1. Sudan Multi-Donor Trust Funds Phase One
Review,
Sudan Multi-Donor Trust Funds Phase One
Review Sudan MDTFs

2. MDTF-S
The MDTF-S is in a position to contribute towards South Sudan’s development over the medium-term; its contribution to meeting recovery needs will be minimal.
This reflects the contradiction placed in the fund’s original mandate; simultaneous building the capacity of state institutions while at the same time expecting to deliver services through those institutions.
Understanding the necessary conditions for tackling recovery and development critical for the design of MDTF mechanisms.
Review Sudan MDTFs

3. MDTF-S
The overall performance of the MDTF-S has improved since mid-2006.
Projects gaining critical momentum and showing tangible results on the ground, in areas of education, health and infrastructure where projects have moved to the implementation phase.
The average rating given for the MDTF-S portfolio performance is Moderately Satisfactory, but with potential to improve.
Review Sudan MDTFs

4. MDTF-S
The most important constraint to project performance has been capacity; not only of the GoSS but also the limited capacity of the Administrator and the Donors during MDTF inception phase.
The key enabling factor for performance improvement: the gradual strengthening of the capacity of stakeholders.
The size and quality of the GoSS civil service has improved at the central level.
The World Bank has increased the capacity of the Juba Secretariat and placed greater management and decision-making authority in the field.
The Joint Donor Office has overtime developed its capacity to support MDTF operations.
Further CD support is needed at sub-levels of government to strengthen their ability to become effective implementing partners.
Review Sudan MDTFs

5. MDTF-S
Performance improvements have also been aided by two other factors:
Mutual learning: Overtime MDTF stakeholders have achieved a better understanding of each other’s systems and institutional culture as well as impact of challenges on the ground limiting operations.
Embedding projects teams in Ministries, and providing technical support to procurement and project management also showed positive results.
Review Sudan MDTFs

6. MDTF-S
Combined effect: Changing stakeholder perceptions of the MDTF-S’ objectives:
Consensus that the MDTF-S should support implementation of the CPA by contributing to:
Capacity development at the state and local levels of government, strengthening their ability to become counterparts with the central government
The implementation of GoSS development priorities, on a sectoral and geographic basis
Coordination and policy dialogue, including programmes outside of the MDTF-S
“Recovery” expectations have been dropped by stakeholder groups, except for beneficiaries and sub-levels of government, resulting in continued public frustration, with accompanying political and reputation risk.
Improve communication of MDTF objectives and operations to reach benneficiaries and local govts.
Review Sudan MDTFs

7. MDTF-S
Progress achieved during Phase One may be undermined by the uncertainty over financing for Phase Two and Three.
Donors and the GoSS both met their deposit obligations for Phase One.
But, the donors are agreeably late both signalling and confirming their pledges for Phase Two.
At the same time, the financial situation of the GoSS has changed.
anticipated 20% revenue shortfall for 2007, which resulted in GoSS requesting a reduction in the counterpart matching ratio from 2:1 to 1:1.
A change in the ratio will result in a cumulative deficit totalling USD 232 million in Phase Two and Phase Three.
Review Sudan MDTFs

8. MDTF-S
The MDTF-S’ current financial constraints leave the MDTF-S open to the perception that commitments on the part of donors and the GoSS may be shifting.
Information on the GoSS’ financial constraints has been available since the third quarter of 2006.
However, the OC did not appear to anticipate that GoSS constraints and pledging would create uncertainty.
The Committee, therefore, could have been more effective as a forum to manage information, build consensus and provide strategic direction.
Progress achieved may be undermined by the uncertainty over financing for Phase Two and Three.
Review Sudan MDTFs

9. MDTF-S
As a matter of urgency, the OC should act to clarify the financial situation of the MDTF-S:
Donors should confirm their pledges
The GoSS must clarify its financial situation & its priorities for MDTF-S funding, in light of both its financial constraints as well as shifts in how the GoSS is defining those priorities two years into the CPA.
The OC should formally confirm a shift in the counterpart matching ratio, from 2:1 to the level at which analysis of GoSS finances demonstrates it is viable
The MDTF-S Technical Secretariat to make the necessary adjustments to the portfolio’s composition, implementation timeline and the fund’s procedures.
Review Sudan MDTFs

10. MDTF-S
Governance system meeting regularly, and performing well on technical issues (project approvals).
NGOs and non-donors observers to OC, expanding participation, improving information flows, enhancing coordination inside & outside MDTF
OC has performed less well on strategic issues. Did not act decisively to:
Manage and resolve initial start up difficulties.
Address financial issues as the end of Phase One approaches.
Key obstacles including heavy agenda and limited capacity.
The Oversight Committee should consider measures to separate the technical and strategic aspects of its mandate.
Review Sudan MDTFs

11. MDTF-S
Donors raised expectation that NGOs’ would play a key role in MDTF-S implementation.
NGOs participate as observers to the OC, giving them positive access to information and the decision-making process.
However, the role of NGOs in MDTF-S implementation has been limited to sub-grants on four projects.
Obstacles to NGOs playing a greater role include the shift in the MDTF’s role to medium term development and GoSS reluctance to engage NGOs.
At its core, limited participation reflects uncertainty among MDTF-S stakeholders on the role they expect NGOs to play.
Clarifying the roles and contributions of NGOs in the MDTF-S can enhance relationships.
Review Sudan MDTFs

12. MDTF-National
Review Sudan MDTFs

13. MDTF-N
In terms of sectoral, geographic coverage and funding allocation, the MDTF-N is in line to achieve its objectives, which are also aligned with stakeholders’ perceptions about what the MDTF-N should be trying to achieve.
The low implementation rate at the end of the first phase of the Interim Period compromises the performance of the MDTF-N in tackling Sudan's needs (prioritisation, sequencing and delivery).
Review Sudan MDTFs

14. MDTF-N
At the end of Phase One, the MDTF-N is moving towards a more focused and systematic support to institutional and organisational capacity development to the public and private sectors.
While this support is still small in funding volume, it is not insignificant.
The OC-N has been providing the MDTF-N with technical support; but it has mostly been relying on the World Bank to provide the MDTF-N with strategic guidance and review results on the ground.
Both donors and GoNU need to strengthen their own capacities for results monitoring, leading the MDTF strategic direction & ensure needed capacities for present & future operations.
Review Sudan MDTFs

15. MDTF-N
GoNU ownership and leadership of the MDTF has grown as understanding of the mechanism increased over the last year.
Donor funding to the MDTF-N has not delayed MDTF-N project approval and implementation.
Delay in counterpart funding has affected project implementation, but the actual impact of delayed counterpart funding on MDTF operations is much smaller than it is perceived to be.
It is important to "ring-fence" dialogue over the MDTF-N from issues beyond the MDTF scope to strengthen OC and project performance, including resolving issues related to counterpart funding.
Review Sudan MDTFs

16. MDTF-N
The MDTF-N portfolio is rated as performing ‘Moderately Satisfactorily’
The common constraints to implementation were capacities (procurement, management, local conditions) and World Bank delay in providing feedback to project.
The gradual strengthening of the technical and managerial capacities by most parties responsible for MDTF-N project implementation (GoNU, the Administrator, and MA) have been the key enabling factor for performance improvement .
Review Sudan MDTFs

17. The MDTFs
Review Sudan MDTFs

18. From the viewpoint of disbursements, the MDTFs have not been supporting Sudan’s needs.
Significant increase in activity during the second year of operation, including increase in disbursement and contracting.
But, most of the projects have not yet delivered substantial tangible goods to the public.
During Phase One, the MDTFs have mostly focused on establishing the mechanisms, developing its strategic direction and building up relationships.
The reasons behind the lag in time between the MDTFs establishment and effectiveness of projects were related to overestimation by all stakeholders of how quickly MDTF projects could start delivering outputs to beneficiaries.
Review Sudan MDTFs

19. The capacities of all MDTF partners had to be built overtime
The capacities of all MDTF partners had to be built overtime. The history of MDTFs thus explains the fact that MDTF projects are in their initial phase of implementation: It has been a combined effect of the resourcefulness and limitations of all MDTF partners.
A change in perception about the added value of the MDTFs from the 2006 to this review has taken place within GoNU and by other MDTF stakeholders.
Review Sudan MDTFs

20. At the end of Phase One:
Both MDTFs are moving towards a more focused and systematic support to institutional and organisational capacity development to the public and private sectors.
The GoNU has ownership of the MDTF-N and GoSS has a high level of ownership and engagement with the MDTF-S.
The OCs support to the MDTFs have focused more on technical and procedural than strategic issues. As the MDTFs move into their “operational” phases, the OCs need to take the front role in the strategic direction of the MDTFs.
Review Sudan MDTFs

21. At the end of Phase One:
The Sudan Consortium has not been working as a forum for guiding the MDTFs regarding framework changes as it was mainly to focus on the JAM. However, the Sudan Consortium’s role in keeping stakeholders engaged in the CPA remains highly relevant.
Gender has not been a central issue in the implementation of the MDTF-S portfolio.
A Gender Specialist is urgently needed to ensure compliance of both MDTFs with gender mainstreaming.
Conflict analysis of MDTF operations also need to be carried out more consistently.
Review Sudan MDTFs