From Funding to Impact: What Has IESS-Kairouan Actually Delivered in the Fight Against Poverty in Kairouan?

                        

From Funding to Impact: What Has IESS-Kairouan Actually Delivered in the Fight Against Poverty in Kairouan?

A document- and data-based investigative report
Prepared and published by: Mohamed Chaieb Barhoumi
ATEP MED – Arabic Digital Center for Media & Development
Areas: Poverty and Local Development | Employment | Women and Youth | Water | Climate Adaptation | Development Finance | Development Accountability

INVESTIGATION SUMMARY

The Economic, Social and Solidarity Integration Project in Kairouan, known as IESS-Kairouan, is a major development initiative targeting vulnerable rural communities in Kairouan Governorate, Tunisia. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the project has a total cost of approximately US$51.27 million, financed through contributions from IFAD, the Tunisian government, the Adaptation Fund and beneficiaries. The project covers seven delegations and 35 rural sectors, including eight rural sectors in El Alaa. Its original design targeted 16,800 households, approximately 84,000 people, with objectives related to poverty reduction, income generation, support for women and youth, improved access to drinking water, and climate resilience.

However, the latest available supervision documentation in 2026 indicates a gap between elapsed project time and implementation progress, together with delays affecting several activities. The central journalistic question is therefore not simply how much money was allocated, but a more important one:

What has actually been transformed from this funding into measurable and sustainable improvements in people's lives?

1. A US$51.27 Million Development Project

The project's total cost is approximately US$51.27 million. IFAD data indicate approximately US$23.8 million from IFAD, US$9.21 million from the Adaptation Fund, US$15.88 million in cash financing from the Tunisian government, together with beneficiary contributions.

The project's official website also presents the original total cost at approximately TND153.81 million. Differences between dollar and Tunisian-dinar figures should be considered in the context of exchange-rate changes and financing developments during implementation.

But the size of the financing raises a fundamental question:

Have these financial resources been converted into measurable improvements in the lives of the targeted households?

2. Where Does the Project Operate?

The project covers seven delegations: Hajeb El Ayoun, Oueslatia, Ain Jloula, Sbikha, Haffouz, El Alaa and Chebika, covering a total of 35 rural sectors.

El Alaa is particularly relevant to this investigation because it contains eight rural sectors, the largest number among the project's intervention areas.

This provides an opportunity to move from general project objectives to specific local interventions and examine whether financing and decisions have actually translated into services and economic activities benefiting local communities.

3. The Original Target: 16,800 Households

The original project design targeted 16,800 households, approximately 84,000 people.

Priority groups included poor and low-income households, small farmers and livestock breeders, with particular attention to women and youth. The project also established objectives related to improved living conditions, income-generating activities, water access and climate adaptation.

Over time, some targeting and implementation indicators have been revised. This does not automatically mean project failure. However, it raises an important investigative question:

Does the revised targeting represent a realistic adjustment, or does it reflect difficulties in reaching the project's original target population?

4. After 72% of the Project Period: Physical Implementation at Approximately 61%

The official IFAD supervision report issued in August 2026 provides an important indicator.

After approximately 72% of the project period had elapsed, physical implementation stood at around 61%, while financial commitments reached approximately 68%, financial execution around 54%, and IFAD loan disbursement approximately 63%.

These figures do not mean that the project has stopped. They do, however, reveal a gap between elapsed time and implementation progress.

The supervision report also classified the project as a Potential Problem Project, indicating risks or potential difficulties in achieving the expected results.

With the project's completion date having been extended, an important question emerges:

Will the extension generate additional development impact, or will it mainly provide additional time to complete delayed activities?

5. Income-Generating Activities: 427 Out of a Target of 1,820

The project established a target of 1,820 income-generating activities.

However, the 2026 supervision report indicates that approximately 427 activities had been established, representing around 28% of the target.

Women accounted for approximately 42% of beneficiaries of these activities, while young people represented only around 4%.

The report also indicates that approximately 96% of the activities were agricultural in nature, with a strong concentration on sheep fattening and goat breeding.

These figures raise several questions:

Are these activities generating sustainable income? How many are still operating? How many have stopped? Have young people actually benefited? And has the project contributed to diversifying the rural economy, or does it remain heavily concentrated on traditional activities?

6. Another 350 Activities Still in Procurement

The supervision documentation indicates that approximately 350 additional income-generating activities had been identified and were still under procurement procedures.

This means that part of the planned economic support had not yet been converted into operational activities at the time of the report.

The investigation therefore needs to establish when these activities were delivered, who received them, what type of support was provided, its value, and what monitoring mechanisms exist after delivery.

Most importantly:

How many of these activities will still be operating one or two years after receiving support?

7. Women and Youth: Has Priority Become an Economic Result?

Women and youth are among the project's priority groups. Yet the available results show a significant difference between the two groups.

Women represent approximately 42% of beneficiaries of income-generating activities, while youth account for only around 4%.

Therefore, simply identifying women and youth as priority groups is not enough.

The real question is:

Has this priority translated into economic independence and sustainable income opportunities?

For young people in particular, the meaningful indicator is not simply how many received training or support, but how many obtained sustainable income or maintained a viable economic activity.

8. Training: 3,547 Beneficiaries

Approximately 3,547 people benefited from training, including 1,466 women and 687 young people.

However, the integration of the climate dimension into training remained limited. According to the supervision report, only approximately 12% of trained participants benefited from training with a climate-related component.

This is significant because climate adaptation is one of the project's major objectives, while many supported activities depend on agriculture and livestock, sectors particularly vulnerable to drought, water scarcity and climate change.

9. Water: From a General Objective to Local Projects

The project established an objective of improving access to drinking water for approximately 4,300 families.

However, this objective cannot be measured simply by counting projects, tenders or administrative procedures.

The real indicator is:

Are the targeted families actually receiving regular and safe water services?

This is why specific local projects are particularly important for the investigation.

10. Case Study: El Alaa and 51 Rainwater Cisterns

On 17 April 2025, the official IESS project published a tender for the construction of 51 semi-buried rainwater cisterns in El Alaa delegation, with a submission deadline of 19 May 2025.

This document is important because it moves the investigation from general statements about improving water access to a specific local intervention whose implementation can be traced.

However, a tender announcement alone does not prove that all 51 cisterns were completed and placed into service.

The questions therefore remain:

What happened after the tender? Was the contract awarded? How many cisterns were actually constructed? How many entered service? And how many households benefited from them?

These questions require completion and acceptance documents, as well as field verification, before they can be presented as final facts.

11. El Alaa Is Not the Only Local Intervention

The project's official procurement records reveal other interventions, including semi-buried rainwater cisterns in Oueslatia and Ain Jloula, the acquisition of populated queen-bee colonies and equipment linked to honey production, as well as interventions involving solar energy, water and agriculture.

These documents make it possible to establish a clear investigative chain:

Announcement → Tender → Contract → Implementation → Completion → Handover → Use → Impact

This approach transforms procurement records into an investigative tool rather than treating them as purely administrative documents.

12. What Do Procurement Documents Reveal?

For a journalist, a tender announcement is not simply an administrative document. It is the starting point of a chain of questions.

The investigation can follow:

• the publication date;
• the number and nature of facilities;
• the tender deadline;
• the company or contractor awarded the contract;
• the contract value;
• the implementation period;
• the completion date;
• the handover status;
• the current condition of the intervention;
• the number of beneficiaries;
• and the actual impact after operation.

This makes it possible to investigate the full life cycle of a development project, rather than relying solely on official statements about achievements.

13. Water and Infrastructure: Delays and Cost Changes

The 2026 supervision report reveals different levels of progress among infrastructure projects.

At Ksar Lamsa, implementation was approximately 40%, while about 55% of the planned time had been consumed.

At Ben Jeddou, implementation reached approximately 95%, but the time consumed reached around 223% of the original period, with a financial amendment of approximately TND216,000.

At Louata, the estimated cost of the borehole increased to approximately TND1.3 million, compared with approximately TND500,000 at the time of the mid-term review.

These figures do not, by themselves, prove mismanagement or wrongdoing.

They do, however, require explanation:

What caused the delays? Why did costs change? Were price increases or technical changes responsible? Did these changes affect beneficiaries? And, ultimately, did the services reach the intended communities?

14. From Outputs to Impact

A development project can build cisterns, establish economic activities, train thousands of people, construct infrastructure and disburse funds.

But these are outputs.

Impact is different.

Impact means reduced household vulnerability, increased and sustainable income, continued operation of supported businesses, greater economic independence for women, improved opportunities for young people, better access to water, and stronger resilience to drought and climate change.

This is the gap that the investigation seeks to measure:

The distance between what the project produces and what actually changes in people's lives.

15. Investigative Monitoring Scorecard

Target households: Original target: 16,800 households. The latest direct 2026 target indicates 13,881 households.
Investigative question: Why was the targeting revised?

Target population: Original design: 84,000 people. The 2026 direct target indicates 27,762 people.
Investigative question: What explains this adjustment in targeting?

Income-generating activities: Target: 1,820. Established: 427.
Investigative question: Why does implementation remain at approximately 28% of the target?

Women: Approximately 42% of income-generating activity beneficiaries.
Investigative question: Has this participation produced sustainable income?

Youth: Approximately 4%.
Investigative question: Why has youth participation remained limited?

Training: 3,547 beneficiaries.
Investigative question: What happened after the training?

Climate-related training: Approximately 12%.
Investigative question: Is this sufficient to support the project's climate-adaptation objectives?

Physical implementation: Approximately 61% after 72% of the project period.
Investigative question: Does this create a risk for final impact?

Financial execution: Approximately 54%.
Investigative question: Can implementation be accelerated?

IFAD loan disbursement: Approximately 63%.
Investigative question: Does financial disbursement correspond to measurable results?

Water: Target of approximately 4,300 families.
Investigative question: Did the service actually reach the targeted households?

El Alaa: 51 rainwater cisterns announced through a 2025 tender.
Investigative question: How many were completed and placed into service?

16. What Do the Documents Establish — and What Still Requires Verification?

The official documents establish the project's financing, intervention area, original objectives, several implementation results, progress indicators, the existence of an official tender for 51 rainwater cisterns in El Alaa, other water and agricultural interventions, and delays affecting certain infrastructure projects.

However, several important questions still require additional verification.

These include the actual number of completed cisterns, the number of households using them, the sustainability of income-generating activities, the income they generate, the number of activities that have stopped, the real economic impact on youth and women, and the quality and continuity of water services.

These issues should be verified through local records, completion and acceptance documents, interviews with beneficiaries and, where possible, field reporting.

17. Questions for the Next Stage of the Investigation

What happened to the 51 cisterns in El Alaa?

Was the contract awarded? To whom? What was its value?

Were the works completed?

How many cisterns entered service?

How many households are benefiting?

What is the current status of the 427 income-generating activities?

How many are still operating?

How many young people obtained sustainable income?

How many women achieved greater economic independence?

Has the project achieved its objective of improving water access for approximately 4,300 families?

And what will happen to the supported activities and infrastructure after external financing ends?

CONCLUSION

The analysis of official documents concerning IESS-Kairouan reveals a major development project with a total cost of approximately US$51.27 million, covering extensive rural areas of Kairouan Governorate and addressing poverty, income generation, women and youth, water access and climate adaptation.

But funding is not the same as impact.

The original project design targeted 16,800 households and established a target of 1,820 income-generating activities, together with improved access to drinking water for approximately 4,300 families.

In contrast, the latest supervision data indicate approximately 427 established income-generating activities, representing around 28% of the target, while overall physical implementation stood at approximately 61% after around 72% of the project period had elapsed.

In El Alaa, an official document shows that a tender was launched in April 2025 for the construction of 51 semi-buried rainwater cisterns.

These figures do not prove that the project has failed.

They do, however, raise a fundamental question for any development programme financed through public and international resources:

FROM FUNDING TO IMPACT: WHAT HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED IN PEOPLE'S LIVES?

Methodology and Sources

This investigation is based on an analysis of official project documentation, particularly project design documents, supervision reports, the mid-term review, project data and procurement records.

The investigation does not make allegations of corruption or mismanagement without independent evidence. It distinguishes between:

Funding → Implementation → Outputs → Results → Impact

The final social and economic impact requires further verification through local documentation, completion and acceptance records, interviews with beneficiaries and field reporting.

Primary sources: IFAD – IESS-Kairouan Project; Official IESS-Kairouan project website; official IESS-Kairouan procurement records

Investigative Methodology & Accountability Focus

This investigation examines whether a major development project in Kairouan, Tunisia, is translating substantial financial commitments into measurable improvements for vulnerable households and communities.

The project, estimated at US$51.27 million, was designed to support approximately 16,800 households through poverty reduction, income-generating activities, improved water access and climate adaptation. The investigation compares the project’s planned objectives with available evidence on financial execution, physical implementation, income-generating activities, beneficiary participation and climate-related interventions.

Using official project information, public documents, implementation indicators and documentary cross-checking, the investigation identifies gaps between planned targets, reported progress and measurable outputs. It examines, in particular, the establishment of income-generating activities, the participation of women and young people, climate-related training and the implementation of water infrastructure.

Rather than assessing success solely through expenditure or completion rates, the investigation asks a central accountability question:

Are the resources committed to the project producing sustainable and measurable improvements in the lives of the people they are intended to support?

The investigation also identifies areas requiring further field verification, including infrastructure completion and use, the sustainability of income-generating activities, household-level economic benefits and the long-term impact of project interventions.

A document- and data-based investigative report
Prepared and published by: Mohamed Chaieb Barhoumi
ATEP MED – Arabic Digital Center for Media & Development

The reporting combines document-based investigation, financial and data analysis, source verification and an accountability-focused approach to development journalism.