CRI Project Document Template

Country: Mali
Amount requested from CRI: US$ 2,887,000
Sourced from: CRI
CRI Project ID:
Associated Investment Project ID: 2000001896
Implementing entity: Ministry of Rural Development
Proposed completion date for CRI Project: 30/06/2024
Completion date of associated Investment Project: 31/12/2026

1. Context

A. CONTEXT AND JUSTIFICATION

In Mali, agriculture contributes 40 per cent of GDP and employs close to 80 per cent of the
population, mainly on poorly equipped small family farms. The sector has been experiencing a triple
crisis due to the continued lack of security due to subversive, terrorist, extremist, and criminal
activities, the continued impact and backlash of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the indirect effects of
the war in Ukraine. The latter has contributed, inter alia, to a doubling of input prices (urea a.o.
fertilisers, pesticides, etc.). This trend has been affecting most inputs, with many farmers switching
from chemical to organic, leading not only to problems of affordability but also of availability. In the
agricultural sector, Mali’s government crisis response focuses mostly on immediate access to
chemical or organic inputs, traditional fossil-based or renewable energy/fuel, etc. This response is
being enhanced by IFAD’s developmental view of focusing on a shift towards a more sustainable
low external input type of agriculture in the medium term, and a complete transition towards agro-
ecology in the longer term. The CRI project’s associated Investment project, the ‘Multi-energy for
Resilience and Integrated Territorial Management Project’ (MERIT), has recently begun
implementation and its main rationale lies precisely in supporting target farms improve soil fertility
and adapt to climate change.

The current financial burden on rural households is such that are likely to be pushed (back) into the
unsustainable over-exploitation of natural resources, in particular crop land, pasture land, forest
land, and inland water bodies. There is a risk that MERIT fails to reach some of its intended target
groups, as many of them will not at present be able to afford to feed their animals. They have
already been resorting to distress sales, thus decreasing the availability of organic fertiliser.
Additional grant funding under the four activity areas of the CRI is needed to ensure access to
inputs in the short term, and to support transitions towards sustainable input use and alternative
renewable sources of inputs including energy, in the medium to long term. Other types of response
to the impact of the crisis in IFAD’s portfolio in Mali are neither planned nor underway, owing to
resource constraints (full use of IFAD’s PBA, and bilateral partner DPs adopting a “wait-and-see”
attitude due to the current political situation). The proposed CRI-funded initiative complies with
IFAD’s mandate and targeting approach as it will be fully aligned to the host project, MERIT. The
specific advantage of CRI compared to other possible financing modalities is that grant funding (not
currently available to IFAD in Mali) allows for paying some of the extra costs of transitioning towards
agro-ecological practices.

Principles to be upheld include interventions that will be timely, flexible, simple, speedy without
compromising quality, “doing good” rather than “doing no harm”, and not contributing to restore
unsustainable livelihoods. Synergies with other agencies and specialized organizations will be
maximized, in particular with WFP and FAO as part of the SD3C-Mali programme, and duplication
of efforts and IFAD engaging in humanitarian relief operations, will be avoided. National ownership
and demand from government will be key principles and participation will be ensured in the
development and implementation of early recovery activities. A final principle to be upheld will be
that of “leaving no one behind”, which in this case means making an extra effort and allowing for
extra time to reach out those small-scale farmers who cannot at present afford to transition towards
agro-ecological practices.
2. Project Description

A. Alignment, ownership and partnerships

Alignment to CRI cuts across all four pillars: affordable access to inputs and improved food systems
and production through investment in small-scale infrastructure are at the very core of the host
project’s interventions that promote biodigesters and integrated farming systems including agro-
ecological practices. Likewise, access to finance as well as markets and market-related information
is ensured through collaboration with IFAD’s flagship rural finance in Mali, INCLUSIF.

Alignment with government priorities and policies is strong. Government crisis response priorities
in agriculture mostly relate to easing access to inputs for smallholder producers, starting with inputs
for the country’s traditional export crop, cotton, which is the main foreign exchange earner in the
sector. The last harvesting season, 2021/2022, saw a historical record high production of 760 000
tonnes in Mali. Government intervention on this cash crop has a long history, in particular with
respect to pricing; this year, the price was set at FCFA 285, up FCFA 5 from the previous season.
Prices for fertilisers (for cotton and other crops) are subsidised, with farmers having to pay FCFA
12 500 for a 50 kg bag of mineral fertiliser or FCFA 2 500 for a 50 kg bag of organic fertiliser, and
government picking up the difference by paying the remainder to cover the real market price. The
CRI project is fully aligned with government policies seeking to facilitate smallholders’ access to
quality inputs at affordable cost.

Ownership of the host project, MERIT, is thorough, and will be further consolidated by the CRI
project as its resources and approach are very complementary and timely. Partnerships of the host
project include those with SNV and AVSF, as well as the IFAD country programme partnership with
the two other RBAs, FAO and WFP (through the regional SD3C intervention), will be leveraged, as
per their respective comparative advantages. The host project document was prepared before the
Covid-19 crisis, following a fully participatory and extensive consultation process.

B. Project objectives, geographic area of intervention and target groups

The host project (MERIT) goal is to contribute to improved food and nutritional security, poverty
reduction and strengthened resilience, including climate resilience, for poor rural people in southern
Mali. The development objective is sustainable improvement in access to renewable energy and
soil productivity. The CRI-funded project will share the same objectives, and focus in particular on
the more immediate input needs of target groups.

The host project is being implemented in the Regions of Kayes, Sikasso, Koulikoro and Ségou and
targets smallholder women, men and young people (crop and livestock farmers, and agro-
pastoralists), who are considered the groups most vulnerable to climate change. The targeting
approach combines the criteria of vulnerability to climate change at the local level and eligibility
criteria (number of animals, access to water, etc.). MERIT will benefit more than 42,000 households,
or some 420,000 indirect beneficiaries in the project area, of whom at least 50 per cent women and
30 per cent young people. The CRI-funded project will reach out to the poorest segments amongst
these target groups and consist of 12,000 farmers of which 50% will be women, and 30% youth.

C. Components/outcomes and activities

The two CRI subcomponents are: 1) Sustainable use of organic inputs and scaling-up of agro-
ecological practices; and 2) Access to organic inputs and promotion of agro-ecological practices.
They will be embedded in the second component of the host project and will ensure: 1) crisis-
bridging support to farming communities in the short term; and 2) strategic support to prepare agro-
ecological transitioning in the medium to long term. Among the first batch there will be activities
aimed at substituting chemical with organic fertiliser and pesticides, boosting production and
availability of bio-fertilisers, promoting integrated pest management, as well as achieving important
increases in fodder production. The rising cost of fuel has made crops grown under irrigation more
expensive to grow and to transport them to and from markets. To counteract soaring food prices
and the deterioration of rural households’ purchasing power, host project funding is currently being
used to equip a number of vegetable gardens. In these gardens, CRI funding will promote integrated
vegetable gardening using agro-ecological practices and alternative fertilisers; the gardens will
furthermore be crucial for improving the nutritional status of target groups.

Activities will be implemented by testing and disseminating innovations using participatory

approaches, together with training mechanisms to scale-up their adoption: (i) action research and
demonstrations; the development of technical reference materials and installation of demonstration
plots on bioslurry and compost use; and the implementation of in-situ agroforestry trials; (ii) training,
through the creation of mixed farmer field schools; and the upgrading of vegetable gardens to turn
them into integrated vegetable gardens relying on bioslurry and other forms of organic compost and
biological pest control, as well as on renewable sources of energy (solar pumps); and (iii) the
preparation and support for the implementation of 24 Municipal Climate Change Adaptation Plans
(PCAs), to be conducted according to a participatory and bottom up approach, from village level to
municipal level, ensuring the tailoring of adaptation measures to local specificities, and thus
ensuring a better uptake and ownership of the interventions. Additional M&E arrangements will
specifically monitor and report on CRI activities. The host project outcome to which these CRI
activities will contribute is the ‘achievement of sustainable improvements in soil productivity’.

D. Preliminary costs, financing and benefits

The total cost of the intervention funded by IFAD through the CRI initiative is two million eight
hundred eighty-seven thousand (2,887,000) US dollars. These will be an additional financing to
the existing financing instruments already existing in the host project MERIT.

Activity-based budget by expenditure category

C. Goods & services
Preparing/implementing 24 PCAs 888,000
Upgrading infrastructure for livestock raising and supporting seed producers 319,000
Development of 6,370 h of land un-der climate resilient agricultural practices 1,248,000
Action research and demonstration on agro-forestry practices 33,000
Promotion of agro-ecological practices/enhanced fodder production 101,000
Integrated veg gardens adopting agro-ecological practices/bioslurry 173,000
D. Training & workshops
Training of 12,000 farmers in climate resilient agricultural practices 72,000
Training on agro-forestry practices 44,000
II. Recurrent expenses
2. Operating expenses (dedicated M&E for CRI) 9,000
Subtotal CRI PROJECT COSTS 2,887,000

Categories Amount (USD ) %

I. Goods & Services 2 771 000 96%

II. Training & Workshops 116 000 4%
Total 2 887 000 100%
 Activity-based budget by component and source of financing ( in 000’s of USD )
CRI Subcomponents Host project Beneficiaries IFAD IFAD IFAD IFAD Env. & New Env. & Fin. gap Gov’t Total
Components and FIPS FIPS loan grant clim. CRI env. & clim.
Subcomponents (loan) (grant) gap clim. funds
Gap
1. Access to organic 2.2 Biofertilizer and
inputs and crop/livestock/
promotion of agro- forestry integration
ecological practices for sustainable
intensification of
production systems
2.2.1 Development 1,248
of 6,370 h of land
un-der climate
resilient agricultural
practices
2.2.2 Training of 72
12,000 farmers in
climate resilient
agricultural
practices
2.2.3 Action 77
research,
demonstration and
training on agro-
forestry practices
2.2.4 Promotion of 101
agro-ecological
practices/enhanced
fodder production
2.2.5 Integrated veg 173
gardens adopting
agro-ecological
practices/bioslurry
Subtotal 2.1 1,488 3,144 1,163 506 1,671 375 3,753 10,430
2. Sustainable use of 2. Resilience of
organic inputs and production
scaling-up of agro- systems and
ecological practices integrated
territorial
management
2.1. Integrated
territorial
management
 2.1.1 Preparing/ 888
implementing 24
PCAs
2.1.2 Upgrading 319
infrastructure for
live-stock raising/
supporting seed
prod.
Subtotal 2.2 3,063 1,133 1,352 1,207 1,505 4,873 11,925
Subtotal 2.1+2.2 1,488 6,208 2,296 1,858 2,878 971 1,880 3,753 4,873 22,355
3. Project - -
management,
M&E and - 45 16 6,166 2,280 - - - 94 - 0 8,601
knowledge - 65 24 934 345 - 9 - - - 0 1,367
management

1. P Management
2. M&E and KM
Subtotal 109 40 7,099 2,626 - - - 94 - 0 9,969
Total PROJECT COSTS 4,527 109 40 21,769 8,052 5,642 2,887 2,755 1,995 3,753 4,873 54,544
Activities measured under the logical framework indicator ‘development of 6,370 h of land under
climate resilient agricultural practices’ (contributing to the host project objective of a total of 19,720
h to be achieved over 7 years), will take place in the context of the participatory climate change
adapted land use planning exercise (the PCAs). The breakdown of this cumulative figure is as
follows: 1) 2,500 h under soil and water conservation and soil fertility restoration techniques (stone
bunds and earthen dams); 2) reforestation and farmer-managed natural regeneration of 3,720 h;
and 3) 150 h under community-based small-scale irrigation schemes.

Benefits. Economic benefits have been calculated and are accessible as part of the host project’s
Economic and Financial Analysis. Those directly derived from CRI-funded activities include
enhanced household food security, incomes, and nutrition, through integrated market gardens, and
inter-cropping of maize with fodder crops. The integrated market gardens are expected to be used
by 2 women (on 0.03 h) per household, and, combined with increased fodder production leading to
better-fed cows and better milk production, will improve family nutrition. Activities will also contribute
to decrease carbon emissions in the project area.

Complementarity with the EU initiative on Food Production and Resilience of Food Systems
in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. This EU initiative will focus more on the
medium to long term and the “hardware” (e.g., biodigesters), whereas the CRI-funded project will
address the short term and “software” (e.g., training) plus immediate input needs.

Exit strategy and sustainability. The host project scales up the successful pilot activities of a
previous intervention, PAPAM/ASAP, of which it integrates the main lessons learned. Its longer
duration will much increase the likelihood of sustainability, as it will allow for gradually building up
all elements necessary for a comprehensive exit strategy. In particular, MERIT will have established
the necessary enabling environment in both the private and public sectors for the continued
effective use of the ‘biodigester-solar panel nexus’, and the continued adoption of agro-ecological
practices for sustainable productivity increases, namely: 1) awareness on the demand side, and
the organisational capacity (including through the host project’s partnership with farmer
organisations at several levels) to articulate the demand and the information, data, and knowledge
to address it though appropriate channels to local providers of goods and services from the private,
public, and NGO sectors; and 2) organisational and technical capacity on the supply side, with a
new value chain articulated around newly created jobs embedded within the local economy and key
actors for the supply of non-financial and financial goods and services created by the scaling up of
agro-ecological practices and alternative technologies.

Using the entry point of the PCAs, 12,000 farmers who will have been trained on climate resilient
agricultural practices and who will have been supported to adopt them on a cumulative 6,370
hectares of land, the host project will ensure that the necessary enabling environment in both the
private and public sectors is available to support the sustainability of benefits derived by targeted
farming households. This will comprise the practical knowledge and know-how on-farm and up- and
downstream from agro-ecological production as well as extension advisory services, within a
broader regional context in which decentralised government is enabled to pull local transitions to
proven and experimental agro-ecological practices that achieve sustainable productivity gains (inter
alia, through participatory land use planning and territorial development in the context of the
preparation, and support to the implementation of, 24 PCAs). At national level, a dedicated
stakeholder platform will be established, following the example of some of the well performing value
chain platforms or roundtables. MERIT also has the mandate to prepare a National strategy for the
promotion of biodigesters.
 3. Risks

A. Project Risks

Residual
Inherent
risk
Risk category/sub- risk (high,
# (high, Mitigation measures
category/description medium,
medium,
low)
low)
1 Country context
Project area limited to districts
Security concerns High Medium
without security concerns
2 Environment/Climate
Targeting based also on water
Insufficient access to water and
availability, monitoring of
over-exploitation of existing water High Medium
availability, increasing storage
resources
capacities
3 Institutional Capacity
Lack of continuity of government Key actors pro-actively
intervention in the relevant Medium Low involved from start-up and
technical domains institutional support provided
Coordination mechanisms put
in place at several levels and
Insufficient stakeholder
High Medium incentives for coordination
coordination
increased through a value
chain approach
No or not enough benefits for the Appropriate targeting of
relatively poorer farming High Medium vulnerable households,
households in the project area appropriate biodigester size
Technical difficulties in O&M training, technician
technology transfer, non-regular networks, increased fodder
High Medium
supply of raw material for production and improved
biodigesters, livestock diseases livestock parks
Awareness raising,
Insufficient uptake and ownership participatory assessments of
of training opportunities including technology uptake
Medium Low
FFS bottlenecks, rigorous selection
of FFS facilitators and
participants
4 Financial Management
Mali was supposed to create
integrated country programme Ongoing discussion between
approach to centralize ICO and the government.
management of all of its existing Segregation of duties issues
project; however, it is yet to tackled in the previous
materialize. This is cause Substantial Moderate quarterly finance meeting. A
weaknesses in segregation of procurement specialist and a
duties between MERIT’s staff and new internal auditor should be
INCLUSIF staff. MERIT is yet to hired and this will reduce the
have a procurement specialist risk rating.
and an internal auditor onboard.
The project procedure manual is
Exchanges with the project
needs to be to be amended to
Substantial Moderate and the ICO to initiate this
improve internal controls and
process have taken place.
segregation of duties.
In terms of budgeting and Continuous IFR support is
Moderate Low
financial reporting, the project provided to the FC.
 have been seeing improvements
in their IFRs. However, the
project still needs to improve on
its quality and ensure better
forecasting and reporting while
respecting the deadlines.
Government’s counterparts have
Consistent exchanges
been low under MERIT due to the
Substantial Moderate between the PMU and the
political situation in the country
government on this matter.
and changes in regime.
5 Project Procurement
Procurement has been an issue
Country programme approach,
and is being followed up closely Medium Low
SPO support
including following the CP audit
6 Timeliness
Programme approach and
Start-up delay High Medium pre-identification of key
partners and service providers
Working group exists and has
Approval and adoption of relevant
Medium Low the mandate to promote
national policy delayed
approval and adoption

4. Implementation

A. Organizational framework

The host project is being implemented under an outsourcing approach based on partnerships with
qualified in country service providers present, in particular the international nongovernmental
organizations AVSF and SNV, which have demonstrated their comparative advantage in
connection with ASAP/PAPAM.

The IFAD portfolio in Mali is evolving towards an integrated programme approach for more effective
resource allocation and to improve project performance and impact. MERIT is under the technical
oversight of the Ministry of Agriculture, and its national project coordination unit and steering
committee have been created by ministerial decree. In addition, a number of regional coordination
unit have been set up, sometimes housed together with IFAD sister projects such as INCLUSIF,
following a country programme approach.

The financial management arrangements under the host project MERIT will apply to CRI. However,
the project will open a separate designated account for this fund.

The steering committee is chaired by the Ministry of Agriculture, and its secretariat provided by the
national project coordination unit.

Financial management and procurement of CRI-funded activities will be carried out and supervised
as part of the host project.

B. Planning, M&E, Learning, KM and Strategic Communication approaches

M&E of CRI-funded activities will take place as an integral part of the host project’s M&E system.
KM and communication will, likewise, be done in the context of MERIT, which already disposes of
a KM strategy that is currently being implemented, and of a communications expert.

An additional budget of USD 9,000 will be earmarked for specifically monitoring CRI-funded
activities, ensure timely and adequate reporting, and tailor-made communication and knowledge
management/learning products as required. A CRI sub-page will be posted on the host project’s
existing website.
Annexes
Annex 1: Government Request
Annex 2: Logframe (simplified and limited to CRI-funded activities and their link to the host project)
Annex 3: Project cost tables by component/outcome, expenditure category and financiers
Annex 4: Financial Management Issues Summary1

1
Applicable only for OSC proposals to Government entities.
Annex 1: Government Request
 Annex 2: Logframe (simplified and limited to CRI-funded activities and their link to the host project)
Indicateurs Moyens de vérification
Synthèse/Résultats Risques
Noms Références Mi-parcours Fin Sources Fréquences Respons.
Objectif de développement du Projet
Amélioration durable de l’accès à des 4. Nombre de tonnes d’émissions de gaz à Rapports des
• Retards à la mise en
énergies renouvelables et de la effet de serre (CO2) évitées ou de carbone opérateurs et
UCN et œuvre
productivité des sols fixé (3.2.1 ) 0 620 548 1 537 8093 SSE du Projet Annuelle
opérateurs • Dissémination lente de
Evaluation
la technologie
ExACT
Indicateurs Moyens de vérification
Synthèse/Résultats Risques
Noms Références Mi-parcours Fin Sources Fréquences Respons.
Composante 1. Promotion du nexus biodigesteur
Effet 1: Les ruraux ont accès à des 5. Nombre de ménages déclarant une Annuelle à • Disponibilité d’animaux
Enquête UCN et
énergies propres et renouvelables diminution significative du temps consacré à 0 7 000 12 500 partir de la stabulés et déjections
d’effets Opérateurs
la collecte de combustible (3.2.3) 3ème année animales insuffisantes ;
Produit 1.3: Le nexus économe en 8. Nombre de biodigesteurs/kits 2 650 biodig. • Retard dans
GES est diffusé photovoltaïques/foyers améliorés/lampes 1 300 kits PV l'approbation de la
solaires installés 650 biodig. 23 000 FA & LS 5 650 biodig. SSE et stratégie nationale
Prestataires et
600 kits PV 3 600 kits PV rapports Annuelle • Difficultés d'adoption
Financement CRI 900 biodig. UCN
0 FA & LS 50 000 FA & LS projet des technologies en
900 kits PV raison de spécificités
culturelles
Indicateurs Moyens de vérification
Synthèse/Résultats Risques
Noms Références Mi-parcours Fin Sources Fréquences Respons.
Composante 2. Résilience des systèmes de production et gestion intégrée des Terroirs
9. Pourcentage de personnes/ménages Annuelle à
Enquête Prestataires et
déclarant une augmentation de la production 0% 60% 80% partir de la 3ème
d’effets UCN
(1.2.4) année
Effet 2 : La productivité des sols est
10. Pourcentage de personnes déclarant
durablement améliorée Annuelle à
l’adoption de pratiques et technologies Enquête Prestataires et
0% 60% 80% partir de la 3ème
durables et résilientes au changement d’effets UCN
année
climatique (3.2.2)
11. Nombre de PCA mis en place 143 Documents
30 180 Annuel Communes
Financement CRI 12 des PCA
Produit 2.1: Les terroirs villageois sont 12. Nombre d’hectares de terres soumises à • Participation limitée des
4 850 Rapports UCN,
gérés de façon durable une gestion résiliente au climat (3.1.4) producteurs locaux dans
0 19 720 d’activités et Annuelle Prestataires et
Financement CRI les différents processus
2 000 SSE Producteurs
d’apprentissage
Produit 2.4 : Les petits producteurs sont 16. Nombre de personnes formées aux • Epuisement ou carence
formés sur les pratiques d’agriculture pratiques et/ou techniques de production 15 500 Rapport de des ressources en eau
résiliente au changement climatique (1.1.4) Prestataires et
0 41 000 formation et Annuelle pour les différents
Financement CRI UCN
SSE usages sous l'effet des
4 500 sécheresses répétées
 Annex 4: Financial Management Issues Summary
COUNTRY
A. COUNTRY PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE
Country – FM KPIs:
FM Inherent Risk:
Country Disbursement Ratio
(rolling-year)
Outstanding Ineligible
Expenditure
Outstanding Advances
(Projects in Expired Status)
Applicable PBAS cycle:
PBAS Available allocation:
1 Corporate Disbursement Ratio Methodology considers ASAP, AFD, IFAD, KFW and SPA financing sources only.
2
Deuxième et troisième revues du FMI de l’accord au titre de la facilité élargie de crédit, demandes de dérogation pour non-
respect de critères de réalisation et de modification d’un critère de réalisation — analyse de viabilité de la dette – février 2021.
MALI
SUBSTANTIEL TI (2020) : Le score du Mali sur l’indice de corruption perçue de Transparency
International est de 29/100 en 2019, ce qui place le pays parmi les nations les plus
corrompues au monde. À l'échelle mondiale, le Mali est classé 130ème sur 180 pays.
Le rapport 2020 de l’indice Mo Ibrahim de la gouvernance en Afrique (IIGA) montre
une détérioration croissante de la gouvernance au Mali classé 31ème sur 54 pays en
2019 avec un score de 46,6/100
CPIA (2019): L’Évaluation des politiques et des institutions en Afrique (CPIA) jauge la
qualité des structures politiques et institutionnelles nationales, et leur capacité à soutenir
une croissance durable et à réduire la pauvreté. La Note globale de la CPIA 2019
(l'Évaluation des politiques et des institutions en Afrique) du Mali est de 3,4. Il n’a pas
été relevé une évolution par rapport à l’année précédente. La Note CPIA du Mali est
supérieure à la moyenne des Pays IDA en Afrique subsaharienne qui est de 3,1. Le
Groupe d’indicateurs le plus performant est la « Gestion économique » avec une note
de 4 et le Groupe d’indicateurs le moins performant est la « Gestion et institutions du
secteur public» avec une note de 3,1. Les notes des autres groupes d’indicateurs sont
les suivantes : (a) politiques structurelles avec une note de 3,3 ; (b) politiques d’inclusion
sociale et de promotion de l’équité avec une note de 3,2.
PEFA (2021): Dans l'évaluation du PEFA 2021, l’analyse détaillée de la performance
de la GFP par pilier montre que seul le pilier relatif à la stratégie budgétaire présente
une performance plutôt BONNE. Les autres piliers présentent une performance
BASIQUE tandis que celle du pilier « examen et audits externes » est FAIBLE. Un
système d'audit externe est en place au niveau étatique, mais les rapports sont fournis
au parlement avec un retard considérable, ils ne sont pas publics et les institutions
auditées ne fournissent pas de réponses aux recommandations. De plus, les institutions
chargées de l'audit externe ne sont pas suffisamment dotées en personnel et en
équipements et le président du SC-CS est nommé par l'exécutif. Le système de
passation des marchés est bien organisé au Mali en ce qui concerne le processus
d'appel et de règlement des différends, mais il ne couvre que les marchés passés à
partir d’un certain seuil, soit environ la moitié des marchés. Les audits annuels de
l’ARMDS sur la passation de marchés portent en partie sur l’utilisation efficace des
ressources, mais ils sont produits tardivement et ne sont pas suffisamment exploités
IMF/WB-Debt Sustainability Analysis: Une analyse de viabilité de la dette a été
réalisée par le FMI en février 2021. Selon le rapport, « le Mali continue à présenter
un risque modéré de surendettement extérieur et global, comme dans l’évaluation
conjointe Banque mondiale-FMI de mai 2020, mais la vulnérabilité augmente. La
dégradation du solde budgétaire due à la pandémie et au coup d'État, la trajectoire
plus progressive de rééquilibrage vers la cible budgétaire de l’UEMOA et la réduction
de l’aide extérieure sous forme de dons, et donc le recours accru à des emprunts
intérieurs plus onéreux, ont entraîné une hausse considérable de la dette publique et
des besoins de financement bruts. »2
 LENDING TERMS DSF Grant

B. PORTFOLIO, FM RISK & PERFORMANCE

Existing Portfolio:
Project Financing FLX Lending Currency Amount %Disbursed Completion
instrument Status (2) Terms (million) date
FIER 2000000422 DSBL DSF HC XDR 10.80 99,38 30/09/2022
GRANTS
FIER 2000000421 DSBL LOANS XDR 10.80 99,37 30/09/2022
FIER 2000003564 DSBL SUPG USD 0.442 88,44 31/12/2021
FIER 2000003860 APPR SUPG USD 0.539 -
INCLUSIF 2000002304 DSBL GRANT XDR 15.75 57,06 31/12/2024
INCLUSIF 2000002305 DSBL LOANS XDR 15.75 63,05 31/12/2024
MERIT 2000003147 DSBL DSF HC EUR 7.100 - 31/12/2026
GRANTS
MERIT 2000003148 DSBL LOANS EUR 19.100 0,68 31/12/2026
SD3C 2000003655 DSBL DSF HC EUR 5.6 4,64 30/09/2027
GRANTS
SD3C 2000003656 DSBL LOANS EUR 15.1 4,63 30/09/2027

Project Project FM Performance Score: Performance Score: Performance Score: Performance Score:
risk Quality of Financial Quality & Disbursement Rate Counterpart funds
rating Management Timeliness of Audit
FIER Substantial Moderately Moderately Satisfactory Moderately
Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory
INCLUSIF Moderate Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
MERIT Substantial Not Specified*3 Not Specified* Not Specified* Not Specified*
SD3C High

Les dispositifs de gestion financière des Projets FIER, INCLUSIF et MERIT (en phase de démarrage) répondent aux exigences minimales du
FIDA pour la traçabilité de l’information financière et en matière de gestion budgétaire, de comptabilité, de reddition des comptes, de contrôle
internes et externes et de gestion de Trésorerie. Les équipes des services financiers, renforcée en 2021 avec le recrutement d’un Auditeur Interne,
disposent des pré-requis en comptabilité et en gestion financière. Le système d’informations financières du Projet INCLUSIF a été évalué comme
robuste et capable de renseigner sur l’état des dépenses de manière satisfaisante. Sur le Projet FIER, des améliorations sont nécessaires
notamment sur la prise en charge des engagements financiers et la gestion des avances de fonds. Mais globalement sur les deux projets, il est
possible de concilier les décaissements effectués avec les dépenses enregistrées en comptabilité.
Les missions d’audit des comptes des Projets FIER et INCLUSIF sur les exercices 2019 et 2020 ont formulé des opinions favorables sur les États
Financiers, les ECD et la gestion des Comptes Désignés/Spéciaux et la gestion de la passation des marchés. L’évaluation des risques fiduciaires
effectuée en 2021 relève que pour les Projets FIER et INCLUSIF, le risque Inhérent est évalué respectivement comme « Substantiel » et
« Modéré ». Pour le Projet MERIT en phase de démarrage, le risque inhérent est « Substantiel » principalement à cause du dispositif de gestion
financière, qui prévoit une délégation de la responsabilité fiduciaire au niveau des antennes.
Les améliorations majeures recommandées par la dernière mission de supervision de FIER d’avril 2021, portent pour l’essentiel sur : a) les
analyses budgétaires à effectuer avant les engagements des dépenses (pour éviter les dépassements budgétaires) et la ventilation en
comptabilité, des dépenses dans les catégories de dépenses appropriées ; b) l’actualisation du manuel de procédures pour renforcer notamment
les procédures de contrôles sur les activités des UCR; c) le réajustement du dispositif organisationnel du SAF avec une répartition plus efficiente
des tâches entre le Chef comptable et l'assistant comptable; et e) la justification des avances de fonds à des partenaires sur les fonds de
contrepartie depuis 2016.

3
*New project MERIT. Not specified means that the criteria has not been assessed yet via a supervision mission or an
external audit assessment.