AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.2 5 November 2010 Prepared by: CHRM Original: French Translated by: CLSD Reviewed by: CHRM

Probable Date of Presentation to the Committee on Administrative and Human Resources Policy Issues (CAHR): FOR CONSIDERATION 8 November 2010

MEMORANDUM

TO: THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

FROM: Cecilia AKINTOMIDE Secretary General

SUBJECT: PROPOSALS FOR ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF LOCALLY- RECRUITED STAFF (EFFECTIVE 1 JANUARY 2011)

REVISED VERSION*

Please find attached a revised version of the above-mentioned document, which takes into account recommendations made by Board members at the Informal Board meeting held on 26 October 2010.

Attach:

Cc.: The President

*Questions on this document should be referred to: Mr. Kordje BEDOUMRA Vice President CSVP Ext 2052 Mrs. G. ARCHER-DAVIES Director CHRM Ext. 2031 Ms. J. WAMEYO Division Manager CHRM.2 Ext. 2166 Mr. M. SAIDIL MOCTAR Principal Compensation Officer CHRM.2 Ext. 3320

SCCD: W. A. A. The revisions take into account the following additional changes which are tracked in red in the document:

STAFF AT POST IN ABIDJAN The salary adjustments for GS staff at post in Abidjan will be based on the results of the Abidjan market. In accordance with the recommendations of the consulting firm, Management proposes a weighted average salary increase of 5.1%. However the current salary structure is maintained for 2011.

STAFF AT POST IN TUNIS In application of the dispositions contained in the Policy Framework governing the Status of Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Extended Mission Regime (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77) approved on 18 July 2003 and the Compensation Framework (ADB/BD/WP/123/REV4) approved on 15 July 2008, Management recommends (a) the maintaining of the current salary structure and (b) a weighted average salary increase of 3%.

BUDGETARY IMPACT

The budget impact has been further reduced from 797,926 UA to 624,536 UA.

TABLES MODIFIED

Tables (i), (ii) (iii), 5.3, 6.2.1 and 7.2 have been updated.

PARAGRAPHS MODIFIED

The EXECUTIVE SUMMARY and Chapter 7 - MEASURES ENVISAGED AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS have been updated.

ANNEXE 1

The salary scale for HQ based support staff has been modified.

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

PROPOSALS FOR ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF LOCALLY-RECRUITED

STAFF (EFFECTIVE 1 JANUARY 2011)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

INTRODUCTION 7

SALARY REVIEW CONTEXT 9

COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK OBJECTIVES 11

LOCAL STAFF SERVICE CONDITIONS 13

CONSULTING FIRM’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14

MANAGEMENT’S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 18

MEASURES ENVISAGED AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 22

Annex 1 : Locally-Recruited Staff Salary Structures for 2011

Annex 2 : Lists of Comparators

Addendum : Consulting Firm’s Report on the Salary Survey

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The Bank’s compensation policy for locally recruited staff underscores the need to preserve its external competitiveness on the local market, while ensuring that the performance of each staff member is fully recognized. The new Compensation Framework (ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev.4), adopted by the Board of Directors on 15 July 2008 is in keeping with these goals and aims to encourage employee productivity and better position the Bank to attract, motivate and retain the best talent by ensuring increased focus on results, equity, efficiency, competitiveness and long-term sustainability. The Board approved this compensation framework with two complementary pillars, namely (a) Strengthening of performance-based remuneration supported by an enhanced market position and (b) Rationalization of benefits and improving long-term sustainability. For the 2008-2012 period, the Board of Directors approved a positioning at the 75th percentile as the target market positioning for all locally-recruited staff.

2. 2010 was the first year of performance-based individual salary adjustments for locally recruited Field Office staff. On 15 April 2010, the Committee on Administrative Affairs and Human Resource Policy Issues of the Board (CAHR) endorsed Management’s proposal on the classification of positions for locally-recruited Field Office staff.

3. For the 2011 salary adjustment exercise, Management has:

 Recruited an international firm which has conducted a salary survey of comparators in all locations where the Bank employs local contract staff;

 Set up a committee comprising professional category staff from the Bank’s organizational units to analyze and improve on management’s recommendations. The Staff Council has also been consulted on the report.

 Had a discussion at the CAHR committee level and Informal Board on its proposals.

4. For Headquarters (HQ) locally recruited staff, the survey shows that the Bank’s salary structure and weighted average actual salaries lag the reference market average by 5.1% and 16.3% respectively. The consultant recommended an average actual salary increase of 5.1% which was lower than the actual gap in light of the significant numbers of newly hired staff in recent years. In so doing the consultant removed the gap that was due to staff turnover.

5. Management divided the Headquarters (HQ) locally recruited staff into two categories i.e. (a) staff based in Abidjan (b) Staff based in Tunis.

LOCATION TOTAL POSITION Vs ABIDJAN POSITION Vs TUNIS SCALE SALARY SCALE SALARY ABIDJAN 36 5.1% 14.96% n/a n/a TUNIS 390 5.1% 16.43% -49.50 -39.91 TOTAL 426 5.1% 16.30 -49.50 -39.60

Out of the 390 total GS staff based in Tunis, 178 staff were relocated from Abidjan to Tunis and 212 staff have been recruited in Tunis.

6. In view of the underlying legal and policy framework, the use of Abidjan as reference for the GS staff salary adjustment was and continues to remain valid. To change this methodology would amount to introducing a new regime of expatriate status for the GS staff Page | 1

which may be financially more expensive for the Bank1. For the staff in Tunis, considering, the Bank’s length of stay in Tunis and the change in staff demographics whereby all the new staff have been recruited in Tunis since the relocation, management proposes a 3.0% weighted average increase in actual salaries which is more or less equivalent to the estimated rate of inflation in Tunisia2. 7. For the 36 staff based in Abidjan, Management proposed to maintain the current salary structure and to offer a weighted average salary increase of 5.1% as recommended by the consultant.

8. Based on the fact that the Bank is no longer recruiting new staff in Abidjan and that the current salary grid remains competitive vis-à-vis the Tunis market, Management proposes to maintain the salary scale at the 2010 levels.

9. For Field Office (FO) locally recruited staff, the survey shows that the salary structure is below the reference market target in 22 countries and higher in 3 countries. The survey also highlighted the differences between the Bank’s weighted average actual salaries and the targeted 75th percentile of the reference market, from -20.9% to 29.9%., according to category and local market. A salary structure for Zimbabwe Field Office has also been developed subsequent to the opening of the Field Office.

10. In light of these analyses, and in order to position Bank salaries at the targeted 75th percentile of the reference market, the Consulting Firm made recommendations for adjustments to locally recruited staff salary structures ranging from 0% à 10.8%. With regard to actual salaries, the Consulting Firm recommended weighted average increases ranging from 0% to 29.9%, according to category and local reference market positioning.

11. Based on the provisions of the Compensation Framework (ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev4), Management proposes the following recommendations:

 Adjustment or the maintaining of the current salary structure of HQ and FO locally recruited staff to the 75th percentile of the reference market as indicated in Table (ii) in order to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

 Weighted average increases in the actual salaries of locally recruited staff, as indicated in Table (iii), to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

 Approval of an amount of Six Hundred and Twenty Four Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty Six Units of Account (UA 624,536 ) as indicated in table (i) and its inclusion in the 2011 Budget to support the proposed adjustments and their impact on the total payroll (salaries, pensions, dependency allowances and medical contributions), in order to achieve the 75th market percentile target as approved by the Board of Directors; and

 Adoption of the salary scales in Annex 1, effective 1 January 2011.

1 Legal Note issued by the General Counsel ( Ref ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add 1) and ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.1/Add.2 2 Source. ESTA March 2010. Page | 2

12. Management invites the Board of Directors to note that:-

 the proposed increases will be applied on the basis of the 2010 performance evaluation results and the positioning of each staff member concerned on the salary scale and, in the case of staff recruited in 2010, in proportion to the period of employment at the Bank. The proposed measures -will be effective 1 January 2011.

 a review for the total compensation framework will also be launched for locally recruited staff.

Page | 3

Table (i): Proposed Salary Adjustments – Budget Implications

BUDGET IMPACT (UA) STRUCTURE ACTUAL LOCATION SALARIES TOTAL Algeria 0 1,999 1,999 Angola 0 0 0 0 21,510 21,510 0 17,999 17,999 0 907 907 DR Congo 0 38,111 38,111 Cote d'Ivoire 0 24,233 24,233 0 207,875 207,875 0 0 0 0 12,873 12,873 0 7,959 7,959 Ghana 0 44,665 44,665 0 5,267 5,267 Madagascar 0 0 0 Malawi 0 7,275 7,275 0 0 0 0 3,724 3,724 Mozambique 0 0 0 2,913 0 2,913 Rwanda 0 0 0 0 23,829 23,829 Sierra Leone 0 1,257 1,257 0 0 0 South 0 38,266 38,266 Tanzania 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zambia 0 27,257 27,257 TOTAL 487,919 Pensions, Dependency Allowances and Medical Contributions 136,617 GRAND TOTAL 624,536

Staff members only receive structural salary adjustments if their salaries fall below the minimum of the new salary structure after the application of the performance based increase. Except for Nigeria, the increase in the salary structure will not lead to a separate budget impact because either (a) the weighted average proposed increase to salaries is equal to or higher than the minimum of the new scale or (b) the staff salaries are already higher than the new minimum.

Page | 4

Table (ii): Proposed Structural Adjustments – Comparison between Consultant proposals and Management proposals.

CONSULTANT FINDINGS VIS-À- VIS THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE 75th CONSULTANT MANAGEMNT LOCATION PERCENTILE PROPOSAL RECOMMENDATIONS Algeria 3.4 3.4 3.4 Angola 4.3 4.3 4.3 Burkina Faso 9.1 9.1 9.1 Cameroon 4.5 4.5 4.5 Chad 1.9 1.9 1.9 DR Congo 8.4 8.4 8.4 Cote d'Ivoire 5.1 5.1 0 Tunisia -49.5 none 0 Egypt 5.9 5.9 5.9 Ethiopia 5.2 5.2 5.2 Gabon 2.8 2.8 2.8 Ghana 8.4 8.4 8.4 Kenya 10.8 10.8 10.8 Madagascar 7.9 7.9 7.9 Malawi 5.2 5.2 5.2 Mali -1.3 0 0 Morocco -1.6 0 0 Mozambique 3.2 3.2 3.2 Nigeria 7.3 7.3 7.3 Rwanda 2.1 2.1 2.1 Senegal -2.2 0 0 Sierra Leone 5.4 5.4 5.4 Sudan 7.6 7.6 7.6 South Africa 9.1 9.1 9.1 Tanzania 9.6 9.6 9.6 Uganda 5.6 5.6 5.6 Zambia 8.4 8.4 8.4

In July 2010, the ADB moved away from the UNDP based salary structures. The salary structures are established for each field office in line with the movements in each market to place them at the 75th percentile of this market.

Page | 5

Table (iii): Proposed Weighted Average Adjustments – Comparison between Consultant proposals and Management proposals.

In July 2010, by approval of the Compensation framework ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/rev4, the Bank moved away from automatic salary adjustments. The salary adjustments are established for each office in line with the movements in each market to place them at the 75th percentile.

MANAGEMNT CONSULTANT RECOMMENDATIONS FINDINGS VIS-À-VIS THE BASED ON WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONSULTANT LOCATION 75th PERCENTILE PROPOSAL GS (%) LP (%) GS (%) LP (%) Algeria* 9.10 No staff 9.10 No staff Angola No staff No staff No staff No staff Burkina Faso 10.20 7.50 10.20 7.50 Cameroon 6.90 6.80 6.90 6.80 Chad 1.00 -4.10 1.00 0.00 DR Congo 10.80 13.70 10.80 13.70 Cote d'Ivoire** 16.30 No staff 5.10 No staff Tunisia** -39.60 No staff 3.00 No staff Egypt -3.60 -5.20 0.00 0.00 Ethiopia -1.00 17.90 0.00 17.90 Gabon -1.50 6.20 0.00 6.20 Ghana 5.80 29.90 5.80 29.90 Kenya 4.00 -11.00 4.00 0.00 Madagascar -5.90 -4.40 0.00 0.00 Malawi -6.30 5.40 0.00 5.40 Mali -11.40 -12.20 0.00 0.00 Morocco -11.10 3.10 0.00 3.10 Mozambique -14.70 -4.70 0.00 0.00 Nigeria 0.00 -5.20 0.00 0.00 Rwanda -5.50 -13.40 0.00 0.00 Senegal -6.70 11.40 0.00 11.40 Sierra Leone 3.90 -16.90 3.90 0.00 Sudan -20.90 No staff 0.00 No staff South Africa* 24.00 25.10 24.00 25.10 Tanzania -7.30 -17.60 0.00 0.00 Uganda -0.40 -10.20 0.00 0.00 Zambia 4.20 14.00 4.20 14.00

*For South Africa and Algeria, the adjustment is vis-à-vis the UNDP grid as these offices were not operational in 2009 and hence the staff did not get any salary adjustments vis-à-vis the UNDP grids. ** This calculation is based in the entire HQ based GS staff group (Abidjan/Tunis).

Page | 6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Board of Directors of the African Development bank on 18th July 2003 considered and endorsed Management’s proposal on the Legal and Policy Framework governing the Status of Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Mission Regime (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77). The Board discussed the Framework within the context of the general principle contained in article 4 of the General Regulations of the Bank (Adopted by the Board of Governors of the Bank), as well as the consultative provisions contained in Staff Regulation 2.13 adopted by the Board of Directors on 20 March 1998. The document on the status of staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Mission Regime (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77) specifically indicated that for the purposes of the annual adjustment of GS staff salary as prescribed in Staff Regulation 5.4, the basis for a decision would continue to be a survey of other organizations based in Abidjan. This decision was further endorsed during the review of the Compensation Framework 2008-2012 (ADB/BD/WP/2007/123/Rev4).

A legal note (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add.1) provided by the General Counsel indicated that, the Board of Governors having decided that the Headquarters of the Bank shall remain in Abidjan, any decision by a subordinate rule-making organ should be consistent with and not derogate from, this decision of the Board of Governors.

Based on all these observations and approvals, Management issued the PD 02/2003 concerning the implementation of the temporary relocation regime which together with the Board of Governors Resolutions, Board of Directors resolution continue to govern the salary adjustment mechanism and contracts for Head Quarters Based locally recruited staff.

Since its relocation to Tunis in 2003, the Bank has taken several measures to minimize the impacts of relocation on locally recruited staff members relocated from Abidjan. Education costs for children attending school in Tunis are covered up to 90% instead of 80% applied to other staff, with the same ceiling as applied to internationally-recruited staff members. GS staff relocated to Tunis also continue to receive a temporary relocation monthly allowance of UA 330 although this allowance has now been discontinued for the international category professional level (PL) staff relocated to Tunis. The staff members also receive home leave payments based on air travel from Tunis to Abidjan every two years The payment to Abidjan-based staff of the security allowance equivalent to 12.5% of the salary has also been discontinued with effect from 1 January 2010, in view of Côte d’Ivoire’s return to Phase 2 of the United Nations security system. Finally, some staff members in this category have continued to benefit from the voluntary separation programmes for those who chose to separate from the Bank’s service.

1.2 In accordance with the resolutions adopted on 27 September 1999 and 13 November 2002, the Board of Directors of the Bank and Fund decided to establish a network of Field Offices (FO) in the Regional Member Countries and authorized Management to gradually open Offices in certain member countries. To that end, the Boards in June 2004 approved a Decentralization Strategy (ADF/BD/WP/2004/84/Rev.1) providing for the opening of up to 25 offices in the following countries: Algeria, Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Ghana, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Malawi, Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Chad, Tunisia and Zambia. Subsequently, an Office was opened in South Africa, and the Board of Directors has recently approved the Bank’s proposal to establish a Country Office in Zimbabwe.

Page | 7

The establishment of these Offices has improved dialogue with the countries, enhanced the Bank’s visibility, strengthened portfolio management and improved coordination with the other donors. To enable the Field Offices fully play their role, Management has provided them with the necessary competencies, through a mix of international staff members transferred from headquarters and locally-recruited staff who meet the requirements of the positions to be filled.

1.3 Management is convinced that without an acceptable compensation package, the Bank will encounter difficulties in making these offices competitive in attracting, motivating and retaining the skills required to ensure effective decentralization. It is against this backdrop that several measures have been envisaged to improve the existing human resource policy concerning the Field Offices.

Following a complete study of the Bank’s compensation system, the Board of Directors on 15 July 2008 adopted a new Compensation Framework aligned with the Human Resource Strategy approved by the Bank in 2007. This new framework made possible the necessary adjustments to the Bank’s salary policy and the restructuring of benefits provided to staff, so as to free up resources to finance the enhanced market positioning. The new Compensation Framework has also made it possible to extend some benefits to locally-recruited Field Office staff and made provision for the introduction of a Bank-specific job classification system for this category, as well as the regular adjustment of their salaries based on the findings of annual salary surveys on the local markets of each host country. Finally, it has given them regular Bank staff status, which now entitles them to the same terms of employment as their counterparts at headquarters.

1.4 For 2010, the Board of Directors approved, for HQ locally recruited staff, a weighted average actual salary increase of 7.5 % and a 5.5% increase in the salary structure, positioning the Bank at the 75th percentile of the approved reference market. The increases approved by the Board of Directors to position the salaries of FO locally recruited staff at the 75th percentile of the market, or take into account the inflation rate in the country, varied from 1.5% to 46.9%, depending on the category (GS, LP).

1.5 For 2011, Management is hereby submitting, for consideration by the Board of Directors, proposals for salary scale adjustment and salary increases in accordance with the duty stations and the survey conclusions.

1.6 In addition to the Introduction, this document comprises six (6) parts: The first concerns the context for the salary review, the second sets out the objectives of the Compensation Framework, the third part states the terms of employment of locally recruited staff, the fourth part reviews the Consulting Firm’s conclusions and recommendations while the fifth part presents Management’s analyses and conclusions. The sixth and last part considers the measures envisaged and recommendations made by Management.

The Consulting Firm’s report is provided as an addendum to this document.

Page | 8

2. SALARY REVIEW CONTEXT

2.1 Outline

As part of its Human Resources Strategy (2007-2011) and its Institutional Services Reform Programme, the Bank has actively endeavored to provide high quality benefits and to attract and retain a diversified staff. This chapter briefly discusses this context and the achievements in the areas of human resource reform and decentralization.

2.2 Implementation of the Human Resource Reforms

On the basis of the 2007 Human Resources Management Strategy and the Strategic Framework, the Bank has adopted a concerted approach to the finalization of the Learning and Retraining Strategy, which aims to build its internal capacities which should impact the quality of its services to regional member countries. It recently finalized the first module of the Leadership and Management Retraining Programme, with an internationally renowned business school, the United Kingdom’s Cranfield School of Management, and embarked upon an ambitious training and retraining programme for Field Office staff with Mane Gere Associates. In addition, the Career Development Framework, an initiative comprising a series of 6 interdependent interventions (promotion, individual retraining plan, performance management, mobility, selection and recruitment, and reward) used in managing the career paths of managerial and non-managerial staff, has been launched. In order to pursue capacity building by recruiting and retaining staff, the Recruitment Manual has been revised as a benchmark for all tasks concerning recruitment to GS, PL and EL positions, as well as internal promotion on the basis of competition. The job classification for locally-recruited Field Office Staff has also been completed, to support the implementation of the new Compensation Framework. The Bank’s unfailing concern for its staff’s wellbeing has resulted in Guidelines for HIV/AIDS with a view to managing the delicate issue of HIV/AIDS in the work place.

Furthermore, ambitious efforts are underway to complete, in the next twelve months, essential policy documents on the Extension of the Mandatory Retirement Age, The Young Professional’s Program, Review of the Staff Individual Study Program, Diversity report and Action Plan, Job Classification and Realignment of Salary Grades, Mid-Term Review of the Compensation Framework, the Annual Medical Report, Technical Assistance Personnel Guidelines, the Performance Management System review, the Mutually Agreed Separation Policy and Revision of Staff Rules. Last but not least, Management has organized a follow up Staff Survey, launched in September 2010.

The Bank is aware of the difficulties to be overcome to achieve the above-mentioned objectives with limited resources, but is determined to act in conjunction with the different parties and stakeholders to obtain positive results.

2.3 Acceleration of the Decentralization Process The decentralization process has followed a well thought-out and gradual approach. The number of active Field Offices has increased from 4 in 2002 to 25 in 2009, with a total staff of 409 international and local staff, i.e. about 21 % of the total number of Bank positions. The transfer of functions and responsibilities has been carried out on the basis of the countries’ needs and the staff capacities. A number of Offices have staff covering more than one country.

Page | 9

An independent assessment conducted by the Operations Evaluation Department (OPEV) in 2008, concluded that the implementation of the existing strategy was well advanced. OPEV determined that the decentralization had contributed to: i) improving portfolio management; ii) improving the Bank’s responsiveness and country policy dialogue capacities; iii) enhanced the Bank’s visibility in regional member countries and coordination with donor partners. In its section dedicated to the African Development Bank, the 2009 Multilateral Organization Performance Assessment (MOPAN) report also noted s the Bank’s increased commitment as well as the strengthening of its dialogue with clients and other development partners.

On 21 June 2010, the Board of Directors approved the Bank’s proposal to open a Country Office in Harare, Zimbabwe to consolidate the Bank’s presence in the country.

The Bank began opening offices in regional member countries in 1999 driven by client demand for stronger commitment, shorter project implementation periods and more efficient implementation. Over time, the lessons learnt from the experience of the Bank and other actors have been taken into account.

The Group’s financial situation and the development impact and quality of the Bank’s operations were examined in the document on salary adjustments for international PL staff.

Page | 10

3. COMPENSATION FRAMEWORK OBJECTIVES

3.1 Reference Market and Positioning

The Compensation Framework approved by the Board identified as comparators a group of at least the ten (10) best employers, where possible, in each local market, including public organizations, private firms, international humanitarian organizations, bilateral agencies and Embassies. The Board of Directors approved a 75th percentile positioning as the target market position for all locally-recruited staff. As in the past, and as in the case of the internationally recruited staff, the Bank the services of an international consulting firm to compare the Bank with the market data.

The countries were split into two groups: Group 1 comprising a sample of 15 employers in countries with larger, more diverse labor markets, and Group 2, a sample of 10 employers in countries with smaller and less diverse labor markets. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the World Bank were selected for all the countries, as international public sector benchmark institutions with which the Bank shares the local talent pool.

An indicative breakdown of the number of comparators to be selected by activity sector, depending on the level of the local market, is indicated below:

Table 3.1: Breakdown of Comparators

Sector Group Group 1 2 World Bank 1 1 United Nations 1 1 Bilateral Agencies 3-5 2-3 Embassies 2 1 International Humanitarian Organizations 0-2 0-1 Other Public 2-4 2-3 Private 4-6 2-3 TOTAL 15 10

In selecting the comparators, Management has, to the extent possible, maintained the same organizations for each sector across the country group, to ensure consistency of salary data and equity amongst the field offices.

This year, Management has, with the participation of all the offices, revised the lists used for the 2011 exercise. Some offices have submitted new lists to Management. However, considering the difficulty of submitting proposals on the adjustment of Bank staff salary review to the Board of Directors for discussion before the approval of the 2011 budget, Management has maintained the same comparators as in 2010. Nevertheless, the following measures have been implemented to take the offices’ concerns into account: i) Removal from the existing lists of comparators whose salary averages are very low in comparison to other comparators, which has helped increase the weighted averages of the reference markets in the countries concerned, such as Mali, Morocco, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Madagascar and Uganda; and

Page | 11

ii) Revision in 2011 of comparator lists for all interested offices, in order to have a stable and acceptable list for future exercises.

The Bank is working with the consultants to ensure that we reach the targeted at least 10 comparators (for the smaller markets) and at least 15 comparators (for the larger markets). The cycle for 2011 is has already started in order to stabilize the number and type of comparators to fit into the framework as approved by the Board. The Bank and the consultants have already commenced the campaign in all the countries by visiting these bilateral lenders, development partners and other sector comparators to ensure that they are included in the next cycle.

The list of all comparators selected for this year is presented by country in Annex 2.

3.2 Performance-Based Compensation

One of the key objectives of the new compensation policy is to enable the Bank to manage all compensation (salaries and benefits) involving direct and indirect payments, in order to reward strong performances. It was on this basis that the Board of Directors approved the restructuring of staff benefits in order to release the resources earmarked for financing the enhanced market positioning. Consequently, high performing staff members are rewarded on the basis of their results and their contribution and enabled to support their personal choices. Compensation reform was essential to support the new 360° performance management system, which will make it possible, not only to reward the most outstanding staff members, but also to identify the weakest.

Pursuant to Presidential Directive 04/2009 issued on 1 October 2009, concerning the staff Performance Management System, a memorandum informed staff of the launching of an electronic tool for implementation of the new Performance Management System, indicating the different processes of the operation and the related cut-off dates. A complete schedule for the performance evaluation process with detailed descriptions of the main stages and instructions for staff, supervisors and multi-raters was also communicated. Prior to the operation’s start-up, the Bank organized intensive training sessions at headquarters and in the Field Offices in order to explain to staff how to use the tool on-line and to address their possible concerns. The 2009 Performance Evaluation was carried out according to the new procedures, especially on-line evaluation and the weighting of objectives and key performance indicators.

The time taken to complete the 2009 evaluation process was the shortest in the Institution’s history. The fact that the existing system is operational online and allows for easy monitoring was a key factor in the significant completion rate.

The Bank is determined to introduce an enhanced performance management process, with the performance management system constituting just one component. In that respect, continuing training of supervisors and staff members in the conduct of the overall performance management process will be organized. The responsibilities of staff members and their supervisors in this process will be well defined. This will provide clear indications and raise the efficacy of the performance rating during the evaluation exercise.

Page | 12

4. LOCALLY RECRUITED STAFF SERVICE CONDITIONS

4.1 In 2007 and 2008, the Board of Directors approved a series of measures to improve the working conditions of locally recruited Field Office staff. In particular, the new provisions cover the medical plan, the retirement plan, education grants and dependency allowances, as well as the Group Accident and Life Insurance. The new Compensation Framework adopted by the Board of Directors in July 2008 gave locally-recruited Field Office staff the status of regular Bank staff. Performance evaluations and annual performance-based salary adjustments were introduced in the Field Offices. In addition, the SAP NPO, ‘Salary Processing Project’ was introduced, thus permitting the central processing of all salaries and entitlements. This reform helped to reduce the time devoted by staff to administrative matters, thereby creating more time for operations-related activities. Field Office staff efficiency has improved due to the strengthening of the orientation/ on-boarding and training programmes offered to locally- recruited staff and Resident Representatives. Greater authority has been delegated to the Resident Representatives for decision-making concerning the recruitment of locally recruited staff.

4.2 On 15 April 2010, the Administrative Affairs and Human Resource Policy Committee of the Board (CAHR) endorsed Management’s proposal for classification of locally- recruited Field Office staff. The objectives of this proposal was to establish a benchmark value for all Bank jobs, in an equitable, coherent and efficient manner and to provide a reliable basis for the compensation system which laid the foundation for a salary policy to enable the Bank attract and retain qualified staff.

4.3 In accordance with the provisions of the Compensation Framework adopted in July 2008, the salary adjustments for locally-recruited Field Office staff are applied under the same conditions as those of headquarters staff with the same status. 2010 was the first year of application of salary adjustments for this category of staff on the basis of their performance. In 2010, the inflation rate recorded in the country was also taken into account in calculating the salary adjustments for each field office.

4.4 While the employment conditions of staff with international status are based on the international labor market, those of locally recruited staff are based on local market conditions. The locally recruited staff salaries correspond to the pay grades applied to staff at the different Bank duty stations. Their salary scales are denominated in the local currency, except in the cases of the Angola, DR Congo and Mozambique offices, which, falling in line with existing local practices of other institutions, are denominated in American dollars.

4.5 The Board of Directors on 30 June 2010 approved a Bank-specific salary scale for each Field Office. These scales will be revised annually on the basis of the findings of salary surveys carried out on a sample of employers for each local market. The proposed salary scales are presented in Annex 1.

Page | 13

5. CONSULTING FIRM’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Following these analyses, the Consulting firm drew conclusions enabling it to make recommendations both for Headquarters and Field Office locally recruited staff.

5.1 Locally Recruited Headquarters’ Staff

As requested and in keeping with past practice and previous resolutions, the Consulting firm’s analyses focused on the position of headquarters’ staff vis-à-vis the Abidjan market and provided an analysis vis-à-vis the Tunis market for indicative purposes.

5.1.1 Abidjan Market

The Consulting firm’s analysis concerned salary structures and actual salaries. As in the previous exercises, a distinction is made between staff with salaries within the salary scale and those whose salaries, for historical reasons, are outside the salary scale.

5.1.1.1 Salary Structure

The comparison of salary structures shows that the scale of salaries of headquarters GS staff whose salaries are within the salary grid is on average 5.1% lower than the 75th percentile of the reference market as tabulated below.

Table: 5.1.1.1: Bank Salary Structure vis-à-vis 75th Percentile of the Abidjan Market

Difference Gra Current 75th Percentile Difference Current 75th Percentile from Mean de Minimum Minimum from Minimum Maximum Maximum Maximum Difference (FCFA) (FCFA) (FCFA) (FCFA) % % 4,826,0 GS3 00 5,168,033 7.1% 8,446,000 9,722,091 15.1% 11.1% 6,274,0 GS4 00 6,782,166 8.1% 10,980,000 12,399,582 12.9% 10.5% 7,906,0 GS5 00 9,395,757 18.8% 13,835,000 13,212,058 -4.5% 7.2% 9,882,0 GS6 00 9,813,027 -0.7% 17,294,000 18,671,257 8.0% 3.6% 12,353, GS7 000 12,770,855 3.4% 21,617,000 22,350,852 3.4% 3.4% 15,441, GS8 000 16,669,977 8.0% 27,022,000 28,658,324 6.1% 7.0% Weighted Average 5.1%

5.1. 1. 2 Average Actual Salaries

The comparison of the actual salaries of headquarters GS staff with the Abidjan reference market shows that the Bank’s weighted average is 16.3% below that reference market as shown in the table below.

Page | 14

Table: 5.1.1.2: Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Abidjan Market

th Grade Actual Average 75 Percentile of Market Average Difference (Market) (FCFA) (FCFA) % GS 3 5,694,520 7,658,452 34.5% GS 4 7,228,562 9,407,058 30.1% GS 5 9,609,946 11,340,511 18.0% GS 6 12,521,590 14,242,142 13.7% GS 7 15,091,664 16,970,229 12.4% GS 8 18,289,687 22,139,041 21.0% Weighted Average: 16.3%

The consultant noted that the huge gap was due to demographic changes in GS support staff.

5.1.2 Tunis Market

5.1.2.1 Salary Structure

The comparison shows that the Bank’s salary structure remains competitive this year, in relation to the Tunis reference market as seen in the Table below:

Table: 5.1.2.1 Salary Structure vis-à-vis 75th Percentile of the Tunis Market (TND)

75th Difference 75th Current Percentile from Current Percentile from Difference Grade Minimum Minimum Maximum Maximum Average GS3 15,464 11,683 -24.5% 27,062 15,689 -42.0% -33.2% GS4 19,474 12,748 -34.5% 34,079 18,499 -45.7% -40.1% GS5 23,941 13,860 -42.1% 41,897 18,591 -55.6% -48.9% GS6 29,439 15,853 -46.2% 51,519 24,669 -52.1% -49.1% GS7 36,799 19,133 -48.0% 64,406 30,749 -52.3% -50.1% GS8 47,109 23,556 -50.0% 82,448 31,469 -61.8% -55.9% Weighted Average -49.5%

5.1.2.2 Average Actual Salaries

The comparison of actual salaries with the Tunis reference market shows that, again, this year, the Bank’s actual salaries are competitive as seen from the Table below.

Table: 5.1.2.2 Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Tunis Market

th Grade Actual Average 75 Percentile of Market Average Market Difference (TND) (TND) % GS 3 15,582 13,156 -15.6% GS 4 19,779 15,125 -23.5% GS 5 26,295 16,751 -36.3% GS 6 34,262 19,972 -41.7% GS 7 41,295 24,150 -41.5% GS 8 50,045 27,315 -45.4% Weighted Average: -39.6%

Page | 15

5.2 Locally Recruited Field Office Staff

The Consulting Firm carried out an analysis of salary data for all Field Office staff at post at 31 July 2010. Unlike last year, when the Consulting firm’s comparisons focused solely on actual salaries, these have been expanded to include salary structures, as the Bank now has its own salary structure for each Field office since 1 July 2010.

5.2.1 Bank Salary Structures vis-à-vis the Reference Market

The comparisons between the Field Office salary structures vis-à-vis the reference markets show that most of the Bank’s salary structures are below the 75th percentile market target approved by the Board of Directors.

5.2.2 Bank Average Actual Salaries vis-à-vis the Reference Market

The comparisons between the Bank’s salary data and those of the local reference market shows that the Bank’s position on the local market varies from country to country.

5.3 Consulting Firm’s Recommendations

5.3.1 Salary Structures

With a view to positioning the salaries of Bank locally recruited staff at the 75th percentile of the reference market in all duty stations, the Consulting Firm has made recommendations for adjustments ranging from 0% to 10.8%, as indicated in Table 5.3

Based on the proposed weighted averages for adjustment, the Consulting Firm has proposed for headquarters’ and Field Office staff the salary scales presented in Annex 1.

5.3.2 Actual Salaries

To position the averages of locally recruited Field Office staff salaries at the 75th percentile of the reference market in all the duty stations, the Consulting Firm has recommended weighted average increases ranging from 0% to 29.9% as indicated in the following Table.

Page | 16

Table 5.3: Salary Adjustments Proposed by the Consulting Firm

Weighted Average Salary Increases Salary Structure % Field Offices Adjustments % GS LP South Africa 9.1 24 25.1 Algeria 3.4 9.1 Angola 4.3 Burkina Faso 9.1 10.2 7.5 Cameroon 4.5 6.9 6.8 Cote d'Ivoire 0 5.1 Tunisia 0 3.0 Egypt 5.9 0 0 Ethiopia 5.2 0 17.9 Gabon 2.8 0 6.2 Ghana 8.4 5.8 29.9 Kenya 10.8 4 0 Madagascar 7.9 0 0 Malawi 5.2 0 5.4 Mali 0 0 0 Morocco 0 0 3.1 Mozambique 3.2 0 0 Nigeria 7.3 0 0 Uganda 5.6 0 0 DR Congo 8.4 10.8 13.7 Rwanda 2.1 0 0 Senegal 0 0 11.4 Sierra Leone 5.4 3.9 0 Sudan 7.6 0 Tanzania 9.6 0 0 Chad 1.9 1 0 Zambia 8.4 4.2 14

Page | 17

6. MANAGEMENT’S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 6.1 Headquarters Staff

Headquarters GS staff comprises staff who remained in Abidjan, staff transferred from Abidjan to Tunis and staff recruited in Tunis. As in previous years, the reference market remains that of Abidjan, though the Bank is still temporarily relocated to Tunis. Finally, as in the past and at the Board’s request, a comparison continues to be made with the Tunis market.

6.1.1 Positioning of Actual Salaries in relation to the Current Salary Scale

The disaggregation of actual salaries of headquarters’ locally recruited staff members as at 1 July 2010 has led to their classification into three categories, as shown in the following Table:

Table 6.1.1.1: Disaggregation of salaries in thousand CFA francs

Staff Below the Current Staff above the Current Staff Above the Grade Staffing Market Mid Point Mid Point Current Maxima Total 75th GS Staffing Percentile Number Average Number Average Number Average 1 1 7,658,452 1 8,809,845 2 6 7,658,452 6 4,891,998 0 0 3 14 7,658,452 13 5,694,520 0 1 15,227,079 4 20 9,407,058 14 7,106,330 1 7,220,922 5 15,738,231 5 95 11,340,511 52 8,065,574 27 12,422,909 16 16,821,918 6 117 14,242,142 72 10,902,427 38 15,589,478 7 18,628,170 7 150 16,970,229 111 13,908,490 38 18,547,778 1 27,138,064 8 54 22,139,041 45 17,119,738 9 23,437,463 0 457 313 113 31 100% 68% 25% 7%

 Staff whose salaries are below the mid point. The weighted averages of these staff members’ salaries are also below the 75th percentile of the reference market.

 Staff whose salaries are above the mid point.

 Staff whose salaries exceed the maxima: The Bank’s efforts to standardize the salaries of its GS staff continue to be fruitful, as shown in the Table below. The numbers will decline to 21 as at the end of the year as a result of the voluntary separation programme, normal departures and internal promotions.

Table 6.1.1.2 Trend Analysis of Staff with salaries above the Salary Scale

Yea 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 July r 2010 Staff 311 288 204 180 140 115 97 88 75 63 40 31

6.1.2 Gap between Bank Actual Salaries and the Market In 2010, the Bank took the following measures concerning headquarters GS staff:

 A salary structure adjustment of 5.5% to position the salary scale at the 75th percentile of the market;

Page | 18

 A weighted average actual salary increase of 7.5% for staff members whose salary is within the salary scale in order to improve its positioning on the reference market; and

For the current year, the study shows that Bank’s actual salary structure and salaries lag the 75th percentile by 5.1% and 16.3% respectively, for the following main reasons:

 The salary structure: fewer movements in the comparators’ scales.  Actual salaries: In 2010, the gap between the Bank’s weighted average actual salaries and the targeted 75th percentile of the market was 17.2%. But a 7.5% adjustment was recommended and approved. Furthermore, from January to July 2010 there were massive demographic changes at the Bank vis-à-vis comparators. The Bank recruited 39 new GS staff members at headquarters and promoted 14 GS staff members to higher grades in the same category. These staff members are generally recruited at the entry salaries for their respective grades. Furthermore, for the same period, the Bank recorded 26 departures of GS staff members, including17 under the voluntary separation programme, and all of whom had high salaries. On the other hand, the average salaries of these staff members with salaries exceeding the Bank’s ceiling remain, this year as well, far above the 75th percentile target of the reference market. A comparison shows the weighted average of salaries of this staff category to be 32.5% over the market already, which explains why no actual salary increase is envisaged for this staff category.

6.2 Field Office Staff

Locally-recruited Field Office staff comprise general services staff (GS) and professional staff (LP).

6.2.1 Bank’s Salary Structures

Since 1 July 2010, the Bank has a salary scale for each Field Office. These scales were formulated on the basis of the findings of the salary surveys conducted by the Consulting Firm. For 2011 projections, they have been used as benchmarks for comparison with the reference market. The analysis of data provided by the Consulting Firm shows that, in almost 90% of cases, the Bank’s salary structures are below the targeted 75th percentile of the different reference markets, as shown in Table 6.2.1 below:

Page | 19

Table 6.2.1: Differences between the Salary Structures and the Reference Market

Offices Percentage Differences South Africa 9.1 Algeria 3.4 Angola 4.3 Burkina Faso 9.1 Cameroon 4.5 Cote d'Ivoire 5.1 Tunisia -49.5 Egypt 5.9 Ethiopia 5.2 Gabon 2.8 Ghana 8.4 Kenya 10.8 Madagascar 7.9 Malawi 5.2 Mali -1.3 Morocco -1.6 Mozambique 3.2 Nigeria 7.3 Uganda 5.6 DR Congo 8.4 Rwanda 2.1 Senegal -2.2 Sierra Leone 5.4 Sudan 7.6 Tanzania 9.6 Chad 1.9 Zambia 8.4

6.2.2 Weighted Average Actual Salaries

The comparison reveals three situations:

Offices with weighted averages of staff salaries above the 75th percentile of the local reference market: For these offices, no salary adjustment is required on the basis of the market positioning.

Offices with weighted averages of the salaries of staff in a particular category (GS, LP) above or below the 75th percentile of the local reference market: for the salaries of these Offices above the 75th percentile of the local market, no salary adjustment on the basis of market positioning is required, while increases are required for those with salaries below the Bank’s target, to position them at the reference market target.

Page | 20

Offices with weighted average staff salaries below the 75th percentile of the local reference market: to position the salary averages of these offices at the set target, adjustments are required.

A comparison of the Bank’s positions in 2010, with those of 2009, shows that there are significantly fewer differences between the market and the Bank as shown in Table 6.2.2 below.

Table 6.2.2: Comparative Differences between Averages of Bank Actual Salaries and the Market 2009 % differences 2010 % differences Field Offices GS LP GS LP Algeria N/A N/A 9.1 South Africa N/A N/A 24 25.1 Angola N/A N/A N/A N/A Burkina Faso 7 11.6 10.2 7.5 Cameroon 5.9 3.8 6.9 6.8 Egypt -6.5 -7.2 -3.6 -5.2 Ethiopia -22.7 20.6 -1 17.9 Gabon 10.3 30.2 -1.5 6.2 Ghana 6.5 46.9 5.8 29.9 Kenya 7.3 -10.9 4 -11 Madagascar -11.7 -14.3 -5.9 -4.4 Malawi -6.8 0.9 -6.3 5.4 Mali -13.9 -10 -11.4 -12.2 Morocco -12.9 10.6 -11.1 3.1 Mozambique -22.5 -7.2 -14.7 -4.7 Nigeria 16.4 34.5 0 -5.2 Uganda -0.8 -19.4 -0.4 -10.2 DR Congo 10.8 31.5 10.8 13.7 Rwanda -14.5 -22.8 -5.5 -13.4 Senegal 1.2 23.1 -6.7 11.4 Sierra Leone -0.2 -30.6 3.9 -16.9 Sudan -26.5 N/A -20.9 N/A Tanzania -20 -25.2 -7.3 -17.6 Chad 7.7 -2.2 1 -4.1 Zambia 0.7 32.4 4.2 14

It should be noted that the conclusions concerned the overall weighted averages, given that disparities were noted between grades and at the individual level.

Page | 21

7 MEASURES ENVISAGED AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Following the Consulting firm’s analyses and taking into account the approved compensation framework, Management has made recommendations for salary adjustments for locally- recruited staff.

7.1 Salary Increase Matrix

The salary adjustments will be applied to staff members in accordance with the new performance evaluation system. In order to take into account internal equity issues, staff members at the lowest levels will, for equal performance, be awarded higher salaries than those of staff members in the highest ranges. Similarly, staff members with the strongest performances will be rewarded with higher percentages than other staff members.

As in the past, staff members who joined the Bank in the 4th quarter of 2010 (whose period of employment is too short for a meaningful performance evaluation) will not receive performance based increases. Also, only staff members evaluated in respect of 2010 and in service as at 1 January 2011 will benefit from the proposed salary adjustments.

7.2 Financial Impact

The proposed salary adjustments will result in an estimated payroll increase (salaries, pensions, dependency allowances, medical contributions) of six hundred and twenty four thousand, five hundred and twenty six Units of Account (UA 624,536) in order to achieve the targeted 75th percentile of the market approved by the Board of Directors.

Table 7.2: Financial Impact

Items Amount in UA Salary Increases 487,919 Pensions, Dependency Allowances, Medical Contributions 136,617 Total 624,536

7.3 Positioning of Headquarter based GS staff

Management divided this group of staff into two categories i.e. (a) staff based in Abidjan and (b) Staff based in Tunis. For the staff based in Abidjan, the comparison with the Abidjan market showed that the salary structure and the actual average salaries were below the Abidjan market by 5.1% and 14.96% respectively. For the staff based in Tunis the analysis shows that the salary structure and the actual average salaries were below the Abidjan market by 5.1% and 16.43% respectively. However, the salary structure and actual average salaries were above the Tunis market by 49.50% and 39.91% respectively. Out of the 390 total GS staff based in Tunis, 178 staff were relocated from Abidjan to Tunis and 212 staff have been recruited in Tunis.

In view of the underlying legal and policy framework (Policy Framework governing the Status of Staff in the context of the Temporary Relocation Extended Mission Regime (ADB/BD/WP/2003/77) approved on 18 July 2003 and the Compensation Framework (ADB/BD/WP/123/REV4) approved on 15 July 2008), the use of Abidjan as reference for the GS staff salary adjustment was and continues to remain valid. To change this methodology

Page | 22

would amount to introducing a new regime of expatriate status for the GS staff which may be financially more expensive for the Bank3.

The consultant recommended an average actual salary increase of 5.1% and a structure increase of 5.1%. However, considering, the Bank’s length of stay in Tunis and the change in demographics whereby all the new staff have been recruited in Tunis since the relocation, management proposes, for the staff based in Tunis, a 3.0% weighted average increase in actual salaries which is more or less equivalent to the estimated rate of inflation in the Tunisia4.

For the 36 staff based in Abidjan, Management proposes to offer a weighted average salary increase of 5.1% as recommended by the consultant.

Based on the fact that management is no longer recruiting new staff in Abidjan and that the current salary grid remains competitive vis-à-vis the Tunis market, Management proposes to maintain the salary scale at the 2010 levels.

7.4 Management's Recommendations 7.4.1 Based on the survey findings, and provisions of the Compensation Framework, Management proposes the following recommendations:

 Adjustment or the maintaining of the current salaries salary structure of HQ and FO locally recruited staff to the 75th percentile of the reference market as indicated in Table 5.3, in order to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

 Weighted average increases in the actual salaries of locally recruited staff, as indicated in Table 5.3, to position the Bank at the targeted 75th percentile of the local reference market;

 Approval of an amount six hundred and twenty four thousand, five hundred and twenty six Units of Account (UA 624,536) and its inclusion in the 2011 Budget to support the proposed adjustments and their impact on the payroll (salaries, pensions, dependency allowances and medical contributions), in order to achieve the 75th market percentile target as approved by the Board of Directors; and

 Adoption of the salary scales in Annex 1, effective 1 January 2011.

7.4.2 Management invites the Board of Directors to note that:-

 the proposed increases will be applied on the basis of the 2010 performance evaluation results and the positioning of each staff member concerned on the salary scale and, in the case of staff recruited in 2010, in proportion to the period of employment at the Bank. The proposed measures -will be effective 1 January 2011.

 a review for the total compensation framework will also be launched for locally recruited staff.

3 Legal Note issued by the General Counsel ( Ref ADB/BD/WP/2003/77/Add 1) and ADB/BD/WP/2010/137/Rev.1/Add.2 4 Source. ESTA March 2010. Page | 23

ANNEX1 Locally-Recruited Staff Salary Structures for 2011

Page | 24

Page | 25

Page | 26

Page | 27

Page | 28

Page | 29

Page | 30

Page | 31

Page | 32

Page | 33

Page | 34

Page | 35

Page | 36

Page | 37

ANNEX 2 Comparator Lists by Country

Offices Comparators Offices Comparators Algeria 1- Canadian Embassy Mali 1- Canadian Embassy 2- CitiBank 2- Embassy of Netherlands 3- Embassy of the United States 3- European Union 4- European Union 4- Orange Mali 5- GSK 5- United Nations 6- Nokia Siemens Networks 6- World Bank 7- Pfizer 8- United Nations 9- World Bank Angola 1- Banco African de Investimentos Morocco 1- Canadian Embassy 2- British American Tobacco 2- European Union 3- Chevron Oil 3- Nokia Siemens Networks 4- Coca-Cola 4- Pfizer 5- Embassy of United States 5- Procter & Gamble 6- European Union 6- United Nations 7- Halliburton 7- USAID 8- OPS 8- World Bank 9- United Nations 10- World Bank Burkina 1- Bank of Africa Mozambique 1- Banco de Mocambique Faso 2- Canadian Embassy 2- Canadian Embassy 3- Ecobank 3- Ernst & Young 4- Embassy of United States 4- European Union 5- European Union 5- Total Mozambique 6- Millennium Challenge Account 6- United Nations 7- UEMOA 7- USAID 8- United Nations 8- World Bank 9- World Bank Cameroon 1- CitiBank Nigeria 1- Africa Finance Corporation 2- Colgate-Palmolive 2- British American Tobacco 3- Embassy of Netherlands 3- Canadian Embassy 4- Embassy of United States 4- CitiBank 5- European Union 5- Embassy of Netherlands 6- GTZ 6- European Union 7- Price Waterhouse Coopers 7- GT Bank 8- Standard Chartered Bank 8- Halliburton 9- United Nations 9- Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Ltd 10- World Bank 10- Schlumberger 11- Stanbic IBTC Bank PLC 12- Unilever 13- United Nations 14- USAID 15- World Bank Chad 1- BEAC – Bank of Central African States Rwanda 1- Bralirwa 2- Swiss Cooperation 2- Canadian Embassy 3- Ecobank 3- DFID 4- Embassy of United States 4- Embassy of United States 5- European Union 5- European Union 6- United Nations 6- MTN 7- World Bank 7- United Nations 8- World Bank

Page | 38

DR Congo 1- Canadian Embassy Senegal 1- BCEAO 2- CitiBank 2- British American Tobacco 3- Embassy of Netherlands 3- Canadian Embassy 4- European Union 4- CitiBank 5- Stanbic Bank 5- Ecobank 6- United Nations 6- Embassy of Netherlands 7- USAID 7- European Union 8- Vodacom 8- International Development Research 9- World Bank Centre (CRDI) 9- Nokia Siemens Networks 10- OXFAM-GB 11- Pfizer 12- Philip Morris 13- United Nations 14- USAID 15- World Bank Côte d’Ivoire 1- ADM COCOA SIFCA Sierra Leone 1- Embassy of United States 2- Canadian Embassy 2- European Union 3- Chevron 3- National Revenue Authority 4- CitiBank 4- Rokel Commercial Bank 5- Ecobank 5- Sierra Leone Commercial Bank 6- Embassy of United States 6- Standard Chartered Bank 7- European Union 7- United Nations 8- Puma Energy 8- World Bank 9- United Nations World Bank Egypt 1- AFREXIMBANK South Africa 1- Arcelor Mittal 2- Canadian Embassy 2- Canadian Embassy 3- Embassy of Australia 3- CitiBank 4- Embassy of the Federal Republic of 4- Coca Cola Germany 5- Colgate Palmolive 5- Embassy of the Netherlands 6- DeBeers 6- European Union 7- Embassy of Netherlands 7- Fulbright Commission 8- European Union 8- General Dynamics 9- IBM 9- International Development Research Centre 10- Ranbaxy (IDRC) 11- Unilever 10- Nestle 12- United Nations 11- Nokia Siemens Networks 13- USAID 12- United Nations 14- Vale 13- USAID 15- World Bank 14- World Bank Ethiopia 1- African Union Sudan 1- Canadian Embassy 2- Department for International Development 2- Embassy of Netherlands (DFID) 3- Ericsson AB 3- Desert Locust Control 4- European Union 4- Embassy of Netherlands 5- MTN 5- Embassy of Sweden 6- United Nations 6- Ericsson 7- USAID 7- European Union 8- World Bank 8- International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) 9- Nokia Siemens Networks 10- Oilibya Ethiopia Ltd. 11- Save the Children 12- Tobacco Marketing Consultants 13- United Nations 14- USAID 15- World Bank

Page | 39

Gabon 1- CitiBank Tanzania 1- CitiBank 2- Elf Exploration 2- Embassy of Netherlands 3- Embassy of United States 3- European Union 4- European Union 4- Nokia Siemens Networks 5- Nestlé 5- Tanzania Communication Regulatory 6- UBA Bank Authority 7- United Nations 6- United Nations 8- World Bank 7- World Bank

Ghana 1- African Center for Economic Transformation Tunisia 1- Aventis-Sanofi (ACET) (TAR) 2- Baxter 2- African Mining Services 3- Canadian Embassy 3- AngloGold Ashanti 4- CitiBank 4- Australian High Commission 5- Crown Maghreb Can 5- CAL Bank Ltd 6- Embassy of Netherlands 6- Embassy of Netherlands 7- Embassy of United States 7- European Union 8- European Union 8- Golden Star Resources 9- IBM 9- Newmont Mining 10- NCR 10- TiGO 11- Nokia Siemens Networks 8- Unilever 12- Pfizer 9- United Nations 13- Unilever 10- USAID 14- United Nations 11- Vega Foods Corp 15- World Bank 15- World Bank Kenya 1- Barclays Bank Uganda 1- Bank of Uganda 2- British American Tobacco 2- Barclays Bank 3- British High Commission 3- British American Tobacco 4- Canadian Embassy 4- Embassy of Netherlands 5- CitiBank 5- Embassy of United States 6- Colgate Palmolive 6- European Union 7- European Union 7- MTN 8- Kenya Commercial Bank 8- United Nations 9- Libya Oil LTD 9- World Bank 10- Nokia Siemens Networks 11- Standard Chartered Bank 12- Unilever Kenya Ltd 13- United Nations 14- USAID 15- World Bank Madagascar 1- Banque Centrale de Madagascar Zambia 1- Bank of Zambia 2- European Union 2- Barclays Bank 3- United Nations 3- Canadian Embassy 4- USAID 10- Communication Authority of Zambia 5- World Bank 4- European Union 6- Zain 5- Stanbic Bank 6- United Nations 7- USAID 8- World Bank 9- ZESCO Malawi 1- British Embassy Zimbabwe 1. African Capacity Building Foundation 2- European Union 2. Embassy Of Australia 3- Privatisation Commission 3. Embassy Of Canada 4- Stancom Tobacco 4. Embassy Of Netherlands 5- United Nations 5- Embassy Of United States 6- USAID 6. European Union 7- World Bank 7- United Nations 8- World Bank

Page | 40