Frequently asked questions

A consultancy sells deliverables: a study, a plan, a report. A territorial development operator carries a transformation: it starts from data, builds a coherent project portfolio, assembles the financing round table, steers delivery and publishes impact. Studies remain necessary, but they are a means; they are delivered by XP-NOVA in service of the programmes.

No. ODT is a private initiative of XP-NOVA SARL, an engineering and consulting firm established in Yaoundé since 2006. It works with decentralised local governments, supervising administrations and donors, but does not depend on them. Programme contractual commitments are carried by XP-NOVA SARL, with the liability and insurance attached.

XP-NOVA carries the disciplines: studies, owner's engineering, works supervision, structuring, monitoring and evaluation. ODT carries the territories: it assembles those disciplines around a single cause. The boundary is editorial, commercial and contractual; ODT is neither a duplicate nor a subsidiary of XP-NOVA, but its territorial division, alongside AGROVITA, Technology and Training Engineering.

We do not claim so. The published programme models are programme models, and they say so. What is documented is thirty-seven years of engineering of major public facilities (airports, stadiums, campuses, water supply, energy) across five countries, contractually mobilisable for territorial programmes. Every reference states its engagement framework.

With your territory's profile. We prepare, without commitment, a territory profile: sourced Observatory indicators, potentials, first portfolio orientations. If you have a municipal development plan, we use it as the starting point to turn it into a portfolio of 8 to 12 prioritised, structured and fundable projects over one term of office.

A qualified pipeline rather than a list of needs: portfolios prepared to your standards, verifiable data on baseline situations, and organised accountability (verified milestones, published indicators, governance involving stakeholders). For revenue-generating components, we structure public-private partnerships.

Yes, on two conditions: the project must follow a territorial logic (it serves the municipality, not only the investor) and accept the transparency of statuses. We assess feasibility, structure the partnership with the local government and secure access to local resources. Decentralised cooperation and diaspora contributions are recognised windows of local financing.

Programme model: a replicable model with assumption-based figures to be adapted to each territory. Under structuring: a real territory whose partnerships are being assembled. Track record: an assignment actually delivered, with its engagement framework stated. These statuses are displayed on every programme; they are our first proof of transparency.

From the World Bank's World Development Indicators database, queried through its public API. Each value shows its vintage and source; when no recent value exists, it is not displayed rather than estimated. Current coverage is the six CEMAC countries at national scale; regional and municipal breakdowns will be introduced with dedicated official sources.

Through the six-phase cycle: data-driven diagnosis, vision and portfolio, structuring (studies, budgets in FCFA, governance, safeguards), steered delivery, sustaining local capacities, published impact measurement. The model provides the components and orders of magnitude; your data, your actors and your financing windows set the programme.

No. They are sizing assumptions, in FCFA, to be refined through feasibility studies. A regional agropole, for instance, is indicated between FCFA 15 and 40 billion depending on the basin; a municipal portfolio between 2 and 10 billion over one term. They serve to situate the ambition and the financing structure, not to commit an expense.

Nothing. Getting in touch is free and without commitment, and the territory profile is prepared as a basis for discussion. Assessing the need comes before any proposal: a quote, in FCFA, is only issued once the need is framed and the scope of the assignment agreed.

Structuring represents around 1 to 3% of the portfolio and can be financed through support windows (national municipal equipment funds, donor technical assistance, decentralised cooperation), through the municipal budget, or a combination of both. The financing plan for structuring is part of the proposal.

Four families: multilateral and bilateral donors (World Bank, AfDB, European Union, AFD, GIZ, KfW), climate funds (Green Climate Fund, GEF, bilateral windows), public-private partnerships for revenue-generating components, and public budgets and national windows (public investment budget, municipal funds, decentralised cooperation), which form the counterpart that makes the others credible.

First response within 48 working hours. A territory profile takes a few weeks depending on data availability. Structuring a municipal portfolio fits within one term of office; territorial programmes (agropole, corridor, basin, pole) roll out over four to ten years, in tranches, with a pilot first.

Through the site form, by e-mail or on WhatsApp, as you prefer. An identified contact person replies within 48 working hours. We never write to you first on WhatsApp: the link offered on the site opens a conversation that you start yourself.

It is used solely to process your request. Document requests follow a validation procedure, after which a personal download link, valid for seven days, is sent to you. Any error reported in the Observatory's data is corrected, published and traced.

Yes, on reasoned request: they are shared with institutional partners, together with detailed reference sheets, as part of due diligence. Identification details (corporate form, capital, trade register, tax ID, social security) already appear in the site footer.