Pakistan ISM project evaluation : rehabilitation and institutional strengthening components, January - February 1988

Evaluation covers FY83-87. Progress was made in rehabilitating the systems, although original project plans were modified. Instead of the systems approach stressed in the Project Paper, a "band-aid" approach was adopted, in which only the most vulnerable parts of the system were patched up. This approach was justified by emergency conditions, and no known major breaches have occurred since completion. Institutional improvements have been less significant. Efforts were made to obtain adequate funding, prepare O&M manuals, establish and/or improve workshops, introduce rehabilitation and maintenance equipment, and respond to various management problems. But the impact of these efforts has been to set the stage for future initiatives rather than to establish mechanisms capable of sustaining physical and institutional improvements. To some degree, the project's limited institutional impact is the direct result of management deficiencies. Inappropriate resources were mobilized, while others were squandered, misdirected, or not coordinated. Contributions were made in specific areas of interest or expertise, but no single guiding force was present for attaining overall objectives. Inherent difficulties in institutional development were exacerbated by poor communication, flights of fancy, and plain poor judgment. Consultants confused quantity with quality, the Provincial Irrigation Departments (PID's) were selective in responding to project needs and initiatives, and A.I.D., for its part, entered the project with only limited understanding of PID's as institutions. Although the project should have achieved more concrete results by the end of Phase I, its original goals were unrealistic and did not necessarily represent the interests of both A.I.D. and the PID's. The first challenge in Phase II should be to create a productive dialogue to achieve a shared agenda. Also, A.I.D. should be prepared to make a commitment of at least 15 years to complete the process of physical rehabilitation and institutional development. To ensure continuity, Phase II design should begin immediately and conclude quickly. The design should be based on a phased strategy, which establishes overall norms and permits specific details such as TA requirements and equipment purchases, to be articulated during implementation. Short- and long-term sustainability objectives should be precisely defined; this will require that physical and institutional targets emphasize O&M as well as rehabilitation. The design should focus on what is simple and genuinely possible and stress active PID involvement.