2013 RFR Maintenance Implementation Framework Final July 2013

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL RESOURCES (MINAGRI)
REPUBLIC OF RWANDA
Rural Feeder Roads

Maintenance
Implementation
Framework
July 2, 2013
Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance
Implementation Framework
July 2, 2013
This publication was produced for review by the Rwanda Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources
and the US Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Parsons Government Services
International within the scope of the USAID-funded Rwanda Rural Feeder Roads Improvement Program.
Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 2

Table of Contents
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................5
Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................................................6
Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................................7
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................9
Table 1: Development Partners’ Contribution to Rural Feeder Roads in Rwanda .......... 10
Chapter 1: Background................................................................................................................................. 12
1.1 Roads Governing Act, Policies and Strategies ........................................................................ 12
1.2 Description of and Classification Road Network in Rwanda .............................................. 12
Table 2: Road Classification in Rwanda ....................................................................................... 12
1.3 Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance Reference document ...................................................... 13
1.4 Central Government Institutions’ Roles and Responsibilities............................................. 14
Table 3: Roles and Responsibilities of Key GoR Institutions ................................................. 14
Chapter 2: Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance in Rwanda ..................................................................... 16
2.1 Type of Maintenance .................................................................................................................... 16
a) Recurrent/Routine Maintenance............................................................................................ 16
b) Periodic Maintenance ............................................................................................................... 16
c) Emergency/Urgent Maintenance ............................................................................................ 16
2.2 District Role in Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance................................................................. 17
Chapter 3: National, Regional and International Lessons Learned..................................................... 18
3.1 Lessons Learned from Rwanda Projects and/or Initiatives .................................................. 18
a) RTDA’s Experience: Community Participation Associations.......................................... 18
b) Helpage’s Experience with Labor-Based Roads Rehabilitation ....................................... 20
c) Other Community-Based Participation in Road Maintenance ........................................ 21
3.2 Lessons Learned from Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Countries ...................................... 22
a) Rural Road Maintenance Must be Supported by the Central Government ................ 22
b) Involve Local Government Early and Often ....................................................................... 22

c) Include the Private Sector When Possible .......................................................................... 23
d) Explore Multiple Funding Streams Simultaneously ............................................................ 24
Chapter 4: Proposed Recommendations for MINAGRI’ Sustainable Rural Feeder Roads
Maintenance Strategy .................................................................................................................................... 25
4.1 Existing Gaps and Challenges ..................................................................................................... 25
4.2 Proposed Recommendations...................................................................................................... 26
a) Human Resources and Capacity Building ............................................................................ 26
Table 4: Summary of Proposed Necessary Human Resources And Capacity Building... 27
b) Training, Technical Assistance and Institutional Development ...................................... 28
Table 5: Summary of Training, Technical Assistance and Institutional Development ..... 28
c) Funding ........................................................................................................................................ 29
d) Other Recommendations........................................................................................................ 30
ANNEX 1: Rwanda Roads Network Map ............................................................................................. 31
ANNEX 2: Sustainable Rural Road Maintenance – Checklist .............................................................. 32
ANNEX 3: Asset Management and Planning ........................................................................................... 34
ANNEX 4: Typical Rural Feeder Roads Training Topics and Target Audience .............................. 35
ANNEX 5: Guidance for the Formation of Community-Participation Organization /Supervision
and Quality Control ...................................................................................................................................... 39
ANNEX 6: Typical Logistics and Small Maintenance Equipment Needed by Community-Base
Cooperative for RFR Maintenance ............................................................................................................ 41
ANNEX 7: Selected References ................................................................................................................. 42
DISCLAIMER
The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the
US Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the constructive guidance by the Rural
Feeder Roads Sub-Sector Working Group, Agricultural Sector Working Group (ASWG),
Rwanda Local Development Support Fund (RLDSF) and Road Maintenance Fund (RMF),
consulted Districts and all the stakeholders during the process of developing this framework
document. Particular gratitude is due to the US Agency for International Development (USAID)
Rwanda Rural Feeder Roads Improvement Program with the support from Parsons
Government Services International, Inc., and Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources
(MINAGRI) for their time, support, contextual conversations, and reviews.

Acronyms and Abbreviations
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

AASHTO American Association of State Transportation Officials
DCP Dynamic Cone Penetrometer
GoR Government of Rwanda
EU European Union
EDPRS Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HIMO Haute Intensité Main d’ Oeuvre (Labor Based Wor ks)
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MINICOM Ministry of Trade and Industry
MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture
MINECOFIN Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning
MININFRA Ministry of Infrastructure
MINALOC Ministry of Local Government
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NBR National Bank of Rwanda
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
O&M Operations and Maintenance
ONATRACOM Office Nationale des Transports en Commun
RMF Road Maintenance Fund
RLDSF Rwanda Local Development Support Fund
RMS Road Maintenance Strategy
RFR Rural Feeder Road
RRA Rwanda Revenue Authority
RTDA The Roads and Transport Development Agency
SME Small and Medium Enterprise
TIG Travail d’Intérêt Général
USAID US Agency for International Development
VUP Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme
WB World Bank

Executive Summary
This Rural Feeder Road (RFR) Maintenance Implementation Framework was developed for the
Rwanda Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources in order to provide a common structure
for the planning, budgeting, implementation and monitoring of rural feeder road maintenance in
Rwanda. The Framework is necessary because of the large number of Development Partners
committed to building Rural Feeder Roads in Rwanda. For these investments to yield
sustainable results the roads must be maintained. The responsibility of maintaining rural feeder
roads in Rwanda falls primarily to the Districts. A common framework for the maintenance of
Rural Feeder Roads will provide Districts, no matter who is paying for the rehabilitation of
Rural Feeder Roads, a common approach to maintaining those roads, ensuring that the
economic and social benefits of the roads extend to the target population over time.
This document discusses the legal foundation for Rural Feeder Roads maintenance in Rwanda,
as well as the legal foundation of a community-based maintenance approach. It also explores
Rwanda’s experience to date with RFR maintenance, followed by international lessons learned.
The approach laid forth in this document is practical, efficient, and measurable. Its
recommendations are focused on short-, medium- and long-term solutions in three key areas:
(i) building the capacity of the road maintainers; (ii) improving the ability of government
institutions to plan, budget, and implement, and monitor the required maintenance; and (iii)
how the required maintenance can be funded.
In the capacity building area, the Framework makes specific training and technical assistance
recommendations for the Districts and Sectors, focused on the government engineers who will
be responsible for managing the RFR maintenance programs. It also makes recommendations
regarding mobilizing and training the communities, as well as the road contractors and
engineering firms who will carry out the initial RFR rehabilitation.
In the institutional development area, the Framework advocates for building local government’s
capacity to perform efficient and timely maintenance, which means that local governments must
know how to plan and carry out the maintenance at the right time, preserving investments with
cost-effective solutions, thereby utilizing available funding resources in the most efficient
manner.
In the funding area, the document urges exploring multiple sources of financial support,
including funds from the central government, grants or loans from Development Partners, local
revenue generation at the District level, and support from the private sector. In order to
ensure the appropriate allocation and availability of funds, different levels of government should
regularly coordinate the roles and responsibilities of RFR maintenance. This coordination
includes securing the Districts’ commitment, through Memoranda of Understanding, to RFR
maintenance for newly constructed or rehabilitated roads. Additionally, there should be a
yearly maintenance plan and dedicated budget for RFR maintenance at the District level. The

Districts yearly Performance Plans should include RFR maintenance, including the allocation and
disbursement of maintenance funds based in past performance.

Introduction
Agriculture is a critical element of the Rwandan economy. Over 90 percent of households

practice some form of crop cultivation while the sector serves as the principal source of
employment for nearly 80 percent of the labor force and accounts for about 40 percent of
gross domestic product (GDP). Nevertheless, agricultural productivity remains extremely low
and most Rwandans farm at a subsistence level. The Government of Rwanda (GoR)’s national
agriculture strategy seeks to transform the sector from its current subsistence nature to
market-oriented production that encourages diversification to nontraditional crops such as rice,
maize, and beans because of their potential contribution to exports, as well as food security.
The GoR’s Vision 20201 recognizes that agricultural transformation is “only one element of the
economic strategy, which aims to create more diversified and competitive economy 2”, as it also
requires, among other critical aspects, the promotion of infrastructure development to achieve
sustainable economic growth.
The Rwanda Rural Feeder-Road Development (RRFD) program, MINAGRI’S comprehensive
national rural feeder road development program, was developed as a means to improve rural
productivity and diversification of market-oriented agricultural commodities. It further
strengthens the national commitments for decentralization and lays out the important
possibilities for beneficiary-centered and lasting rural development where availability of rural
feeder roads will significantly speed-up a market-oriented agriculture productivity. While a
significant amount of resources have been invested by GoR (national or central level
government) and Development Partners in agricultural modernization programs, the
maintenance of rural feeder roads was identified as a missing link that required special
attention3.
As such, appropriate and timely maintenance of roads became a critical aspect to be addressed,
placing Districts and communities at the center of the proposed way forward, as they are the
ones benefiting the most from properly maintained roads. When maintenance is not
undertaken, well-built roads are bound to deteriorate and ultimately become impassable.
“The cost of rehabilitation is many times higher than that of maintenance. It has been shown
that neglecting maintenance completely and carrying out only rehabilitation when this is
required is almost 4 times more expensive than carrying out the necessary maintenance works”
(Rwanda Road Maintenance Strategy, 2008). Therefore, developing this Rural Feeder Roads
Maintenance Implementation Framework became of critical importance for MINAGRI’s RFR
Policy Action, ensuring that at District level (i) maintenance projects have common and
1
Vision 2020 is the key socio-economic policy document that serves as the basis for the development of national
and sectoral policies and strategies.
2
Refer to the Rwanda Vision 2020, page 3.
3
Refer to Rwanda Rural Feeder-road Development Program RRFD-Program, MINAGRI, September 2012.

coordinated approaches; and (ii) Districts authorities have plans to systematically address
maintenance.
To date, as illustrated in the table below, Development Partners’ contribution to improve a
total of 2,300 km of feeder roads across the country is of about $145 million. Much still needs
to be completed to develop a common and sustainable approach to RFR maintenance.
Table 1: Development Partners’ Contribution to Rural Feeder Roads in Rwanda
DEVELOPMENT KM OF CONTRIBUTION DISTRICTS

PARTNERS FEEDER
ROADS
Eight districts4
USAID
800 $ 40 million (Gatsibo, Kamonyi, Kayonza,
(Period 2011-2016)) Nyabihu, Nyagatare, Nyanza,
Ruhango, Rwamagana)
Five districts6
The Netherlands 550 $ 13 million5 (Burera, Gicumbi, Musanze,
Nyamasheke, Rusizi)
Four districts
World Bank (WB)
250 $ 45 million (Gisagara, Karongi,
(2012-2015 Period)
Nyamasheke, Rwamagana)
Seven districts
European Union
(EU) 700 $ 47 million7 (Bugesera, Huye, Muhanga,
Ngoma, Ngororero, Rubavu,
(2013-2017 Period)
Rulindo)
TOTAL 2,300 $145 million
Data source: Rural Feeder Roads - Sector Policy Support Programme (SPSP), EU Delegation to the
Republic of Rwanda, Formulation Study-Final Report, March 2012.
Because of the multiplicity of Development Partners, MINAGRI requested the drafting of this
Framework, which was developed within MINAGRI’s Common Framework of Engagement for
Feeder Roads, and as a complement to the RLDSF RFR Maintenance Module, which supports
the formulation of MINAGRI’s Policy Action and Strategy.
This Framework is divided in 4 chapters. The first chapter provides background information
looking at Acts, Policies and Strategies governing roads, description and classification of the
road network in Rwanda, RFR maintenance documents, central government institutions’ roles
4
The Program’s initial target of 1,000 km in 12 districts was reduced to 800 km in 8 districts.
5
Contribution in Euro is 10 million.
6
The Netherlands Embassy has supported, through NGOs, feeder road rehabilitation in five districts since 2002. A
third phase of this assistance is under formulation.
7
Contribution in Euro is 36 million.

and responsibilities. The second chapter describes RFR Maintenance in Rwanda, addressing the
type of maintenance and the Districts’ role. Chapter 3 highlights lessons-learned at the national,
regional and international level; and finally, the fourth chapter offers recommendations for
MINAGRI’s Sustainable RFR Maintenance Strategy, focusing on short-term, medium-term and
long-term endeavors in the areas of Human Resources and Capacity Building, including Training
and Technical Assistance (TA), as well as dedicated funding sources.

Chapter 1: Background
1.1 Roads Governing Act, Policies and Strategies

In Rwanda, the road sector realm is governed by:
 Law No. 55/2011 of 14/12/2011 which regulate the road network in Rwanda and
determine its, reserves, classification and management.
 Rwanda National Construction Industry Policy, Ministry of Infrastructure, Republic of
Rwanda, August, 2009. The main driving force of this Policy is to develop an effective
institutional framework for sustainable infrastructure development and maintenance in
the construction and civil engineering sectors for buildings and transportation.
 Transport Sector Policy, Ministry of Infrastructure, Republic of Rwanda, December
2008, which is inspired by the Vision 2020, the Economic Development and Poverty
Reduction Strategy (EDPRS), the National Investment Strategy and the Medium Term
Expenditure Framework. The policy defines the vision of the Government for the sector
as well as its strategic orientations, which will guide its actions during the next five years.
 Rwanda Road Maintenance Strategy, Transport Sub-sector, Ministry of Infrastructure,
May 2008, which describes: the type of maintenance, a strategic framework and
priorities, financing/budget, procurement/contract management, community
participation/poverty reduction, and coordination of road maintenance works. The
document calls for a survey of un-classified road network on a district-by-district basis
to obtain accurate data about the length and location of routes within each district
which will be identified and categorized as gravel, earth roads or tracks.
1.2 Description of and Classification Road Network in Rwanda

Article 3 of Law No. 55/2011 of 14/12/2011 governing roads in Rwanda classified the road
network summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Road Classification in Rwanda
CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION
National roads  International roads that link Rwanda with neighboring countries;
 Roads that link Districts or that link a District and the City of Kigali;
 Roads that link areas of tourist significance and facilities of national or
international importance such as ports and airports.
Districts Class 1  Roads headquarters within the same District or those roads that are used
within the same Sector.
Districts Class 2  Arterial roads that connect District roads to rural community centers,
which are inhabited as an agglomeration.

CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION
Specific roads  Specifically constructed to connect national roads or District roads to Kigali
City and other urban areas to the agricultural production, natural resources
processing or to tourist sites.
Rwanda has a road network of about 12,819 km, out of which 1,256 km have been classified as
paved national roads, 1,687 km as unpaved national roads, 38 km as District Class 1 paved
roads, 1,838 km as District Class 1 unpaved roads, and 8,000 as unclassified roads. While official
estimates indicate that the unclassified road or rural feeder roads (RFR) cover about 63% of the
total network, unofficial data indicates that the unclassified road network are about the double
of this figure8, which according to the World Bank 2010 Rwandan Infrastructure Assessment,
100% of them are in poor condition.
Rwanda Road Class

National Road - Paved National Road - Unpaved
Kigali & District Class 1 - Paved Kigali & District Class 1 - Unpaved
Unclassified Roads
10%
13%
0%
14%
63%
1.3 Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance Reference document

In an effort to support the implementation of decentralization, a RFR Maintenance Module9 was
developed (validated and adopted since April 201210), among others modules, within the
framework of the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manual. The module describes the
responsibilities of the local government authorities (District, Sector, and Cell) for the
maintenance of rural roads, providing a step-by-step description and examples required to
8
RTDA, 2012
9
The set of modules were elaborated in the context of joint donor support for the implementation of RLDSF’s
Capacity Building Plan.
10
The module was developed by RLDSF with the German Financial Cooperation. The current version of the
module is dated December 2012.

conduct carry out effective RFR maintenance, and examples on how to calculate maintenance
costs. The manual also includes useful templates for RFR maintenance implementation11.
This Rural Roads Maintenance Implementation Framework was designed to complement the
RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance Module and to:
 Avoid duplication of efforts among development partners;
 Optimize the use of resources within government institutions and among development
partners;
 Coordinate approaches among development partners implementing RFR activities in the
Districts;
 Avoid communication challenges at the District level due to competing Rural Roads
Maintenance approaches and training manuals.
1.4 Central Government Institutions’ Roles and Responsibilities12

There is no central or national ministry or agency principally responsible for RFR, but several
national level ministries have important stakes and interests, among them MINAGRI,
MININFRA, MINICOM, and MINALOC, which supervises and monitors the functioning of local
administrative structures specifically the Provinces, Cities, Districts, Sectors, and Cells.
The country’s Transport Sector consists of four key institutions, including Ministry of
Infrastructure (MININFRA), RTDA, Road Maintenance Fund (RMF), Rwanda Civil Aviation
Authority and Office Nationale des Transports en Commun (ONATRACOM).
Table 3: Roles and Responsibilities of Key GoR Institutions
KEY GoR
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
INSTITUTIONS
MININFRA Responsible for establishing policy, planning, and monitoring and evaluation
(M&E) for the Transport Sector.
MINAGRI Establishes policy guidance, planning, assessment, resource allocation,

regulation, brokering modern and commercialized farming and feeder road
construction plus routine repair and maintenance.
RMF Provide funding for National and District Class 1 roads.
RTDA13 Manage and control (a) national roads network with a view of achieving road
11
While the Module is at its earlier stages of implementation, it will certainly be subjected to revisions as lessons
learned are captured at district level.
12
The role and responsibilities for RFR maintenance at the local and central level are described in RLDSF Rural
Road Maintenance Module.

KEY GoR
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
INSTITUTIONS
safety and maintenance, and (b) waterways and transport infrastructure in
Rwanda.
Through the District Support Units, provides technical assistance on
transportation infrastructures to the Districts.
13
RTDA emerged from different Transport projects funded by European Union, World Bank and African
Development Bank to constitute a unique Agency working as single project implementation unit.

Chapter 2: Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance in Rwanda
2.1 Type of Maintenance

In accordance with the RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance Module, three (3) types of maintenance are
adopted:
a) Recurrent/Routine Maintenance
It is carried out on a regular basis once or more frequently per year on a section of a road,
particularly before and after the rainy seasons. Tasks include:
 Grass cutting and vegetation control
 Removing small landslips
 Cleaning/re-shaping of side drains
 De-silting of culverts and channels
 Repairing potholes
 Maintenance of signs and traffic safety
 Uprooting of vegetation from roadway across bridges
 Clearing of flood debris, etc.
b) Periodic Maintenance
It is recommended to be scheduled every 3 years (at intervals of 1 to 5 years according to
RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance Module). Periodic Maintenance involves more comprehensive and
costly activities such as:
 Reshaping or re-gravelling of the road surface
 Repair of culverts,
 Re-surfacing and major repair or reconstruction of cross-drainage structures.
 May require additional design
 Specific form of periodic maintenance is spot maintenance: works are carried out on
short sections (typically 1 km or less) of roads in order to ensure a reasonable level of
passability.
Occasionally required on a section of road after a certain period. Normally larger scale,
requires specialist equipment and skilled resources, and usually need the temporary deployment
of these resources on the particular road section.
c) Emergency/Urgent Maintenance
Emergency Maintenance is only mandatory in response to a particular unforeseeable event, e.g.
floods, land slips or other emergencies. The work required varies in accordance with the event
but is usually required immediately to re-open immediately the road, which would have become
impassable, to normal traffic.

The following factors affect the composition and costs associated with the maintenance of the
road network: topography, weather, volume of traffic, level of service standards, and age of the
infrastructure. When traffic increased up to more than 200 Annual Average Daily Traffic
(AADT), it is necessary to pave the roads.
The cost estimate of each type of maintenance is presented in RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance
Module 14.
2.2 District Role in Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance

Districts are the implementation institution for routine maintenance of National and District
Class 1 roads in their jurisdictions using community association under RTDA management
funded by RMF. Revenues from fuel levy and road toll levied on foreign registered vehicles are
collected by Rwanda Revenue Authority (RRA) and transferred into the RMF account held in
the National Bank of Rwanda (NBR).
The maintenance of these roads is carried out based on yearly renewable performance based
contracts between the community association and the District. The field inspection and
verification of the completed maintenance tasks are done by the Sector Agronomist under the
supervision of the District Engineer15 or Engineer in charge of Infrastructure.
Periodic and emergency maintenance are carried out by road construction contractors under
the direct supervision of RTDA using by RMF. No funding is provided for District Class 2 and
unclassified roads maintenance from RMF.
Districts receive budget support from RLDSF (with no earmarked budget line for RFR
maintenance). Districts are responsible for the maintenance of RFR (District Class 2 or
unclassified roads) within their jurisdictions. It is up to the District, through the District’s
Counsel to decide the allocation of funds. At this point in time, RFR maintenance rank low
among Districts’ priorities. For the fiscal year 2012-2013, Districts will start receiving
earmarked budget for RFR maintenance from RLDSF who will assist them in programming and
planning.
14
Refer to pages 18 – 19: Financial Implications of O&M, RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance Module, December 2012.
15
District Engineers are supervised by the Vice-Mayor of Economic Development and Finance.

Chapter 3: National, Regional and International Lessons Learned
3.1 Lessons Learned from Rwanda Projects and/or Initiatives

a) RTDA’s Experience: Community Participation Associations
RTDA devolves routine maintenance of national and district class 1 roads to community
participation associations. This devolution of responsibility has the following advantages:
 Creation of job opportunities to local community people, thus supporting poverty
alleviation;
 Imparts a sense of community ownership for road infrastructure;
 Builds the skills and knowledge of local people regarding road works through training;
Communities involved in routine road maintenance carry out a number of tasks, including:
 Cutting bushes on both sides of the road at a distance not exceeding 5m from drainage
structures or shoulders;
 Cutting and uprooting grass on the shoulders of both sides of the road and in the
damaged masonry ditches on the road;
 Cleaning and removing any debris and silt in drainage structures and under the culverts
and bridges;
 Cleaning and removing all road obstacles and landslides of up to 50m3/Km from the
road16;
 Keeping the road passable and operational at all times by removing obstacles like fallen
trees, rocks, or dead animals;
 Backfilling of small potholes with gravel and patching stones.
The monthly routine maintenance Cost/Km is 33,750 RWF, which is 405,000 RWF /Km/year,
or about $675 /Km/year.
Rwandan Public Procurement Law (Article 21 and Article 58) forms the legal basis for
contracting a community participation organization to carry out road maintenance. Currently,
273 road cooperatives have been formed across all Districts for routine maintenance on
national roads.
Each road maintenance team has an Executive committee of 7 members (chair, vice/chair,
treasurer, secretary and 3 committee members) and an Inspection committee of 5 members
(chair, vice/chair, secretary and 2 committee members). At this point in time, 8 to 9 members
have been trained for road maintenance. According to the law, the elected chairman of the
executive committee is a signatory to the contract and the election process is monitored and
approved at the Sector level. The maintenance contract is in Kinyarwanda. The signatories of
16
Any extra volume of landslides beyond 50 m3/Km will be contracted separately and the unit price/m3 is fixed to
4500 RWF/m3.

the contract are the elected Chair Person of the Community Participation Association, and the
District. The contract amount is BoQ-based with a one-year renewable duration. Work begins
after the order of service is issued. Payment is upon completion of work and at the end of each
calendar month.
The key stakeholders for the development of a Maintenance Implementation Framework are
RTDA, RMF, the Provinces, Districts, and Sectors. Their roles and responsibilities are described
below:
Province
 Monitors routine maintenance works in the province;
 Consolidates all maintenance methodologies from the Districts and prepares an
appropriate methodology for road maintenance works in the Province;
 Settles any disputes beyond District level;
 Advocates for and builds the capacity of Community Participation Associations aiming to
evolve into Small/Medium Enterprises (SMEs);
 Provides quality assurance and quality control of the process.
Sector
 Controls and supervises contracted maintenance works on a daily basis;
 Monitors the community association’s activities and advises them on acquiring essential
services like Mutuelle de santé;
 Approves the road maintenance works prior to payment; and
 Ensures all community participation members are paid accordingly.
District
 Signs contracts with Community Participation Associations for routine maintenance;
 Provides daily control and supervision of routine maintenance works on entire road
networks in the District;
 Approves and pays the invoices submitted by the Sector/s for payment;
 Settles any disputes within the Community Participation Association;
 Informs the other stakeholders of any issue that is beyond control of the District; and
 Provides quality assurance and quality control of the process.
RMF
 Secures funds for the routine roads maintenance;
 Pays the invoices approved and submitted by RTDA;
 Disburses funds for road maintenance to the Districts;
 Funds training of Community Participation Association for road maintenance works;
 Informs and updates RTDA regarding available funds for road maintenance for budgeting
and planning purposes;

 Monitors and evaluates routine maintenance works.
RTDA
 Controls and supervises all road maintenance works under execution;
 Devises and provides technical assistance and training to Community Participation
Associations17;
 Approves submitted invoices by the Districts for disbursement by RMF;
 Addresses all issues submitted by the Province regarding the execution of the program;
 Consolidates field reports and prepares maintenance progress reports every 3 months
to share with all stakeholders;
 Conducts at least one Provincial meeting every 3 months to assess the progress of
maintenance work;
 Evaluates the performance of Community Participation Associations before renewing
their contracts;
 Terminates contracts of Community Participation Associations that have failed to
execute the contracted works for 2 consecutive months
 Distributes road chainages18 (PK) to every Community Participation Association
according to their area of residence along the road network;
 Reviews the unit cost of maintenance works per Km per year;
b) Helpage’s Experience with Labor-Based Roads Rehabilitation
Helpage is a Non-Governmental Organization that has been implementing RFR projects with
funding from the Government of the Netherlands. They have rehabilitated approximately 520
Km of RFR using HIMO (labor-based) approaches in 5 Districts (Burera, Gicumbi, Musanze,
Nyamasheke, Rusizi) from 2003 to 2012. To guarantee the sustainability of the roads, Helpage,
in collaboration with the District governments, has formed 72 cooperatives at Sector level,
including maintenance specific associations19. They have trained 144 technicians (about 2 per
cooperative) who have engaged in the maintenance of 600 Km of roads, building communities’
ownership and their effective participation. Aside from providing technical training and
assistance, Helpage also has provided organizational development assistance to these
cooperatives, focusing particularly on strengthening their management capabilities.
Cooperatives’ activities are funded through micro-finance systems.
17
The capacity building for Community Participation Associations includes training on the following topics: road
functions and structure (pavement, drainages, bridges); road maintenance techniques; explanation of the technical
terms for the parts of a road; how to backfill a pothole on both paved and un paved road; the material
characteristics necessary for road construction. The trainings are implemented through field demonstrations and
classroom lessons.
18
length as measured using a chain or tape
19
Cooperatives members were formed using the following criteria: proximity to the road, age, gender and
experience in RFR.

c) Other Community-Based Participation in Road Maintenance
The following sections highlight Rwandan initiatives used by the Districts to maintain feeder
roads.
Umuganda
In Rwanda, there is a monthly mandatory community service day on the last Saturday of each
month from 8:00 AM to 11:00 AM. This mandatory community service is called Umuganda,
which means community service. The day is called “umunsi w’umuganda”, meaning
contribution made by the community and is designed to be a day of service, building the
country by citizens themselves. By law, all able-bodied persons above the age of 18 and below
65 are expected to participate in volunteer community work. Umuganda Community works are
an initiative that brings leaders and the citizens together. (Rwanda Governance Board, 2012).
Umuganda offers an effective system of RFR creation and maintenance in various Districts
and/or Sectors (SEA, 2012: 43). Umuganda was enacted by Law n°53/2007 of 17/11/2007. It is
done on the last Saturday of every month
Travail d’Intérêt Général (TIG)
TIG is a Rwandan program allowing people found guilty of participating in the genocide to serve
all or part of their sentences doing community service. TIG, “Travail d’Intérêt Général,” is a
French acronym that means “works of general service.” The program is normally referred to as
community service. TIG has contributed significantly to road rehabilitation and maintenance
(SEA, 2012: 43). The GoR blends justice and reconciliation by giving the Genocide perpetrators
the opportunity to confess, serve their community, and receive some leniency. They spend
some time in prison and the rest in the community as they are actively engaged in the works of
common interest. According to the Ministry of Internal Security in 2013, Rwanda has saved
more than RWF40 billion through TIG as an alternative penalty to imprisonment.
Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP)
The Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) aims to eradicate extreme poverty by 2020,
focusing on growth, job creation and exports generation. The VUP, however, starts as a pilot
covering one of the poorest Imirenge in each district, operating solely in specific rural areas. Its
prime objective is to release the productive capacities of the poor and extremely poor,
supporting a pro-poor growth for job and exports program. It focuses on important cross-
sectoral actions and programs (i.e. environment, water and sanitation, health and population,
social protection, youth, and other cross-cutting issues), and intends to foster improvements in
agriculture productivity as well as manufacturing and service activities by off-farm employment
opportunities.20 Road rehabilitation and maintenance are among projects implemented in VUP
sectors when decided by the sector counsel. Every VUP beneficiary household is required to
20
Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy, 2013 – 2018 (EDPRS2), The Republic Of Rwanda.

receive payments through an account with a financial institution (there can be no cash payments
from government according to law passed in 2008)21.
3.2 Lessons Learned from Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Countries

More than a decade of experience has demonstrated that under suitable conditions, labor based
road construction and maintenance has financial and economic advantages and need not have
technical disadvantages. There are a number of key lessons to be derived from the experiences
of other countries in rural road maintenance.
a) Rural Road Maintenance Must be Supported by the Central Government
The development of country capability for labor-based rural road construction and maintenance
is a long-term endeavor (e.g. 10 years) requiring a lasting commitment from the government.
Successful labor-based rural road maintenance plans rely on large up-front investments in
technical assistance and training to develop managerial as well as technical skills.22 In each
instance of successful labor-based road maintenance programs, governments have made clear
policy commitments to fund the maintenance.
Even in countries that draw upon multiple funding sources for rural road maintenance, such as
Nepal,23 the central government still provides annual block allocations to district governments
for infrastructure works, some of which are specifically dedicated to road maintenance. The
same holds true in Malawi. Funding from the central government means that a policy decision
has been taken during the planning and budgeting process in order to account for the
maintenance of rural roads.
When funding and operations of rural road maintenance has been made the sole responsibility
of the local government, such as in Nigeria and Tanzania, there have been serious funding
problems that have jeopardized the success of their rural road maintenance programs.
b) Involve Local Government Early and Often
While funding of rural road maintenance should not fall only on the shoulders of local
government, local government’s early involvement in the planning and design of road
maintenance programs is essential for success. One of the key reasons Malawi’s road
maintenance program is successful is because the District Councils assume responsibility for the
maintenance of the roads by providing the necessary training and supervision of the
maintenance clubs. However, the program might have been even more successful if local
governments had been included from the beginning, planning stages. As it is, local authorities
were sometimes unprepared to handle the resulting large increase in maintenance
21
Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP), Annual Report 2009/10 Published by Rwanda Local Development
Support Fund, January 2011.
22
Rural Roads in Sub-Saharan Africa - Lessons from World Bank Experience, World Bank Technical Paper Number
141, Africa Technical Department Series, page 34.
23
Rural Road Maintenance - Sustaining the Benefits of Improved Access, ILO 2007, page 93.

requirements. Recent projects have tried to include local authorities in the planning and route
selection process so they understand the necessity of careful planning for rural road
maintenance24.
c) Include the Private Sector When Possible
In Kenya, the World Bank-funded Rural Access Road Program (RARP) has paved the way for
other countries to implement rural road programs with labor based methods25. The
Government of Kenya established 45 construction units in 26 districts. Road maintenance is the
responsibility of the District Engineer, who is assisted by 1 or 2 inspectors and by 1 to 4
overseers depending on the length of roads in the district. Each construction unit undertook
labor-based road construction with equipment provided for the hauling of gravel. Each unit was
headed by an inspector and employed 250 casual laborers, divided among seven sub-units (one
administrative, two earthworks, two drainage, one graveling and one quarry). A senior
inspector was in charge of four units, and reported to the Rural Access Roads Engineer in
Headquarters. The organization proved effective and cost efficient. Routine maintenance is
executed using the length-man system with local people acting as contractors and taking care of
1.0 to 2.0 kilometers of road. Each contractor is paid the equivalent of 3 days a week of casual
labor with the consent of the overseer who ensures that all maintenance work needed has
been performed. In order to avoid discrepancies, the Ministry has started to develop
productivity standards for the contractors.
Ghana presents another example in Sub-Saharan Africa where labor-based rehabilitation has
been carried out by private contractors26. In 1985, with the assistance of an IDA credit and
UNDP/ILO technical assistance, the young Department of Feeder Roads (DFR) started
implementing a unique project using local labor-based contractors. A pilot project in the
Western Region (cocoa areas) was first established in 1986. This program included a 23 week
course for contractors, supervisors, and DFR staff, all of whom were being exposed to this
technology for the first time. During the training, the participants completed the rehabilitation
of a 10 kilometer road at a training model site, using labor from local villages. At the end of the
training the contractors were provided with 4-year loans to buy their own set of tools and light
equipment to carry out labor-based contracts. The equipment comprised a tipper truck,
tractors and trailers, pedestrian vibratory roller, water tank, water pump, and a complete set of
hand tools. Following the training stage each of the contractors was awarded a 5 kilometer trial
contract to allow DFR to assess their performance. The contractors performed well during the
trial contract (2 km per month) and received a standard contract for 25 kilometers (one year).
After three courses, 21 contractors have been trained with a potential output of approximately
500 kilometers per year.
24
Rural Roads in Sub-Saharan Africa - Lessons from World Bank Experience, World Bank Technical Paper Number
141, Africa Technical Department Series, page 37
25
Ibid., page 30
26
UNDP/ILO, "Feeder Roads Improvement in Ghana,”1990.

A third example of successful use of the private sector in rural road maintenance is in Malawi.
The European Union-funded Income Generating Public Works Program (IGPWP) uses a village-
based system modeled around a road maintenance club and the lengthman system where one
person is responsible for the annual routine maintenance of one kilometer of a road. The clubs
are formed at the village level where District officials, District Councils and Village
Development Committees help establish the clubs. The club members are drawn from villages
next to the road, with preference being given to those living next to the road and having
participated in the rehabilitation of the road. Each kilometer of the road is assigned to one
person. Local government instructs the club members on routine maintenance techniques
before they start work, and provides them with subsidized tools. The road maintenance
program pays half of the cost of the tools, and the members pay the other half in installments.
Every year, the club enters into a contract that details all the activities each member is
expected to do on a monthly basis, as well as the conditions and requirements for
performance-based payment. A Community Road Foreman (CRF) helps the local government
supervise the club members’ activities on a daily basis. Additionally, the District Roads
Supervisor (DRS) visits each maintenance club at least twice every month.
These types of community-based systems have also been successful outside of Africa. For
instance, in Cambodia, the Asian Development Bank has helped the Government of Cambodia
develop a system in which the government assesses maintenance needs and the level of
resources required to meet those needs. The maintenance needs are then divided into discrete
civil works contracts and awarded to community-based “contractors” who have been trained
for the purpose. The workers are paid based depending the amount of work they complete.
This system has provided a transparent system for the use of maintenance funds. Similarly, in
Peru, the Rural Roads Project (RRP) has set up a cost-effective routine maintenance system
based on contracting out labor-intensive maintenance works to micro-enterprises, local
cooperatives, and other community-based organizations27. These community-based
“contractors” are hired through performance-based contracts with the Peru Roads
Department (PCR) and are paid on a monthly basis.
d) Explore Multiple Funding Streams Simultaneously
In addition to funding from the central government, rural road maintenance in Nepal is also
funded by loan and grant projects funded by international development banks28. Additionally,
the districts have access to locally sourced funding that can be used for rural road maintenance.
Some districts allocate some of their revenue from local taxes to maintaining local roads. In
addition, districts have awarded road toll concessions to road user committees or local
contractors. Under these concessions, a portion of the concession fees are returned to the
roads to finance maintenance works.
27
RLDSF Operations and Maintenance Manual Module on Road Maintenance, RLDSF, December 2012, page 69.
28
Rural Road Maintenance - Sustaining the Benefits of Improved Access, ILO 2007, page 93.

Chapter 4: Proposed Recommendations for MINAGRI’ Sustainable Rural Feeder
Roads Maintenance Strategy
This section puts forward recommendations based on best practices and lessons-learned from
national, regional and international experiences, looking at short-term (e.g. 1 – 3 years),
medium-term (e.g. 5 years) and long-term endeavors (e.g. 10 years).
The graphic below shows proposed approach to guarantee the sustainability of MINAGRI’s
Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance Strategy. As such, this Framework puts forward activities and
recommendations to support the success of RFR maintenance in Rwanda, by addressing:
Human Resources and Capacity building, including training and TA, as well as dedicated funding
sources. Refer to the checklist for Sustainable Rural Road Maintenance plan is Annex 2.
Proposed Implementation Framework for Sustainable RFR Maintenance
4.1 Existing Gaps and Challenges29

The existing gaps and challenges in the RFR maintenance sector can be summarized as follows:
 Under-staffed district engineer offices at Sector and District level
 No Civil Engineering Technicians at the Sector level
 District Engineers with limited experience on the labor approach to road maintenance
29
Technical Gap Assessment and Capacity Building Plan drafted on June 2012 within the scope of the USAID-
funded Rwanda Rural Feeder Roads Improvement Program, implemented by PARSONS Government Services
International, Inc, and Rural Feeder Roads - Sector Policy Support Programme, EU Delegation to the Republic of
Rwanda, Formulation Study-Final Report, March 2012.

 Nonexistent or limited number of community participation organizations in RFR
maintenance sector
 Weak Monitoring and Evaluation System.
 Limited capacity in road design, construction, and maintenance (District, Supervision
Firms, Contractors)
 Limited number of local supervision firms and road contractors
 Poor performance of local supervision firms and road contractors
 Weak capacity at district level to plan for road maintenance
4.2 Proposed Recommendations

a) Human Resources and Capacity Building
Recommendations below will take advantage of the 2012 MINAGRI Rwanda Rural Feeder Road
Development Program (RRFD-Program), which plans, over a period of 8 years, to reinforce
human resources by recruiting about 2,125 all-purpose technicians (at least 5 per Sector), 162
Bachelors in Sciences (6 in each of the 27 districts), and 54 Masters in Science (2 per district for
senior district-level RRFD program supervision and management).
In the short-term and over the long-term, RFR development assistance, from both GoR and
Development Partners should focus on classroom training, TA and on-the-job training (OJT) to
existing staff at both District and Sector levels, aiming at building the capacity of the District
Engineers, RLDSF Engineer, Engineer in charge of Infrastructure and the Sector Agronomists.
Specific to the Sector level of local government, over the long term, Sector Agronomists
should be replaced by Civil Engineer Technicians to be recruited within government existing
structure.
Similarly, in the medium-term and over the long-term, as foreseen by MINAGRI one or
more Engineers need to be recruited or specifically assigned to RFR Maintenance at District
level. The appointment and training of RLDSF Engineering in each districts is on-going.
At community level, in the short-term, RFR development assistance should focus on
supporting the formation and/or strengthening of existing community-based organizations or
Community Participation Organizations located along the roads, ensuring that training and TA
is provided to enable them to carry out routine maintenance using hand tools30 provided by
District. Over the medium-term and long-term, these community organizations should evolved
to community-based cooperative or community “contractors” taking a SME-oriented
approach31, as referred in the PCR described above (see lessons-learned section). These SME-
oriented community organizations will then be able to carry out Routine maintenance and
30
RLDSF Operations and Maintenance Manual Module on Road Maintenance, RLDSF, December 2012, page 17.
31
Typical Logistics and Small Maintenance Equipment Needed by Community-Base Cooperative or “contractor”
for RFR Maintenance are presented in Annex 6.

Periodic Maintenance through a bidding process, while continuing to benefiting from on-going
OJT and technical support.
District will also have the option to use of a combination of the following approaches:
Umuganda, TIG Program, and community participation through VUP to conduct at Sector level
for RFR maintenance.
Finally, Road Construction Contractors should be involved in Periodic and Emergency
Maintenance, benefiting from training and TA to strengthen capabilities such as the use labor-
based work methods with environment issues and gender integration or the successful contract
management. Engineering Firms should be involved in Technical design of RFR when required
and supervision of Emergency Maintenance works benefiting from training and TA described in
the following section in order to build their skills, improve their performance and allow greater
participation in RFR maintenance sector. Typical rural feeder roads training topics and target
audience are shown in Annex 4.
Table 4: Summary of Proposed Necessary Human Resources And Capacity Building
TARGET SHORT TERM MEDIUM TERM LONG TERM

GROUP 1 – 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years
District/Sector Training and Technical Assistance to existing District Engineers, RLDSF Engineer,
Engineer in charge of Infrastructure
Recruit Engineer in charge of RFR Maintenance
Training and Technical Recruit, train and on-the

Assistance to existing Training and Technical job-training of Civil
Sector Agronomist Assistance to existing Engineer Technician in
Sector Agronomist charge of RFR
Maintenance
Community32
Formation, training and
Formation, training and Technical Assistance to
Technical Assistance to
community participation organizations and/or
community participation
contractors (SME oriented)
organizations
Involvement of VUP33, Umuganda, TIG (optional)

Road
Training and Technical Assistance to private sector for greater participation in
Contractor/
RFR maintenance
Engineering
32
Guidance for the Formation of Community-Participation Organization /Supervision and Quality Control is
presented in Annex 5.
33
In order to alleviate poverty, population from vulnerable sectors will be included in paid community participation
organization for road maintenance including women and youth.

Firms
b) Training, Technical Assistance and Institutional Development

In the roads sector, little has been put in place during the decentralization process to ensure
that local authorities possess the knowledge and skills to effectively deal with road maintenance.
Institutional capacity to perform efficient and timely maintenance involves the capacity to plan
and carry out the works at the right time, preserving investments with solutions, which are
cost-effective, and thereby utilizing available funding resources in the most efficient manner.
This requires:
 Technical staff;
 A thorough knowledge of road network (see annex 3: asset management and planning);
 Sound procedures for road condition inventories;
 Efficient planning procedures;
 Effective procurement systems;
 Good supervision;
 Adequate logistical support;
 Transparent and up-to-date reporting;
 Reliable financial management.
This Framework calls for the building of the capabilities of the stakeholders listed below in all
aspects of the maintenance implementation in order for them to be fully knowledgeable with
and capable of planning, executing, supervising, administering, and implementing RFR
maintenance. In order to address the above-described requirements, training needs to be
provided to the following audience: Districts Engineers, Engineering Design and Supervision
Firms, community participation organization or cooperatives, and local contractors subsequent
to an assessment for capacity/technical gap analysis.
The key concept of target audience’s technical capacity strengthening is that they should learn
from a combination of formal classroom training, workshops, and OJT. With the exception of
Community participation organizations, the target audience will benefit from technical trainings
to complement to their existing knowledge and field experience. During the implementation of
the capacity building plan, all parties will actively participate in identifying constraints of the
system to identify effective improvement measures.
Table 5: Summary of Training, Technical Assistance and Institutional Development
TARGET GROUP TOPICS
District/Sector
Agronomist  Technical design

TARGET GROUP TOPICS
 Maintenance planning, management, supervision, monitoring,

Engineering Firms and contracts management
 Quality Assurance and Quality Control
 Road functions and structure

 Maintenance techniques
Community
 Training to use tools and light equipment for road maintenance
Participation
organizations  Organization and management, budgeting, planning, and
accounting
 Operation and maintenance of small construction equipment
 Contracting including all tendering and pricing procedures.

 Contracts management, organization and control of assets
Local Road
Contractors  Organization and technical capabilities to conduct RFR
maintenance works
 Quality Assurance and Quality Control.
c) Funding
The following requirements are critical to ensure appropriate allocation or availability of funds:
 Promote regular coordination among the different levels of government institutions and
clarify and increasingly disseminate the roles and responsibilities of the key government
stakeholders;
 Secure Districts commitment, through Memoranda of Understanding to RFR
maintenance for newly constructed or rehabilitated roads;
 Develop and ensure the existence of yearly maintenance plan and dedicated budget at
district level;
 Include RFR maintenance in the Districts’ yearly Performance Plans; including allocating
and disbursing maintenance funds based in past performance.
As previously mentioned exploring multiple sources of funding is of critical importance. In the
short-term one of the proposed recommendations is to ensure that road rehabilitation
contracts, funded by Development Partners, include a clause and cost that covers 1 year
allocated to conduct maintenance. Similarly, there should be continuous funding for RFR
maintenance from GoR (national or central level government) and Development partners as
well earmarked budgets.
Additionally, in the short-term and over the long-term, districts should receive targeted or
dedicated transfers of funds from GoR (national or central level government) to incentivize and
further support RFR maintenance. Districts should also allocate some of their revenue from
local taxes to maintaining local roads. As described in the Nepal experience, districts should
award road toll concessions to road user committees or local contractors, where a portion of

the concession fees are returned to the roads to finance maintenance works. In the medium-
term and over the long-term, districts should also reach out to private sector companies to
secure investments, or corporate sponsorship, for road maintenance. Such private sector
support can address firms’ corporate social responsibility requirements.
Finally, for sustainability purposes, over the long-term, each district should set-up and sustain
a RFR Maintenance Fund.
d) Other Recommendations
Aside from the recommendations described above the following ones should also be part of the
MINAGRI’ sustainable Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance Strategy:
 When addressing maintenance a combination of labor-based activities and construction
equipment;
 Promoting private sector involvement and particularly RFR contractors;
 Using performance-based contracts when appropriate;
 Using appropriate material from District-owned borrow area during
construction/rehabilitation for maintenance;
 Addressing Environmental issues and ensuring Gender Integration;
 Preparing Technical Design of roads that minimize maintenance (drainage/structure
sizing, slope stabilization, turfing, etc.);
 Considering participatory approach at the sector level to include community-based
organizations and further build their ownership (lessons learned from RTDA, Helpage,
other countries);
 Large dissemination of the RLDSF’s RFR Maintenance Module;
 Raising awareness about the importance of rural road maintenance at District level
through seminars and workshops;
 Subjecting annual transfers to a positive evaluation of District’s O&M overall progress.
 Setting up and /or strengthening RFR maintenance associations at the sector level;
 Developing and promoting exchange of experiences across Districts between Engineers
and maintenance community organizations (District/Province).
 Ensuring coordinated implementation of projects/activities, involving RLDSF, Districts
and Development Partners;
 Addressing M&E, , involving RLDSF and Districts
 Ensuring that oversight is carried out by RTDA and MININFRA.

ANNEX 1: Rwanda Roads Network Map

ANNEX 2: Sustainable Rural Road Maintenance – Checklist34
1. Institutional capability
1.1. Legal powers
1.1.1. Is the responsibility for road maintenance legally defined?
1.1.2. Are all roads the responsibility of the maintenance department?
1.1.3. Are the legal powers understood?
1.1.4. Are the powers adequate?
1.2. Administration
1.2.1. Is there an administrative structure capable of maintaining roads?
1.2.2. Is there an unambiguous chain of command?
1.2.3. Are responsibilities defined?
1.2.4. Are staffs aware of their responsibilities?
1.3. Human resources
1.3.1. Are there sufficient personnel available?
1.3.2. Are they adequately trained?
1.3.3. Are they adequately motivated?
1.3.4. Is there an internal training scheme?
1.3.5. Are there operations manuals?
1.4. Budget
1.4.1. Is a budget awarded?
1.4.2. Is it adequate?
1.4.3. Can it be relied upon?
1.4.4. Are operations independent of foreign exchange constraints?
1.5. Financial control
1.5.1. Does full financial control reside within the maintenance authority?
1.5.2. Are accounts independently audited?
2. Managerial capability
2.1. Inventory
2.1.1. Does it exist?
2.1.2. Is it up-to-date?
2.1.3. Does it cover location and classification of all roads and structures?
2.2. Planning and programming
2.2.1. Is work programmed according to defined priorities?
2.2.2. Are the costs and benefits of programs assessed?
2.2.3. Is programming done within a plan designed to preserve or enhance
the network in the medium/long term?
2.3. Budgeting
2.3.1. Is there a regular and formal budgeting process?
2.3.2. Is this related to actual costs and the ability to disburse?
2.4. Cost control
2.4.1. Is work done measured and cost Estimated?
2.4.2. Are costs realistic in terms of overheads, equipment, materials and labor?
2.4.3. Is cost information collected centrally and used for budgetary purposes?
2.4.4. Is there a physical inspection and audit of work done?
2.4.5. Is productivity measured?
34
Adapted BROOKS,D M, R ROBINSON and KP O'SULLIVAN. (1989). Priorities in improving road maintenance
overseas: a check list for project assessment. In: Proceedings Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 1, 1989, 86, Dec.,
1129-1141.

2.5. Plant and equipment
2.5.1. Is there a fleet of plant and equipment of the size and composition required?
2.5.2. Is the availability adequate?
2.5.3. Is the utilization adequate?
2.5.4. Are the workshops and stores adequate to support it?
2.5.5. Is there an organization capable of managing the fleet cost-effectively?
2.5.6. Is adequate financial provision made for replacement and repair?
2.6. Supplies
2.6.1. Are materials available as required?
2.6.2. Does an adequate system exist for ordering and stockpiling road
maintenance materials?
3. Technical capability
3.1. Planning
3.1.1. Are the criteria upon which road maintenance planning is based constantly
under review?
3.1.2. Do strong links exist between those responsible for road maintenance
planning and those responsible for:
(i) Design and construction?
(ii) Traffic surveys and forecasting?
(iii) Road safety?
3.2. Materials
3.2.1. Are the properties of materials used fully understood?
3.2.2. Are there adequate testing facilities?
3.2.3. Are materials of sufficient quality and quantity available?
3.2.4. Are appropriate materials always used?
3.2.5. Are testing methods appropriate and carried out at the appropriate
frequency?
3.3. Quality control
3.3.1. Is quality control of products and materials adequate?
3.3.2. Is quality control on site adequate?
3.4. Condition measurement
3.4.1. Are roads inspected systematically to determine maintenance requirements?
3.4.2. Are physical measurements made of road condition to determine
maintenance requirements?
3.4.3. Are condition measurements made using sophisticated or high-speed
instruments?
3.5. Field monitoring
3.5.1. Is there any systematic monitoring of:
(i) quality of work?
(ii) work methods?
(iii) material quantities used?
(iv) hours spent on job?
3.5.2. Do the results of any monitoring feed back into the future planning process?
3.6. Research and information
3.6.1. Is there adequate access to current work on road maintenance from other
road maintenance organizations or international research centers?
3.6.2. Is research on road maintenance currently carried out within the
organization?
3.6.3. Are new techniques and practices introduced as a result of research results?

ANNEX 3: Asset Management and Planning
“The Un-classified network will be surveyed on a District-by-District basis to obtain

accurate data about the length and location of routes within each District. The routes will
be identified and categorized as gravel, earth roads or tracks.”35
RTDA is responsible for preparing an inventory and classifying road network: National,
District Class 1, and District Class 2 roads. This provides a framework for financing of the
network through the usage of public funds.
MININFRA/RTDA has completed the creation of a GIS database for National and District
Class 1 roads pending Cabinet’s approval. The development of District Class 2 roads by
RTDA is in-progress. The prioritization of the road segment to be maintained is based on
the condition assessment of the road segment, the traffic levels and the importance of the
road in terms of agricultural value chain and other specific key criteria as identified by the
Districts.
As per the American Association of State Transportation Officials (AASHTO): “Asset
management is a systematic process of maintaining, upgrading, and operating physical assets
cost- effectively”. In simple terms, the set up of a rural road asset management will be used
for: - identifying deficiencies in the road system, predicting future trends in those
deficiencies, developing strategic plans and policies, - assessing funding requirements,
determining budget allocations, developing forward plans for improvement, and performing
works into budget years.
A GIS-Integrated Asset Management System can significantly facilitate the organization data
related to rural roads. The collection requirement is to collect a single point indicating the
attribute (condition, surface, etc) at the point of change. The data is later processed to make
continuous data from the single observance. The first step could be the use of an in-house
Excel spreadsheet.
The first step could be the use of an in-house Excel spreadsheet.
35
Rwanda Road Maintenance Strategy, Transport Sub-sector, Ministry of Infrastructure, May 2008.

ANNEX 4: Typical Rural Feeder Roads Training Topics and Target Audience
A. Training Topics
TRAINING TOPIC 1: CONSTRUCTION SAFETY

Module 1.1: Personal Protective Equipment
Module 1.2: Work Zone Traffic Control
Module 1.3: Safe Operations and Internal Traffic Control in the Work Space
Module 1.4: Heavy Equipment
Module 1.5: Hand and Power Tools
TRAINING TOPIC 2: OVERVIEW OF RURAL ROADS TECHNICAL DESIGN

Module 2.1: General Design Requirements/Traffic
Module 2.2: Topographic Survey
Module 2.3: Road Geometry/Typical Cross-Sections
Module 2.4: Geotechnical Investigations
Module 2.5: GIS in Rural Feeder Roads Design
Module 2.6: Hydrologic and Hydraulics Studies
Module 2.7: Drawings and Documentation
Module 2.8: Bill of Quantities
Module 2.9: Engineering Cost Estimate
Module 2.10: Technical Design Report
TRAINING TOPIC 3: RURAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION/ REHABILITATION

and SUPERVISION
Module 3.1: Technical Specifications
Module 3.2: Bid / Tender Documents
Module 3.3: Cost Estimate / Unit Price Based On Inputs (Labor, Plant, and Material)
Module 3.4: Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Module 3.5: Construction Inspection and Supervision
Module 3.6: Project Management
TRAINING TOPIC 4: RURAL FEEDER ROADS MAINTENANCE

Module 4.1: Asset Management/Roads Prioritization
Module 4.2: GIS in Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance
Module 4.3: Maintenance Method and Planning
Module 4.4: Tools and Equipment

Module 4.5: Contract Management
Module 4.6: Traffic Count
TRAINING TOPIC 5: TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL SOFTWARE

Module 5.1: Microsoft Office (Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint)
Module 5.2: Microsoft Project
Module 5.3: ESRI ARGIS
Module 5.4: Cad Software (AutoCAD Lt, AutoCAD Civil 3D …)
Module 5.5: Hydrologic and Hydraulics Software
TRAINING TOPIC 6: LABOR-BASED METHODS/COMMUNITY-BASED

COOPERATIVES
Module 6.1: Organization and Management
Module 6.2: Tools and Equipment
Module 6.3: Rural Feeder Roads Construction
Module 6.4: Rural Feeder Road Maintenance
Module 6.5: Work Organization/Planning, Daily Programming
Module 6.6: Bill of Quantity
Module 6.7: Unit Costing, Estimating, Cost Control
Module 6.8: Reading Drawing
Module 6.9: Surveying
Module 6.10: Inventory, Control, Reporting/ Productivity
Module 6.11: Book-Keeping
TRAINING TOPIC 7: ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

Module 7.1: Environmental Regulatory Agency/ Rwanda Environment Rules and Regulations
Module 7.2: Environmental Impacts Assessment in Rural Feeder Roads
Module 7.3: Technical Design and Environmental Integration
Module 7.4: Environnemental Management and Mitigation Plan (EMMP)
TRAINING TOPIC 8: GENDER INTEGRATION

Module 8.1: Women in Rural Roads Construction /Rehabilitation and Maintenance
Module 8.2: Family Planning
Module 8.3: HIV / AIDS Awareness
Module 8.4: Income Generation and Management
Module 8.5: Nutrition

Module 8.6: Agriculture
Module 8.7: Gender Mainstreaming
TOPIC 9: PROCUREMENT PROCESS

Module 9.1: Bid/Procurement Process
Module 9.2: Procurement
Module 9.3: Accounting
Module 9.4: Auditing Process
TRAINING TOPIC 10: MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Module 10.1: Performance Monitoring Plan
Module 10.2: Main Elements of Performance Monitoring Plan
Module 10.3: Monitoring Baseline
Module 10.4: Performance Monitoring Report
Note: The topics listed below are indicative. The training topics and contents will be determined on
the capacity gap assessment of the target groups.
B. Rural Feeder Roads Training Topics and Target Audience
TRAINING TOPICS TARGET AUDIENCE
District Engineering Construction Community Construction

Engineers/ Design Supervision participation Contractors
Engineering Firms Firms and
Technicians Cooperatives
Construction Safety x x x x x
Overview of rural roads
x x x
technical design
Rural road construction/
rehabilitation and x x x x x
supervision
Rural feeder roads
x x x x x
maintenance
Technical/professional
x x x x
Software
Labor-based
Methods/Community- x x x x x
Based Cooperatives
Environmental
x x x x x
Considerations

Gender Integrations x x x x x
Procurement Process x x x x
Monitoring And
x x x
Evaluation

ANNEX 5: Guidance for the Formation of Community-Participation
Organization /Supervision and Quality Control
A. Guidance for the Formation of Community-Participation Organization
In accordance with the Rwanda Road Maintenance Strategy, that maintenance to be carried
out as a combination of community-based participation and private contractors.
Experiences across many countries show that road maintenance, whether periodic or
routine, is an activity, which lends itself to labor based methods. There are whole varieties
of systems, from the simple lengthman system for routine maintenance to small contractors
with simple equipment for periodic maintenance, which can be used. The basic concept,
however, is that maintenance is an activity which must involve the local communities to the
fullest extent possible. Even in the long term, the Government is not going to have sufficient
financial resources to pursue a policy of equipment-based maintenance.
The productivity rate depends on the characteristics of the road (worse condition, steeper
areas, less durable road surfaces, higher traffic levels, fewer road protection measures in
place), will lead to lower productivity rate and a higher number of maintenance workers as
consequence.
The formation of the maintenance community participation teams is as follows:
Team Size
An average production rate of 2.0 km per worker is suggested for routine maintenance.
Depending on the road length, several maintenance teams can be formed. It is more efficient
to limit the size of the team to 5. The teams can be assigned to different tasks.
Example: In order to carry out a routine maintenance on a rural feeder road segment of 20
km located in Kinazi Sector, Ruhango District, the community participation organization will
be 20/2 = 10 workers or 10/5 = 2 maintenance teams of 5 workers.
Selection of Team Members
The community participation teams conducted by Sector and District staff may use the
guidance indicated in table below if not conflicting with local or national requirements.
Criteria Description
- The selected maintenance workers must be between
18 and 50 years of age
- The selected maintenance workers must be physically
Technical and mentally fit
- The selected maintenance workers must live near the
road to be maintained
- The selected maintenance workers must be
unemployed
- The selected maintenance workers must be from the
Social poorest people of the Sector
- At least 30% of selected maintenance workers must be
women
- Preference should be given to unemployed youth
Registration of the Maintenance Team
After the selection of maintenance workers has been completed, the team is ready to be
registered following the rules in vigor in the District for this type of organizations (election
of president, vice-president, gender balance: at least 30% of women within committee, etc.).
Training of the Maintenance Team
Once the registration process has been completed and a bank account (example at SACCO
Bank, which is operating in almost every sector) has been opened for the maintenance
team, they must sign a performance-based contract with the District in order to maintain
the road segment within their sector. The rural road maintenance will be funded from the
Districts ‘budget from various sources.
The maintenance team will complete the following trainings before start working: basic
theoretical and practical maintenance activities, managerial aspects of the maintenance
contract (team management, performance measures, required document, and payments,
plus other modules related to gender: gender mainstreaming, family planning …).
B. Supervision and Quality Control
Monitoring road quality is essential. In order for road maintenance to be effective, routine
inspections are necessary. It is suggested that inspections are conducted after every rain
event and regularly once a week.
For routine maintenance performed by community-based participation or cooperative, the
supervision and quality control will be carried out as following:
- Weekly Visual Field Inspection conducted by the Sector Agronomist or the
Agent in charge of Infrastructure at the sector level;
- Site visit by the District Engineer or Engineer in Charge of Infrastructure when
required;
- Monthly site visit by the District Engineer or engineer in Charge of
Infrastructure;
- Periodic oversight visit conducted by RTDA;
- Efficient and cost effective supervision and quality control system: camera,
compaction testing using DCP and reporting using geo-tag pictures.
The supervision and quality control system required for periodic and emergency
maintenance will be similar to what is necessary for rehabilitation or reconstruction works
under RTDA supervision.

ANNEX 6: Typical Logistics and Small Maintenance Equipment Needed by
Community-Base Cooperative for RFR Maintenance
Logistic and Equipment Use Number

Road inspection
To carry out routine inspection of
the road segment especially after 1 by Community-based
Motorcycle
each precipitation event to asset Cooperative
the condition of the road
Take geo-tag pictures or record
GPS Video Camera
the condition of the road for the 1 by Community-based
mountable on the
District Engineer in charge of Cooperative
helmet
Maintenance
Small Mechanical and
Construction Equipment
Small Dump Truck 1-3 by District
Towed grader 1-3 by District
Haulage trailer 1-3 by District
Rollers 1-3 by District
Walk Behind Double
1-3 by District
Drums Vibrator Roller
Walk Behind Sheepsfoot
1-3 by District
Vibrator Roller
Bowser for fuel 1-3 by District
Bowser for water 1-3 by District
Concrete Mixer 1-3 by District
Heavy Duty Contractor
1-3 by District
Saw
Portable Power
1-3 by District
Generator
Parked at the District, the small construction equipment can be attached and powered using
MINAGRI’s agricultural tractors, which are available in most Districts. Community-based
Cooperative will rent the equipment, as needed; from a unit, which can be set up by a
private entity at the District. This could complement agricultural activities already
established at the Districts and help solve the lack of construction equipment and the
associated high cost.

ANNEX 7: Selected References
1. “Asset Management of Road Infrastructure – the Big Picture.” Nazir Alli. The South
Africa National Roads Agency Limited, Sept. 2007.
2. “Experiences in the Financing of Community Based Rural Road Maintenance in

Cambodia.” Ministry of Rural Development, Kingdom of Cambodia, the Upstream
Project, ILO, Sept. 2001.
3. "Feeder Roads Improvement in Ghana.” United National Development

Program/International Labor Organization. 1990.
4. “Finance, Organization and Participation--Country-specific solutions for Rural Road

Networks: The GTZ Experience.” Gerhard P. Metschies, Siem Rap. GTZ. May 2002.
5. “Financing Of Road Maintenance in Sub-Saharan Africa: Reforms and Progress

Towards Second Generation Road Funds.” Mustapha Benmamar. Sub-Saharan Africa
Transport Policy Program (SSATP), Discussion Paper No. 6. World Bank. Sept. 2006.
6. “GIS: A Tool for Transportation Infrastructure Planning in Ghana. A Case Study for
the Department of Feeder Roads.” Stephen Yao Fiatornu. Ghana Department of
Feeder Roads, 2006.
7. “GIS: A Tool for Transportation Infrastructure Planning in Ghana. A Case Study to

the Department of Feeder Roads.” Stephen Yao Fiatornu. 5th FIG Regional
Conference. Accra, Ghana. March 2003.
8. “GIS-Based Road Information and Management System: A Decision Support Tool for
Public Works Department, Government of Maharashtra.” Map India Conference.
2003.
9. “Guide-Handbook of Implementation of Community-Based Rural Road Maintenance

at Hamlet Level in Ben Tre.” Center for Environment and Transport Development
(preside), Ben Tre Road and Bridge Technical Science Association and Quang Binh
Community Development Centre.
(http://www.markets4poor.org/m4p2/filedownload/Guideline%20on%20CB-RRM.pdf)
10. “Implementing Performance-Based Road Management and Maintenance Contracts in

Developing Countries.” GTZ. 2004.
11. “Managing and Financing Rural Road Maintenance in Developing Countries.” Larry
Schroeder. USAID/Associates in Rural Development, Inc.
12. “Managing Road Maintenance Using Geographic Information System Application.”

Mohd Zulkifli B. Mohd Yunus, Hamidah Bt. Hassan. Journal of Geographic
Information System. 2010, 2, 215-219.
13. “Operation and Maintenance Manual, RFR Maintenance Module: RLDSF.” German
Financial Cooperation with the republic of Rwanda. December 2012.
14. “RRFD-Program – Final Draft.” Rwanda Ministry of Agriculture and Animal

Resources. September, 2012.

15. “Rural Road Maintenance - Sustaining the Benefits of Improved Access.” International
Labor Organization. 2007.
16. “Rural Road Maintenance Management.” Bjorn Johannessen. Ministry of Rural

Development, Royal Government of Cambodia. November, 1999.
17. “Rural Roads in Sub-Saharan Africa - Lessons from World Bank Experience” World
Bank Technical Paper Number 141, Africa Technical Department Series. World
Bank.
18. “Rwanda Road Maintenance Strategy, Transport Sub-Sector.” Rwanda Ministry of

Infrastructure. May, 2008.
19. “Summary of Transport Backward-Looking Joint Sector Review for the Financial
Year 2011/12 (September 2012),” Republic of Rwanda. September 2012.
20. “Sustaining Africa’s Rural Road Networks: The Asset Management Approach.” John
Howe. World Transport Policy and Practice. 1999.
21. “Team-Based Maintenance of Rural Roads: Conceptual Guide.” International Labor

Organization. 2009.
22. “Transport Sector Policy.” Rwanda Ministry of Infrastructure. December, 2008.

2013 RFR Maintenance Implementation Framework Final July 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

2013 RFR Maintenance Implementation Framework Final July 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2013 RFR Maintenance Implementation Framework Final July 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL RESOURCES (MINAGRI)

Rural Feeder Roads

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 2

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 3

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 4

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 5

AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 6

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 7

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 8

Agriculture is a critical element of the Rwandan economy. Over 90 percent of households

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 9

DEVELOPMENT KM OF CONTRIBUTION DISTRICTS

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 10

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 11

1.1 Roads Governing Act, Policies and Strategies

1.2 Description of and Classification Road Network in Rwanda

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 12

Rwanda Road Class

1.3 Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance Reference document

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 13

1.4 Central Government Institutions’ Roles and Responsibilities12

MINAGRI Establishes policy guidance, planning, assessment, resource allocation,

RMF Provide funding for National and District Class 1 roads.

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 14

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 15

2.1 Type of Maintenance

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 16

2.2 District Role in Rural Feeder Roads Maintenance

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 17

3.1 Lessons Learned from Rwanda Projects and/or Initiatives

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 18

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 19

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 20

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 21

3.2 Lessons Learned from Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Countries

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 22

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 23

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 24

4.1 Existing Gaps and Challenges29

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 25

4.2 Proposed Recommendations

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 26

TARGET SHORT TERM MEDIUM TERM LONG TERM

Training and Technical Recruit, train and on-the

Involvement of VUP33, Umuganda, TIG (optional)

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 27

b) Training, Technical Assistance and Institutional Development

TARGET GROUP TOPICS

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 28

 Maintenance planning, management, supervision, monitoring,

 Road functions and structure

 Contracting including all tendering and pricing procedures.

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 29

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 30

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 31

Rural Feeder Road Maintenance Implementation Framework – July 2013 32