Niger - Youth Employment Productive Inclusion (English)

Table of Contents

• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 1
• 1. Project Data 1
• Project ID Project Name 1
• Country Practice AreaLead 1
• LCTF Numbers Closing Date Original Total Project Cost USD 1
• Bank Approval Date Closing Date Actual 1
• IBRDIDA USD Grants USD 1
• Prepared by Reviewed by ICR Review Coordinator Group 1
• 2. Project Objectives and Components 1
• DEVOBJTBL a. Objectives 1
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 2
• Did the Board approve the revised objectiveskey associated outcome targets 2
• Date of Board Approval 2
• Youth productive inclusion in rural areas US14.5 million at approval US16.1 million after restructuring US15.7 million actual at closing. 2
• Institutional support and project management US7.5 million at approval US8.3 after restructuring US7.4 million actual at closing 2
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 3
• 3. Relevance of Objectives 3
• Rationale 3
• The PDO was relevant for the country context. 3
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 4
• The PDO was relevant to the latest World Bank Country Partnership Framework CPF 2018-22 extended to FY23 and addressed the key Fragile Conflict and Violence FCV risks identified in the framework. 4
• The PDO was aligned with the governments Social and Economic Development Plan PDES 2022- 26 particularly Axis 1 on social inclusion and with the National Solidarity Program. 4
• Rating 4
• 4. Achievement of Objectives Efficacy 4
• Objective 4
• Rationale 4
• The project aimed to support youth employment in poor areas through strategies that differentiated between rural and semi-urban areas. 4
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 5
• The project served 40 communes selected according to a well-articulated set of criteria delineated in the PAD. 5
• Outputs 5
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 6
• Outcomes 6
• Findings of the impact evaluation in rural areas found a significant increase in beneficiaries monetary contributions to savings groups ICR p. 14 6
• The impact evaluation also found a threefold increase in savings among beneficiaries compared to the control group ICR p. 15. 6
• Young women engaged in more off-farm income generating activities than men but activities performed by young men were more profitable. 6
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 7
• The project strengthened the capacity of ANPE to expand employment services at the municipality level. 7
• Rating 7
• Rationale 7
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 8
• Overall Efficacy Rating 8
• 5. Efficiency 8
• Operational efficiency was low at first but improved considerably over time. 8
• The project team adapted implementation measures to maintain efficiency against a backdrop of increasing security risks. 8
• Project costs were in line with to similar programs in the Sahel. 8
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 9
• The project administrative cost ratio decreased over time and was maintained within international standards 10 percent. 9
• Efficiency Rating 9
• Rate Available Point value CoverageScope 9
• 6. Outcome 9
• Outcome Rating 9
• 7. Risk to Development Outcome 9
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 10
• 8. Assessment of Bank Performance 10
• Project design was based on prior research that identified key constraints to employment. 10
• Project design included a thoughtful and well-elaborated targeting strategy 10
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 11
• Project design targeted in part conflict areas and gave full consideration to the associated risks. 11
• The projects institutional framework took advantage of the experience of technical ministries and institutions working with youth employment in the country. 11
• Initial procurement challenges were not sufficiently anticipated and mitigated during the planning phases of the project. 11
• The results framework was mostly rigorous based on a robust theory of change 11
• Quality-at-Entry Rating 11
• Supervision by the World Bank was adequate. 11
• The project team reacted in a timely and effective manner to numerous substantial challenges that arose. 11
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 12
• Quality of Supervision Rating 12
• Overall Bank Performance Rating 12
• 9. ME Design Implementation Utilization 12
• The results framework was clear and realistic and PDO indicators were relevant and measurable. 12
• ME design included regular supervision and process monitoring a mid-term review satisfaction surveys and an impact evaluation. 12
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 13
• The ME plan was consistently implemented with strong engagement and coordination between the central ME unit implementing partners and decentralized agents. 13
• Appropriate adjustments were made to the ME plan as needed in the course of the project. 13
• The MTR and subsequent process evaluation identified bottlenecks and proposed measures to overcome implementation delays which led to successful restructuring of the project. 13
• The ICR was informed by data from the impact evaluation particularly with respect to demonstrating the projects effectiveness and outcomes. 13
• ME Quality Rating 13
• 10. Other Issues 13
• The project was classified as Category C and did not trigger safeguard policies. 13
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 14
• Fiduciary risk was rated substantial at project launch but upgraded to moderate during implementation. 14
• During program implementation procurement challenges were met with creative solutions. 14
• Positive spillover effects were observed within beneficiary communities where non-beneficiaries created spontaneous groups replicating the VLSA model. 14
• Giving an economic opportunity to youths living in risk areas reduced migration and the risk of involvement with army groups. 14
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 15
• Beneficiaries experienced better consumption and food security than the control group. 15
• 11. Ratings 15
• Ratings ICR IEG Reason for DisagreementsComment 15
• 12. Lessons 15
• Youth productive inclusion programs can be viable and highly effective in FCV contexts. 15
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 16
• Establishing effective and functional collaboration with the non-profit sector can contribute to the successful implementation of productive inclusion measures in near-conflict areas. 16
• Project design prioritizing simple high-impact measures and in-built flexibility are important in FCV settings. 16
• In near-conflict but still accessible areas productive inclusion measures can be an instrument to reduce youth migration and their potential engagement in illicit businesses and armed groups. 16
• Impact evaluations using experimental designs can provide valuable information on the benefits of new approaches or tested approaches being applied in new contexts. 16
• 13. Assessment Recommended 16
• 14. Comments on Quality of ICR 16
• The ICR was well written and of high quality. 16
• Independent Evaluation Group IEG 17