e.a*.

1mm: WIP PAwgn^,froanp Ord h tui Sllrt.

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

z

mn'C

'0

- 167 -

ANl (a)APA RvM-T( fTr'-D

*pWtL' PWrxT MPMP - -' r'1 F rwTA 1'Arn PR T

(CDIT 719, UrIA'-s 1439/144O-E6)

Aoraigal Estimte adW Acttual -u"mlative Disbursunents

isa1 ars Omulative tDishursegents Atual diburantand Ralves Avraisal 'ctual 'Ibtal Mg a ESEVOMof

Estimte rishurse,ents aailsal estite....... ...(tES mill ion)....

1977178Dezember 31, 1977 0.1 - -June 30, 1978 10.3 - -

1978179TVeoenber 31, 1978 21.1 0.1 0.5June 30, 1979 30.3 9.5 31

1979/80Decewcer 31, 1979 39.9 12.9 32June 30, 1980 45.5 14.3 32

1980/a1December 31, 1980 51.5 18.9 37June 30, 1981 55.3 22.3 40

1981/82December 31, 1981 59.5 25.0 42June 30, 1982 62.7 26.7 43

1982/83L'ecarer 31, 1982 66.0 29.7 4SJune 30, 1983 - 36.1 55

1983/84December 31, 1983 - 41.2 62June 30, 1984 - 46.5 70

1984/15December 31, 1984 - 52.0 79June 30, 1985 - 59.3 90

reYember 31, 1985 - 62.4 95June 30, 1986 - 64.3 97

1986/87August 22, 1986 - 66.0 100

Closing Date 31412/1983 31/12/1985 y

The original closing date of 31/12/1983 has been extedded by two yearsto 31412/85. Project accounts were kept ooen for a period of six monthsto allow disbursements against comritirents made before closinq.

-168-

MM", 10.(b)

AMP~ PFPTfl.IC C' WCYPT"

PRO3E=' aiTV=0rIc MKR - NZLE LTA rf^PAWC~E II PRWECT?

(CED!¶" 719, LOAMS 143941440-=Ir

D~isbursemients of Rf Funds a/

Year Absolute Disbursemtents (Imilative, risbursemuents**....e**~.q.***.........*.....*qe *........

1980/81 20,000 20,000

1981/82 9,886 29,886

1982/83 8,052,667 8,082,553

1983/84 7,537,512 15,620,065

1984/85 9,839,754 25,459,819

1985/86 11,668,465 37,128,284 W/

utip11l

30 August 1986 5,150,898 42,279,182

t/ oan v~L,. 77 65 621.

1k/ Out oif an original allocation of cm4 50.0 million.

- lS9 - ANNEX 11

APAB RFPMLIr CF EX:YPT

PRaQLYj.' C WCF!'TrCKt WPY-0 - NILE DELIA rPALAGE I! PR7F(M

(CREDIT 719, LCA 1439/1440-EGT)

Acpraisal and Actual Cost Estinmte

A=raisal Actual Estinute(August 1986) at full

Local Foreign Tbtal Local Foreion l/ Tbtal comoletionM(981 M'imes)

............. , US$millionl A. DrainaQe Works- (cen drain remodellinq 38.6 11.8 50.4 21.2 )48.2 )104.4 )106.8- Field drainage 19.8 20.4 40.2 35.0 ) ) )- Pumpino stations 1.5 3.8 5.3 1.8 3.3 51.0 6.2- Aqricultural extension - 0.3 0.3 )21.0 - y/ - -- Administration & training 7.4 0.4 7.8 ) - 21.0 27.9- Overheads (10% of local

costs) - - - 3.5 _ 3.5 3.5Sub-total: 67.3 36.7 104.0 82.5 51.5 134.0 144.4

Phtsical contingencies: 10.1 4.5 14.6 - - - -Price contingencies: 32.8 13.4 46.2 - - - -Total: 110.2 54.6 164.8 82.5 51. 5 34.0 144.4

B. Production of CVC DiPes- Equi=ent for factories

and spare parts - 3.9 *3.9 ) ) ) )- Paw material - 9.9 9.9 )4.6 )18.6 ]/)23.2 )25.0- Installation 0.3 0.4 0.7 ) - ) )- Cperation and maintenance 1.0 1.8 2.8 3.2 - 3.2 3.2Sub-total: 1.3 16.0 17.3 7.8 18.6 26.4 28.2

Physical contingencies: 0.2 1.7 1.9 - - - -Price continaencies: 0.4 6.0 6.4 - - - -

Total: 1.9 23.7 25.6 7.8 / 18.6 1/ 26.4 2?72

C. Bilharzia Control- Eouipment - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 0.8- o4lluscicides and drugs - 7.8 7.8 - 9.9 9.9 10.1- Administration 3.6 - 3.6 6.2 - '6.2 7.8Sub-total: 3.6 8.4 12. 6. 2 i: 1i6! 18.i

Physical contincencies: 0.4 0.8 1.2 - - - -Price continqenc2s3: 0.9 1.2 2.1 - - - -

Total: 4.9 10.4 15.3 i:T M 10.6 16.8 18.7

D.Water Master Plan Study - 0.9 0.9 - 0.9 0.9 0.9

Total Prolect: 117.0 89.6 20.0 96.5 81.6 178.1 192.2

1 Direct foreign exchanme costs, corresponding with disbursement categories./ According to EPAPD records. Includes also collector pipes./ Diibursmnts of CS$ 14.4 million on RK loan for PVC pipe factories and PVC

powder up till 30 August 1986: LE 6.0 million disburs_nents for costs ofmobile PVC factories and PV0 powder for Nile Delta Drainage IT projectincluded in agricultural extension ccmponent of Upper Egypt TI, were tdded.

4 See Annex 16. Pro-rata for Upper Eoypt II./, The procurement of some equipment for the Extension Service in MM mm

charged to drainage equipent.

ARAB REPUBLIC OF CGYPT

PROJECT COMPLiTION REPORT - NILE DELTA ORAINAGE 11 PROJECT

(Credit 7%9, Loans U43911440-E61)

Project Costs by Year

Local tfiacial soets - IssmaL eo COPomeat LA *i lle 19'7"71 7a1|9 79180 8013, 81182 l 2183 831S4 04185 eStee IbiSl 8*1I' al18i 1939_,. _.____ .. .................... __ - ---- -__-------

'astallaatio Mts field dA isaa i h 8.16 010t *19 366 61.6S I.S 065* . , oa td

roe sae ao.t View £apcoru I - - 0.08 0. 5 0.SS 0.eS 0. o 0.61 0 *.ss

Local 1sitsts. coas t£t1l me* 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.38 0.30 .SS, 0.1 0.32 0. .0O - ,

Oerbesda 0. 0 0.12 0.00 .is 0.is 0.*0 0.6 0.tS 0. 0.0o e

Ogee dcai. geeocitLUg 0.62 0.66 1.10 2.93 3.S 2 .s 2.63 *.3l 8*9 _ _ .

ppatg asatie., - - - 0.06 0.10 0.20 0.32 0.SS 0. o. 0.3? 0.1 7

aMis1* .e ot dt iiuao Ctetis - - .03 t.0 2.30 I .IS 3.713 S.. 3.00 o 2.b t.0 1.00

sdsL.utua1ttis costs end beildt lae - - 0. 30 0.16 0.81 0.J1 0. 2 6.3 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60

46eCt.O) t9imeciil Iee4l :oat. d9aimig. Coop. 8L D O.SS 1.97 2.9w 9.0e 9.56 88.9t 85.65 *6.J 11.09 6.93 2.77 1.17 8.60

tocal coil.- dcats.g. Coe poat n10se .l1lio

as eoltag *iachmgo itae 1.;6 8.16 3.39 ; .; 1 ;.20 ;. ; .0; 0.6 ;; 0.63 0.03 0.3 0.;; 0.03

Local costs *uptpsAd ts dollat 1.s0 3.26 }* .01 1.1 86 83.60 85.8 15.23 14.69 4.80 2.30 8.61 1.81

foseige esadasgo costs Osalmage cooepoeat - use elliton*-------------------------------------------------------

_________________

.guipm.mt got dsaloage - 3.61 * 1.70 3.01 1.12 0.37 t.60 2.06 1.91 _

cet.U .01 - - - 6.18 .9 2. 1.38 8 . 0. 1S M.9S I.1 0.79 - - _

luteusiom satices . , , ._ , , _ _ _ , _

PIC Vold" sA factoclsa SEE 0 - I 0 ? 2. 3.J1 t.3J i .91 1.5 , , ,

Ittel foteig olecblage costs sateavg ooep. as0 millie - - 3.11 *.SO .12 12.17 13.00 IS.90 1.7 *.6S... .. , .- ....... ......... ........ M.......

*. .. . .... C...... .. ..... ......... f. .S....... .SS-

total aoegi draliege Co oaeot - 030 .Ill1o. 8.10 3.26 1.19 I3.81 tS.60 2 25.5129.69 3J.1t 21.941 0.55 2.10 1.61 t.81

gas coats hilbt cla c7op. LS a*iliom 0.16 0.83 0.21 0.J1 0.40 0.16 .35 1.37 1.60 1.91 -

Socal coat; bilbala coup. -650 s e e0.26 0.22 0.36 0.66 0.66 0.74 8.31 1.16 8.11 I."

toseigs case billasaLa celp. nso mllIon - - 10.21 0.30 . - - 0.11 - 0.23a...... *....*eS S...... ... f. s6z.. ... *.S.*.. *S****S ***S*S *D*SC....S S**S S*zwses .0bW*S%

total coats biltaca4l cospobeat - ISO mission 0.26 0.22 10.6S 0.;; 0.66 0.1e $.37 ;.2S 8.11 ;.;5

0608 - Wat datoc tsl Stued

5.5 ; Cost. SP Studg - 0SO *lUlee - -I0.3 0.21 0.20 - - - -

....... .0..... D.0 , .... * ** ....... v. ...... ease ....... *........... .50-z ..... sue ....00.

Total Fedjot costs._~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- - - _._.__. _. -- - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ...............

total ptoject coat OSO gillioc ;1.3 3.1 5 1 8.11 20. ;1 1.26 31.31 30.25 32.l1 2 ;.t; 10.39 2.30 ;.6 ; I;

total ptojaet coats LB 0.70 2.80 83.61 8S.66 IJ.S6 23.49 29.91 39.00 21.0 62.52 2.7? 8.31 6:64

Ico.ouic cost: -Ocaluae compoest _

total *esa. costa dtoolsoe o"Proaet to La JIltoa 0.91 3.JS 1.S 28.89 89.19 38.20 n.s5 50.31 J3'.39 i.15S 6.18 3.08 2.36

S.tlatots 3.40 2.10 2.10 2.60 2.09 8.61 8.10 .t1 8.117 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00

aMaleted egog. eosts Ardaie Coop. 8961 coal. aled 1 P 6 o i *I 4 , .To . . .9 * I o *. . -. . 0 I 4 I 61

RAS REPUBLIC OP eGyPT

* PROiECT CoMPLETION REPORT - MILE DELTA DRAIAE 11 PROJECT

(CREDIT 719. LOANS 1439/1440-EBT)

Unit Cost for Field Orainca in Selected Areas

hL** Total Arms Area Completed C ractocs OLveread Joo &LGoss " Grass Cm t P 1 Cahp, SOWl Cas"............ (feddns) . . . . (LE) ...........................

1. WESTERN DELTA

Gabar*s I 9 2 12,300 1o.o40 12.300 10.840 . 907s407 619,748 92.900 162.006 1.782.061Abu Hum_os 2 3.500 3.052 3.500 3,052 451.28t 179.261 37,339 66*769 734,456Abu tummos 3 2,400 2.129 2,400 2.129 195.935 130.305 26.532 35.277 380.045Joint Zini I 5.600 4.873 5.600 4.873 660.193 311.S91 85.354 107,714 1,184.5S2Joint Zint 2 4.300 3.767 4.300 3.767 420.181 248.110 102.990 77.128 545.4090a.anhur 2 4.500 3.906 4,500 3.906 375.479 229,242 92.037 69.676 766.434Belhstr 6.100 5,324 6.100 5.324 44.8,31 332.825 92.726 07.438 961,620Zini 2 2.600 2.471 2.800 2,471 330.671 142.196 45.546 51.041 570.254

SMuO-tot-LL 41.500 2636i2Q 41 S00 3SA.36 3-80eeH 219,21 1524 657j«49 7263Si

Not aree as a percentage of gross 87.6% 07.6%

Coat per fed. groess 91.6t 52.85 13.86 IS.65 174.37Cost por tfd not 104.76 60.32 15.82 16.09 199.00

11. MIDDLE DELTA

Total Cooplotedcontracts 94.6S0 01.650 94.650 8t.650 5,990,939

price ascal. 1.417,184SA;SQ121" 7.4081J23 _fif_lQ 1_9020370 1._Z2.7 t1-43t67-42SNot area as a percentage of gross 86.3%Cost par fed. gross 76.27 49.20 10.89 13.34 151.69Coat per tfd. nets 90.73 57.03 12.62 15.46 175.84

Iotals 336,150 118.013 130.150 130.013 11.236.107 6.849.938 5.805.549 I,920.121 2l.693.160Bassuas mamumama=&== muamua= =.U3au2ua massuMusa =uuuusx=k= 411411smeml aasuaauuaa

Not area as a percentage of gross 56.7% 86.71Cost per fed. gross& 62.40 50.31 13.79 14.30 156.60Cost per fed. nets * 95.06 S6.04 13.61 16.27 t12.90

hauLs: .EPAPO.



NILE DELTA II DRAINAGE PROJECT

(CREDIT 719, LOANS 1439J1440-EGT)

Field Dra;nage Areas Under the Responsibilityof the uinter~ance Department of EPADP and Existing Maintenance FaciLities

(October 1986)

Total Are Aea uder the raintewice as Naber of Niber of Field Staff.kRvised CwtAeted Ihintenace Dept. a Pelentage Oerating (aratingArea of EPm P of the corpLeted Vainteawce 9bintenwice Enginmers Tednicveh

Diretoae area CenGtres S&frentres(fed) (fed) (fed) WZ)

EASTERN DELTA 93,900 93,900 59,200 63.0 15 79 62 91

MIDDLE DELTA 204,200 204,200 47,550 23.3 19 77 26 70

WESTEV'W DELTA 101,900 101,900 22,100 21.7 6 27 13 30

TOTAL 400,000 400,000 128,850 32.2 40 183 101 191

Source: Maintenance Dept. EPADP.

I -IaI"'

- 173 -

ASN!Y 15

APAB PEt1BLIC OF ErCYP"

PRWEC~T COMPWTICN IF''W - NL rL. rMA1W-E IT PPOJE'C"

(CREMTT 719, LCkA3 1439/1440-EI7T)

Bilharzia C,ontrol Comoonent: Fbreian Cost for Procurementof EouiPment and Materials

Item A'praisal Estimate Actual Year ofUnit Ouantitv Value Unit QLantitv Value Procurement

mTss1000) ( nnn000

Trucks No. 2 36 No. 4 228 1980

Pickups No. 20 140 - - -

Station waqon No. 3 21 NO. 2 12 1980

Jeeps No. 40 280 Mo. 34 267 1980

Microbus No. 1 12 No. 2 18 1980

Miscellaneous Sum - 73 - - 22 1979

Molluscicide ohns 600 6,600 Thns 630 9,950 1979

Drugs:- Baylocide - - 340 - - 475 1979- Baylarcil - - - - - 123 1984

Freiqht &insurance - - 900 --

Sub-total: - - 8,4Q2 - - l1,095

Continqencies 1,990 -

TOTAUL: 10.390 1i.095

Source: M.inistry of Health.

- 174 -

ARTY 16

APAR PFP8LTJC. oF EnYPT

rwa7C`" ( rSZrIOR REPMr' - tW. r1rVA P aISTVA( II PFli5EC

(e.EDIT 719, LWnE 1439/1440-FxTr)

Rilharzia rontrol ('orionent: Estimated Tucral Fxcendituresfor the Ailharzia rontrol Proarawre in FvDt m /

Fisoal Year For Stores, For `etoorarv staff Tbtallocal nuterials of snail control i/ Local

01M staff allowances exTenditure17.7.7100000100,00.. .. 0... 200,000....... (rE);

1977/78 100,000 100,000 200,0001978/79 100,000 100,000 200,0001979/80 200,000 200,000 400,00od1980/81 210,000 300,000 510,0001981/82 210,000 400,000 610,0001982/83 500,000 500,000 1,000,0001983/84 1,222,500 - 800,000 2,022,5001984/85 851,200 1,200,000 2,051,2001985/86 700,000 1,460,000 2,100,0001986/87 1,420,000 1,446,352 2,866,352

total: 5,513,700 6,446,352 11,960,052

.j/ Fxcludino salaries for reqular staff at Pealth Units and Centres.A/ mAproximate ficures.

Source: Ministry of Health.

- 175 -

ANNEX 17



(Credit 719, Loans 143911440-EGT)

Project Economic Rate of Return

List of Tables

1. IncrementaL Economic 'roduction Value

2. Economic Project Costs and Benefits Flows

3. Main Accounting Ratio.s fo.c Costs of the Project

4. Base Case and Switching Values

5. Sensitivity AnaLysis

- 176 -

ANNEX 17Table 1

ARAB REPIJBLIC F F.GYPT

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - NILE DELTA ORAtNAGE II PROJECT

(CREDIT 719, lOANS 149/1440-EGT)

Proiect Economic Return: Incremental Economic Production Value

Farm Gate Incremental

Prices Production

Value

(LE/ton) (LE million)

Cotton (lint) 1.740 11.3

Rice (paddy) 200 11.4

Wheat 220 9.7

Maize/Sorghum 205 10.9

Oerseem (green) 15 17.9

Vegetables and fruits 150 28.0

69.2l 8s;2 1 ,1~~~~~~~~~~33

_ n . .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

ARaB itEPU5LIC OF EGYPT

p*UB1JBCT OPbRE?i0 ASPORT - MILE DElTA DRAINAGE *I COOJEeT

(CrOdit 710. Loans 140911440-EG1)

Protect Economic R-t- oe Poturn - acenoemc Prot-ct Lo-t- and 6en-Fits Flows

P R O J e C T C O S T S P R O J E C T B fN E F I T S

Sub-tot-l Total foreign US dollar Total *con. Deflators Deflated Ar-a equlpped Incremental Benefitsfinancial exchanG costs exChange coats econ. costs with tile benefits 1986

local costs drainage rate drainage drainage comp. drainage stream constantdrainage coop. component component 1986 cost In S prices

PERIODS (LE million) (US$ mllion) (LE million) values (teddans'000) (LE ellilon)_____ ___ ______-_---_- ---- __--- -- - - -- ---- ----- ------ - ------ -- -- _--- __--_--__-____-_______

1977/78 0.56 - i.e6 0.96 3.40 3.24 - - -

1978/79 1.97 - 3.84 3.35 2.60 8.71 - - -

1979/80 2.92 3.63 1.39 :.58 2.70 20.46 7 - -1980181 9.04 13.50 1.29 25.84 2.40 62.00 9 - -1981182 9.56 4.12 1.20 19.69 2.09 41.15 55 4 3.31982/83 11.96 12.17 1.12 31.20 1.11 50.47 73 0 9.21983/84 15.85 13.08 1.01 39.S 1.60 63.29 01 13 18.41984/86 18.34 15.90 0.83 S0.34 1.37 68.96 91 is 26.039889/S 17.09 7 75 0.83 38.39 1.17 44:92 70 1 42.0

1986187 4.93 4.45 0.83 13.75 1.00 13.75 9 IT 53.61987/88 2.77 - 0.83 4.71 1.00 4.71 - 14 03.11988189 1.77 - 0.63 3.01 1.00 3.01 - 7 .68.91989/90 1.40 - 0.83 2.38 1.00 2.38 - 3 *71.e1990/91 - - 72.31991/92 - 73.01992/93 - 73.71993/94 - 74.4

Onwards - 89.2

not S Local costs Increased by 70% due to accounting factors (soe Table 3). . D

.Iz

e-

ANNEX 1?- 178 -TabL 3



NILE DELTA DRAINAGE 1I PROJECT (Credit 719, Loans 143911440-E6T)

Main Accounting Ratios for Costs of the Project

AverageItem. S!. iI'led Diesel/ Cement others Accoun:ing

Labour Gasoil Ratios

Accounting ratios 1.25 6.5 2.2 -1.0 _

S. Civil rU-rks, of Total (bsts . . . . .

a. Field Drainage S5 17 20 7 2.35

b. Cpen Drain Remodelling

- excavation 75 10 - 1S 1.74- structures 45 10 10 35 1.78

c. Field Drain Maintenance SP - 25 20 1.74

It. Caoital tachinerv - - - - 0.965

IrI. GaOital Vehicles - - - - 0.910

ANNEX 17-179 -TO'ST-O4


PROJECT CONPLETION REPORT - NILE DELTA DRAINAGE II PROJECT

(Credit 719, Loans 143911440-EGt)

Project Economic Rate of Return - Base Case and Switching VaLues

ZacreseataL totalbenefits costs SacgeUetaldrainage drainage net

PIEEODS c*mponent component benefits

1 101.80 369.20 -267.402 53.80 13.75 40.053 63.70 C,.71 58.994 68.90 3.01 6S.89S 71.60 2.38 69.226 72.30 2.38 69.927 73.00 2.38 70.62B 73.70 2.38 71.329 74.40 2.38 72.0210 75.10 2.38 72.7211. 75.80 2.38 73.4212 76.50 2.38 74.1213 77.20 2.38 74.8214 77.90 . 2.38 75.521S 78.60 2.38 76.2216 79.30 2.38 76.9217 80.20 2.38 77.8218 80.70 2.38 78.3219 81.40 2.38 79.0220 82.10 2.38 79.7221 82.80 2.38 80.4222 83.S0 2.38 81.1223 84.20 2.38 81.8224 84.90 2.38 82.5225 85.60 2.38 83.2226 86.30 2.38 83.9227 87.00 2.30 84.6228 87.10 2.38 85.3229 88.40 2.38 86.0230 89.10 2.38 86.72

SVITC1IKUG VALOUS AT 12S

APPRAISAL SVTTCEUG VPS8UCEUTAGBSTIZEA VALUE VALUE CHANGE

STOT 606.43 357.81 -41.001

CToT 357.81 606.43 69.69%

-------------- --------------------------------- -_

net Present Value at OCC 121 a 248.7Internal Bate of Beturna 23.6SCoupon fguivalent late of Rvtuta - 20.71

ARAB REPUBLIC OF E6YPT


(Credit 719, Loans 1439-1440-E6T)

Project Economic Rate of.return - Sensitivity Analysis

11351T VALUES O Ittt 5TEAKS Al A DISCOSIt 313 or 121

0tot OU 102 Or 201 Ur SO *003 107 00 D 205 D0N3 S0 LAC I 3513 L13 2 13t35 LAO I I 33t3

Clot 246.7 309.3 369.9 SS1.9 .166.0 121.6 -51.6 163.1 12S-. 13.9 St 101 212.9 213.S 331.2 516.1 152.2 91.6 -90.1 141.9 69.9 30.1 0go 201 17t1. 2317.7 296.1 e60.3 016.5 SS. -126.3 112.1 96.1 ;. Aap 50% 69.8 130.6 191.0 313.0 9.1 -51.6 -233.6 *.D -5J.3 -105.1D00W I0 , 266.6 315.1 05.1 S87.6 223.8 161.2 -18.1 219.S 161.S 109.7D00R 206 320.2 360.9 S I.S 623.6 259.6 199.9 11.1 2iS.1 ;9t.2 165.4D003 SO0 627.6 *68.2 56S8. 130.8 366.9 306.3 126.6 362.6 306.6 252.6Us I 1313 - - - - - - - 222.3 136.0 112.3LAO 2 1335 - - - - - - - - 199.2 1466.Las 3 I331S - - - - - - - - - 11.0

* 13133311. 3StC 0s o 313O3 OF 31 SThllS*--f*- .... a...ass.uas....u..f-_. w

3lO0 UP 101 OJ 201 8P 50S DOS 105 0330 205 D0M1 S0% 113 I :u&a LUJ 2 VEI0S LIS 3 13535

CtOT 23.570 26.767 30.111 *2.02e 20.S65 11.102 9.S93 19.863 16.096 16.16al 013 20.632 23.S76 26.-66 3.293 11.216 15.692 S.16I 11.08S 96.10S 13.046uP 201 I8.OI2 21.056 23.516 31.9" 1 16.1s 14.0Sl 1.JIS 15.53) 11.SIS 18.059at 501 16.05* IS-5.8 17.702 23.5S6 12.266 10.181 6.910 12.122 M3.I5S 9.120bO0 1O5 21.136 30.960 15.102 19.996 21.S76 20.261 11.091 21.01* 11.144 1S.51600Du 201 M.-964 36.7e7 42.024 61.901 27.596 23.576 12.93* 23.061 19.166 11.103Dat3 506 70.390 86.656 10.312 251.21S 57.321 %6.666 33.516 39.262 29.150 2t.620ULS I 151 - - - - - - - 21.516 1.069 136. 09U0 2 3l313 - - - - - - - - MM516 16.066the 3 1t335 - - - - _ _ _ _ * 2.S16a

LA

- 181 -ANNEX 18



(Credit 719, LoanS 14391l1440-EGT)

Assessment of costs of field drainaqe to be recovered(Area in thousand feddans and costs in LE million)

r-overnorate From 1964 - 1985 1986 'Tbtal from 1964-1985

Area Costs to be Area Costs to be Area Costs to berecovered recovered recovered

Wqest Delta 189 12.2 12 1.9 201 14.1Middle relta S. 351 21.0 98 12.2 449 33.2Middle Delta N. 89 5.5 - - .. 89 5.5East Delta 566 26.1 - - 566 26.1|Reni Suef 159 8.4 - - 1S9 8.4Minia 50 3.3 6 0.6 56 3.9Asauit 49 4.3 - - 49 4.3Souhag 85 7.1 - - 85 7.1Esna 36 1.7 - - 36 1.7Ram Orbo-Asswan 23 1.6 - - 23 1.6Cuena _38 2.5 - - 38 2.5

1 635 93.7 116 14.7 1.751 108.4

Scurce: EPAPD: Planninq and Evaluation Department.

Field drainage cost recovery - 1980/81 to 1985/86

(LE '000)

Year Prooertv Taxes revelorment Bank 0T7AL

1980-81 273 273l98i-82 300 3001982-83 48 481983-84 79 72 1S51984-85 145 111 2561.7.1985 to 30.6.1986 1 253 12 1 265

Source: EPAPD: Planning and Evaluation Department.

- 183 -

ANNEX 19Page I


PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - NILE DELTA DRAINAGE 1I PROJECT

(Credit 719, Loans 143911440-EGT)

ailharzia Control - Summary of the Internationat Evatuation Mission Report

1.1 nraovX ct

3ILLABZZA, a disease kown in Egypt since bu3MredA of Tears, hascaused Lcmeasurable misery to peoples death azd Q:St certaiLly amarked loss of protductivity; siLce ths l9O00s many a coctrol*chcms haA been tried. The government of Egypt has, since any years, sponsored bllharzia control and tried witl pilot and largescale projects, giVen the respectiV4 cools of each period, togain control of the disease. But oanly L tho last fev years,with the advent of efficient drugs and molluscicides as well asimproved strategies and better basic health cowerage have contralmeasures succeeded in producing and sustainng significantresults lz term of a reduction of morbidity and reduction ofLnfeteiou

1.2 IISTORT AND PRES~I= PROGIA STATUS

p easearted'J

Jsntsax 1977 n b the * I t&S of the World ain. T5hi programwus i~tcr dei^cotaij t.The ffddle Egypt rea covers3bree goerDnrates; Neni Suef, Inlra and Asuiut (North) With1,050,000 feddwa, popultion of or S willnt, 20 distzictswith 590 villages. 34 RTJ's, 210 snail coutrol units and 33,450km length of water canals. tn ths area extenive waterlnvestmet -and land ceclimation acbksz have been Lplemented.S.b hbaematbum b" been the anly species Li the area. Theprogram bad thzee excutioU phaed: actiVQ intQeCv%tion,

consoliation and since 1984 maintenance baa been started.

Control activities comprised ollUnsciciding and chemotherapy withthe ean to consLderably reduce the prevalance of bilhazria andcontrol its disease mlAnifesttatio. hSe results aChieVd durlnglntervmntion and coasolidation vith apparent reduction oftranxsisou, prevalence and £ueumitr of Lufection led to thebe gl-ing of the ma* tea^nce phase with a reduction of the areavide molluacicidiag thus econosising on the auntmt and theexpesoe of the molluacicide.

to view of the enocmous ares and distances involv*d in theddle and Upger 4gpt Projects, the logistic problems of

trnswport, drugs and molluscScide supply, and the I'nme,nanagiemt tas required, the tea regars the progress of theproject to-d.to as remrkable and higbly camwodabls. -he teaobaa witnessed numerous examples of solld achievement at all

lwv%ls -cenc:a-l .nistry of 6eslthe Covernorato. Disttict adtural Wealth Unit.

- 184 -

A?'.NEX 190age 2

1.3 t SON8 FOR 2RES; 1:,3;1N

FoUllowiug a racomudation of the World Bank, the HMo decidedthat a revlew of the present achieveewnt of the control program.iwoeuld be wo hted, to couider. in lightef new controLteeb«olog1es a cost effecetie 4trategy for mfinve-ning presev'taehlave men ts and for an expansion of control operationau:itootber *ceac. Subsequently an tnternatioual evaluation missLonwas fielded during the period of October 1984 to April 1985. Theteam worked La elose cooperation with the counterperts of the Moa

d the govrmoratas. The missio evuluated the vaious aspectsof the program.

1.4 MUI ASPC 0 SCIISTOSOsMISErDn1IowLMcAL TRnDS An c IO AP DOLIQUY..-

hes two basic aspects of the fiddle and Upper pe t biLharz acotcrol projects were evaluated using three main methodologies:

(I) a--4-L*ioa of data present in Ministry of Kealth progr^ssreports. and its comparison with governorate act bealth unitdata.

(LI) A random sample Zurvry of Middl agypt carried ouct i?fovu-ec- Deeamber 1984, involving tha einamnation of 33.985persons L 20 districts and 60 villages.

(1LL) A progrme of 63 viits by theteam to a total of S3 b**lthimits La S governocates, and to governorate laboratories*These viLits s-erve the purpose of quality control. crosschecking of reported data ad observation of thead*isatration of chemotherapy.

Trecd In the most L.poct t epidemiological parameters havebee generally downwards since the inLtitatmo of theproje-ct. ad a good measure of dLsesse -controt ha beeuachieved. The baselLn informeaion Lu 1977 atowe aprevaleaceof about 30Z1 a the Middle East project area,ths bad been reuced to about 8.51 by the ed of 1984.Tis& is a remearable reduction La the acst of SchistososLafection and ha bees accompanied by a Lrge reduction LaLntenity of infection to low Levels consistent with thepresce of low worm bucdeu. Iover, transmission stUlcontinues in the project area and significant reinfection,particulaxy amng schoolchildren have bee tak14g plce. Amob-r of driousl foci of lifection and dUoease still nedfurther control. The techaiques employed <l screening are

- 185ANNEX 19Page 3

very well-performed, but have a tendency to umderstate tprevalence-rats of Lafectitou, mid tbiA bhould be boe La mi4

sbe plan4n future ad±!citltous of contral etrategIe..

Siailarly. lntenlS:'cz :f Lafeetion epressed as geometric rne,.egg output can be obcaied sor efficiently by the use ofampler. quicker and cheaper tecbniques.

Because data recording, tnsmiLsion and analyais are slow, ensubject to inevitable errors. the bealth unit area is a aoreappropriate unLt tbAA the govercrcate for future data trendpresentation and cosarisan.

Limited autochthonoue trausniLsion of Schistoso-a nusoiainfectious now occurs in the project area; futuro controlstrategy suet allow for this.

Hetrifomate compliance rates are generally disappointingly low,

and the use of this drug has been devalued La the minds of he,lth

staff a scow members of the public by the introduction of

single dose peasiquantel ia some S.baematobium areas.

1.5 aSOLOCSCAL ASPCTS OF SCIISTOSCMICaSSUM SMPLn= AND CONTOL

The present method of snail. sampling was observed and evaluated

in term of sensitivity In detecting tradsmission potential byinependent snil sapling. Assessamt of tbe comparisonreveaLed that the present sail. sampling strategy used by the

sail Samplig units is not sensitive La finding inected snails.

legtedin thee s*al control work, ome are-wide molluscicidingoperati=o wee observed at UE Chanayim, South Aitautg a radius

control operation wec observd at Minya; and focal olluscicidlg

was witessed at the Nile liver Li I locations n'"Asslut and at

the !brahimlya Cana LaL Assiut

lecaese mest of the period of this evaluatio missio coc4wn4 -

with the low transmission season, much of the actual appraisa of

the present operations La Hidule end Tpper Egypt bad to be ade

by inspection of past data, on asmouts of niclosamide used,-

timing of appllcations, and mainly, epidemiological tnfomtion

shedding light on re-infection rates La school children by seson.

In the past, solluscicidiag La Kiddle and Tpper Zgypt helped by

cheotherapy, bas reduced hiun levels of S. baemtobluInfection quickly bowever, the pr esnt area-wide applications of

mefluacicide once a yemr ia Middie Egypt =n.twice. a aeerXa

pper Ggyt o loogr sies to'be cost-effecCive. Ze#orn anioeoteo fut so lli ci i, iLddl* an pper Ept, as wll asthe Nile Delta A" anmmarised iL anothr sary section of thisreport and arm given detail La the chapter on sndl c9strel.

- 186 -A1.NE)A 19

1.6 COSTS

Th- total cost of the Midls Eagpt project which Me beespecially s*etied vas; ;77 to 1984 Lt 26,079,865; the totalpopulation covered is 1977 wa 4.5 million and La 1984 5.85million. The tabulation presented by MIoE indicates a prevalencerate of 30S La 1977 ad 9.21 La 1984. Mm total umer ofinfected persona fod ia the L977 to 1984 period La 6,314,000perna. LZ 26,000,000 6,314,000 perso a LS 0.50 coat perepisode of Inection.

Aauminig a man population of 5.040 millio and an annaletea4iture of LI 3.250,000, the per capita cast of thisprogra m a L 0.64 per person per year. Assuing a populationof 4.28 mllIon at risk. the cost per perscn is LI 0.76 per year.

Percntae compone_t costs for the project have bZei*- snail control 69.1S- obehotherapy 30.9n

100.01

Percentage eotal costs for the project have been:- Puso1el 42.61- uolluscicidea 49.01

d - dg - 3;SZ a- trsport wA aieGllaneoA coSt& 4.9S

100.00

tMe Sh budget for all purposes ba increased from L970 LI 1.26to 1964 LB 7.f per caplta. The bibarxzs control, cot La 1964me just over 81 of th budgeted per capita cost af auCovemument heath services.

*.7 KAAr I & OZaMZST!

Us biharuis program la four levels: Ninistry of Health -Depacmt of kodemic diseases vith the overall responsibilityfor the eacutios of the program; the health dirctorate of theLoveroate where the director of ndemc dise"as La thRcut1ve Diretor in charge of, sung other dutCes, the

bwsia control actAvities together with the snai control* service wA supervising the dstrict activities under ther

guidace of the ditrict maager bw is to oversee the I'c inMi dstrict. Mm workload of all concerne La considerable ada n eac level only a percentage of thes total work time La beingapeot Os bilbiquria control.

Us present mnagt syemt is approprite. Procuremmnt,logistics, storag ad distribution of deg ad Poleluacacidesae undertaken efficiently. Th tranport system is is good

: . *o1nditio sad vel spxevised. Personnel saga_st La ademquate,not posltians are filled. The prcsent organlsational ecruture

* is. geaed to suete area-wide molluaciciag, sail and h,ma-* * prealc survey. Ch thapy La hadled through the eIU.

187 -ANNE1X 9

Ia the future the emphasis will be more cm chasothereay a less-n mollusciciding. ruese chages of strategy will havecoquences on the managw-t s tc tur%.

1.8 hALT! EDUCATIO - COtCNICATIoC - LQrN MATION

There La cc structured health education - informtico program forschistosomiasis. It wa not possible to evaluate the Impact thehealth education activities bad lu changing the behaviouralpattecn of the people ia the Middle Eypt Progam area. Peoplegenerally are *aare of bilhareta the caute of the di&e"* azAits trsnasiou. The people do know thAt there La treatmetreadily available in the RET's bue the treaet coplianco isaot very stisfactory.

TSre are many reasona which can be identified why healtheducation in the past di. not greatly influence the people in thearea at risk. It se that theee La a definite lack ofperceived opertaneca LL the Mds of most people. Eai': tesanot to take bilbaraia as a serious diseae.

The d1ffereut halth ed&cation approaches did not take -itoconsideration the people's behaviour: 'school children vill- go_.swiming couttary to advice - women will do their laundry in thecanali sice they cobine this work with a socal functiaa -facues are La frequent water-contact La th course of wotking Lathe fialds.

Realth education activities vere not targetted to either specificgroupe -. school children -- farmars - noc timd and coordinatedwith bilharsia controL activities such sa case fIndin -

- everybody shold have is urine examined at leat once a year.Mm "a of mllu.cicid±ng and the importance of l treatetcowse a va not effectively ad cniningLy c cated to thepeole. School chlUdrn were not sufficiently ezpoae4 to thepeablems of bilharxia. The qwdia, televisionu ad adio we notused to full advanta,e to stimulate comity participation inths control perg.

1.9 RECO !ATSONS

The reccmudations for futue actio made by the evaluation tearSn the present report are objective and independent; they. are. of

course, entirely open to agre t t or ejection by the Govermntof Egypt. The ceccinndAtioa made fall into 6 categories.

1.9.1 Future Priorities and Strategies

Wlthin the fincaial and an agment resources available,priorities have to be assigned to two options

1.9.L.l fThe steeanca.ad/ow lapruvent.of present achievi e.iMiddle and PP E tgapt, to protect the large existing investamt.

- 188 -

ANNE X 19Page'T

1.9.1.2 Te etesion of bilb1arz±a czntrol to Uio Xlle Delta.

-aying allocated priority to these two ^Vtlaus, or having decided.to proceed with both. t- f-x-thar th' m.st be m-de:

1.9.1.3 The setting of ta:gets on a rea basis for pre'-lence - rates.n intensities of infection.

1.9.1.4 The choice of screening techniques to be adopted au the balanceto be achieved in costrol betveen education, chemotherapy andinllusciciding.

I1.9.1 Surveillance Procedures

The team rocomn.ds that epidemiological gsawvillwsce data bepresented by defined E4alth ult are& rather than byGovermorate. Although ti may seen to be a formidable task. itioild not in fact produce an indigestible mass of inforzation,and it Ls essoetal if tbe necessary flexibility and peed inapplying £itensification and diversific,tion of control effort toproblem villages is to be achievd. The translation of datatrends into rapid and effective executive action desmeds thatGovernorate Executive Directors of Bilhruia Control:

1.9.1.1 Be fClly traind in.a epidology and managenent activities.

1.9.2.2 B released frm theair many other heavq and tineconsuming 4utiesto concentrate on endemic disease problems.

1.9.3 ScreenIns Techninues

he teem reco_ rds that screening techniques used in thebllhasia program4s and any futuce extnsions df them be modifiedas Collows:

1.9.3.1 Parasitological Screening Taec)niques

S9ediinetaton. centrifrugation. direct microscopy should beretaIned for uriarJy screening.

A quantitative 50 mg rAto--Uts tecbnique should be introduced forfaecal screeoing in the RIU's sad the necessary training programinsdituted.

Siagle-use staind4 Nyyrel* fllters and syrLages should be used-for egg-output comt lug in urine, and the necessary trainingprocedures should be instituted.

1.9.3.1 Snail Screening techniques

A sustaine re-training of ail sapLig yorkers, snailtechniciaes, aI their agricultural.-ngineer superwis*or becarried out so that ALL future snal sapling be conductedipdM"ily La Villag hUMa vater contact pointA.

- 189 -

L.9.4 Control Stratecies

The teo hba cecowendations an tbree aspec:4 of future control-strtegies:

1.9.4.1 The Bole of liforwationlEducation

In order to better the people's understanding of bilbALuia adits control. the major reconmeudactos are:

Make- use of TV and Radio broadcasts, using specially produced,attractive and st4mulating films sad radio tapea.

Address target groups; school children, pregwaut women, farners.

Coordinate comn3nicatiom efforts vitb mollusciciding activities.

StinlLate people to have their urine examined regularly.

Mae people aware that cotplete tretment coplLance is of utocstimportance to improve their health.

l.9.A.2 Snail Coctrol

or the Middle Egypt Project in the maintenance phase, theprcset once-a-year area-wide ollusciciding operations adback-up spraying af Lnfested water courses should be stopped atthe eand of 1985. A fach more cost-effective strategy ofmollusciciding could then be implemmted in 1986. Ths strategyentails initial area wide allusciaciding in only the fewrem ining area whbee there are higb and homogeneous huroprevalence rates (selective area mollusciciding), *ad alsosolluscicidilg in indvivdual villages scattered tbhroughtudistricts with unacceptably hlgh prevalence ratei. Prevalencerates (especially among school children) rather thn snail datasbould be the main initial criterlou of whethat to malluscicidinga village or groups of villages. Second, the wholesollusciciding program should slowly e*olve towards focal controlas fewer and fewer 1illages need radius control. Any futurefocal molluaciciding should cocentrate in village foci thee.infected snails are found in or near water contact points.

In the Upper Egypt project, the present timing of the area-widemollusciciding operations need to be modified. tins d of thefirst application scheduled to begin La May, it should be movedforward to early April as was one in previou yeacrs (to preventth first peak of trarJ Udsdou). lnstead of the seconapptication to begin Ln Septa ber, it should be tiend to begin Laearly August (to prce.nt the second peak of transmission). by1967 when the maintenance pbase begin., all future molluscicidingshoulA be drastically reduced, a4 the future strategy sboudthen follow the racomandatios gives a for the. iddle Eypt.Project.

- 190 - ANNEX 19Page 8

for MY bilbasiA control projec^. to begin in the Nl* Delta,-... .total ar-wide ollusciciding should Got be conideed as -

- ;. serious opetw for susil control. Any future wllusckctdiog n .. . * project framwock in the Delta shuld initially dopr selective

&ea& mollusciclding and radius control, targetted to hightrassaLsaiom-bigh prevalence area and village* only. The Later- slution of wollusciciding towards core focal control voud becontingent upon progress being ando an reducing levels of hiininfection

1.9.4.3 Cotherap

: t2Nre, fficent deivery of chemothacapy reoquires that health ustphysicians should serve for a period of 3-S years Lu a curalhealth anit, and require good perfounce reports from theirsupervisors before being allow to procee to Nite y oftr @fesltahighe training programs.. Thy should also be requLced toproduc. brief sf ual reports of thbei udt activities, includinverifiable evidence of bilhar:iA detection rates ad drogcopLiance ratees.

I*ealth soi ts mt be regularly suprvise and inuitore for drug

de;1ivry activities.

Metruifaatoe shoud be progressively phased tt of use, andplaced al over Egypt by pratiquantel, used Lu a sngle dose at

40 m per kg body-weLght, 'ollovin bi-enul scr*eeng of schoolstudets and annal screening of the rest of te population.

1.9.5 Khnsainnt rsues

Due to the inceasing work loa a staff increase at the M isrecinded. 4Pyician having field xperlee ;e6d specialtraieLng is epidology and m gag _t should be selected. TAiwould allw cre frequent supervision of field activities. Tbezantive director at gowern-gate 1e1l should be an

epidemiologist with _maginet exeriuce. Th district mnager*houd be a full tine staff aber with a s*iar backgrd a

the exocutAve dic*tor at governorats level.

The doctoai at the RIM le"m should be posted for extendedperiods OJ. duty (three yeas). FrWtheOtre it is higblyreciomnA to organise courses wth practical cont"ets for thectraL health physiciansl to ja-ble them to efficintly operate a

1.9.6 Cost rZacseg

1e reInm4ed strategy for th initeace pbase in MidleEgpt doe Got requie mior staff changes. The personnel costswl rmin sore le the csme ancept po"sibly s nowe*taUsbIsat poets for supervisor-epidemlogiasts at cetlMinistry of le9alth ad govermorate level.

*- 191 -ANNEEX 19Page 9

ThC costs for iMorted dnus: Praxiqustel 40 mg/ - avera;.body weight 50 gg * 2000 q a 4 tableta 600 m eah for uoe--treatmnt course, each costing approx. MI. 6 (GecAnCe -a%e 1.?,Kscch 1985 Ot! 3.41. - $. t.-) $1.75 per tretmet.co:- ,--peGrso. AasiAg that 500,000 persons have to be treatedaza±lly the cdat is $875,000 perso. per yeac.

Mm cost for mLlusciciding in Kiddle £apt fow the maintenancephae Ls estimted to require 31 meric toues of niclcaaide peryear. I mtric tone coating $18,000. The yearly needed acuntof 31 toces costing *558,000.

Ztatte for chmotbirapy Ln Upper Ept is 600,000 treatmentspor yer coating approx. $1.050,000.

ror the maintenance phase in Upper Egpt the aeeded amount cfiaoUuscicide La estimted to be 56 metric tomes per year costi$1,0080000.

1.10 Cz^DsI0NS

Vey substantial peogress hs been made in reducingprevaLence-rate of infectio and controling disese e in therAddle msd Upper Egypt project are" and it ha been demonstratedove a vecy laTe ara inhabited by sm 10.2 million people in1.964, that control by integrated meaure of area widemollus'^4ciding and slective uss chmtherapy can be deliveredS" maitaine ovr a tims-paP of up to 8 yeas.

A clear ueed hc bUs " Sdettified to matitain and reinforcecontrol in Middle and Upper Egypt with some madificatios in

It to highly desirble that the area of control operations shaldbe extended to those parct of the NU* DeLta which are at presentuieontrolle d.

ne evaluation tea strogly reco_ind that theas proposals areau approprAte subject for fundidg by the eatersational BLnk forRecontruction and Developent, A that these proposls shauldbe treated as a matter af the greatest urgency by the IBRD.

- 193 -

AVINEX 20

APAB rPrutIC CF EQVPT

PPOJEC!T CrMPEl=CN ' - -E TPELTA rPAINAGE TI PPrUFCr

(r'PFriT 719, MANS 1439/1440-)

Proiect Fouivnent - Ampraisal Estinate and Actual

rescriPtion Acsoraisal Estimate Actualrtlit Ouantity Cost Ouantitv rost

tSS'0oo rEs-oia1. Pumwina Stations

Puwp units for new stations NO. 14 1,120 21 2,954Pumw units for reolacerent No. 10 800 14 1,738Echuipment for transmission line Km 19 114 19 15Svare Darts sum 305 271Miscellaneous sum 281 287Sub-total: 25,265

2. Perodellina Ooen Drainst'raqlines 1. m3 No. 22 1,694 22 3,153Hydraulic excavators 3/4 m3 No. 23 1,518 31 1,947Transporters 60 tons No. 8 640 2 107Extra tractor No. 1 50. - -Pickups No. 15 105 15 98Trucks 7.5 tons No. 15 270 10 348JeePs . No. 15 105 - -Workshoo eouipment sum - 300 - 741R4are Parts am - 1,198 - 1,478Miscellaneous sum - 706 - -qub-total: 6 7,872

3. Field DrainageConcrete pipe nakinq nachines No. 5 300 - 66Tile lavinq machines No. 26 2,210 51 6,214Gravel crushers No. 4 600 2 274-wheel tractors No. 20 320 - -Collector lavinq machines No. 8 1,040 19 1,860Agricultural tractors No. 120 1,200 28 281"'railers No. 240 264 - -Transcorters 60 tons NO. 2 160 2 94Transcorters 20 tons No. 4 240 - -Trucks & trailers No. 26 572 11 521Pick-uTs No. 30 210 65 426Jeeps No. 30- 210 - -Station waqons No. 13 91 - -Mobile cranes No. 2 90 - -Motorcvcles No. 70 42 - -Scare parts sum 1,835 - 1,524Miscellaneous sum 1,126 - -Sub-total: 10,510 11,O13

- 194 -

ANNEX 20Pae 2

Description ADraisal Estimate ActualUnit Ouantitv Cost C-2antitv Cost

LYS$ '000 tisS 'OOC

4. Field Drainace MaintenanceFlushing units No. 20 140 32 381Spare Parts sum - 28 - -Miscellaneous sum - 20 - -.Sub-total: 188 38

5. AdministrationOffice equipnent sum - 100 - 57Laboratorv equipment sum - 50 - 81Miscellaneous equipment sgm - 50 - -Spare parts sum 30 -Miscellaneous sIm - 28 - -Sub-total: 28- 138

6. Aaricultural Extension ServiceGeneral purpose vehicles NO. 20 140 - -Motorcycles No. 50 30 - -Miscellaneou3 eouipment sum - 50 - -Spare parts sum - 34 - -Miscellaneous sum - 30 118Sub-total: 284 - 118

7. Other EauiPnentLoaders No. - - 21 1,217Drilling riq NO. - - 1 78Mobile PVC pipe plant No. - - 1 545Diesel engines No. - - 12 168Spare parts for PVC plants sum - 225Bulldozers No. - - 6 369PVC powder sLn - - - 139Floatinq aquatic harvesters No. - - 2 515Reinforcement steel bars tons - - 9,000 3,393Miscellaneous equipment sum - - - 638Additional mare parts sum - - - 977Miscellaneous sum 141Sub-total: 8,405

1e1'AL: 20,446 33,192

Notes:

D/ ue to the lack of detailed information the distribttion of equipmentamong the various conponents is not accurate.

i/ Equipment for bilharzia control not included.]/ Additional equipnent and material for production of PVC pipes was

provided through the KfW loan (about CM 44.4 million).

Project Performance Audit Report on Egypt Upper Egypt

Documents

Transcript of Project Performance Audit Report on Egypt Upper Egypt