PROBLEMS OF THE PROJECTS IN

THE CONTEXT OF PAKISTAN

PROBLEMS AT PLANNING LEVEL
(Project formulation)
 General
• Lack of coordination (instt/wings)
• Alternatives are not weigh up
• Politically oriented project
• Pet projects
• Lack of flexibility (design)
• Formulation in hurry

• Project where is no need

• Party manifesto

• Priorities of donor agencies

• Public policy is not followed

FINANCIAL
• Lack of sufficient resources
• Unrealistic costing
• Limited knowledge of expert
• Inaccurate knowledge
• Lack of desired data
• Wrong assumptions of input
• Optimistic costing
• Inflation trend not followed
• Late releases of funds
• Dependency on foreign loan/aid/grant in aid
 APPRAISAL
 Not done technically

 Original plan not revised

 Projects are not reviewed properly

 Projects approved w/o appraisal

 Excessive delays in common projects

Approval
 Complicated procedure of approval

 Approval is generally delayed

 Approval of non viable projects

 Politically oriented projects are approved well in time

 Role of different approving bodies

No Place for unforeseen situation
Project plan do not provide steps for unforeseen
situation

Internal or external factors

Unforeseen, may be national

international,

government policies,

local community
PROBLEMS AT IMPLEMENTATION
LEVEL (Inherited Problems)

 Shortage Of Input
 Wrong Location of Project
 Lack Of Proper Guidance
 Lack of Training Of The Project Staff
 Gape Of Planning & Management
 Political Involvement/Overstaffing
 Non Flexible Pc-I (27/45/15)
PROBLEMS WITHIN THE PROJECT

• Lack of mutual understanding

• Lack of prompt/proper communication
• Lack of cooperation
• Shifting of the project
• Transfer of management
• Lack of accountability
• Non clarity of the objectives
• Mishandling of finances
• Delay in release of funds
• Lack of qualified staff/manag
MONITORING/FEEDBACK

• No systematic monitoring
• Lack of trained m/team
• No CMU
• M/feedback not followed
• Component wise monitoring
• Financial/administrative
• Academic/physical monitoring
• No regularity, accuracy,
• No Promtness, completeness
• Monitoring techniques/mechanics not used
REVIEW OF THE PROJECT

• Review not done properly

• Half yearly review
• Annual review
• Role of supervisory deptt:
EVALUATION PROCESS

• No formative evaluation
• No summative evaluations
• Findings not circulated/followed
• External evaluation
• Evaluation by donor agency
• Internal evaluation
• Concerned Ministry