|
|
 |
| |
 |
|
| |
 |
Over the past year, the response to the global financial crisis has continued to dominate the development work of international institutions, including the World Bank Group. Challenges of poverty and fragile states, environment, and climate change remain daunting, and the manner in which these are addressed is shifting.
The World Bank Group must adapt to these changes for greater development effectiveness. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Association, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) individually face particular challenges in the increasingly multipolar world. But there are opportunities for coordination across the World Bank Group, whether between public and business activities, among sectors, or across macro and micro concerns.
This review is IEG's first Bank Group-wide annual evaluation. It looks at select issues of current relevance related to development results. Regarding the World Bank, this report considers the importance of decentralization but, based on limited data, does not find any association with project performance. At IFC, a number of projects show gaps in quality at entry—a specific rating—relative to the institution’s credit review guidelines. For MIGA to deliver on its development mandate and improve project development outcomes, strengthening the quality of underwriting is critical.
Emphasizing these synergies, Part I of this report discusses recent activities and results of the World Bank Group; Part II focuses on select issues in development effectiveness at each institution. A separate volume contains a detailed review and rating of management response and actions regarding recommendations from IEG from recent years. |
|
| Management Response | Chairperson's Summary: Committee on Development Effectiveness |
|
 |
 |
The recommendations contained in IEG's evaluations are the outcome of a large amount of information and analysis, often covering decades of World Bank Group activities. This richness is a source of value to the World Bank Group, yet also a potential obstacle to effective follow-up. IEG tracks the actions of the Bank Group management in response to its recommendations. Because of differences across the Bank Group institutions, each IEG unit has different approaches to developing recommendations and tracking follow-up actions. Click on a tab below for a detailed comparison of these approaches.
NOTE: The IEG Management Action Tracking Systems are divided into three categories: IEG Management Action Tracking System for IEG-World Bank, IEG Management Action Tracking System for IEG-IFC and IEG Management Action Tracking System for IEG-MIGA.
| IEG Management Action Tracking Systems for IEG-World Bank |
| Issue |
IEG-World Bank |
| Which reports are being tracked? |
Corporate
Sector
Thematic |
| What is being tracked? |
Implementation by Bank management |
| How many recommendations are currently being tracked? |
55 recommendations from evaluations issued 2007-10 |
| What rating system is used for tracking? |
Status of adoption: (high, substantial, medium, low)
Status of implementation: (active, complete, incomplete, overtaken by events, difference of opinion)
Written assessment of management response |
| What is management's role?
|
Self-ratings
Written self-assessment
Coordinated by OPCS |
| When are recommendations retired? |
Retired after four years through implementation report to the Board unless rated active by IEG |
| How frequently does IEG update? |
Annually |
| Who can access it? |
Internal: Final MAR report accessible as e-MAR; Implementation Report submitted to CODE
External: Summary including a table of management and IEG ratings of level of adoption published in annex to annual report (ARDE until 2009)
|
| IEG Management Tracking Systems for IFC |
| Issue |
IEG-IFC |
| Which reports are being tracked? |
Corporate
Sector
Thematic
Country |
| What is being tracked? |
Implementation by IFC management, based on negotiated indicators |
| How many recommendations are currently being tracked? |
65 recommendations in 2010 |
| What rating system is used for tracking? |
Status of adoption: (high, substantial, medium, low)
Status of implementation: (active, inactive)
Written assessment of management response |
| What is management's role? |
Self-ratings
Written self-assessment
Coordinated by IFC strategy unit |
| When are recommendations retired? |
When “implemented,” “superseded,” or “no longer relevant” |
| How frequently does IEG update? |
Biannually |
| Who can access it? |
Internal: Implementation indicators, management and IEG comments accessible to management and IEG
External:Recommendation, management response, level of adoption, and status in BROE (2008)
|
| IEG Management Tracking Systems for MIGA |
| Issue |
IEG-MIGA |
| Which reports are being tracked? |
Corporate
Sector
Thematic |
| What is being tracked? |
Implementation by MIGA management |
| How many recommendations are currently being tracked? |
16 outstanding recommendations in 2010 |
| What rating system is used for tracking? |
Status of adoption: (completed, medium, low)
Written assessment of management response |
| What is management's role? |
Written self-assessment
Coordinated by MIGA management |
| When are recommendations retired? |
“Completed” recommendations retired every year, retired when “implemented,” superseded,” or “no longer relevant” |
| How frequently does IEG update? |
Annually |
| Who can access it? |
Internal: MATR is annexed to IEG-MIGA annual report, includes recommendations, management comment, and IEG implementation rating; accessible on MIGAnet and E-board
External: Redacted version of MATR annexed to IEG-MIGA annual report posted on MIGAnet of E-board
|
|
|
|
|
Source: IEG.
NOTE: As of December 2009. ARDE = Annual Report on Development Effectiveness; BROE = Biennial Report on Operations Evaluation; CODE = Committee on Development Effectiveness; MAR = Management Action Record; MATR = Management Action Tracking Record; OPCS = World Bank Operations Policy and Country Services (“management”).
|
| |
| |
| 
