ADB Result Framework Remarks “Accelerated economic and social recovery” obtainable as direct project impact, or a bit too optimistic logical gap? (2), (3) “Critical economic and social services resumed” by 28% of original capacity infrastructure? Is about the highest level Impact assumed to hit because of the project. But essentially the Project addresses school rebuilding and some road work. Isn’t is a little exaggerating that economic and social recovery will be “accelerated” just by the project? (2), (3) Given economic and social services cover a wide variety of areas, would 28% of the road recovery sufficient to trigger and resume critical services? (4), (9), (13), (16), and (21) The result framework says “executing agency” is responsible for these data preparation. However, executing agency is ministry of finance, so we should understand the responsible agency for data collection should be implementing agency, i.e. sectoral agency. (4), (9), (13), (16), (21) “executing agency” is Ministry of Finance (c.f. “Implementing Agencies are sectoral departments)

ADB Result Framework Remarks (5) “enrolment restored to pre-earthquake level” but if number of households do not restore to pre-earthquake level? (6) This is an “Output 3” indicator (7) According to the indicator, it is if School (building) is “rebuilt or retrofitted;” upgrading is for amenities (5) This indicator assumes all the people evacuated elsewhere will come back to contribute to the indicator by enrolment back at pre-earthquake. Is it a realistic assumption, where we saw many people could not come back and had to relocate to other areas. (6) This is a numeric indicator that directly measures the achievement of Output 3 (7) Output 1 says schools are built and upgraded, but the indicator suggests rebuilt and retrofitted combined. (8) Upgrading seems to refer to that of amenities, like sanitation facilities. Difficult to differentiate building of what, upgrading of what, retrofitting of what….. These have cost implications. (8) Amenity upgrading

ADB Result Framework Remarks (10) According to the indicator, it is “rehabilitated” (11) “Target 20% women in workforce” - not sure if project planners made sure this % is a sensible figure. (12) sexually transmitted infection prevention, ….... campaign (Target: 50% women) - Is this contextually appropriate indicator? (10) The Output says “roads and bridges are rehabilitated and/or reconstructed” but when looking at the indicator, it refers to “rehabilitation.” For Road and bridges, different level of work have such different unit cost – to put asphalt, to widen the road, or to create a bridge has huge cost differential, and thus this information has to be written in clear coherence with procurement arrangement. This indicator assumes 20% of the workforce comes from women. Wonder if project planner has really checked these many female would be available for labor in the project target area. (12) Although we see this type of GESI indicator quire a lot, it is unclear why it is a useful indicator to measure the degree of achievement of road work output. (14), (15) Constructed from scratch, possible with land acquisition included, and rebuilt have different cost and procedure implication. For the duration of the project, doing it for 300 buildings seems rather bold as only one output of total 4 output consisting project. (14), (15) “constructed and/or rebuilt” are very different activities in terms of cost implication.

ADB Result Framework Remarks (17) “provision for select temporary offices” ?????? (18) Match between the Output and Indicators ???? (19) Talking about engineering domain of work, but is this applied to each implementing agency's staff??? (17) Provision for select temporary offices - the explanation is unclear as an indicator. If it means only select offices are granted temporary offices while permanent offices are rebuilt, etc. (18) For the output of disaster management capacity strengthening, the indicators are technical quality assurance (by who?) and 500 staff’s skill upgrading, but it is not clear what type of staff are the target. (20) “disaster risk reduction technical approaches” must be mastered by regular (non-technical) staff????

Endnote and contact for Q Note: Essentially, result framework should be based on clear logic. If the argument is (a) not clear, (b) not logical, (c) not consistent, and/or (d) contradicting, it is called “logic failure”. maki.tsumagari@gmail.com