An Evaluation of the World Bank's Trust Fund Portfolio
An Evaluation of the World Bank's Trust Fund Portfolio
An Evaluation of the World Bank's Trust Fund Portfolio
- No tags were found...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
CHAPTER 6FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONSremains adequate to ensure consistency with <strong>the</strong> Bank’soverall trust fund policy <strong>of</strong> only accepting trust funds(including FIFs) that promote development and aideffectiveness.6.15 Management, accountability, and risks. All trust fundsreviewed by <strong>the</strong> evaluation are broadly consistent with <strong>the</strong> Bank’smandate, but not always well aligned with Bank or client countrypriorities. Its trust fund management framework and policy focusesmore on processes than on <strong>the</strong> strategic issues surrounding <strong>the</strong> Bank’scontinuing uptake <strong>of</strong> responsibility in administering donor trustfunds.6.16 The Bank’s accountabilities for <strong>the</strong> trust funds it managesare—with some exceptions—weaker than for IBRD/IDA and Bankbudget-financed activities. The accountability gaps arise because <strong>the</strong>Bank and donors have agreed to parallel allocation, approval, andbusiness processes. Despite ongoing efforts at mainstreaming trustfunds in Bank operational processes, many processes are attached to<strong>the</strong> source <strong>of</strong> funds ra<strong>the</strong>r than to <strong>the</strong> development activity beingfinanced. This has generated inefficiency and weak accounting forresults. If Bank-managed trust funds are to be used efficiently and inan accountable way, <strong>the</strong>y need to follow <strong>the</strong> same policies, processes,and procedures that guide <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Bank’s core resources.6.17 There are both potential missed opportunities and risks to <strong>the</strong>Bank and its clients from <strong>the</strong> Bank continuing to accumulate trustfund resources and responsibilities without a clear strategy and moreeffective oversight and accountability. Clients face potentialdevelopment risks and <strong>the</strong> Bank faces potential reputational risksfrom <strong>the</strong> Bank accepting trusteeship <strong>of</strong> individual trust funds thatprove not to work well, and more generally, from taking onobligations that operate outside <strong>of</strong> Bank operational policies (as in <strong>the</strong>case <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FIFs) or are inconsistent with Bank commitments to aideffectiveness principles as set out in <strong>the</strong> Paris Declaration. Moreover,<strong>the</strong> unpredictability <strong>of</strong> multi-year donor contributions to establishedtrust funds and, <strong>the</strong>refore, <strong>of</strong> trust fund financing to recipients posesrisks to sustainability <strong>of</strong> support and program planning, both forclients and <strong>the</strong> Bank.Recommendations6.18 This evaluation concludes that because trust funds addresslimitations in bilateral aid and <strong>the</strong> existing multilateral system andhave enabled <strong>the</strong> Bank to enhance its role in pursuit <strong>of</strong> itsdevelopment agenda <strong>the</strong> Bank should continue to accept <strong>the</strong>m. But83