coordinate and exchange information with other relevant programmes relatively well (Coordination). WSPST also succeeded in implementing the programme following the principle of ownership at the general level; however, the separation of the design and build phase from the operation and maintenance phase of the infrastructure projects weakened the incentive for the service providers to ensure high quality design and construction. This situation, in turn, increased the risk of lowered ownership on the assets on behalf of the final operator (Ownership).
In terms of Mutual Accountability, Transparency and Integrity, WSPST’s performance suffered from shortcomings by not having sufficiently specific guidelines in place in all aspects of programme governance and information disclosure, but, a number of positive aspects also indicate strengths in mutual accountability especially at policy-level. In terms of coherence, WSPST can be considered one element among a wider portfolio of Finland in the water and sanitation sector in Vietnam, where the private sector actors had gained ground before their collaboration with the project, but where Finland’s overall support to business development has been positive.
4.8 Programme Design, Steering and Monitoring
Much of what went wrong with WSPST can be attributed to deficiencies in programme design, steering and monitoring. Many of these deficiencies were highlighted in the WSPST reporting, however it seems to have proven impossible for the SC to make the necessary adjustments.
4.9 Support to Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Development Support to institutional strengthening and capacity development was appreciated for its impact on sector development at the national level, but more could have been done to measure the impact, and to prepare the transition of WSCs to private entities.
WSPST also missed the opportunity to develop a new governance model for WSCs.
WSPST should have worked much closer with WSCs to build their management and governance capacity in anticipation of the equitization process, and to improve their commercial and
operational performance in general. Strong WSCs at the provincial level are a prerequisite to provide efficient water supply services in Class V towns.
2. As recommended in Condes report, the funds could be used for procurement of water safety management platform, provided that there is real need for it by the water utilities, that MOC is relevant and reliable executor for the platform, and that transfer of funds (and change of purpose of use) is legal under Vietnamese law.
3. Use the remaining funds to pay compensations for households who invested in drainage schemes without getting the service and to correct construction defects.
To MFA, on future infrastructure projects (including projects with private sector engagement)
Relevance: Programmes designed to demonstrate the impact of a new solution must be in line with government policy or they must provide an affordable alternative. The selection and/or promotion of any approach or technical solution on a pilot basis must be based on sound reasoning (including technical & financial feasibility studies) with expected measurable benefits being clearly described before programme implementation begins.
Effectiveness: Financial feasibility studies must be more rigorous, including financial modelling linking utility’s/company’s income statement, balance sheet and cash flow statement to give more accurate estimate of the financial feasibility of the investment. The assessment should also take into consideration the legal requirements and its enforcement, as well as socio-economic aspects (i.e. income level) and behaviour of the expected service users. Surveys of willingness-to-pay and a broader affordability analysis (see, for example, ADB guidelines) are critical in planning new investments in water and sanitation infrastructure. Investment decisions should be made based on project owners’ business plans.
Effectiveness: design of capacity building and institutional strengthening activities must be based on situation analysis and institutional capacity assessment; Progress towards achievement must be monitored and documented at least in Outcome level (if not impact level).
Efficiency: Following elements must be included and carefully considered in the design of future infrastructure projects
Feasibility studies must assess multiple alternative technical solutions and implementation modalities and select the most locally appropriate solution;
MFA should prepare an accounting and reporting manual for transparent monitoring of infrastructure construction projects;
Fully costed contracts with a service provider for sustainable O&M of DS schemes should be a pre-condition for their construction;
The responsibilities and mandate of international TA must be explicit and understood by all stakeholders. MFA should introduce performance monitoring of TA contract with inputs judged against documented targets; International TA should be responsible for supervising the final technical designs, if the local engineers are sub-contractors under their main contract with the financing agency;
To MFA, on future bilateral programmes
Relevance: Executive and implementing agencies as well as project steering
committees/strategic advisors must stay alert to changes in the project implementation context and take action to adapt the project to the changes in order to the project to remain relevant; this is of outmost importance if the project involves institutional development/capacity building objectives.
Cross-cutting objectives: All future bilateral programme of MFA must be subject to a human-rights, gender equality, and environmental issues analysis, which should inform the
formulation of the programme document, and subsequently, the implementation of the inception phase of the programme. Interventions should also earmark funds specifically to gender equality and HRBA related activities to be implemented throughout the project or programme, as was partly done in WSPST. The analysis of environmental aspects should focus on environmental impact of the intervention, but should also include climate change from the perspective of adaptation and mitigation when relevant.
Aid effectiveness: To strengthen the transparency and governance of its bilateral development interventions MFA should consider the inclusion of the following aspects to the Manual for Bilateral Programmes (MFA, 2018):
Related to the Rapid Transparency Assessment/section on policy- and practice- level transparency:
Making mandatory the establishment of a website for all programmes that would include relevant and timely information on the interventions.
Making mandatory public and timely disclosure of all project deliverables listed in the “Table 5: Phases of the Project Cycle” of the Manual for Bilateral Programmes either on the MFA website and/or programme website.
Related to the Rapid Transparency Assessment/section on accountability:
Consider including provisions for whistle-blower protection in MFA guidelines.
Special attention should be paid to governance and decision-making structures of bilateral programmes during formulation and inception phases to avoid ambiguities in the roles and responsibilities of key actors (especially members of programme management team, steering committee and supervisory board). Steering committees should, when relevant, include formal observers to strengthen the transparency and inclusiveness of the interventions.
Making mandatory the exposure of the MFA corruption hotline number (www.vaarinkayttoepailys.fi) on the wall of current and future bilateral programme offices and their websites.
Related to the Rapid Transparency Assessment/section on integrity:
Making mandatory a training on MFA guidelines and policies on transparency and integrity to all programme staff.
To MFA, on all development assistance programmes
Impact: The evaluability of the impact must be planned at the design phase of the programme and monitoring data including a baseline must be collected during the first year of the project, to facilitate and enrich the final, ex post or impact evaluation. The expected impact of the programme must be crystal clear and supported by analysis on Theory of Change, impact pathway or similar tool. Especially, the intervention design should articulate clearly what is meant by reduction of poverty and inequalities in the form of impact indicators. Such definition is ever more important in future interventions as they are expected to contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Therefore, all interventions should be able to demonstrate their link with relevant SDG indicators under the Goal 1 (no poverty) and SDG 10 (reduced inequalities) at a minimum. Intervention-level indicators that address both of these SDGs, and others, depending on the context, should be added.
Effectiveness: MFA should not engage in long-term financial commitments that extend beyond its approved engagement and as a minimum have an agreed exit strategy with the competent authority before any funds are committed.