Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Results and Performance of the World Bank Group - 2017

141 views

Published on

IEG’s new report, Results and Performance of the World Bank Group (RAP) provides a timely review of the Bank Group portfolio performance and offers key insights into how the Bank can also do better, to improve its project outcomes and achieve its broader development goals.

Published in: Economy & Finance
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Results and Performance of the World Bank Group - 2017

  1. 1. World Bank Project Performance 2017 Results and Performance Report Soniya Carvalho Lead Evaluation Officer June 14, 2018
  2. 2. Three key aspects of performance examined Independent Evaluation Group 2 Project Outcomes Bank Performance (including Quality at Entry and Quality of Supervision) Use of Evaluative Evidence 1. 2. 3.
  3. 3. Corporate target on project outcome was exceeded by volume of net commitments, but was not met by number of projects Independent Evaluation Group 3 Corporate Target Exceeded by volume Corporate Target Not Met by number of projects Percentage rated MS+ 84% Corporate target, 80% 73% Corporate target, 75%
  4. 4. Quality of supervision by volume exceeded the corporate target whereas quality at entry lagged Independent Evaluation Group 4 Quality of Supervision Corporate Target Exceeded Quality at Entry Corporate Target Not Met 89% Corporate target, 80% 75% Corporate target, 80% Percentage rated MS+ by volume
  5. 5. Evolution of the Bank’s guidance on economic analysis risks compromising efficient resource allocation Coherence and consistency is needed with regard to the:  discount rate  methodology for calculating it  time period over which benefits are discounted Independent Evaluation Group 5
  6. 6. Learning from evaluative evidence has been lackluster Independent Evaluation Group 6 Substantial 41% High 32% Complete 20% 5% Moderate 2% Negligible 20% 32% Extent to which management has implemented its action plans
  7. 7. Four calls to action  Improve outcomes of smaller projects  Improve quality at entry across the board  Ensure oversight in economic analysis  And… Independent Evaluation Group 7
  8. 8. Embrace learning from evaluative evidence… Independent Evaluation Group 8 In other words, embrace...
  9. 9. Thank you!
  10. 10. IFC and MIGA Results and Performance Aurora Medina Siy, Sr. Evaluation Officer June 14, 2018, J B1-080 2017 Results and Performance Report
  11. 11. 1. IFC Investments 2. IFC Advisory 3. MIGA Guarantees Presentation of Results and Performance of 11
  12. 12. 1. IFC Investments: Results and Performance Slipped Further in CY14- CY16 • Decline in outcome success ratings across the board except for…​ • environmental and social results and performance starting CY15 • Projects in South Asia​ • Infra Group projects • Returns on IFC’s investments and its value-added to projects and to clients had lower ratings.​ 12 IFC's Additionality 71% 61% Investment Outcome 68% 59% Development Outcome 60% 50% CY11-13 CY14-16
  13. 13. 2. IFCAdvisory: Results and Performance Declined in FY14-FY16 • Weak development results across the board. • Delivery of products/services was successful • But… • expected outcomes were not achieved • outputs had weak strategic relevance • not delivered efficiently • IFC’s role and contribution in projects and to clients were rated low. 13 IFC's Role & Contribution 81% 74% Development Effectiveness 63% 49% FY11-13 FY14-16
  14. 14. Internal Factors Under IFC’s Control Had Stronger Influence on Development Results Upfront Work and IFC’s Unique Contribution for IFC Investments Upfront Work and IFC’s Role and Contribution for IFC Advisory 14
  15. 15. IFC’s Due Diligence and Value-Added were Associated with Development Results 5% 45% 34% 16% Screening, Appraisal & Structuring DevelopmentOutcome HighLow Low High IFC Investments 15
  16. 16. IFC’s Upfront Work and its Role & Contribution are Associated with Development Results 3% 34% 41% 21% Project Design and Preparation DevelopmentEffectiveness HighLow Low High IFC Advisory 16
  17. 17. 3. MIGAGuarantees: Development results stayed flat in FY11-FY16. Other indicators had mixed results. • Marked improvement in • Development results of projects in IDA countries • Environmental and social results and performance. • MIGA’s due diligence ratings vastly improved and can be enhanced. • Lower financial viability ratings indicate sustainability challenges. 17 MIGA's Role & Contribution 94% 89% Development Outcome 61% 62% Assessment, Underwriting & Monitoring 33% 66% FY05-10 FY11-16
  18. 18. Conclusion: • IFC development results and performance in both investments and advisory declined this review period. • Reversal of this trend is within IFC’s internal control. • MIGA guarantees’ long-term trend is flat and it can do more to enhance its development results.
  19. 19. Thank you!
  20. 20. Special Topic: Environmental Sustainability Stephen Hutton Senior Evaluation Officer June 14, 2018 2017 Results and Performance Report
  21. 21. Changes in World Bank project support for environmental sustainability Environmental sustainability portfolio Changes in IFC and MIGAproject support for environmental sustainability Three key aspects examined 21 1. 2. 3.
  22. 22. Independent Evaluation Group 22 WBG’s corporate strategies emphasize environmental sustainability Twin goals Forward look Environment strategy Climate change action plan Forest action plan Sustainability frameworks
  23. 23. Independent Evaluation Group 23 WB projects have 4 percentage points more support for environmental sustainability 19 13 5 33 22 10 10 37 0 20 40 60 Clean Green Resilient Any Environment Percent Benefit type
  24. 24. Independent Evaluation Group 24  Mostly in sustainable development global practices  More in higher income countries  More in countries with large portfolios WB portfolio projects with environmental benefits
  25. 25. Independent Evaluation Group 25 IFC project support for environmental sustainability increased by 4 percentage points 30 8 0 31 33 9 1 35 0 20 40 60 Clean Green Resilient Any Environment Percent Benefit Type
  26. 26. Independent Evaluation Group 26 MIGAsupport for environmental sustainability has increased from a low base 8 4 0 8 36 8 3 36 0 20 40 60 Clean Green Resilient Any Environment Percent Benefit Type
  27. 27. Independent Evaluation Group 27 Conclusion • The World Bank, IFC, and MIGA have all increased their support for activities with potential environmental benefits. • For the World Bank and IFC, this has been by 4 percent. Is this enough?
  28. 28. Thank you! Visit us at http://ieg.worldbankgroup.com

×