is the highly-cited paper by Denizer, Kaufmann, and Kraay (2013), which uses data from the performance of Task Team Leaders (TTLs) to assess the success rates of Bank projects. Denizer et al.’s paper presents the closest analogue to our study, in that it compares project performance across a variety of theorized delivery challenges, including both micro- and macro- determinants of aid project outcomes. One of the earliest works examining the effects of project supervision is Kilby’s (2000) insightful analysis of the marginal rate of return from added supervision, particularly when applied early-on the project life cycle, and particularly so when applied to smaller projects.<sup>5</sup> Ika’s (2015) survey analysis of World Bank task team leaders similarly engages the effect of supervision, showing that a principal cause of failure in World Bank projects can be traced to a lack of timely supervision. This echoes Kilby’s findings, particularly with respect to the cost-benefit analysis of added supervision relative to project performance.

Several insights from literature outside the immediate scope of World Bank project effectiveness may be deemed useful to this analysis. First, a focus on the often-ignored political realities of international aid practices can offer insights into one of the most significant exogenous factors that may affect the ultimate success of disbursements. It is informally understood that aid projects are beholden to political considerations and maneuvering by both grantees and recipients. The extent of this focus has been explored by several works in recent literature, which have looked at both the general effects of political dynamics as well as more focused effects (Laws, 2016). For example, Shin et al.’s (2017) examination of implementing partnerships provides a more nuanced view of how different coalitions of implementing partners can lead to variation in project success. However, in following with the general theme of the literature explored above, such works also exist in a degree of isolation relative to a more comprehensive catalog of delivery challenges that may affect project outcomes.

In addition to political factors, some findings from the literature on public-sector project management may be deemed useful to the analysis attempted here. Khang and Moe’s (2008) use of a project life cycle framework offers a useful analogue to our examination of the sequencing effects that may be anticipated in the delivery challenge taxonomy.<sup>6</sup> By parsing delivery challenges according to different moments in the project life cycle, we may begin to develop an informative theoretical framework for why certain challenges may be expected at certain times. Naturally, some of the challenges explored are to be intuitively expected in specific times (for instance, the designbased challenges can be seen as specific to the front-end definition of aid projects). By applying a life cycle framework to World Bank projects, we gain an informative theoretical prior with which we can better understand the root causes of the issues that often present themselves as delivery challenges.

Lastly, recent work on the performance of public sector programs may offer a useful lens through which World Bank project effectiveness may be analyzed. Knut and Volden’s (2016) examination of the paradoxes of project governance in Norway sheds light on several under-represented challenges and themes that merit further exploration in the literature. The authors focus on the importance of the initial project concept as a major determinant of project outcome, noting that a “lack of competence among planners, avoidance of hidden agendas during planning, underestimation of costs and overestimation of benefits, unrealistic and inconsistent assumptions, and how to secure essential planning data and adequate contract regimes” play a key role in project outcome (Knut

> 5Kilby’s paper is also notable for its examination of project performance as a latent variable.

> 6For a similar and useful analysis of aid program success in Asian Development Bank interventions, see: Feeny, Simon, and Vu Vuong. “Explaining Aid Project and Program Success: Findings from Asian Development Bank Interventions.” World Development 90 (2017): 329-343.

5