The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

APPENDIX C RESPONSIVENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BANK’S COUNTRY PROGRAMS Figure C.4. Most Programs Responded Flexibly to Changing Conditions Quality of Results Frameworks 27. The quality of results frameworks is the first component related to program effectiveness. Just over one-quarter (27 of 96) of country programs were deemed to be moderately satisfactory or better along this dimension. Ratings for results frameworks improved over the period, from 20 percent moderately satisfactory or better in the first half to 36 percent in the second half, but the share rated above-theline in the second half of the period remains very small. 28. The most common deficiency was that the program did not link well Bank instruments and activities to intended outcomes, which was the case in 40 percent of the programs rated moderately unsatisfactory or worse. For instance, in Mauritania (FY03-07), objectives were defined in terms of countrywide goals from the PRSP without being translated into achievable, program-level outcomes. And in India, (FY05-08), there was inadequate linkage between the strategy, program design, and desired outcomes; outcomes were largely built up from the existing portfolio designed under a previous strategy rather than built down from the new strategic design. 29. Another common shortcoming was the lack of an outcome orientation, evident in about 30 percent of programs with results frameworks rated moderately unsatisfactory or worse, with indicators focused on inputs, processes, and outputs rather than outcomes. Programs have improved on this indicator over time—threequarters of the programs with this shortcoming were designed before the rollout of results-based CASs. Finally, in just over a quarter of cases, the programs’ core objectives were not well-enough defined to be reasonably tracked during implementation. 131
APPENDIX C RESPONSIVENESS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BANK’S COUNTRY PROGRAMS Quality of Portfolio Implementation 30. Over half (54 percent) of country programs were rated moderately satisfactory or satisfactory with regard to the quality of the implementation of their lending and non-lending portfolios. There was a slight decline over the period, with 57 percent rated moderately satisfactory or better in the first half, compared to 51 percent in the second half. 31. Of those rated moderately unsatisfactory or worse, there were three common barriers to high-quality implementation. First, in about half of these cases, there were significant delays in implementation. These were frequently due to challenges in procurement and issues related to the capacity of the implementing agency. There was deterioration in portfolio quality in about half of these cases as well, as measured by the share of projects and commitments at risk. Finally, slow disbursement plagued about one-third of the moderately satisfactory or worse programs. Outcomes of Projects and Operations 32. The rating for project outcomes was based on the average rating of independent assessments of projects that closed during the CAS cycle, as reported in the CASCR review. This rating therefore is focused on final outcomes of Bank operations rather than implementation progress; however, it is backward looking at the portfolio of operations that have closed during the period. By contrast, the measure of portfolio implementation was focused on progress in implementing the concurrent lending and non-lending portfolio. 33. The rating for both project outcomes was high—71 percent of country programs were rated moderately satisfactory or better in this regard. This high rating was stable over the period. Outcomes of Analytical and Advisory Activities (AAA) 34. When available, CASCR Reviews use ratings of AAA from assessments of the now defunct Quality Assurance Group in their discussion of knowledge products, but they do not otherwise explicitly rate the outcomes of the AAA program. Nonetheless, even when no rating is specified, all CASCR Reviews make some judgment regarding the usefulness or effectiveness of individual pieces of AAA or of the AAA program in its entirety. This exercise did not review any AAA directly; instead, it considers statements in CASCR Reviews that AAA affected the design of Bank operations or impacted the government’s policies as indications that the Bank’s AAA work had positive outcomes. 132
Page 1 and 2:
The Matrix System at Work An Evalua
Page 3 and 4:
©2012 Independent Evaluation Group
Page 5 and 6:
Costs of Country and Sector Strateg
Page 7 and 8:
Table 3.6. Total Cross-Support Sold
Page 10:
Abbreviations AAA AFR ARDE ARPP BET
Page 14 and 15:
Glossary Term Anchor sector directo
Page 16 and 17:
GLOSSARY Practice managers (PM) Reg
Page 18 and 19:
Overview The Matrix System at Work
Page 20 and 21:
OVERVIEW rather than on the 1997 ma
Page 22 and 23:
OVERVIEW satisfactory or better in
Page 24 and 25:
OVERVIEW toward capacity building a
Page 26 and 27:
OVERVIEW Innovation in the field is
Page 28 and 29:
OVERVIEW Figure D. Outcomes of Bank
Page 30 and 31:
OVERVIEW modernization in the corpo
Page 32 and 33:
OVERVIEW management structure but t
Page 34 and 35:
OVERVIEW Structure Bank-wide matrix
Page 36 and 37:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE interest and ow
Page 38 and 39:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE Management cons
Page 40:
MANAGEMENT RESPONSE that reach far
Page 43 and 44:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
2. The Strategic Alignment of Secto
Page 61 and 62:
CHAPTER 2 THE STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT O
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
CHAPTER 3 THE PROMISE OF A KNOWLEDG
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
CHAPTER 4 DELIVERING QUALITY SERVIC
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122: CHAPTER 4 DELIVERING QUALITY SERVIC
Page 123 and 124: CHAPTER 5 INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND
Page 145 and 146: 6. Conclusions and Recommendations
Page 147 and 148: CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEND
Page 149 and 150: CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEND
Page 152 and 153: Appendix A Matrix Management and Or
Page 154 and 155: APPENDIX A MATRIX MANAGEMENT AND OR
Page 162 and 163: SECONDARY ANALYSIS OF CASCR REVIEWS
Page 164 and 165: APPENDIX B EVALUATION METHODOLOGY a
Page 166 and 167: APPENDIX C RESPONSIVENESS AND EFFEC
Page 176 and 177: APPENDIX D EXPERIENCE IN THE TRENCH
Page 196 and 197: Appendix E Key Findings from Sector
Page 198 and 199: APPENDIX E KEY FINDINGS FROM SECTOR
Page 206 and 207: Table E.1. Country Directors and Ma
Page 210 and 211: # Other Questions Q # 7 APPENDIX E
Page 214 and 215: APPENDIX F FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
Page 216 and 217: APPENDIX F FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS:
Page 218 and 219: Appendix G Comparison of the Six Re
Page 220 and 221: APPENDIX G PROFILES OF THE BANK’S
Page 222 and 223:
APPENDIX G PROFILES OF THE BANK’S
Page 224 and 225:
APPENDIX G PROFILES OF THE BANK’S
Page 226 and 227:
Appendix H Working across Organizat
Page 228 and 229:
APPENDIX H WORKING ACROSS ORGANIZAT
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Appendix I Budgetary Incentives 65.
Page 240 and 241:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES Bud
Page 242 and 243:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES 72.
Page 244 and 245:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES com
Page 246 and 247:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES Fig
Page 248 and 249:
APPENDIX I BUDGETARY INCENTIVES mea
Page 250 and 251:
APPENDIX J WORKING ACROSS SECTORS A
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Appendix K World Bank Sector Strate
Page 258 and 259:
APPENDIX K WORLD BANK SECTOR STRATE
Page 260 and 261:
APPENDIX K WORLD BANK SECTOR STRATE
Page 262 and 263:
Appendix L International Finance Co
Page 264 and 265:
APPENDIX L IFC 2013 CHANGE INITIATI
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
APPENDIX M STAFFING DATA Note: Head
Page 272 and 273:
APPENDIX M STAFFING DATA Table M.7.
Page 274 and 275:
Appendix N Managers Interviewed Nam
Page 276 and 277:
References Barnett, Michael N. and
Page 278 and 279:
REFERENCES Sy, Thomas and Laura Sue
Page 280 and 281:
Endnotes 1 See Wapenhans 1992, 1994
Page 282 and 283:
ENDNOTES appropriately assessed by
Page 284 and 285:
ENDNOTES 46 The respondents to this
Page 286:
ENDNOTES 71 See Safeguards and Sust
show all

The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?