Page 112 - CIWA AR25

Annexes

Effectiveness / Cost Effectiveness Investment‑influenced ratio:
CIWA measures its effectiveness, e.g., its ability to achieve its Total investment value = US$17.4 billion
intended program development outcomes relative to its targets, Funds committed = US$163.1million
through the program Indicator Results (Annex 2). Since CIWA
adjusted the formulation of its Results Framework, annual targets On average, for every US$1 contributed by CIWA to operations

are now set and indicator results reported for the respective (funds committed), the program influenced US$106.7 in

fiscal year rather than cumulatively. CIWA began tracking results cooperative investment value. In FY25, the total investment value
against the new annual targets in FY25. increased by only ~US$100,000 but committed funds increased
by US$28.2 million.
PDO Indicator 1: US$30-40 million influenced investments are

mobilized. Direct beneficiaries ratio:
Total beneficiaries = 86.3 million

PDO Indicator 2: 300,000 people will directly benefit from Funds committed = US$163.4 million

improved water resources management and development

projects influenced by CIWA.
For every US$2.1 committed by CIWA, approximately one person
will benefit, or has directly benefited, from transboundary

In FY25, the Nsongezi Hydropower Project, supported by the NBI water resources potential or mobilized investments. This also
and NCORE, was moved from potential to mobilized investments. increased from FY24, since the total beneficiaries increased by ~

The Nsongezi Hydropower Project is primarily located in Uganda, 12 percent, but funds committed increased by 17.5 percent.
but it is situated on the Kagera River, which forms the border
between Uganda and Tanzania. This is valued at US$156 million Overall, the effectiveness calculation indicates a decrease
and will benefit a population of over 4 million people. Other from previous years despite mobilizing a significant investment

changes include increased mobilized investments in the SADC from NCORE. The reason is due to the significant increase in

GMI Phase II project Subgrants. Quantitatively, the target has committed funds and that mobilizing a potential investment
been exceeded but not through the expected investment, does not change the total investment value.
whereas the value of potential investments decreased by the
same amount and the total remained at US$17.4 billion.
Commercial Improvement and Value for Money
The indicators found in CIWA’s Results Framework, however, do not CIWA maintains economy in its procurement (minimizing costs

fully capture secondary and tertiary benefits of CIWA support. A and ensuring high quality) by requiring that all recipient-executed

transboundary institution strengthened by CIWA, for example, activities finance goods, works, and services in accordance with
can facilitate a series of subsequent regional cooperative actions. the World Bank’s guidelines on “Procurement under IBRD Loans and
Millions of people receive various levels of benefits as a result IDA Credits” and its guidelines on the “Selection and Employment

of each cooperative action facilitated by the strengthened of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers,” jointly referred to as
transboundary institution. These outputs are often counted and the “Procurement and Consultant Guidelines.” Similarly, for all
reported on at the basin and project level but are too broad and World Bank-executed CIWA activities, the Bank is responsible
distinct to aggregate at the program level, given the nature of for carrying out procurement of goods and employment and

issues supported and the timeframe it takes for such benefits supervision of consultants, in accordance with applicable policies
to manifest. In the long run, therefore, CIWA’s actual efficiency is and procedures. Among other things, the guidelines provide

likely to be underestimated by the Results Framework. specific instructions for use of World Bank documents (e.g.,
standard bidding documents, requests for proposals, contract

CIWA estimates the cost effectiveness of the program by forms), conflicts of interest, advance contracting, co-financing,
calculating the ratio of the two PDO level outcomes to the value mis-procurement, and fraud and corruption.
of the overall program:
Availability of Finance
Σ Value of investments influenced At the end of FY25, CIWA was a program of US$179.5 million co-funded by

Investment influenced ratio =
Σ Value of overall program in operation Austria, Denmark, the European Commission, the Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Strong client demand for CIWA support,
combined with 98 percent of the program’s current funding envelope

Σ Direct beneficiaries from investments influenced being provisionally allocated, means that CIWA needs to continue raising

Direct beneficiaries ratio =
Σ Value of overall program in operation funds to expand its impact and ensure sustainability of its successes.
These metrics are based on CIWA’s PDO indicators and the size
of the program in operation, or the total allocated amount of the
overall program envelope. 16

16 Note that the accounting for these two indicators has changed, the difference being that this year the denominator considers the value of the overall program
in operation (amount allocated out of the overall program envelope) instead of only the funding in operation in the CIWA-supported projects that influenced the

investments and beneficiaries. Using program-level values in calculating these indicators provides an improved picture of program-level efficiency and embeds the

expectation that all CIWA activities are intended to eventually influence investments that benefit people.
112