M O PA N A S S E S S M E N T R E P O R T

World Bank
(IDA and IBRD)
PA R T I I
Technical and Statistical
Annex

Published July 2023

For any questions or comments, please contact:
The MOPAN Secretariat
secretariat@mopanonline.org
www.mopanonline.org

M O PA N A S S E S S M E N T R E P O R T
2021-22

World Bank
(IDA and IBRD)
PA R T I I
Technical and Statistical
Annex

EXPL ANATO R Y NOT E
MOPAN is the only collective action mechanism that meets member countries’ information needs pertaining to
the performance of multilateral organisations (MOs). Through its institutional assessment report, MOPAN provides
comprehensive, independent, and credible performance information to inform members’ engagement and
accountability mechanisms.
MOPAN’s assessment reports tell the story of the multilateral organisation (MO) and its performance. Through detailing
the major findings and conclusions of the assessment, alongside the MO’s performance journey, strengths, and areas
for improvement, the reports support member’s decision-making regarding MOs and the wider multilateral system.

This document is published under the responsibility of the Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network
(MOPAN). MOPAN is an independent body that is governed by a Steering Committee composed of representatives of
all of its member countries and served by a permanent Secretariat. The Secretariat is hosted at the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and bound by its administrative rules and procedures. It is
independent in terms of financing and the content and implementation of its work programme.
This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty
over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city
or area.
Please cite this publication as:
Multilateral Organisation Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN), (2023), MOPAN Assessment Report: World Bank,
2021 Assessment, Paris.
© MOPAN 2023

CONTENTS . 1

PART I I – TA BL E O F CO N TE N TS
Abbreviations and Acronyms

2

PART II – Technical and Statistical Annex3
Annex A: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS4
Methodology scoring and rating
4
The World Bank’s scoring overview
5
The World Bank’s performance rating summary
6
Performance analysis table8
Strategic management8
KPI 1: Organisational architecture and financial
framework enable mandate implementation and
achievement of expected results
8
KPI 2: Structures and mechanisms in place and
applied to support the implementation of global
frameworks for cross-cutting issues at all levels,
in line with the principles of the 2030 Sustainable
Development Agenda

27

Operational management48
KPI 3: The operating model and human and
financial resources support relevance and agility
48
KPI 4: Organisational systems are cost- and valueconscious and enable financial transparency/
accountability62
Relationship management89
KPI 5: Operational planning and intervention
design tools support relevance and agility within
partnerships89
KPI 6: Working in coherent partnerships directed at
leveraging and catalysing the use of resources
111

Performance management138
KPI 7: Strong and transparent results focus,
explicitly geared towards function
138
KPI 8: Evidence-based planning and programming
applied151
Results
169
KPI 9: Development and humanitarian objectives
are achieved, and results contribute to normative
and cross-cutting goals
169
KPI 10: Interventions are relevant to the
needs and priorities of partner countries and
beneficiaries, as the organisation works towards
results in areas within its mandate

180

KPI 11: Results are delivered efficiently

182

KPI 12: Results are sustainable

184

Annex B: DOCUMENT LIST187
Annex C: RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL
PARTNER SURVEY203
Respondent profile
203
Survey results
204
Strategic management
204
Staffing208
Cross-cutting issues
210
Interventions212
Financial resources management
218
Managing relationships
220
Performance management
228

2 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

ABBREVI AT IO NS A N D ACR O N Y M S
ADM
ASA
AT
BETF
CCAP
CCDR
CCSA
CEM
CEN
CLR
CPF
CPPR
CPSD
CRI
CRO
DPF
DRR
EBC
ED
EFO
EOY
ESF
FCS
FCV
FIF
FSF
FTE
FY
GHG
GIA
GP
GPG
IBRD
ICSID
IDA
IEG

Accountability and Decision-making
Advisory Services and Analytics
Administrative Tribunal
Bank-Executed Trust Fund
Climate Change Action Plan
Country Climate and Development Report
Cross-cutting Solutions Area
Country Engagement Model
Country Engagement Note
Completion Learning Review
Country Partnership Framework
Country Portfolio Performance Reviews
Country Private Sector Diagnostic
Corporate Results Indicators
Chief Risk Officer
Development Policy Financing
Disaster Risk Reduction
Ethics and Business Conduct
Executive Director
Externally Financed Output
End of Year
Environmental and Social Framework
Fragile and Conflict-affected Situations
Fragility, Conflict, and Violence
Financial Intermediary Fund
Financial Sustainability Framework
Full-Time Equivalent
Fiscal Year
Greenhouse Gas
Group Internal Audit
Global Practice
Global Public Goods
International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development
International Centre for Settlement of
Investment Disputes
International Development Association
Independent Evaluation Group

IFC
IPF
KPI
LIC
MAR
MI
MIC
MIGA
MOPAN
MO
MTR
NDC
NRDV
OPCS
PCE
PCM
PforR
PIU
PLR
RAS
RBM
RETF
RMS
RRA
SALL
SCD
SDG
SEA
SEFF
SH
SORT
SPRP
TF
UN
VPU
WBG

International Finance Corporation
Investment Project Financing
Key Performance Indicator
Low-Income Country
Management Action Record
Micro-indicators
Middle-Income Country
Multilateral Guarantee Agency
Multilateral Organisation Performance
Assessment Network
Multilateral Organisation
Mid-term Review
Nationally Determined Commitment
Natural Resource Degradation and
Vulnerability
Operations Policy and Country Services
Private Capital Enabling
Private Capital Mobilisation
Program for Results
Project Implementation Unit
Performance Learning Review
Reimbursable Advisory Service
Results Based Management
Recipient-Executed Trust Fund
Results Measurement System
Risk and Resilience Assessments
Sustainable Annual Lending Limit
Systematic Country Diagnostic
Sustainable Development Goal
Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
Strategic External Funds Framework
Sexual Harassment
Systematic Operations Risk-Rating Tool
COVID-19 Strategic Preparedness and
Response Program
Trust Fund
United Nations
Vice Presidential Unit
World Bank Group

PA R T I I

Technical and
Statistical Annex
Part II: Technical and Statistical Annex provides the
background to the key findings and scores presented
in the first part of the report. It starts by outlining the
underlying analysis of each score by key performance
indicators, micro-indicators and elements. Then, it lists
the documents used as evidence for analyses and scores.
Last, it summarises the results of the external partner
survey that fed into the assessment.

4 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

ANNEX A – P E R FO R MA N CE A N A LYSI S
METHODOLOGY FOR SCORING AND RATING
The approach to scoring and rating under MOPAN 3.1 is described in the 2020 Methodology Manual, which can be
found MOPAN’s website.
Each of the 12 key performance indicators (KPIs) contains several micro-indicators (MIs), which vary in number. The
KPI rating is calculated by taking the average of the ratings of its constituent MIs.
Scoring of KPIs 1-8
The scoring of KPIs 1-8 are based upon an aggregated scoring the MIs. Each MI contains a several elements, which
vary in number, that represent international good practice. Taking the average of the constituent scores per element,
a score is then calculated per MI. The same logic is pursued at aggregation to the KPI level, to ensure a consistent
approach. Taking the average of the constituent scores per MI, an aggregated score is then calculated per KPI.
Scoring of KPIs 9-12
The scoring of KPIs 9-12 is based upon a meta-analysis of evaluations and performance information, rated at the
MI level and aggregated to the KPI level. For KPI 9, results against the mandate and contribution to cross-cutting
results are given equal weight. KPIs 9-12 assess results achieved as assessed in evaluations and annual performance
reporting from the organisations.
Rating scales
Whenever scores are aggregated, rating scales are used to translate scores into ratings that summarise the assessment
across KPIs and MIs. The rating scale used under MOPAN 3.1 is shown below.
MOPAN 3.1 PERFORMANCE SCORING AND RATING SCALE, METHODOLOGY 3.1

Highly satisfactory (3.51-4.00)

Satisfactory (2.51-3.50)

Unsatisfactory (1.51-2.50)

Highly unsatisfactory (0.00-1.50)

No evidence / Not applicable

A score of “N/E” means “no evidence” and indicates that the assessment team could not find any evidence but
was not confident of whether or not there was evidence to be found. The team assumes that “no evidence” does
not necessarily mean that the element is not present (which would result in a zero score). Elements rated N/E are
excluded from any calculation of the average. A significant number of N/E scores in a report indicates an assessment
limitation (see the Limitations section at the beginning of the report). A note indicating “N/A” means that an element
is considered to be “not applicable”. This usually owes to the organisation’s specific nature.
Changes to MOPAN’s rating system
MOPAN’s methodology is continuously evolving, and a recent notable change concerns how ratings (and their
corresponding colours) are applied based on the scores at micro-indicator (MI) and key performance indicator (KPI)
levels. Compared to the pre-2019 rating scale, the threshold for each rating has been raised to reflect the increasing
demands of organisational performance in the multilateral system. The underlying scores and approach to scoring
are unaffected.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 5

WORLD BANK’S SCORING OVERVIEW
The graphic on page 6 provides a “snapshot” of the World Bank’s scoring against the MOPAN framework of key
performance indicators (KPIs), micro-indicators (Mis) and elements across the five performance areas (Strategic
Management, Operational Management, Relationship Management, Performance Management and Results).
Overall, the World Bank demonstrates strong performance across each of the KPIs. However, it faces relative challenges
for KPI 6, reflecting challenges in working as “One Bank Group,” managing partnerships strategically to contribute to
development results and demonstrating the uptake and results of its knowledge work. Finally, the World Bank faces
challenges in demonstrating the outcomes of its work in the area of gender as well as demonstrating the sustainability
of its operations. These two areas of the framework are marked as “unrated.”

mo

nit
ori

ng

Evid
e

nce

7.2 RB

-bas

ap

sys

pli

ed

tem

ed t

s

arge

KPI 7
Transparent
results focus,
explicitly geared
to function

ts

M in st

rategie
s

7.1 RBM applied

d

ee

5.1 Alignment to country

y ana

lysis

5.2 Contex

pacit
5.3 Ca

t analysis

men
t

desig

5.4

Risk

man

age

ntio
n

inte
rve
es in

issu
ing
cutt
Cros
s5.5

n

ity

sp

bil

ion

sta

ina

en
tat

Su

m

5.6

ple
Im
5.7

rchit
ec

me
wo
rk
nc

ial

fra

upp
ort

1.2 O

rgan

nor

ma
tive

isatio
n al a

vision
1.1 Long-term

ORGANISATIONAL
PERFORMANCE

ty

ali

qu

2.1

e
er

nd

Ge

nt

me

iron

nv
.2 E

2

ues

ss-cutting iss

2.4 Other cro

KPI 3
Operating model
and resources
support, relevance
and agility

KPI 4
Cost and
value
consciousness
financial
transparency

hts

n rig

uma

2.3 H

3.1 Resources alig
ned to functions

3.2 R

esou

3.3

rce m
o

bilisa
tion

De

cen
tral
ised
3
dec
hu .4 Pe
isio
m rfo
nm
an rm
aki
res an
ng
c
ou erce ba
se
s
d

ing
ak
m
ion
cis
ed
de
nn
nt
pla
re
as
g
pa
nt
tin
ns
ge
me
ud
Tra
rse
db
bu
4.1
ase
Dis
s-b
4.2
ult
Res
4.3
t
s
i
nism
Aud
echa
4.4
ol m
ontr
s
4.5 C
cedure
d pro
ti-frau
4.6 An
/ response
evention
4.7 SEA pr
4.8 SH prevention / response

m
an
ag
em
en
t

KPI 1
Organisational
architecture
and financial
framework

KPI 2
Cross-cutting
issues

6.9 Knowledge
KPI 6
sessments
Work in
6.8 Joint as
s
e
ciari
coherent
benefi
ility to
g
partnerships
ountab
sharin
n
6.7 Acc
io
t
a
ion
form
KPI 5
inat
6.6 In
ord
s
Corgie
Planning and
e
6.5
yn
s
S
intervention
em
6.4
yst
e
ys
design support
tag y
ntr
an
t
ou
i
v
l
c
i
d
relevance and
e
ea
Ag
Us
tiv
agility
6.3
6.1
ara
p
m
Co
2
.
6

p

fram
ew
ork
s

ture

KPI 8
Evidence-based
planning and
programming
applied

lm
an
ag
em
en
t

ata

Fin
a

ce
d

1.4

an

1.3
S

m

Str
at
eg
ic
m
t
en
em
ag
an

for

8.7 Uptake of lessons

e
nt
de

Eff
ect

Pe
r

stems
w-up sy
8.6 Follo
ed
track
ance
erform
n
ig
oor p
d es
8.5 P
ased
e -b
ity
enc
ual
Evid
nq
8.4
e
tio
ag
lua
r
ve
Eva
o
c
on
8.3
n
o
c ti
ati
un
alu
nf
Ev
tio
lua
va

en

7.5

ive

7.3

8.2

ep
I nd

7.4

e

t
en
em
g
a
an
m
8.1

Pe
rfo
rm
an
c

THE WORLD BANK’S PERFORMANCE RATING SUMMARY

hi
ns
io
lat
Re

na
io
at
r
e
Op

New
rating
How to read these charts

9.1
atta Result
ine s
d

1.3

1.

4

1.2

ble s
ina fit
sta ene
b

Su

1.1

Micro-indicator

.1
12

1

1.5

KPI 12
Sustainability

1.6
1.7

Key Performance Indicator

Highly satisfactory (3.51-4.00)
s

Satisfactory (2.51-3.50)

0)

Unsatisfactory (1.51-2.50)

-1.00)

Highly unsatisfactory (0-1.50)

cable

No evidence / Not applicable

lity
ua
eq
er
d
/
n
nt
Ge
me
on nge
9.2
r
i
v
En cha
KPI 9
9.3imate
cl
Achievement of
hts
n rig
uma
results
9.4 H
scros
eran
thm
rights
5 OHu
9.9.7
ues
cutting iss

RESULTS

11.2

Tim

es
elin

KPI 11
Efficient
delivery

11.1
effic Cost
ienc
y

-4.00)

6 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

KPI 10
Relevance
to partners
1
to 0.1 R
ne es
ed po
s n

siv
e

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 7

Strategic management
KPI 1: Organisational architecture and financial framework

KPI 2: Cross-cutting issues

1.1 Long-term vision

2.1 Gender equality
2.2 Environment
2.3 Human rights
Other cross-cutting issues

1.2 Organisational architecture
1.3 Supports normative frameworks
1.4 Financial framework

Operational management
KPI 3: Resources support, relevance and agility

KPI 4: Cost and value consciousness, financial transparency
4.1 Translarent decision making
4.2 Disbursement as planned
4.3 Results-based budgeting
4.4 Audit
4.5 Control mechanisms
4.6 Anti-fraud procedures
4.7 SEA prevention / response
4.8 SH prevention / response

3.1 Resources aligned to functions
3.2 Resource mobilisation
3.3 Decentralised decision making
3.4 Performance-based human resources

Relationship management
KPI 5: Planning / intervention design support, relevance and agility

KPI 6: Work in coherent partnerships
6.1 Agility
6.2 Comparative advantage
6.3 Use country systems
6.4 Synergies
6.5 Co-ordination
6.6 Information sharing
6.7 Accountability to beneficiaries
6.8 Joint assessments
6.9 Knowledge

5.1 Alignment to country
5.2 Context analysis
5.3 Capacity analysis
5.4 Risk management
5.5 Cross-cutting issues in intervention design
5.6 Sustainability
5.7 Implementation speed

Performance management
KPI 7: Transparent results focus, explicitly geared to function

KPI 8: Evidence-based planning and programming applied

7.1 RBM applied
7.2 RBM in strategies
7.3 Evidence-based targets
7.4 Effective monitoring systems
7.5 Performance data applied

8.1 Independent evaluation function
8.2 Evaluation coverage
8.3 Evaluation quality
8.4 Evidence-based design
8.5 Poor performance tracked
8.6 Follow-up systems
8.7 Uptake of lessons

Results
KPI 9: Achievement of results

High confidence
Medium confidence
Little to no confidence

9.1 Results obtained
9.2 Gender equality
9.3 Environment / climate change
9.4 Human rights
9.5 Interventions improved RSSH

Highly satisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Highly unsatisfactory
No evidence/Not applicable

Key performance indicator

KPI 10: Relevance to partners
10.1 Responsive to needs

11.2 Timeliness

KPI 12: Results are sustainable
12.1 Sustainable benefits

Micro-indicator

Element 1
Element 2
Element 3
Element 4
Element 5
Element 6
Element 7
Element 8
Element 9

11.1 Cost efficiency

Evidence confidence

KPI 11: Results delivered efficiently

8 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS TABLE
This section provides the background to the scoring of individual key performance indicators across the five
performance areas, by including detailed analysis and score justifications at the level of micro-indicators and
elements. It also highlights the key sources of information used for analysis and scoring. For more information on the
assessment methodology, please refer to Chapter 4, Part I of the MOPAN Assessment of the World Bank (2021).
Certain indicators have been adapted to fit the organisation’s context. Any adaptations and interpretations to the
standard methodology are underlined within the performance analysis table.
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Clear strategic direction geared to key functions, intended results and integration of relevant cross-cutting priorities
KPI 1: Organisational architecture and financial framework enable mandate
implementation and achievement of expected results

KPI score

Highly satisfactory

3.59

The WBG long-term strategic vision is reflected in the 2013 World Bank Group Strategy and the 2016 Forward Look. These
documents, which define the Bank’s forward-looking strategic agenda toward 2030, establish its comparative advantage and
position it to achieve its twin goals of ending extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity. This vision is achieved through
its operational model, which details its geographic and sectoral expertise and wide range of instruments and services. The
organisational structure reflects a matrix management system whereby seven regional groupings interact with five thematic Vice
Presidency Units reflecting 23 global practice groups. The World Bank’s country-driven model is operationalised through CPFs,
which are prepared with borrowing countries at five-to-seven-year intervals and are informed by several analytical products.  
The operating model was reviewed and modified during the assessment period based on evidence from independent evaluations
and client feedback. Although changes introduced in 2014 were intended to promote cooperation across the organisation, they
had unintended consequences in terms of centralising decision making and creating barriers for collaboration. Further changes
were introduced to reinforce the Bank’s focus on “serving all clients.” through enhanced decentralisation of decision-making
and field presence. However, there remain important challenges for promoting collaboration across the World Bank matrix.
Incentives across the WBG remain focused on approvals rather than collective results.
The World Bank’s organisational structure, corporate scorecard and annual reporting is aligned to the SDGs but not framed
around them. The Bank plays an important role in mobilising finance for the SDGs through bond issuances, support for domestic
resource mobilisation and private capital mobilisation; however, there are opportunities to enhance reporting on its contribution
to the SDGs at the outcome level.
MI 1.1 Strategic plan and intended results based on a clear long-term vision and analysis of
comparative advantage in the context of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: A publicly available strategic plan (or equivalent) contains a long-term vision

4

Element 2: The vision is based on a clear analysis and articulation of comparative advantage

4

Element 3: The strategic plan operationalises the vision and defines intended results

3

Element 4: The strategic plan is reviewed regularly to ensure continued relevance and attention to risks 4
MI 1.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank (IDA/IBRD)’s long-term strategic vision is reflected in the World Bank 21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
Group Strategy (2013) and the Forward Look (2016). Medium-term strategic priorities are defined 224, 225, 226, 242,
246, 268, 269
through regular IDA shareholder replenishments and IBRD Capital increases.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 9

The 2013 World Bank Group Strategy identifies the Bank’s overarching objectives and long-term
vision. It responds to a changing landscape of development challenges, including: (i) rising inequality
within and among countries; (ii) the growing role of the private sector in driving economic growth
and transforming living standards; (iii) increasing global connectivity, contributing to new risks and
vulnerabilities; and (iv) increasing threats posed by climate change and other crises (including disease
outbreaks) to poverty reduction and shared prosperity. The Strategy positions the Bank to achieve twin
organisational goals in a sustainable manner to: (i) End extreme poverty, reducing the percentage of
people living on less than $1.25 a day to 3 percent by 2030; and (ii) Promote shared prosperity, fostering
income growth of the bottom 40 percent of the population in every country. The 2013 Strategy also
highlights “Securing the long-term future of the planet and its resources, ensuring social inclusion, and
limiting the economic burdens on future generations will underpin efforts.”
Overall, the strategy envisions a global “solutions bank,” offering world-class knowledge services and
customised development solutions grounded in knowledge and evidence, financing solutions and
ability to convene a wide range of partners. In light of the twin goals, the Strategy identifies a “value
proposition” for the WBG with respect to:
(i)

its global footprint, enabling it to bring the perspectives of its member country into dialogue
around the global development agenda;

(ii) its ability to deliver customised development solutions that are backed by finance, knowledge
and a “One Bank” approach that brings together public and private partners; and
(iii) its ability to advance knowledge about “what works,” building upon world leading development
research, practitioner experience and global outreach.

21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
The Strategy was further supplemented by the 2016 “Forward Look: A Vision for the World Bank Group 224, 225, 226, 242,
in 2030,” which identifies how the WBG will support delivery of the 2030 Agenda. It recognises the 246, 268, 269
WBG’s deep engagement on delivering global public goods over previous decades and its central role

Q1[01], THE STRATEGIES AND POLICIES OF THE WORLD BANK DEMONSTRATE
CLARITY OF VISION
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

All charts in this Annex show the results of the 2022 MOPAN external partner survey unless specified otherwise.

10 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

in scaling up finance for development to support the delivery of the SDGs, particularly in the area of
climate finance, while continuing to reinforce the “twin goals.” The four pillars of the Forward Look
are: (i) serving all clients; (ii) creating markets, maximising finance for development, and expanding
the use of private sector solutions; (iii) leading on global issues; and (iv) improving the business model.
MOPAN’s Partner Survey indicates that most stakeholders agree that the Bank’s policies and strategies
demonstrate a clarity of vision, with over 90 percent responding favourably.
Element 2. The Bank identifies a clear comparative advantage in its strategic documents and uses
periodic touchpoints with shareholders to further operationalise it. There has been a clear and
consistent understanding of the WBG’s comparative advantage over the assessment period.
The 2013 Strategy articulates the Bank’s comparative advantage and “areas of strength” on the basis
of diagnostic work, client surveys and other external assessments. The Strategy identifies the Bank’s
comparative advantages as its:
(i)

global presence and ability to synthesise global perspectives on development issues across its
member countries;

(ii) long-standing country engagement, enabling it to address complex, development challenges that
require long-term interventions;
(iii) broad operational knowledge and expertise;
(iv) track-record of responding to crises and building resilience;
(v) financial strength and ability to provide innovative financial products to its clients;
21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
224, 225, 226, 242,
246, 268, 269

(vi) convening power among local and regional entities; and
(vii) strong reputation for integrity and safeguards.
Most respondents to MOPAN’s Partner Survey agreed that the Bank identifies a clear comparative
advantage in its strategic documents.

Q1[02], THE STRATEGIES OF THE WORLD BANK DEMONSTRATE GOOD
UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 11

Beyond the 2013 Strategy, the recent IDA20 replenishment and the 2018 IBRD Capital Increase have
provided an opportunity for the Bank to reflect on its comparative advantage in light of an evolving
multilateral context. Over the course of the assessment period, these touchpoints have generally
reinforced the statement of the WBG’s comparative advantage, reflecting a consistent understanding
over time. The Bank’s comparative advantage was again recognised in the context of the Bank’s COVID19 Crisis Response in terms of its global reach and depth of engagement, multi-sector knowledge and
practitioner expertise, ability to address development challenges across the public and private sectors
and ability to leverage financing. The vast majority of stakeholders responding to MOPAN’s partner
survey agreed that the World Bank has a clear COVID strategy that reflected its comparative advantage.
Element 3. The 2013 Strategy, 2016 Forward Look, the 2018 IBRD-IFC Capital Package, and recent
IDA replenishments identify operational arrangements and processes to implement the World
Bank’s Strategic Direction. The Bank’s Strategic Direction is further operationalised through the
IDA Replenishment Process and IBRD Capital Package Proposals and the Country Engagement
Framework.
The 2013 Strategy and the Forward Look are operationalised through institutional structures reflecting
the interplay between global sectors and themes and different regional contexts. The WB is organised
into:
(i)

Seven regional units (Africa Western and Central, Africa Eastern and Southern, East Asia & Pacific,
Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, and
South Asia)

(ii) 18 Sectoral Practice Groups and five Global Themes (cross-cutting issues) which report to five
VPUs; and
(iii) A range of global corporate support units.
A key aspect of how the World Bank operationalises its strategy is its country engagement model. The
engagement model consists of a Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), Country Partnership Framework
(CPF), and Performance Learning Review (PLR) and a Completion and Learning Review (CLR). Together,
these tools generate evidence on country development needs, take stock of national development plans
and priorities, identify opportunities for engagement at the nexus of needs and priorities and take stock
of results and lessons learned for future operations. CPFs define the World Bank’s engagement with
specific countries over a period of time. The country engagement model and its matrix organisational
structure enables the Bank to balance its global strategic priorities with the needs and priorities of its
individual borrower countries.
The Role of the IDA Replenishment Process in operationalising the Bank’s Strategic Direction:
IDA relies significantly on the contributions of the World Bank’s member countries, complemented by
capital market borrowings and repayments of IDA credits. The IDA Replenishment process provides an
opportunity for the Bank and its member countries to reflect on its comparative advantage over the
medium-term and identify policy priorities for IDA-funded activities. This dialogue among the Bank’s
management and development partners, including IDA members and Civil Society Organisations
(CSOs), helps ensure IDA’s policy and financing frameworks remain relevant to both borrower country
needs and broader shareholder priorities. The replenishment process is iterative, involving a series of
engagements among member countries (donors and borrowers) and WBG management to take stock of
results achieved and discuss the Bank’s future strategic directions, financing envelope and framework,
policy commitments and results measurement.

21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
224, 225, 226, 242,
246, 268, 269

12 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The most recent IDA20 replenishment, brought forward by one year in light of the financing implications
of the WB’s response to COVID-19, reaffirmed the Bank’s comparative advantage in this context. The
overarching theme of the replenishment, “Building Back Better from the Crisis – Toward a Green,
Resilient and Inclusive Future” addresses the combined impacts of COVID-19, climate change, and
rising conflict as factors which are exacerbating extreme poverty and undermining growth, resilience
and inclusivity. The resulting policy framework and commitments respond to the diverse health, social
and economic impacts of COVID-19. Alongside the Bank’s ongoing emphasis on gender, climate change
and fragility, the IDA20 Special Themes, cross-cutting issues and policy commitments put emphasis on:
(i) addressing immediate human capital challenges and scaling up investment to strengthen inclusive
health systems, universal health coverage, and pandemic preparedness; (ii) promoting inclusive social
protection, (iii)addressing learning losses in education; (iv) increasing jobs and economic transformation
; (v) strengthening governance and institutions, and (vi) promoting overall crisis preparedness.
The Role of IBRD Capital Replenishments in operationalising the Bank’s Strategic Direction:
IBRD Capital is not replenished via a regular cycle, noted in the Evolution Roadmap as a potential area
for attention (should an IBRD ‘Concessional Fund’ for addressing global challenges be established).
Rather, capital package proposals are negotiated between WBG management and shareholders on an
as-needed basis, typically when capital levels are not considered robust to deliver the forward-looking
institutional strategy. Following formal endorsement by the Board of Governors, capital package
proposals and approved by the Treasuries of individual shareholder countries. The 2018 Capital Increase
Package supports the implementation of the Forward Look and the Bank’s comparative advantage into
more specific policy commitments. Policy commitments focus on: (i) serving all clients; (ii) leading on
global issues (including crisis management, climate change and others); (iii) mobilisation and creating

21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
224, 225, 226, 242,
Element 4. There is no defined period for the 2013 Strategy and the Forward Look; however, the 246, 268, 269
IDA Replenishment Process, the Annual Budget process and the Spring and Annual Meetings all
markets; and (iv) improving effectiveness of internal model.

provide a means for shareholders to continually review strategic priorities to ensure ongoing
relevance and track operationalisation.
The 2013 Strategy and Forward Look do not specify a timeframe for review or renewal. However, the World
Bank implements regular touchpoints through which shareholders review the continued relevance
and operationalisation of the Bank’s strategies. In addition to regular IDA Replenishment processes
and as-needed IBRD Capital Increases, the Bank’s Annual Budget process and its Annual and Spring
Meetings provide a means for shareholders to review strategic priorities and their operationalisation.
The Annual Planning and Budgeting Process (the W-process):
Operational priorities may also change for each budget cycle through the “W-process,” which determines
the allocation of resources across the institution. The W-process is a 5-step strategic planning and
budgeting process that aligns available resources to institutional priorities and client need/demand,
integrating both top-down and bottom-up perspectives (discussed in further detail in MI 1.4). The
outcome of the W-process is reflected in Annual Strategy and Business Outlook papers Annual Budget
documents, which report on progress in delivering on strategic priorities and targets over the previous
year and identify the strategic context and business priorities for the next year.
The Spring and Annual Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund:
The Spring and Annual Meetings include a meeting of the Board of Governors, comprising high-level
representatives such as finance ministers, central bank governors and ministers of development from
each of the Bank’s member countries. At the plenary session, the Board of Governors takes stock of
the global economy and takes decisions on major policy directions. The World Bank Development

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 13

Committee, a ministerial-level forum of 25 members representing the full membership of the Bank
meets to take stock of the World Bank’s progress in delivering on its strategic priorities and build
consensus around critical development issues.
At the recent 2022 Annual Meetings, shareholders called upon the World Bank Group to develop a

21, 40, 167, 220, 221,
224, 225, 226, 242,
reduction, shared prosperity and the delivery of Global Public Goods. While it is anticipated that 246, 268, 269
the “Twin Goals” will be retained, the Evolution Roadmap will entail engagement between WBG
roadmap of engagements with the Board of Executive Directors to respond to challenges for poverty

management and shareholders to review mission/vision, the operating model, and financial model of
the Bank to emphasise sustainability and resilience and strengthen the role of the Bank in delivering
Global Public Goods.
MI 1.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 1.2: Organisational architecture congruent with a clear long-term vision and associated
operating model

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.60

Element 1: The organisational architecture is congruent with the strategic plan

3

Element 2: The operating model supports implementation of the strategic plan

4

Element 3: The operating model is reviewed regularly to ensure continued relevance

4

Element 4: The operating model allows for strong co-operation across the organisation

3

Element 5: The operating model clearly delineates responsibilities for results

4

MI 1.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank’s organisational architecture reflects the 2013 Strategy, balancing
country-driven engagement and deep technical expertise to deliver customised development
solutions across multiple sectors.
An updated organisational chart is available publicly reflecting different Vice President Units (VPUs).
The organisational structure is broken down into seven Regional Vice Presidencies responsible for 40, 44, 61, 95, 99, 100,
lending operations, including: (i) project identification, design and supervision; (ii) economic and sector 104, 109, 118, 125,
work; and country relations. Five thematic Vice Presidencies reflect 18 practice areas (key technical 148, 173, 281
areas of development expertise) 5 global themes (cross-cutting issues such as gender; climate change;
fragility, conflict and violence; jobs and knowledge). Alongside these functions are a range of General
Management Units responsible for key corporate functions including Legal, Finance, Internal Audit,
Ethics, Human Resources, Operations Policy. The global practices and themes are provided as follows:

14 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Global Practice VPU

Practice Group

Equitable Growth, Finance, and

Finance, Competitiveness, and Innovation

Institutions

Governance
Macroeconomics, Trade, and Investment
Poverty & Equity

Human Development

Education
Gender
Health, Nutrition & Population
Social Protection & Jobs

Sustainable Development

Agriculture & Food
Climate Change
Environment, Natural Resources & Blue Economy
Social Sustainability and Inclusion
Urban, Disaster Risk Management, Resilience and Land
Water

Infrastructure

Digital Development
Energy & Extractives
Infrastructure Finance, PPPs & Guarantees
Transport

Global Themes

Climate Change
Fragility, Conflict and Violence
Gender
Jobs
Knowledge Management

Element 2. The World Bank’s operating model is clearly set out, including products and services,
beneficiaries and interactions across different operational structures.
The World Bank’s Operations Manual contains the operational policies, directives, procedures and
other instructions to staff that apply to Bank operations. Key Policies and directives include:
• The Bank Directive on Country Engagement, which provides direction on the development
of a framework for the World Bank to engage member countries, including the development,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of country partnership frameworks;
• Policies, Guidelines and Directives for the Bank’s main instruments, including Development
Policy Financing, Investment Project Financing, Program-for-Results) financing and Analytical
and Advisory Services (including Reimbursable Advisory Services), which describe the purpose,
components and requirements of each instrument as well as financial terms and conditions; and
• Policies Guidelines and Directives for Cross-cutting issues, Safeguarding and Risk Management,
including requirements for addressing Gender, environmental and social safeguards, procurement
and preventing fraud and corruption, among many other issues.

40, 44, 61, 95, 99, 100,
104, 109, 118, 125,
148, 173, 281

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 15

Over the course of the assessment period, interactions between corporate structures, practice areas
and themes and Regional Vice Presidencies have been governed by a matrix system. Changes to the
operating model implemented since 2014 have retained this matrix structure but have shifted key
responsibilities for programming to different “anchor” units. The Policy and Procedures Framework of
the Bank, including the Operations Manual sets out how these different areas of the Bank interact in the
delivery of the Bank’s services to borrower countries. Survey results confirm that most stakeholders,
particularly among representatives of the Board (over 90 percent favourable), Borrower Countries (over
90 percent favourable), and Operational Partners (approximately 85 percent favourable), find that the
Bank organises and runs itself in a way that fully supports its vision. Stakeholder interviews confirmed
how different parts of the Bank, including regional staff and staff across the global practices and themes
continuously interact to inform pipeline development, develop and manage operations and promote
learning and knowledge sharing.

Q1[03], THE WORLD BANK ORGANISES AND RUNS ITSELF IN A WAY THAT FULLY
SUPPORTS ITS VISION
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Knowledge partner

40, 44, 61, 95, 99, 100,
104, 109, 118, 125,
148, 173, 281

Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

50%

Disagree

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 3. The operating model has been reviewed periodically to ensure relevance and support
the implementation of the 2013 Strategy and the Forward Look.
The reorganisation in 2014 was developed with the intention of aligning the operating model with
the 2013 Strategic Plan. These changes maintained the existing matrix structure but rebalanced
responsibilities among the regional teams and technical areas. The delivery of operational budgets
was shifted to newly created Global Practices (GPs), with operational staff reporting to directors in the
GPs rather than to sector directors in the Regional VPUs. This shift moved away from a long-standing
practice where programs and budgets were held by regional teams who sought the service of thematic
and sector specialists based on client needs. This shift was intended to reduce silos and obstacles for
knowledge flow across regions to promote the 2013 Strategic Vision in becoming a “Solutions Bank.”
Over time, this structure has been refined based on periodic, evidence-based reviews. Whereas
corporate reporting demonstrated increased knowledge flow and mobility of staff across regions,
a 2019 IEG report on the promotion of knowledge flow throughout the Bank found that the changes
introduced in 2014 reversed the decentralisation of staff and decision-making and contributed to siloes
across the GPs and Country Management Units. In 2019, the Bank came full circle in reversing this
decision and shifting control of operational budgets back to regional VPUs. Accompanying this change
was increased emphasis on growing the Bank’s global footprint to “serve all clients.”

16 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

In 2022, another IEG review examined the impact of changes to the operating model in the context
of examining the effectiveness of the World Bank’s decentralisation efforts between FY13 and FY21.
This review identified a number of benefits stemming from greater staff presence in-country, including
strengthened client-facing support, enhanced opportunities to cultivate government ownership and
coordinate with development partners, greater client satisfaction and day-to-day operational support
and project follow-up, which is particularly important in fragile and lower-income countries. Feedback
from country teams has generally been favourable with respect to increasing the staff footprint on the
ground, particularly in fragile states. In particular, stakeholders note the critical importance of face-toface engagement with borrower country stakeholders.
Element 4. Although the operating model was intended to promote cooperation across the
organisation, there remain important challenges for promoting collaboration across the Global
Practices and Regional VPUs and across the World Bank Group more generally.
The 2013 Strategy identified a number of avenues for enhancing collaboration to work as “One Bank,”
including:
• Integration of corporate support functions across the WBG;
• Better co-ordination of planning and budgeting processes;
• Joint business planning through the Country Partnership Framework to reinforce the impact of WBG
activities on global goals;
• Increasing the number of joint projects among WBG entities, including joint financing of a single
project or a sequence of projects with shared objectives and a shared strategy;
• Introduction of the new organisational structure and operating model in 2014 was intended to 40, 44, 61, 95, 99, 100,
deepen collaboration between technical experts and country teams and promote knowledge flow.
104, 109, 118, 125,
148, 173, 281
The “One-Bank” approach is a central component to the 2013 Strategy whereby WBG entities are
intended to work together collaboratively using their respective comparative advantages to scale-up
development results. In particular, the World Bank has sought to enhance co-ordination between the
World Bank, IFC and MIGA in the development of Country Partnership Frameworks, including through
the development of new analytical products. This was complemented in 2016 by the introduction of the
“Cascade” approach, through which operations are designed through an algorithm that first considers
opportunities to address the development challenge in question through engaging the private sector.
Overall, there has been tangible progress in implementing the “One Bank” approach; however, not
at the intended scale. Metrics for institutional collaboration, harmonisation of policies for the WBG
that recognises the different needs of public and private sector clients, and increased training efforts
were never identified. The World Bank Group-wide Corporate Scorecard includes an indicator on staff
perceptions of collaboration from the staff engagement survey. This indicator currently sits at 44% (out
of a possible 100%). Although there has been improvement since 2018, the indicator still falls short of
the target of 50%.
Country teams indicate that progress has been achieved in developing integrated Country Partnership
Frameworks between IFC, MIGA and the World Bank, confirming strong collaboration throughout the
process. An upstream approach, including development of Country Private Sector Diagnostics as an
input to the development of CPFs has been instrumental in this regard.
Although progress has been achieved, there is room for further improvement. Stakeholders suggest that
more limited progress has been made in implementing the Cascade algorithm; although co-ordination
across IFC and WB colleagues in the context of operations occurs, it remains opportunistic rather
than systematic. Stakeholders expressed concerns over the practicality of applying the algorithm

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 17

systematically. Ongoing concerns were also raised by stakeholders with respect to co-ordination across
WB staff in regional VPUs and Global Practices, suggesting that the current incentive structure continues
to push toward leading operations rather than collaboration. Incentives are still linked to approvals
rather than collective results. This feedback is supported by evaluation evidence, which cites that GPs’
incentives continue to favour own-managed lending, leading to competition and transaction costs.
Element 5. The World Bank possesses an Accountability and Decision-making Framework that
clarifies accountabilities, roles, protocols and behaviours to promote more effective decisionmaking processes throughout the organisation. The ADM Framework is incorporated into the
World Bank’s Operations Policy Framework and is subject to periodic reviews.
The World Bank’s ADM Framework, issued by the Managing Director, defines key roles in the operational
decision-making process and provides guidance on the application of decision protocols including the
ideal composition of roles across project teams and protocol for resolving disagreements. For each

40, 44, 61, 95, 99, 100,
104, 109, 118, 125,
kind of information different contributors need to access and consider in order to perform their role.
148, 173, 281
Together, these decision-making roles promote transparency, collaboration across different areas of
decision-making role, the Framework describes key responsibilities and accountabilities, and the

the Bank, contestability, quality, compliance with operational directives and overall accountability.
A Manager responsible for the decision process determines which positions in his or her unit should
be assigned to decision roles. The ADM Framework specifies that managers retain accountability for
the actions of direct reports for managing quality, risks, results and compliance with Bank policies
and procedures applicable to a decision, even where responsibility for a functional area or decision is
assigned to a direct report.
The ADM Framework is integrated throughout the Bank’s Policy and Procedure Framework, including
the Operations Manual, which contains the operational policies, directives, procedures and other
instructions that apply to Bank operations. The Framework is intended to be implemented with a
learning approach to review processes, practices and organisational structures to identify opportunities
to promote “decision effectiveness.”
MI 1.2: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 1.3: Strategic plan supports the implementation of global commitments and associated
results

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: The strategic plan is aligned to the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, wider normative
frameworks and their results
Element 2: A system is being applied to track normative results for the 2030 Sustainable Development
Agenda and other relevant global commitments
Element 3: Progress on implementation and aggregated results against global commitments are
published at least annually
MI 1.3: Analysis

4
3
2
Evidence documents

Element 1: The World Bank’s core strategic documents and ongoing commitments are aligned
to the Sustainable Development Agenda and build upon the Bank’s comparative advantage in

15, 21, 49, 112, 122,
contributing to the achievement of the SDGs. Progress has been made over the assessment period 123, 125, 143, 149,
to better position the World Bank’s Business Model to delivering the SDGs.
154, 159, 171, 224,
The 2016 Forward Look identifies a vision for how the World Bank Group supports the Sustainable 226, 246, 247
Development Agenda while staying focused on the “twin goals.” In particular, the document identifies

18 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

the World Bank’s leadership in delivering global public goods, further supported by the establishment
of Global Practices and Themes, which are noted to be linked to the SDGs. Additionally, the Forward
Look identifies the role of the World Bank Group in scaling up finance for development, including
through enhanced linkages between the World Bank, International Finance Corporation and MIGA.
The World Bank contributes to the SDGs through three main routes: (i) financing; (ii) data (discussed in
element 2, below); and (iii) implementation.
Implementation
The World Bank’s organisational structure supports the implementation of the SDGs, with its Global
Practices and Cross-Cutting Solutions Areas aligning to the SDGs almost one to one. IDA Replenishments
over the assessment period (IDA18, 19 and 20) have each underscored the importance of ensuring
IDA is well-positioned to support the poorest countries to achieve the SDGs. The theme of the IDA19
replenishment “Ten Years to 2030: Growth, People, Resilience” underscores that progress against the
SDGs depends on the ability of IDA countries to finance programmes that generate growth, support
wellbeing, and help countries cope with the adverse impacts of climate change, fragility and unforeseen
shocks. IDA20 Replenishment reflects the international community’s commitment to support IDA
countries in addressing the challenges arising from the pandemic and get them back on track to
achieving the SDGs. The IDA20 policy commitments identify a series of operational priorities geared
toward addressing the impact of the pandemic on poverty levels (through a focus on investing in human
capital including strengthening health services, losses in learning in education and reinforcing social
protection systems) and accelerating green climate friendly development. The 2018 Capital Package
was specifically geared toward enabling IBRD to scale up its activities to deliver the Forward Look,

including providing more tailored support to the diverse range of IBRD borrower countries, support 15, 21, 49, 112, 122,
WBG leadership on global issues, maximise finance for development and continuous improvement to 123, 125, 143, 149,
154, 159, 171, 224,
the business model.
226, 246, 247
There have been some challenges noted over the period in aligning the World Bank’s country-driven
business model to the Sustainable Development Agenda. In particular, a 2020 IEG report noted that
CPFs did not systematically address WBG contribution to the SDGs. Fewer than half of the sample
reviewed addressed the Bank Group contribution to the SDGs, with some making a linkage between
CPF objectives and operations that were either not explained or provided very general explanations.
Recent efforts to improve the Bank’s Outcome Orientation for CPFs has tried to address this challenge.
The Country Engagement Directive was revised in 2021 to note that High Level Outcomes for CPFs and
indicators for CPF Results Matrices should reflect the Sustainable Development Goals and the borrower
country’s development strategy. Similar changes were also made to the guidance for the Systematic
Country Diagnostics to inform alignment to the SDGs upstream.
Financing
The activities of the World Bank support the SDGs by providing financing, and mobilising finance for
development via a number of pathways, including: (i) bond issuances; (ii) guarantees and other risk
mitigation products; and (iii) domestic resource mobilisation. Beyond this, the World Bank Group’s
“Cascade Approach” is intended to introduce more systemic collaboration between the World Bank, IFC
and MIGA to identify opportunities to mobilise private investment to address development challenges.
IDA and IBRD leverage shareholder contributions through capital market borrowings. Since the hybrid
financial model was introduced in 2018, IDA’s market borrowings, including through IDA’s Sustainable
Development Bonds, have grown to USD 19.7 billion as of June 2022. Sustainable Development Bonds
are each linked to specific SDGs or themes under the World Bank’s Sustainable Development Bond
Framework. In FY21, IBRD issued USD 68 billion in Sustainable Development Bonds, including USD 1.6

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 19

billion in green bonds, supporting 723 IBRD projects. Country-specific bonds have provided a means of
enhancing preparedness for natural disasters. The innovative Jamaica Catastrophe Bond (CAT Bond)
issued by the World Bank in partnership with bilateral donors allowed Jamaica to purchase USD 185
million for insurance coverage for 3 hurricane seasons. This insurance-like risk transfer agreement
allows the Government of Jamaica to receive needed funds quickly if future storms exceed intensity
thresholds. World Bank bonds have also been a platform for partnerships, with its USD 100 million
5-year bond to support IBRD’s ongoing sustainable development and COVID-19 activities mobilising
USD 50 million for UNICEF to support similar activities. This particular bond programme was named
“Deal of the Year” by the International Financial Law Review.
IDA and IBRD guarantees are another important means through which the World Bank mobilises
finance for development. Guarantees are provided for both Investment Project and Development
Policy Financing and are used to: (i) mitigate government-related risks to enable financial visibility
and bankability; (ii) mobilise private investment for strategic projects; (iii) expand financing options,
reduce costs and improve financing terms for projects and governments; and (iv) ensure the long-term
sustainability of projects. In FY19, IDA and IBRD’s 54 guarantees totalling USD 8.4 billion mobilised USD
32 billion in commercial finance and USD 24 billion in public financing for projects.
The World Bank supports Domestic Resource Mobilisation through its Global Tax Programme and
its Reserve Advisory and Monitoring Programme (RAMP). The World Bank’s Global Tax Programme
provides advisory services and technical assistance to help strengthen national tax institutions and
support countries in raising more and better tax revenue, contributing to a stable, predictable and
sustainable fiscal environment. In FY22, the USD 90 million Global Tax Umbrella Programme combined
contributions from 10 development partners to implement 78 projects covering 85 countries. RAMP 15, 21, 49, 112, 122,
offers demand-driven capacity building and asset management services to central banks, pension 123, 125, 143, 149,
funds and sovereign wealth funds that can be used to support development activities and strengthen 154, 159, 171, 224,
226, 246, 247
financial stability and economic resilience.
Element 2: The World Bank has gradually strengthened the alignment of its results frameworks
to the SDGs and makes a notable contribution to monitoring the SDGs through the Corporate
Scorecard (including the IDA Results Measurement System) and the World Development
Indicators platform and its participation in inter-agency groups.
Over the assessment period, there has been a sustained effort to align IDA’s corporate Results
Measurement System (RMS). For IDA18, shareholders authorised revisions to the RMS to increase
alignment to the SDGs. For the IDA20 RMS, nearly all indicators across the WBG goals, special themes
and cross-cutting themes are aligned to SDG indicators across the three tiers. Each SDG is covered in
the IDA20 RMS by at least one indicator, an increase from the IDA19 RMS for which 60/79 indicators were
aligned to the SDGs.
Corporate Results Indicators have been identified to help operationalise the RMS indicators throughout
operations to help the World bank aggregate this information to report on IDA Results aligned to the
Sustainable Development Goals, facilitating internal and external reporting. The CRIs, reflected in
operations results frameworks, help cascade World Bank priorities to operations and report on how
operations are contributing to strategic results in concrete terms. Use of the CRIs is required for all
active and pipeline operations of more than USD 5 million for which one or more CRIs are relevant to
the content of their interventions irrespective of the type of instrument.
The World Bank also contributes to global monitoring of progress toward the SDGs through the InterAgency Expert group on SDG Indicators, convened by the UN Statistical Commission in 2015. The
World Bank is an observer to this group, which is responsible for developing and implementing global

20 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

indicator frameworks for the goals. The World Bank is a custodian or co-custodian for 20 indicators and
is involved in the monitoring of an additional 22 indicators. The World Bank’s SDG Indicators Group
comprises subject matter experts across different thematic and practice groups that provide technical
input and report indicator estimates. The World Bank’s World Development Indicators (WDI) platform
includes many official SDG indicators and other relevant data, including an SDG dashboard that allows
users to explore country trends and regional distributions.
Element 3: The World Bank’s annual reporting is aligned to the SDGs but is not framed around

them. Products such as the SDG Atlas builds upon the Bank’s extensive data from the WDIs, but 15, 21, 49, 112, 122,
123, 125, 143, 149,
there are opportunities to improve the regularity of reporting the World Bank’s contribution.
154, 159, 171, 224,
Building upon the WDIs, the World Bank has published a semi-annual atlas of Sustainable Development 226, 246, 247
Goals, presenting key dashboards and trends as well as information about how the SDG indicators are
measured; however, the most recent atlas available was published in 2020. The World Bank’s annual
report is aligned to the SDG indicators, including key indicators and trends reported for each region
of operations. However, reporting is framed according to the World Bank’s strategic and operational
priorities rather than by the SDGs. However, alignment of corporate indicators with the SDGs is noted
clearly. Whereas annual reporting is largely aligned to the SDGs, there are opportunities to enhance the
regularity of SDG-linked reporting, particularly the Atlas.
MI 1.3: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 1.4: Financial framework supports mandate implementation

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

4.00

Element 1: Financial and budgetary planning ensures that all priority areas have adequate funding in
the short term or are at least given clear priority in cases where funding is very limited

4

Element 2: A single integrated budgetary framework ensures transparency

4

Element 3: The financial framework is reviewed regularly by the governing bodies

4

Element 4: (Bank-executed) Trust Funds and grants in place to complement lending activities and
support thematic priorities and Global Public Goods
Element 5: (Bank-executed) Trust Funds are managed to optimise value for shareholders and can be
applied flexibly to address country needs.
MI 1.4: Analysis

4
4
Evidence documents

Element 1: The World Bank’s W-process operationalises strategic priorities into work programmes
and staffing plans, striking a balance between strategic priorities and country-driven needs.
The World Bank Group aligns its resources to strategic priorities through an annual strategic planning,
budgeting and performance review exercise called the “W” process. This process includes three top-

5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
to strategic planning while the final three contribute to budget formulation.
125, 139, 140, 141,
W1: Senior management sets strategic planning priorities in response to the external context and 145, 148, 160, 166,
170, 175, 191, 221,
borrower country demands and sets an indicative budget envelope.
250, 263, 264, 271
W2: Vice-presidential units (VPUs) and departments review and respond to these corporate priorities.
down decision points and two bottom-up input phases. The first two points of the process speak more

They provide initial budget proposals and responses to the proposed priorities.
W3: Based on this input, senior management refines the guidance on priorities for each Bank Group
institution. An indicative 3-year unit-level budget envelope is elaborated.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 21

W4: VPUs and Departments develop institutional work programmes in line with determined priorities
and planned budget envelopes.
W5: Senior management for each WBG institution review the VPU-level allocations and agree on an
aggregated budget proposal.
Although Bank Management shares a rolling 3-year budget trajectory for consideration by the Board,
the Board only approves a budget for the next fiscal year.
Stakeholders note that some of the advantages of this process is that it forces some high-level principles
on the planning and budgeting of activities, reconciling providing a basis for decision-making around
trade-offs, supported by clear timelines. The W-process is supported by analytical work identifying
changes in the context and borrower country needs, supporting a strategic discussion about how
priorities need to shift over the short and longer-term as well as relevant risks. This process has evolved
over time, with the first step involving a discussion of aspects of the process itself that may need to
change. Survey results among Board Members were overwhelmingly positive and confirmed that the
financial framework supports the effective implementation of the Bank’s mandate and strategy (over
90 percent favourable).

Q1[04], THE WORLD BANK’S FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK SUPPORTS THE EFFECTIVE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANDATE AND STRATEGY
Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2: The World Bank’s budget framework ensures transparency, including detailed
explanations of outflows, inflows, external funds and rationalisation of administrative expenses.
Transparency is supported through a publicly available annual budget and annual audited
financial statements with non-public detailed quarterly updates to the Board.
The World Bank reports on its budget through three main tools. First, an Annual Budget is approved
by the Board and reported publicly. Second, the World Bank provides annual financial statements for
IDA and IBRD that are externally audited and similarly made publicly available. Finally, the Board is
provided with Quarterly detailed budget reports which are not available publicly.
The annual budget document discussed in June and the Strategy and Business and Outlook paper
discussed in the Spring ahead of the Budget document links the budget trajectory to the World
Bank’s strategic priorities and describes key contextual drivers that have influenced the trajectory and
priority-setting (e.g., the influence of COVID-19). The Budget document provides an overview of the
lending outlook, and underlying assumptions and projections for external funds. A breakdown of the
administrative budget is provided by (i) unit or account (Operational Units, Institutional, Governance,
and Admin units, Grant Making Facilities and Centrally Managed Accounts- e.g., HQ leases, staff
benefits) and (ii) funding envelopes (Country Engagement (CE), Global Engagement (GE) and Program
and Practice Management (PPM).
The budget document reports progress in rationalising the Administrative Budget in line with the
budget commitments under the IBRD Capital Package, identifying key areas of cost savings and
emerging trends for Cost of Doing Business. This is supplemented by an annual retrospective report on

5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
125, 139, 140, 141,
145, 148, 160, 166,
170, 175, 191, 221,
250, 263, 264, 271

22 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

these budget commitments in the annual Forward Look update paper. Key areas of efficiency savings
include: (i) corporate procurement; (ii) real estate; (iii) travel, food and hospitality and external events;
(iv) compensation reforms; (v) workforce planning; and (vi) portfolio management. An overall amount
of cost-savings realised is reported; however, some stakeholders have noted a lack of clarity on how
cost-savings from previous years are reflected in annual budgets, noting that it is not clear whether cost
savings accumulate year over year.
The annual budget document is complemented by annual, externally audited financial statements for
IDA and IBRD which are available publicly. These statements provide detailed information on annual
budget execution and includes information about revenue inflows, including loan interest revenue, net
investment revenue and results from the borrowing portfolio. Furthermore, the Board is provided with a
non-public Quarterly Business and Risk Review, providing a detailed breakdown on total commitments,
emerging risks from problem projects, financial performance and administrative expenditure.
Since 2017, the WB has used twelve indicators to track efficiency of resources at the aggregate level.
These indicators are separated into three broad categories of Budget Sustainability, Strategic Alignment,
and Budget Efficiency and include the following metrics:
(i)

the IDA and IBRD budget anchors (Administrative expenses as a share of operational revenues);

(ii) External Funds Ratio (external funds as a share of total administrative spending plans);
(iii) Operational share of unit budgets; Client Engagement Share of Operational Unit Budgets;
(iv) FCV share of Country Engagement Budgets; Bank Budget to lending volume ratio;
5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
(vi) Bank Budget per Project Approved Ratio; and
125, 139, 140, 141,
145, 148, 160, 166,
(vii) Bank Budget per Project Supervision ratio.
170, 175, 191, 221,
Reference points for these budget anchors are agreed with shareholders. Reporting is broken down by 250, 263, 264, 271
IDA and IBRD and presented in the annual budget.
(v) Bank Budget to Portfolio Volume Ratio;

Element 3: The Financial Frameworks for IDA and IBRD have been gradually strengthened
throughout the assessment period to promote the adequacy and sustainability of capital to
deliver on the strategic plan over the medium-term. Clear targets, anchors, minimums, buffers
and tolerances have been set to guide decision-making to promote financial sustainability.
Processes are in place to support regular review of the financial framework by the Executive
Board.
IDA Financial Framework
In FY18, IDA introduced a new hybrid financing model that includes market debt. Concessionality (grants
and interest rate subsidy to support concessional lending) financed by IDA’s equity from shareholder
contributions through regular replenishment cycles. As of FY21, IDA’s funding sources include: (i) donor
grant contributions and Concessional Partner Loans; (ii) donor contributions toward the Multi-donor
debt relief initiative (MDRI); (iii) income transfers from other WBG agencies; (iv) loan repayment and
investment income and (vi) carryover funds from previous replenishment cycles and market borrowing.
In FY18, IDA also started to implement a series of measures to enhance its risk management, including
a revised capital adequacy framework, accompanied by changes to its liquidity policy and introduction
of a Single Borrower Limit. IDA has a solvency-based capital adequacy model such that it is required to
hold capital to cover credit risk, market risk and operational risk covering all assets on its books. The
main capital adequacy measure is Deployable Strategic Capital, representing the capital available to
cover future commitments over and above the current portfolio. The policy minimum requires that

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 23

the DSC is greater or equal to zero, including a 10% conservation buffer which would include capital
allowances to reflect unexpected losses from IDA’s financing portfolio. A series of measures have been
included to further promote capital adequacy, including:
(i)

a trigger such that future lending and grant commitments must be adjusted should the policy
minimum for the DSC be breached or fall below what would be expected of an AAA entity;

(ii) liquidity is monitored to ensure IDA has the ability to satisfy borrowing and commitment
obligations, even under stressed conditions (under the Liquidity Policy, IDA must hold liquid
assets equal to 80% of projected outflows over the coming 24 months); and
(iii) if IDA’s access to the market is impaired, no additional loans or grants will be issues until access to
cash funding resumes or all market debt is repaid.
Standard and Poor’s reaffirmed IDA’s AAA rating in 2022 based on unparalleled shareholder support,
low levels of non-accrual, strong preferred creditor treatment and strong risk management practices,
including the capital adequacy framework. IDA’s Risk Adjusted Capital (RAC) is one of the highest in
the sector at 69%. Growth in replenishments have been steady, increasing 10% per year on average
over the past 50 years. IDA’s debt write-off programmes, including HIPC and MDRI are both fully donor
funded. Despite being exposed to borrowers with low credit quality, IDA has a very low level of nonaccruals at 0.8%. As of 2021, IDA’s liquidity reflected 2.43x requirements over the next six months and
1.56x requirements over 12 months.
The integration of market debt through bond issuances alongside other resources mentioned
above has increased overall funds available for concessional lending considerably. As of 2021, IDA’s

borrowing through capital markets totalled USD 22.1 billion. IDA’s financial model enables it to provide 5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
considerable value for money for shareholder contributions. Since IDA18, the new financial model has
125, 139, 140, 141,
enabled IDA to mobilise an extra three USD for every USD of partner contributions. More than 70% of 145, 148, 160, 166,
the IDA19 replenishment was funded by resources other than partner contributions. The recent IDA20 170, 175, 191, 221,
Replenishment includes a record package of USD 93 billion, including USD 23.5 billion in total partner 250, 263, 264, 271
contributions.
IBRD Financial Framework
IBRD’s financial framework is designed to earn adequate income to ensure long-term financial capacity
necessary to support development activities. IBRD lends to credit-worthy MICs and LICS through
long-term-loans with maturity up to 35 years. These loans are financed through shareholder equity
and borrowings raised on capital markets. Primary sources of revenue are earnings from loans and
investments, which cover administrative expenses, loss provisions on loans and other exposures,
transfers to reserves, surplus and transfers to IDA.
IBRD has gradually enhanced its financial model to promote long-term sustainability. In 2008, a strategic
capital adequacy framework was introduced which sets a policy minimum for the loans to equity ratio.
In 2014, a budget anchor ratio was introduced as a measure of budget sustainability. This indicator
tracks the relationship between administrative expenditure with IBRD loan spread income. In 2016, an
income-based approach was introduced to govern IDA transfers. Finally, a new Financial Sustainability
Framework (FSF) was introduced for IBRD (operationalised in FY20) as part of the 2018 Capital Package
Commitments.
The objective of the new FSF is to support efficient use of capital to support a predictable medium-term
lending level through prudent safeguarding of IBRD’s triple A rating alongside enhanced flexibility to
respond to crises. The framework helps ensure annual lending remains automatically aligned with longterm sustainability on the assumption of no further shareholder capital injections. The FSF introduced:
(i) the Sustainable Annual Lending Limit (SALL) which represents the annual lending commitment level

24 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

for a ten-year period in line with the capital adequacy framework; and (ii) a “crisis buffer” approved
annually by the Board to enhance capacity to respond to crises. An annual decision-making process
with the Executive Board synchronises decision-making on the annual budget, loan pricing and income
allocation. Terms around access to the crisis buffer forces a decision around trade-offs where required
to preserve financial sustainability. The FSF is to be reviewed after five years of implementation, and
such a review is underway.
Standard and Poor’s notes the extremely strong financial position of IBRD, with a Risk-Adjusted Capital
(RAC) of 25.8% as of 2022, above the limit of 23% where IBRD’s triple A rating and risk profile may be
eroded. The triple A rating is supported by IBRD’s stable profile, including RAC, an extremely low rate of
Non-Performing Loans at 0.65% (which compares well even to other Multilateral Lending Institutions)
and a strong preferred creditor profile. IBRD is noted for its strong shareholder support, through both
paid-in and callable capital, strong risk management practices, sustainable lending limits to support
the capital base and diversified funding by geography and investors (both country shareholders and
private entities).
Element 4: The World Bank manages a range of trust funds that complement its lending activities
to support delivery of Global Public Goods. These funds support the delivery of the World Bank’s
strategic priorities for Global Practices and Global Themes, including Analytical and Advisory
Services.
Trust funds provide a platform for knowledge-sharing and partnerships between donors, client
countries and other stakeholders at the global, regional and country level. Bank-executed trust funds
(BETFs) are implemented by the World Bank as part of the programme of work, whereas. Recipient-

5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
executed trust funds (RETFs) are implemented by country-level representatives, including national 88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
governments, UN agencies and other implementing partners. Financial Intermediary Funds (FIF) are a 125, 139, 140, 141,
type of Trust Fund supported by the World Bank through tailored administrative, financial, legal, and/or 145, 148, 160, 166,
operational services. FIFs are important tools in the development finance toolbox offering customised 170, 175, 191, 221,
250, 263, 264, 271
financing platforms for partnership programs and special financing mechanisms (discussed further
in KPI 6). Trust funds enable the Bank to reduce transaction costs for borrower countries by reducing
the proliferation of bilateral programmes and mobilise development finance from national and nonnational donors.
BETFs and RETFs provide a predictable, multi-year source of funding to complement the World Bank’s
lending operations through knowledge work, technical assistance, project preparation support,
scale-up of innovative approaches, impact evaluations, regional projects that address transboundary
issues and institutional support around debt management. These funds also position the World Bank
to engage in challenging circumstances where lending is not feasible, including: (i) situations of fragility
and conflict; (ii) situations where there is a limit on the IDA envelope or available IBRD resources; (iii)
countries in arrears; (iv) non-World Bank members (e.g. West Bank and Gaza); and (v) natural disasters
and other emergencies, including refugee influx. Trust funds allow the Bank to engage in different
types of partnerships, including financial partnerships with non-state donors and implementing
arrangements with UN Agencies and NGOs.
Cash contributions into Trust Funds have increased over the assessment period from USD 2.79 billion in
FY18 to USD 4.86 billion in FY22. Disbursements have similarly increased from USD 3.86 billion in FY18
to USD 5.57 billion in FY22. Approximately 81% of trust fund contributions are from sovereign donors,
whereas the remainder is provided by private non-profit organisations, private for-profit organisations,
inter-governmental institutions and transfers from other WBG entities.
The World Bank’s Trust Fund policy was updated in 2021 in the midst of a reform process to reflect
increased emphasis on programmatic, multi-donor trust funds (discussed further below). The policy

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 25

describes the purpose of trust funds (as reflected in the articles of agreement), the criteria to establish
a trust fund and the circumstances in which a trust fund can be used. The policy is complemented by a
range of operational guidelines and directives (e.g. cost recovery framework, governance of trust funds
and results-based management of trust funds). RETFs are administered via a grant agreement that is
subject to the World Bank’s operational risk management and safeguards system (e.g. Environmental
and Social Framework, Financial Management, Procurement, Risk Management, Anti-Corruption and
Anti-Money Laundering). Since 2007, Trust Funds have been integrated into the Business Planning and
Budget Process and allocation of Trust Fund fee income have been fully integrated into the World Bank’s
budget. An analysis and forecasting of aggregate BETF disbursement are included in the Strategic
Business Outlook paper. An annual report for trust funds is produced and made publicly available. This
report is accompanied by quarterly management reporting.
Trust Funds contribute to the World Bank’s overall financial framework through investment activities.
The World Bank Treasury manages the liquid assets of Trust Funds in a single, co-mingled investment
pool. Upon receipt, cash contributions are invested in capital markets until they are disbursed to final
recipients. Cash contributions are primarily invested in high-quality securities, including securities
issued by sovereign governments and multilateral institutions via a conservative approach that
emphasises liquidity and preservation of capital. Between FY18 and 22, investment income from trust
fund (including FIF) assets was USD 2.1 billion. The cost recovery framework has also been updated
such that the Bank now recovers 89% of the total cost of trust fund management. New BETFs carry a
12% flat fee of total disbursement whereas RETFs have a graduated fee between 5 and 2% depending
on the commitment size.
Trust funds played an important role in the World Bank’s response to COVID-19, with 1.63 billion
allocated to 319 COVID-related operations before the end of FY22. These allocations, primarily
allocated through RETFs (94%), supported interventions to reach vulnerable populations, including:
(i) economic inclusion and cash transfers, including for migrants; (ii) continuation of school feeding
programmes during lockdowns; (iii) risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) activities;
(iv) e-commerce training for women entrepreneurs; and (v) essential health services delivery. Trust
funds also contributed technical assistance to countries for sovereign debt management to address the
macroeconomic impacts of COVID-19.
As noted in the evolution roadmap, a major challenge remains in striking the right balance in providing
concessional resources to IDA and blend countries and IBRD countries, who continue to face important
development challenges, including with respect to global public goods like addressing climate change.
Historically, most of the trust funds disbursed for recipient executed activities have been disbursed to
IDA and blend countries (72.9% and 73.0% in FY20 and FY21, respectively). In FY22, 53% of disbursements
for RE activities went to IDA and blend countries due to the use of trust funds to address the invasion in
Ukraine. There are limited indications that this change is part of a broader trend.
Element 5: Since 2019, the World Bank has launched a series of reforms to reduce fragmentation,
strengthen efficiency and promote the transparency and strategic alignment of Trust Funds.
Overall, these reforms have made good progress. However, aligning trust funds to country-level
and realising operational efficiencies on the ground remain ongoing challenges.
In FY19, the World Bank launched a series of reforms to reduce fragmentation among its trust funds and
increase alignment with strategic priorities. In FY19, 70% of the World Bank’s 540 Trust Funds by number
accounted for just 7% of the total Trust Fund resources. This fragmentation was said to contribute to
higher transaction costs and administrative burden for World Bank staff.

5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
125, 139, 140, 141,
145, 148, 160, 166,
170, 175, 191, 221,
250, 263, 264, 271

26 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

A shift toward “Umbrella Funds” was introduced to address this issue. Each Umbrella programme is
anchored by a Multi-Donor Trust Fund and supports one or more strategic priority areas of the Bank’s
Global Practices or Regions. Each Umbrella Fund has a common governance structure, programme
management and administration unit, communication plan and a common results and reporting
framework. An annual programme report is prepared for each Umbrella Fund. This initiative is intended
to help deliver results at scale and streamline partner dialogue around shared priorities and mutually
desired outcomes. Global Practices and regional units feed into the design of Umbrella Programmes to
ensure alignment to strategic priorities.
In 2022, “Umbrella Funds 2.0” was launched building on a series of deep-dive consultations with
donor agencies, continued engagement with GPs and Regional VPUs and peer learning sessions
with programme management and administration units. The initial Umbrella Funds initiative faced
challenges due to the absence of a mechanism to accommodate more specific donor interests in
geographic and thematic areas. The Strategic External Funds Framework (SEFF) was introduced as an
annual management exercise for updating and adjusting strategic priorities authorising changes to the
Umbrella Fund architecture (discussed further in KPI 6). Currently, 60 of 72 planned Umbrella funds are
operational. These 72 funds account for 90% of donor fundraising.
Although the reform is a major step forward in reducing fragmentation, some challenges remain. There
remain 80 standalone trust funds, but these now need to be specifically justified. Furthermore, the 5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
update of the World Bank’s Trust Fund policy points to continued tensions in aligning to country needs 88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
for specific countries based on the tension between promoting global priorities and responding to 125, 139, 140, 141,
145, 148, 160, 166,
country needs. Stakeholders note that structuring trust funds geographically would not be as efficient
170, 175, 191, 221,
given the geographic scope of operations in over 100 countries and the co-financing element of some 250, 263, 264, 271
regional trust funds. Furthermore, there is an ongoing need to update the World Bank’s systems for
monitoring trust funds throughout their life cycle in line with the reform.
Some stakeholders at country level indicated that there continues to be some inefficiencies across
multiple funds available to different countries and that the World Bank sometimes has trouble bringing
together trust fund resources in specific countries on a similar scale to Regional Development Banks.
Furthermore, although the Umbrella Funds were supposed to help streamline reporting requirements
to donors, some country representatives report that some donors maintain specific requirements that
country offices have difficulty avoiding and that the overall administrative burden linked to trust funds
has not necessarily decreased.
However, other stakeholders noted that the Reform has greatly simplified the process of accessing trust
funds at the country level. There is evidence of good practice in some regions where new Regional
Umbrella Funds are playing a critical role in supporting regional ASA for regional cooperation initiatives.
A key example is the Middle East and North Africa Regional Strategy, which support energy cooperation
in partnership with the Arab League.
Stakeholders responding to MOPAN’s partner survey provided mixed responses with regard to how
efficiently the Bank manages its trust funds, including though umbrella funds, with approximately 60
percent of stakeholders indicating they agree or strongly agree.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 27

Q1[09], THE WORLD BANK MANAGES TRUST FUNDS EFFICIENTLY, INCLUDING
THROUGH POOLED AND UMBRELLA FUNDS
Board member
Donor

5, 7, 8, 16, 27, 30, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 121,
125, 139, 140, 141,
145, 148, 160, 166,
170, 175, 191, 221,
250, 263, 264, 271

Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

MI 1.4: Evidence confidence

High confidence

KPI 2: Structures and mechanisms in place and applied to support the implementation
of global frameworks for crosscutting issues at all levels, in line with the 2030
Sustainable Development Agenda principles

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.50

The Bank has continued to strengthen its focus on key cross-cutting issues including gender equality, environment and climate
change, and FCV. The WB has a gender policy and strategy that is fully incorporated into WBG commitments. A “gender-tag”
identifies projects that can identify and respond to gender gaps. While there is progress, staff resources are stretched, and
results of these efforts are not yet available. Similarly, climate change has been consistently reflected in the Bank’s core policy
commitments with clear targets integrated into the WBG corporate results. The Bank introduced the CCDRs to inform the CPF and
has sharply increased its lending. The Bank has mobilised significant resources from capital markets. Finally, the WB continues
to increase its focus on FCV. It revised its FCV policy and strategy in 2020 that brings sharper focus to the drivers of fragility. The
WB mainstreams fragility through RRAs and new tools are being developed. IEG concluded that projects approved between
2015-2020 were 50% more likely to address fragility issues.
MI 2.1 Corporate/sectoral and country strategies respond to and/or reflect the intended results
of normative frameworks for gender equality and women’s empowerment

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.33

Element 1: Dedicated policy statement on gender equality available and showing evidence of application 4
Element 2: Gender equality indicators and targets fully integrated into the MO’s strategic plan and
corporate objectives
Element 3: Accountability systems (including corporate reporting and evaluation) reflect gender
equality indicators and targets

4
3

Element 4: Gender equality screening checklists or similar tools inform the design for all new interventions 4
Element 5: Human and financial resources are available to address gender equality issues

2

Element 6: Staff capacity development on gender is being or has been conducted

3

28 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 2.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1: The World Bank Group has a Gender Policy and Strategy, which identify roles,
responsibilities and requirements for integrating gender into operations through an outcomedriven approach.
The World Bank’s Gender Policy (OP 4.20) identifies key requirements and roles and responsibilities for
integrating gender into the World Bank’s work at the country-level and within operations, requiring all
CPFs to be informed by a gender assessment.
The policy is operationalised by the World Bank Group Gender Strategy (2016-2023). The Strategy build
upon extensive consultation with borrower countries, the private sectors and civil society as well as
the 2012 World Development Report. The strategy identifies an outcome-driven approach that targets
addressing gender gaps in four key areas:
• human endowments (health, education and social protection);
• removing constraints for more and better jobs;
• removing constraints for ownership and control of assets; and
• enhancing voice and agency, including engaging men and boys to reduce Gender Based Violence
(GBV).
The Strategy adopts an “upstream,” country-driven approach by enriching the evidence base informing
Systematic Country Diagnostics (SCDs), Country Partnership Frameworks (CPFs) and operations,
including through the use gender-disaggregated data.

12, 20, 26, 29, 41, 59,
114, 122, 134, 135,
promotes gender equality though its operations and strategies, with somewhat less agreement among 136, 137, 229, 239,
Civil Society Organisations, the Private Sector, and Knowledge Partners.
246, 250, 262, 285
In a survey of key stakeholders, most stakeholders responded positively (almost 80%) that the Bank

Q3[01], THE WORLD BANK PROMOTES GENDER EQUALITY THROUGH ITS
OPERATIONS AND STRATEGIES
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 29

Element 2: Gender is fully incorporated into the World Bank’s policy commitments, including targets
and systems for follow-up. Regional Strategies identify regional initiatives and targets for gender.
Gender and Development has been an IDA special theme since IDA16. Between IDA16 and IDA20, policy
commitments to promote integration of gender into operations have evolved over time. Since IDA17,
all CPFs have been expected to include a gender analysis, including integration of gender integration of
into the Systematic Country Diagnostics and Results Framework. Gender policy commitments for IDA18
and 19 emphasised:
• increased access to maternal and reproductive health, and adolescent health services;
• Removing barriers for employment and access to financial services, including through enhancing
digital skills and access to ICT;
• Increased investment in Gender-Based Violence prevention and response, including service delivery
to survivors through inclusive health services and safe schools.
Policy Commitments under IDA20 seek to deepen the implementation of the Gender Strategy and
address challenges emerging from COVID-19, including improving the quality and affordability of
childcare, addressing persistent gaps in women’s productive economic inclusion and scaling up efforts
to strengthen national frameworks in for prevention and response to GBV.
Additionally, gender targets are mainstreamed throughout policy commitments for the Human Capital
and Jobs and Economic Transformation special themes. Progress in implementing these policy
commitments are examined throughout the replenishment cycle through annual results reports, midterm reviews and completion reports.
Specific IDA20 gender-related policy commitments and targets are presented below:
Policy Commitment

Commitment and Targets

Area
Jobs

• Incorporate specific economic inclusion components for women into
at least 30 IDA social protection, agriculture, urban and community
development projects.
• Support at least 15 IDA countries to expand access to quality, affordable
childcare, especially for low-income parents.
• At least 25% of IDA infrastructure operations to include actions to create
employment for women in medium and high skilled jobs.

Assets

• Emphasis on closing gender gaps for access and usage in at least 30 IDA20
operations in digital development, financial inclusion and agriculture.
• At least 70% of IDA20 operations with land activities to strengthen
women’s rights.

Voice and Agency

• Support at least 10 IDA countries to strengthen national policy
frameworks around prevention and response to GBV.
• Implement GBV prevention and response protocol is at least 15 IDA
countries, 5 of which are FCV.

Support to
Governments to Bring
Gender Analysis into
Fiscal Policy

• Support at least 10 IDA countries to make their fiscal policy and budget
systems more inclusive and gender responsive.

12, 20, 26, 29, 41, 59,
114, 122, 134, 135,
136, 137, 229, 239,
246, 250, 262, 285

30 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The IBRD Capital package also identifies important policy commitments pertaining to gender. In
particular, IBRD committed to increasing the proportion of operations that seek to narrow gender
gaps (“gender tagged” operations described in element 4) to 55% of operations by FY23, with this
level maintained or increased by FY30. Furthermore, the proportion of IBRD operations with financial
sector components including specific actions to close gender gaps in access to financial services was to
increase to 60% by the close of FY23. Significant progress on these commitments has been made with
the former proportion reaching 90%, and the latter 63% in FY2022.There are also good examples of
regional initiatives for gender:
In the LCR Region, the Poverty, Gender, and Equity Group (LCSPP) coordinates with networks and
GP focal points to operationalise the Regional Gender Action Plan (RGAP) and monitor corporate
commitments. These commitments are consistent with findings of the 2012 World Development Report
on Gender Equality and Development and subsequent strategic recommendations to operationalise
them.
The LAC Regional Gender Action Plan (RGAP FY 21-25)[ was completed in November 2020 after extensive
consultations, hearing from staff across and outside the region. The LAC Regional Gender Action Plan
(RGAP FY 21-25) was completed in November 2020 after extensive consultations, hearing from staff
across and outside the region. The LAC Regional Gender Action Plan (RGAP FY 21-25) was completed
in November 2020 after extensive consultations, hearing from staff across and outside the region. The
new RGAP is organised around three pillars and one cross-cutting theme: (i) Country engagement; (ii)
Analysis, (iii) Operations; and on a cross cutting level Knowledge Management. The RGAP includes a list
of roles and responsibilities and several concrete commitments as well as an extensive list of resources.
This includes Gender Country Engagement Plan, Evidence and Knowledge Generation, Designs and

12, 20, 26, 29, 41, 59,
implementation of interventions narrowing the gender gap, and Focus on the impact knowledge 114, 122, 134, 135,
products have on the design of gender-tagged operations.
136, 137, 229, 239,
246, 250, 262, 285
In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region, a regional Gender-based Violence (GBV) strategy sets
out the regional context for GBV, including prevalence and institutional and legal context. The Strategy
highlights good practices from previous interventions as well as guiding principles for future operations
across three pillars: data and knowledge; policy dialogue; and operational engagement. This strategy is
accompanied by gender strategies for each Country Management Unit in the region which identify key
gender gaps and gaps in the legal framework; identify targeted policy changes and interventions; and
identify outcome-level results linked to interventions.
Element 3: Gender is regularly assessed as part of accountability and reporting processes for
operations, including the corporate scorecard. Beyond accountability processes, innovative
learning initiatives seek to identify “what works” to inform lessons learned for subsequent
operations.
At the corporate level, the World Bank’s Corporate Scorecard includes gender disaggregated data for
nearly all indicators throughout Tiers 1 (Development Context, including long-term development
outcomes) and 2 (Client results, including results reported by clients in implementing WBG supported
operations), increasing from just three sex-disaggregated metrics in 2017 to fourteen sex-disaggregated
metrics in 2020. Gender is also integrated into the IDA20 Results Management System with respect
to Tier 1 (Countries Progress – Gender and Development) and Tier 3 (Organisational and Operational
Effectiveness) and all Corporate Scorecard indicators for Tier 2 are now disaggregated. Tier 3 of the
IDA20 RMS reflects the proportion of IDA20 operations that address or respond to GBV as well as the
proportion of projects that demonstrate a results chain targeting “gender gaps.” This approach is
notable in terms of its focus on how the World Bank positions itself to contribute to gender outcomes,
specifically narrowing gender gaps.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 31

The Independent Evaluation Group conducted a Medium-Term Review of the Gender Strategy (IEG,
2021). The report notes that there has been evidence of implementation and progress, notably in
improving alignment between operations, policy dialogue and analytical work with Country Partnership
Framework objectives, yielding a coherent, outcome-driven approach to help close gender gaps. In
both IFC and the World Bank, increasing percentages of projects have received the “gender tag or flag”
based on data supplied by their reporting systems. Interviews suggests that the Bank has invested a
great deal over the past two years in strengthening the network that connects the sources of knowledge
and country teams with teams that are developing SCDs, CPFs, the core framework for engagement.
However, the MTR of the Gender Strategy identifies an important gap with respect to monitoring at the
project level. Although an annual Board update is produced for overall implementation of the Gender
Strategy, the MTR found deficits in monitoring of progress in reducing gender gaps across operations.
Whereas nearly all projects examined for the review identified results indicators to monitor progress,
some areas such as agency and voice were more difficult to measure concretely. Furthermore, 79% of
projects approved between FY17 and FY19 had not yet reported progress against indicators that pertain
to gender gaps.
Element 4: The “gender tag” is used to assess and promote integration of gender in operations
and analytical work in line with corporate commitments and targets.
A process has been established to mainstream gender into operations through the identification of a
“gender tag.” The World Bank’s Gender focal points review all Board approval documents for operations
and analytical studies to determine whether it should receive a gender tag, indicating that the design
and results chains of projects have analysed a gender gap, developed an activity to respond to the
gap, and put gender gap indicators in results frameworks. This is an outcome-driven approach that 12, 20, 26, 29, 41, 59,
supports a more meaningful inclusion of gender impacts into the programme logic. Processes are also 114, 122, 134, 135,
in place to monitor gender tags at entry, throughout implementation and at completion, including a 136, 137, 229, 239,
new gender development outcome rating in the Implementation Completion and Results Report. 246, 250, 262, 285
Significant progress has been made against organisational targets, with the proportion of gender
tagged operations increasing from 49% in FY17 to 82% (target 55% for IDA and 65% IBRD).
Element 5: Whereas dedicated human resources have been identified to operationalise the World
Bank’s commitment to gender, these resources do not appear to be sufficient to implement the
vision as intended.
There are dedicated human and financial resources to support the implementation of the Gender
Strategy and the integration of gender into World Bank operations. Implementation of the Gender
Strategy is reflected in the Bank’s Global Engagement Budget, which supports Global Units to deliver
global activities without a specific country or regional allocation, including a specific allocation for
providing support to teams in the area of Gender Based Violence. Global engagement staff provide
support to task teams for implementation of the Gender Strategy, including on gender inclusion,
contribution to global and flagship reports, managing the gender tag work programme and the IDA
Gender Theme. In addition, funding for the preparation of lending, analytical work and policy dialogue
on gender issues is funded through the country engagement budget in each Region.
Outside of the gender groups and global practice leads, staff in Regional VPUs are organised as focal
points. These staff perform an important role in linking the Gender Strategy to Operations. However,
there are several challenges in co-ordinating their support, with limited guidance from the Gender
Strategy on how gender support to countries and regional teams should be structured. First, the level of
operational support for gender is varies considerably across regions, with one Focal Lead in LAC and 43
in South Asia. Secondly, as identified in the MTR, there are no standard Terms of Reference nor standard
staff levels, skills and competencies among gender focal points. The selection and professional

32 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

development of gender focal points was noted to be largely ad hoc. The MTR notes that many staff
designated to support work on gender in Global Practices, industries, Regions, and countries are filled
either by volunteers or through designation by senior staff who may have sector or country expertise
but are not gender experts.
The rigorous validation behind the gender tagging process is resource intensive, such that multiple
Global Practice experts and focal points reported that it takes up a substantial portion of their available
time, which limits their ability to assist teams during implementation for monitoring and to support
generation and uptake of evidence.
Aside from specific gender focal points, regional Gender Innovation Labs (GILs) play an important
role in sharing knowledge and evidence for gender across the Bank. These teams implement impact
evaluations of operations that assess the outcomes of development interventions and generate
evidence about how to assess gender gaps. Through these activities, the GILs engage with operational
staff to: (i) share evidence on sources of underlying constraints for gender; (ii) bring together evidence
to inform regional gender strategies; (iii) advise teams on the design of evidence-based programmes;
(iv) identify and test innovative solutions; and (v) work with teams to promote the uptake of effective
policies.
Element 6: Whereas staff training has been rolled out on gender, it is not mandatory. There
have been some challenges seeking to expanding gender awareness development among key
categories of staff.
As a cross-cutting solutions area (CCSA), the Gender team is taking steps to expand the training that
the Bank provides to staff and to reach a wider audience of clients. The MTR of the Gender Strategy 12, 20, 26, 29, 41, 59,
highlighted that the Bank Group lacks a requirement for gender awareness development among 114, 122, 134, 135,
136, 137, 229, 239,
staff. However, there are no specific requirement for gender training. Available evidence suggests that
246, 250, 262, 285
training in this area is not mandatory and has not yet reached some key (operations) staff, impeding
progress in implementing gender tagging and places an additional burden on gender-focussed staff.
Further translation of organisational commitment to project implementation is constrained by the lack
of familiarity with a gender gap (outcome-driven) approach among task team leaders, project leads,
investment officers, and practice managers.
Whereas staff training has been rolled out on gender, it is not mandatory for all staff. The Bank is
responding to gaps in gender awareness amongst staff though targeted training. However, the Gender
Group provides mandatory training to staff nominated by their managers to serve as Regional Gender
Tag Assessors and GP Gender Tag Experts that support project teams upstream. For the current fiscal
year (July 2022 to February 2023) the Gender Group, as the owner of the program, has provided training
to 850 Bank staff. The Training is implemented in collaboration with individual GPs or CMU to allow
customisation of the training responding to the unique circumstance in the respective area. This
customisation includes: (i) leveraging lending instruments such as DPO to accelerate policies, financial
inclusion and social protection for women; (ii) identifying entry points in sectoral engagements such as
Gender and Climate Smart Agriculture, Gender Gaps in DRM); and (iii) identifying entry points within
the cultural and legal frameworks in Regions and CMU. This training is supplemented by quarterly
operations clinics in collaboration with OPSIL.
Many Regions have set additional targets to respond to the corporate mandates and making gender a
shared responsibility of the GPs and CMUs. The Social Sustainability and Inclusion practice along with
other GPs and Regional gender coordination units often support task teams to identify and monitor key
gender issues in the project cycle.
MI 2.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 33

MI 2.2: Corporate/sectoral and country strategies respond to and/or reflect the intended results
of normative frameworks for environmental sustainability and climate change

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.67

Element 1: Dedicated policy statement on environmental sustainability and climate change available
and showing evidence of application
Element 2: Environmental sustainability and climate change indicators and targets fully integrated into
the MO’s strategic plan and corporate objectives
Element 3: Accountability systems (including corporate reporting and evaluation) reflect environmental
sustainability and climate change indicators and targets
Element 4: Environmental screening checklists or similar tools inform design for all new interventions
Element 5: Human and financial resources are available to address environmental sustainability and
climate change issues
Element 6: Staff capacity development on environmental sustainability and climate change is being or
has been conducted
MI 2.2: Analysis

4
3
3
4
4
4
Evidence documents

Element 1: The World Bank has a strong policy and strategic framework supporting environmental
sustainability and climate change.
The World Bank’s support for environmental sustainability and climate change have been reflected
throughout its long-standing operational policies, strategies and corporate commitments over the
course of the assessment period.
World Bank Operational Policies on Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) and Natural Habitats (OP
4.04) note that the Bank conducts environmental assessments on all projects to ensure that they are
environmentally sound and sustainable and prevent, mitigate, minimise or compensate for potential 13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
impacts. Furthermore, the Bank does not finance projects that contravene borrower countries’ 147, 150, 153, 172,
obligations under national policies/ legislation or international treaties / agreements. Furthermore, the 176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
Bank does not support projects that involve significant conversion / degradation of natural habitats.
262, 274, 285
The World Bank’s strategic commitments to environmental sustainability and climate change are
reflected in corporate policy commitments (e.g. IDA policy commitments / IBRD capital package
commitments) and standalone strategies which have evolved over the assessment period to
increasingly scale up the World Bank’s support in these areas. Key corporate commitments include:
(i) scaling-up climate-related finance; (ii) implementing climate and disaster risk-screening for all IDA
and IBRD operations; (iii) implementing Greenhouse Gas accounting for all IDA and IBRD operations;
and (iv) use a shadow price of carbon in all economic analyses. These corporate commitments include
measurable targets for implementation, demonstrated in the table below.

34 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Commitments

Corporate targets

Scale-up climate-related

• Increase climate-related share of commitments to 28% by 2020

finance

(achieved).
• Increase climate-related share of commitments to 35% on average
of IDA/IBRD between 2021-2025 and 50% for adaptation (on track)

Climate / disaster risk

• 100% of IDA operations since 2014 (achieved)

screening for all operations • 100% of IBRD operations since 2017 (achieved)
Greenhouse Gas
accounting and shadow
price of carbon

• GHG accounting for all IDA / IBRD investment Project Financing (IPF)
(achieved)
• Shadow price of carbon used in all economic analysis (on track)
(achieved)

Monitoring and Reporting
on Climate
Resilience Risk Screening
for all operations
Paris Alignment

• All IDA and IBRD operations with over 20% climate finance are
required to incorporate at least one climate indicator
• All operations prepared under IDA20 are to be assessed for their
resilience to climate risks with a new screening tool
• As of July 1 2023, all new operations need to be Paris-Aligned, with
the entire portfolio expected to be Paris aligned by July 1, 2025.

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
The strategic framework for environmental sustainability and climate change in place over the 147, 150, 153, 172,
assessment period include: (i) the 2012-2022 Environment Strategy; (ii) the 2016-2020 and 2021-25 176, 177, 178, 179,
Climate Change Action Plans; and (iii) The Framework for Green, Resilient and Inclusive Development. 188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285
A brief description of each is provided in the table below.
Strategy

Key areas of focus

Environment Strategy

Identifies an agenda to support “green, clean and resilient” paths

(2012-2022)

for developing countries as they pursue poverty reduction and
development through:
• Sustainable management of natural resources, including oceans,
lands and resources;
• Low pollution and low emission development solutions; and
• Resilient development, preparedness for shocks and adaptation to
climate change.

Climate Change Action

Focuses on supporting borrower countries in implementing

Plan (2016-2020)

transformational policies that mainstream climate considerations
into national policies and macroeconomic frameworks, supporting
low-carbon development and supporting the delivery of Nationally
Determined

Contributions

(NDCs).

Targets

scaling-up

climate

co-benefits of the World Bank’s operations across multiple sectors
and crowding in climate finance. Support provided through a range of
blended finance instruments.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 35

Strategy

Key areas of focus

Climate Change Action

Introduces the Country Climate and Development Reports (CCDRs) which

Plan (2021-2025)

integrates climate and development considerations. Prioritises actions
in five key sectors that generate 90% of global GHG emissions. Seeks to
align all new World Bank operations to goals of the Paris Agreement by
starting July 2023. IFC and MIGA will be aligned starting July 2025. World
Bank climate finance to increase to 35% of IDA and IBRD commitments
on average over the CCAP period as well as 50% for climate adaptation.
Targets the scaling-up of domestic resource mobilisation for climate
finance as well as expanding access to private capital.

Green, Resilient and

Emphasises the creation of opportunities for vulnerable populations in

Inclusive Development

the COVID-19 recovery, noting that poverty, inequality and sustainability
are interrelated.

There is tangible evidence to demonstrate that corporate commitments and strategies pertaining to
environmental sustainability and climate change are being delivered, with the World Bank currently 13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
on track to deliver on its corporate commitments. In FY22, more than 90% of World Bank operations 147, 150, 153, 172,
delivered climate co-benefits, with $26.2 billion in climate finance provided. The World Bank continues 176, 177, 178, 179,
to be the largest multilateral provider of climate finance, with 49% of commitments supporting climate 188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285
adaptation in 2022. As of end 2022, 21 CCDRs have been published. through the first CCAP 2021-2025,
the World Bank supported 30 countries in implementing or enhancing their NDCs.
The IDA20 Climate Change Special Theme aligns closely with the recently launched World Bank Group
(WBG) Climate Change Action Plan 2021-2025 (CCAP), which are supported by Regional Action Plans.
Regional Climate Action Roadmaps in the Middle East and North Africa Region and the Latin America and
Caribbean Region: (i) identify key climate transformation areas and impacts based on evidence-based
analysis; (ii) translate these transformation areas into operational priorities and outcomes; (ii) cascade
these priorities to country programmes; and (iv) identify cross-cutting priorities across climate change
programmes, including regional integration, citizen engagement, social inclusion and private sector
participation. These strategies provide a critical opportunity to support climate change adaptation and
mitigation as a regional public good, including monitoring of regional outcomes.
Most respondents to MOPAN’s partner survey (over 90%) agreed (strongly to somewhat) that the
Bank promotes environmental sustainability and addresses climate change though its operations and
strategies, with somewhat less agreement among Civil Society Organisations, the Private Sector, and
Knowledge Partners.

36 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Q3[02], THE WORLD BANK PROMOTES ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND
ADDRESSES CLIMATE CHANGE THROUGH ITS OPERATIONS AND STRATEGIES
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2: Climate change has been consistently reflected among the Bank’s core policy commitments
over the assessment period, including operational targets and frameworks for monitoring.
Climate change and environmental sustainability has been a consistent feature of the World Bank’s policy
commitments to shareholders through subsequent IDA Replenishments and the IBRD Capital Package.
From IDA17 to IDA20, the World Bank has emphasised the mainstreaming of climate change considerations
into operations through monitoring climate co-benefits (increasing to an average of 35% of commitments
between 2023 and 2025). There has been consistent support for scaling up renewable energy and
supporting countries in implementing and updating NDCs and developing long-term strategies. More
recently, the Bank has placed emphasis on the management of biodiversity and nature-based solutions,
including: landscape and watershed restoration and management; and sustainable management of
freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems, including management of plastic pollution.
Commitments and targets for environmental sustainability and climate change have been reflected
throughout the three tiers of the World Bank’s Corporate Scorecard to strengthen corporate incentives
for climate-related operations (see table below). Progress against these commitments is now reported
annually to the Executive Board.

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 37

Tier

Indicator

1

Countries without wealth depletion (%)

1

CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita)

1

Average annual deforestation change

1

Marine protected areas (% territorial waters)

2

Projected lifetime fuel or energy savings (Megawatt hours)

2

Net Greenhouse Gas emissions

2

Number of countries with a completed CCDR

2

Countries institutionalising disaster risk reduction as a national priority.

2

Expanded Power Generation

2

Enhanced Electricity Access

3

Share of climate-related financing in total commitments (IDA / IBRD)

3

Share of adaptation co-benefits over total co- benefits in IDA/IBRD supported operations
(%)

Element 3: Environmental sustainability and climate change are integrated into the World Bank’s
corporate results and accountability architecture.
The World Bank’s IDA Replenishment Commitments for environmental sustainability and climate
change have consistently been reflected in the IDA RMS between IDA17 and IDA20. The IDA20 RMS
includes:
• Number of Countries without natural capital wealth depletion (Tier 1);
• Number of people provided with access to clean cooking (Tier 2);
• Number of IDA countries supported to implement/update Nature-Based Solutions Action Plans (Tier 2);
• Share of adaptation co-benefits over total climate co-benefits (Tier 3);
• IDA financing commitments with disaster risk management co-benefits (Tier 3); and
• IDA20 projects with an AA resilience rating.
IDA RMS indicators have been monitored and reported to IDA shareholders on an annual basis (soon
to move to a quarterly basis). Additionally, since the IDA19 replenishment, all operations with at least
20% climate co-benefits by value are required to identify at least one climate indicator in the results
framework.
In line with increasing emphasis placed on climate change for the Capital Increase Package and the
IDA20 Replenishment, there have been continued efforts to reinforce the representation of climate in
the corporate scorecard. There are plans to increase the number of indicators throughout the three
tiers of the scorecard from 12 to 26, including a Tier 1 indicator on global GHG emissions. New Tier 2
indicators will assess: (i) the number of CPFs informed by CCDRs; (ii) the number of countries supported
to update their NDCs and LTSs; (iii) Beneficiaries of climate change adaptation and resilience activities;
(iv) Share of operations with substantial climate co-benefits having at least one indicator in the results
framework; and (vi) number / financial resources for climate DPFs. These changes will better position
the Bank to demonstrate the uptake of climate-related ASA to inform dialogue and the Bank’s influence
in critical policy reform.

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285

38 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

IEG has been active in evaluating the Bank’s climate finance and support to environmental sustainability.
They analysed the potential climate change benefits from the project portfolio in IDA countries between
FY08–10 and FY15–17 using a database created for IEG’s RAP 2017. The data show roughly a 50 percent
increase in the share of project components with potential climate change benefits for both climate
change mitigation and adaptation between the two periods. However, the 20150-2020 CCAP was not
subject to an IEG evaluation.
A 2017 IEG evaluation looked at the Bank’s support to pollution management under the Environment
Strategy. The report raised concern that pollution management was not being streamlined
systematically into the Bank’s portfolio and that, despite growing challenges, targeted pollution
management interventions had decreased in scale relative to growth in the rest of the portfolio. This
was found to be particularly true relative to climate-change related investments, likely contributing to
greater emphasis on environmental sustainability issues in the CCAP (2021-25).
IEG’s forward looking workplan (FY23 – FY25) is well aligned to the Bank’s commitments under IDA20
and the CCAP, including planned evaluations on: private sector participation in climate action; blue
economy; and green energy transition. Additional themes proposed for FY25 and beyond include the
CCAP, Green finance, biodiversity and climate smart agriculture.
Element 4: Environmental Sustainability and climate change considerations are mainstreamed
into the World Bank Group’s operations.
The World Bank has mainstreamed climate change considerations into its CPF and operations through a
variety of approaches. Upstream approaches provide critical data and information to support dialogue 13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
with borrower governments in designing the Country Partnership Framework. Downstream screening 147, 150, 153, 172,
tools take stock of the World Bank’s support to climate and environmental sustainability and create an 176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
incentive for addressing these themes.
262, 274, 285
Upstream integration into CPFs and policy dialogue:
The World Bank integrates climate change and environmental sustainability considerations into CPFs
through an upstream approach based on the generation of country-level knowledge products. CCDRs
help inform country development strategies by integrating climate and development. They intended to
help inform CPFs and other WBG country engagement products. CCDRs also support countries as they
define, update, and implement NDCs.
CCDRs inform the development of Systematic Country Diagnostics (SCDs), which analyse the
sustainability of the current growth trajectory and poverty reduction and identifies key risks to
sustainability, including those related to environment, climate and disaster risk. The Country Partnership
Framework (CPF) builds upon the SCD to identify means of addressing these risks through public and
private sector solutions. CPFs are expected to incorporate climate and disaster risk considerations into
the analysis of a country’s development challenges and priorities where relevant, including climate
change indicators in the results framework.
Other tools designed to provide upstream evidence to inform the development of CPFs and promote
dialogue with borrowing partners includes new initiatives such as the Blue Economy Development
Framework, which provides a set of analytical tools and technical assistance to help countries define a
roadmap to a diversified and sustainable marine economy which building resilience to climate change.
Similarly, the Global Program of Sustainability aims to integrate environmental and other sustainability
considerations into public and private decisions through the provision of tools and metrics and a
systematic approach to measuring the contribution of natural capital to countries’ development.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 39

Downstream integration into operations:
All IDA operations (since 2014) and all IBRD operations (since 2017) Are required to undergo a Climate and
Disaster Risk Screening at early concept stage to help identify short and long-term climate and disaster
risks with the aim of identifying appropriate resilience measures in development policies, programmes
and projects. This assessment also includes an assessment of the borrowers’ institutional readiness
to address impacts at the national/policy and sector levels. End-to-end guidance on conducting the
screening is available for 14 different sectors, with tools and training available publicly.
A “Greenhouse Gas accounting” analysis is conducted for all IDA and IBRD Investment Projects with the
purpose of better understanding the “GHG footprint” of the World Bank’s portfolio. This analysis is carried
out at project appraisal using a methodology aligned to the International Financial Institution Framework
for a Harmonised Approach to Greenhouse Gas Accounting. This analysis is aggregated to facilitate
reporting against corporate scorecard indicators capturing aggregate GHG emission reductions as a result
of Bank investment projects based on an ex-ante estimation of GHG emissions against a baseline estimate.
The World Bank Group monitors its share of climate finance through the concept of climate co-benefits,
which refer to the share of financing dedicated to climate change adaptation or mitigation in World
Bank operations. Identification of climate co-benefits are identified using the Joint Framework and
Principles for Climate Resilience Metrics in financing operations. Specific operations are flagged based
on harmonised list of climate adaptation or mitigation actions across sectors. Climate co-benefits
are scrutinised by the World Bank’s Climate Change team ahead of approval. The concept of climate
co-benefits covers several activities that are linked to environmental sustainability more generally
(reforestation, treatment of wastewater, biosphere conservation, carbon capture and storage).

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
Bank’s operations to climate change and create additional staff incentives. This new system was piloted 176, 177, 178, 179,
in 20 countries under IDA19 and will be further rolled out and tracked for IDA20. As part of this process, 188, 230, 239, 246,
climate change experts are embedded in project teams to provide additional guidance and help identify 262, 274, 285
In 2021, a new Resilience Rating System methodology was piloted to help track the resilience of the World

best practice. The Resilience Rating system provides ratings an A,B,C scale in response to two questions:
(i) are the projects assets / outputs resilient to risks for climate change and natural hazards?; and (ii) is the
project outcome aimed at building resilience to climate change and natural hazard risk? This innovative
rating system is helping the Bank move toward outcome-level tracking of climate change results.
As of July 1 2023, all new World Bank Group operations in the pipeline are expected to be Paris Aligned,
with the entire portfolio to be Paris Aligned in by July 1, 2025. In support of this requirement, the Bank
has identified guidance and methodology for assessing Paris alignment through a three-step process:
(i) assessing the consistency of operations with countries’ climate strategies; (ii) assessing alignment
of operations with Paris agreement adaptation and mitigation goals; and (iii) assessing risks that the
operation will have a negative impact on a countries low GHG emission pathways and identifying a risk
mitigation strategy.
Element 5: The World Bank’s corporate priorities around climate change are supported by a
network of experts and a range of financing sources and instruments.
The World Bank’s Climate Change Group has realigned into five units to support the implementation
of the CCAP (2021-25) and mainstreaming climate change throughout the WBG. These units address
different dimensions of the World Bank’s support to addressing climate change, including:
• A finance and economics unit, which includes a team of climate economists with expertise in CCDRs;
• An operationalisation and impact unit, which further focuses on mainstreaming climate, Paris
Alignment, and measuring impact;
• A unit serving as the Secretariat for the Climate Investment Funds

40 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• A unit that manages other climate funds, including for results-climate finance;
• And finally, a unit that supports global, regional, and shared services, including knowledge,
communications, learning, and corporate reporting on climate.
Demand for nature, forest, coastal ecosystems, blue economy, and biodiversity investment financing
has increased substantially since 2018. The Environment, Natural Resources and Blue Economy Global
Practice (ENB) provides expertise, technical assistance, and financing to help low- and middle-income
countries manage land, sea and freshwater natural resources in a sustainable way to help create jobs,
improve livelihoods, enhance ecosystem services, decrease pollution and increase resilience to climate
change. ENB works closely with countries, development partners and the private sector to help reduce
vulnerability to climate risks.
Furthermore, the implementation of the Environment and Social Framework (ESF) has mainstreamed
environmental sustainability considerations into all WB policies and operations. ENB projects support
climate change goals, with much overlap between adaptation, mitigation, and poverty reduction
benefits, while ENB analytics provide cutting edge knowledge and innovation on nature finance,
pathways out of pollution and environmental fiscal reform. In addition, nature-based solutions and
pollution management are important components of the CCAP.
Climate Group External Fund Resources
Additionally, the World Bank Group manages a range of trust funds and financial intermediary funds to
support various environmental sustainability and climate change mitigation, adaptation and resilience
activities, identified in the table below:
Resource

Purpose

Climate

A multi-donor trust fund established in 2020 for the Initial commitment

Support Facility purposes of:

Scale
of USD 55 million in

• Ensuring climate change mitigation and adaptation 2020. Portfolio of 70
is at the core of COVID-19 recovery efforts;

operations totalling

• Enabling countries to deliver their Nationally USD 21 million.
Determined Contributions; and
• Helping countries take a long-term view of climate
change in their development planning.
Climate

A Financial Intermediary Fund for which IBRD is trustee Over USD 11 billion

Investment

and the Climate Change Group supports the work pledged since 2008

Funds

of governing bodies. The Fund works through seven and over 400 projects
programmes that seek to lower the risks and costs of supported.
climate financing for innovate projects addressing
clean technology, energy access climate resilience and
sustainable forests.

Scaling Action

A multi-donor trust fund providing results-based Initial funding target

by Lowering

climate finance in the form of grant payments to of USD 1 billion set for

Emissions

projects for achieving pre-agreed climate targets (e.g. 2023.

(SCALE)

emissions reductions).
Projects targeted in three areas:
• Natural climate solutions;
• Sustainable infrastructure solutions; and
• Fiscal and financial markets solutions.

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 41

Resource

Purpose

Scale

Global

This Financial Intermediary Fund is a G20 initiative GIF has mobilised USD

Infrastructure

with the World Bank serving as trustee. It supports low- 2.1 billion in private

Facility

carbon, climate resilient and sustainable infrastructure capital as of FY21.
in emerging markets by:
• Providing a platform for co-ordination;
• Financing of project preparation to increase the
number of bankable climate-friendly infrastructure
projects in EMDE (Emerging Markets and Developing
Economies)
• Providing risk mitigation finance; and
• Developing and disseminating knowledge.

PROBLUE

An umbrella multi-donor trust funds that supports USD 215 million in
the World Bank’s oceans portfolio. This fund supports contributions as of
the sustainable and integrated development of FY22.
marine and coastal resources in healthy oceans
through (i) the management of sustainable fisheries
and aquaculture; (ii) tackling marine pollution; (iii)
sustainable development of oceanic sectors (e.g. offshore renewable energy); and (iv) sustainable seascape
management.

PROGREEN

PROGREEN supports rural livelihood development USD 230 million in
and landscape restoration while tackling declining contributions in FY22
biodiversity, forest loss, and deteriorating land
fertility. PROGREEN provides tools and knowledge
to support countries’ efforts to reduce poverty while
tackling deforestation and landscape degradation, and
increasing risks exacerbated by a changing climate,
such as uncontrolled forest fires and drought.

Global

The GPS informs the decision making by governments, The GPS has provided

Programme on

private sector, and financial institutions. GPS is data and analysis

Sustainability

promoting the use of high-quality data and analysis on in 16 countries and

(GPS)

natural capital, ecosystem services, and sustainability.

supported 25 projects
with a volume of USD

Understanding the value of a country’s environmental

3.5 billion.

assets is the key to sustainable development and USD 44 million were
economic growth. GPS helps countries integrate these pledged to date in
sustainability considerations into policies and decision FY23, and 21 policy
making that addresses climate change and nature engagements were
loss by providing high quality data on stocks and informed in 11
flows of natural resources and ecosystem services and countries.
analysing the corresponding risks and opportunities
for the development process.

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
176, 177, 178, 179,
188, 230, 239, 246,
262, 274, 285

42 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Resource

Purpose

Scale

The Global

The GSFF leverages the Bank’s analytical work, GSFF has raised USD

Shield

policy dialogue and country operations on climate 320 million to date

Financing

change adaptation and resilience to improve financial (US$200 million

Facility (GSFF)

preparedness and financial protection of governments, disbursed) and
businesses and households against disasters, climate leveraged USD 8 billion
shocks and other crises.

in Bank operations to
support 18 countries.

Risk Finance

The RFU supports low- and middle-income countries To date the RFU has

Umbrella (RFU)

and their population to strengthen their financial raised USD17 million.
resilience against disasters, climate shocks and
other crises. The RFU provides global analytical and
knowledge management as well as targeted technical
assistance on disaster risk financing in 11 countries.

Finance for

FDP supports the “greening” of the financial sector To date the program

Development

by supporting programs for sustainable and green has raised US$40

Programme

investments (green affordable housing).

million.

(FDP)
Additionally, the World Bank is mobilising resources for climate finance is through green bonds, issuing
the first ever green bond in 2008. Green bonds raise funds from investors to support lending for eligible

13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
projects that seek to mitigate climate change or help affected people adapt to it. Since 2008, the World 147, 150, 153, 172,
Bank has issued USD 18 billion in green bonds through 200 bonds in 25 currencies. Catastrophe Bonds, 176, 177, 178, 179,
a new product, allow entities exposed to natural disaster risk transfer a portion of this risk to bond 188, 230, 239, 246,
investors, working in a similar way to insurance. CAT bonds help boost countries’ preparedness to 262, 274, 285
respond to climate-related disasters.
While the CCDR is a new instrument, the focus is on knowledge sharing. CCDRs capture a wide range
of information on the interplay between development, climate change, and climate policies, including
poverty, growth and inequality. To support teams, the Environment GP has issued a guidance note on
the CCDR and the CCDR Data Portal which tracks and share information form CCDR (which will feed into
a future Databank). In addition, to support the technical aspects of preparing CCDR, Regional Focal
Points were established. A helpdesk for general questions and focal points in GP were created to assist
with technical and sector analysis.
Element 6: The Bank has identified a range of training and knowledge tools to support staff in
integrating environmental sustainability and climate change considerations into operations.
The World Bank’s Climate Team has increasingly scaled up training for staff around the Bank’s climate
change commitments and mainstreaming tools. Mandatory climate training has been integrated into
the World Bank’s core curriculum and Training on the Paris Alignment of World Bank operations has
recently been introduced.
A total of 29 trainings were launched in FY2022, reaching 3000 World Bank staff. Recently, an executive
training course for WBG Directors was added the available training. Climate change issues are also
integrated into mandatory core training for operations staff as well as operations clinics. Climate change
content has been integrated into OPCS-hosted DPF and IPF core academies, which are required for staff
to become task team leaders for these respective instruments. Since FY20, trainings also introduce task
teams to general GHG Accounting principles and how they are applied to the corporate commitments

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 43

and the ESF, with a focus on Environmental and Social Standard 3: Resource Efficiency and Pollution
Prevention and Management A wide range of optional courses are provided for staff and the general 13, 18, 26, 41, 119,
147, 150, 153, 172,
public through the World Bank’s Open Learning Channel.
176, 177, 178, 179,
Beyond training, the Climate Change Team manages the Climate Change Knowledge Portal – an online 188, 230, 239, 246,
tool for accessing comprehensive global, regional and country-level data and learning related to climate 262, 274, 285
change and development.
MI 2.2: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 2.3: Corporate/sectoral and country strategies respond to and/or reflect the intended results
of normative frameworks for addressing fragility, conflict and violence

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: Dedicated policy statement on Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) situations available and
showing evidence of application
Element 2: FCV indicators and targets fully integrated into the organisation’s strategic plan and
corporate objectives.
Element 3: Accountability systems (including corporate reporting and evaluation) reflect Fragile,
Conflict, and Violence (FCV) situations.
Element 4: Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) screening checklists or similar tools inform design for
all new interventions
Element 5: Human and financial resources are available to address Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV)
situations
Element 6: Capacity development of staff on Fragile, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) situations is underway
or has been conducted
MI 2.3: Analysis
Element 1: The World Bank has a policy and strategy framework for development co-operation
and fragility, conflict and violence.
The World Bank’s existing policy on operations in situations of fragility, conflict and violence was
revised in 2020 to identify the core principles underlying the Bank’s engagement in FCV settings and
emphasising the role of analytic and diagnostic tools in focusing on drivers of fragility and sources of
resilience. Additionally, the policy lays out the principles for the World Bank’s engagement in situations
of forced displacement, humanitarian emergencies and security sector engagements.
The World Bank’s policy is operationalised through a Fragility, Conflict and Violence Strategy (20202025) which seeks to enhance the WBG’s effectiveness to support countries in addressing the drivers and
impacts of FCV and strengthening their resilience, especially for the most vulnerable and marginalised.
The FCV Strategy articulates a differentiated approach for the WB’s operations in FCV contexts structured
around a set of guiding principles and four pillars of engagement, including:
• Preventing violent conflict and interpersonal violence by addressing the drivers of fragility and
immediate to long-term risks;
• Remaining engaged during conflict and crisis situations to preserve hard-won development gains,
protect essential institutions, build resilience, and be ready for future recovery;

4
4
3
3
4
3
Evidence documents

44 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• Helping countries transition out of fragility, by promoting approaches that can renew the social
contract between citizens and the state, foster a healthy local private sector, and strengthen the
legitimacy and capacity of core institutions; and
• Mitigating the spill-overs of FCV to support countries vulnerable and marginalised communities
impacted by cross-border crises, such as forced displacement or shocks resulting from famines,
pandemics, and climate and environmental challenges.
Specific targets for mainstreaming address the uptake of Risk and Resilience Assessments (RRAs) to
inform the design of Country Partnership Frameworks that address drivers of fragile and resilience.

Q3[03], THE WORLD BANK CONSIDERS AND ADDRESSES RISKS OF FRAGILITY,
CONFLICT AND VIOLENCE IN ITS INTERVENTIONS AND STRATEGIES
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner

14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 103,
138, 239, 246 260,
262, 265, 281, 285

Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Over 80 percent of respondents to MOPAN’s Partner Survey agreed that the Bank considers and
promotes FCV through its operations and strategies. Over 80 percent of respondents similarly responded
favourably that the Bank promotes the protection of vulnerable people in its operations.
Element 2: Fragility Conflict and Violence has been a key feature of the World Bank’s policy
commitments and corporate scorecard throughout the assessment period.
Fragility, Conflict and Violence has been a Special theme throughout the IDA18, IDA19 and IDA20
Replenishment Cycles. Policy commitments for these cycles have emphasised:
• Ensuring that CPFs and CENs in FCS countries and countries at risk of FCV are based on fragility
assessment, with increased emphasis over time on drivers of fragility and the Risk and Resilience
Assessments (RRA);
• Implementing new knowledge products, including flagship reports and Joint Recovery Peacebuilding
Assessments with partners;
• Strengthening the World Bank’s operational effectiveness in FCV contexts by enhancing the global
footprint, increasing responsiveness and providing hands-on support;
• Identifying new resource windows, including the FCV Envelope and the Window for Host Communities
and Refugees (WHR); and

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 45

• Addressing regional and transboundary drivers of fragility and resilience.
The World Bank’s Corporate Scorecard reflects these policy commitments through FCS disaggregation
of key indicators and two FCV-specific indicators:
• Refugees by country or territory of asylum (millions); and
• Internally displaced persons (millions).
Element 3: Fragility, Conflict and Violence is integrated throughout the World Bank’s
Accountability Systems.
In addition to those indicators addressed through the World Bank’s Corporate Scorecard, the IDA20 RMS
includes the following indicators at Tiers 2 and 3 to capture the World Bank’s operational effectiveness
in IDA FCS:
• IDA FCS supported in building capacity to use field-appropriate digital open-source tools for collection
and analysis of geo-tagged data, and apply this technology to enhance project implementation and
coordination (number); and
• “Facetime index” in IDA FSC countries, which measures World Bank staff presences on the ground in
number of days per year.
In the context of operations, specific guidance is available to staff to help better account for fragility in
the design of Theories of Change and results frameworks. This guidance underscores the importance of
including drivers of fragility in the TOC and noting the impact of borrower country capacity limitations
on objective achievement in operations. Additionally, mandatory Corporate Reporting Indicators (CRIs)
14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 103,
138, 239, 246 260,
FCV is one of the core thematic pillars of IEG’s work programme. IEG has conducted two relevant
262, 265, 281, 285
evaluations of FCV: Learning from IDA Experience – Lessons from IEG Evaluations with a focus on IDA
which feed into the Corporate Scorecard are expected to be disaggregated by FCS countries.

Special themes and Development Effectiveness (2019); and World Bank Engagement in Situations of
Conflict – An evaluation of FY10-20 experience (2021). These reports concluded that projects approved
between 2015 and 2020 were 50 percent more likely to address fragility issues. However, consideration
of fragility issues remains low for some sectors (agriculture, energy and extractives, transport). While
the availability of knowledge work pertaining to fragility has increased, knowledge work pre-conflict
does not address drivers of FCV.
Element 4: The World Bank mainstreams fragility into its operations through an upstream
approach targeting the uptake of Risk and Resilience Assessments in CPFs and CENs. Additionally,
new downstream tools are being launched to help understand areas of risk in the context of
operations.
One of the main means through which the World Bank is targeting the mainstreaming of FCV into
operations is the expectation that Risk and Resilience Assessments, positioned as core diagnostics,
inform the development of Country Partnership Frameworks (CPFs) and Country Engagement Notes
(CENs) in addressing key drivers of fragility and sources of resilience. An IEG evaluation of the World
Bank’s engagement in situations of conflict between FY10 and FY20 noted that RRAs increasingly
identify concrete drivers of fragility. However, uptake in CPFs has been uneven due to the clientfacing nature of the World Bank’s work and recommendations in RRAs that are missing or hard to
operationalise. Increasing the uptake of RRAs to inform CPFs/CENs by strengthening the methodology
was one of the proposed measures under the World Bank’s 2020-25 FCV Strategy. The RRA Methodology
was subsequently revised in 2021.

46 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Additionally, Interview evidence suggest that the Bank is developing an inclusion and peace filter/lens to
ensure operations in FCV contexts address drivers of fragility. This tool has been implemented in several
contexts, and a guidance note has been developed to support its use. This was a measure identified to
operationalise the FCV strategy. In terms of operational approaches, the Bank is examining adaptive
management and ways to incorporate this into FCV contexts. The Bank is now focusing on providing
guidance, training, knowledge products on this issue of adaptability. The use of peace/conflict/fragility
lenses was identified as a key opportunity in the Risk and Resilience Assessment Methodology.
A good practice example of uptake of the RRAs to inform programming is the World Bank Strategy to
Address Conflict and Fragility in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (2016), which builds upon the RRA
to identify an operations strategy that focuses on drivers of fragility, including: (i) lack of effective and
legitimate governance; (ii) conflicts related to inter-ethnic tensions and identity issues; (iii) proliferation
and presence of armed forces; and (iv) extreme socioeconomic fragility. The Strategy identifies World
Bank priorities for addressing conflict and fragility from a development perspective. Particular emphasis
is placed on ensuring coherence with the international community and humanitarian organisations and
leveraging partnerships to enhance reach and impact.
Element 5: The World Banks engagement in fragile settings is supported by a dedicated fragility
team, an enhanced global footprint and a range of trust funds and resource windows.
Human Resources
The World Bank possesses a centralised team of fragility experts who liaise with Country Directors
and Co-ordinators as well as staff in other global practices. This team is responsible for disseminating
knowledge and good practice, including through Risk and Resilience Assessments (RRAs) and the FCS
Portal. Additionally, the World Bank is on track to achieve its IDA19 commitment as regards increasing

14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 103,
its staffing footprint in IDA FCV countries. As part of the implementation of the FCV Strategy, the World 138, 239, 246 260,
Bank continues to roll out additional measures to ensure the wellbeing, safety and security of staff, 262, 265, 281, 285
creating further incentives for staff to work in FCV contexts, and to attract talent, including local talent,
to work in these locations.
Financing Resources
IDA19 established the FCV Envelope to enhance the World Bank’s financial support to countries
experiencing FCV. The FCV Envelope provides a top-up to regular performance-based allocations (PBAs)
of IDA resources. Funds are provided through three windows:
• The Prevention and Resilience Allocation (PRA) enhances support for countries at risk of escalation
into high-intensity conflict or largescale violence;
• The Remaining Engaged during Conflict Allocation (RECA) enables IDA to maintain a base-level
engagement in countries that experience high-intensity conflict and have extremely limited country
capacity; and
• The Turn Around Allocation (TAA) supports countries emerging from conflict, social/political crises or
disengagement where there is an opportunity for IDA to intensify engagement to support countries
in pursuing major reforms.
In FY21, the envelope provided USD 2.3 billion in top-ups to 9 countries. Following a Mid-Term Review,
the FCV Envelope was continued under IDA20. A mid-term review of the FCV Envelope conducted for
the IDA19 Replenishment noted that the Envelope had been effective in incentivising governments
and country teams to focus on policy dialogue and focus on project that address drivers of fragility
and resilience. Stakeholders in country offices noted the importance of the FCV Envelope in providing
additional resources for engagement in complex settings where PBA allocations do not reflect the scale
of the challenges.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 47

Another important resource envelope is the Window for Host Communities and Refugees (WHR),
helps eligible host countries create meaningful medium to long-term development opportunities and
sustainable solutions for refugees and host populations. For eligible countries, the WHR can provide up
to USD 500 million per IDA cycle to benefit both refugees and host communities, including an emergency
mechanism that provides 100% grant financing to countries experiencing a sudden influx of refugees.
Since being introduced during the IDA18 Replenishment cycle, allocations to the WHR have grown from
USD 2 billion in IDA18 to 2.4 billion in IDA20.
In addition to these IDA windows, the World Bank supports operations in FCV setting through the
State and Peacebuilding Fund and the Global Concessional Finance Facility (GCFF). The State and
Peacebuilding Fund is the largest global trust fund supporting interventions in the context of FCV. The
fund is available to all countries, including MICs with pockets of fragility, non-members and countries
in arrears. The fund focuses on addressing drivers and impacts of FCV and strengthening resilience. The 14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 103,
GCFF is a Financial Intermediary Fund formed in 2016 for which the World Bank acts as trustee. The 138, 239, 246 260,
GCFF supports MICs affected by influxes of refugees through the provision of concessional financing 262, 265, 281, 285
and improved co-ordination for development projects addressing related impacts.
Element 6: The World Bank is expanding its training offerings to staff on operating in FCV settings.
Learning offerings on FCV are currently being expanded and diversified through a new FCV Learning
Curriculum to help ensure staff working in FCV contexts can acquire the necessary skills to engage
effectively. All staff based in FCS are required to participate in the full analytical and operational
curriculum. This includes providing training to staff and fostering communities of practice to increase
awareness among teams of the operational flexibilities that exist in FCV settings, particularly for
procurement, environmental and social safeguards, and financial management. HR delivers training on
personal competencies and the core course has been revamped and is complemented by specialised /
tailored courses to each country. FCV related staff training has increased from 865 staff in FY20 to 1,417
staff in FY22.
MI 2.3: Evidence confidence

High confidence

48 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Assets and capacities organised behind strategic direction and intended results, to ensure relevance, agility and
accountability
KPI 3: Operating model and human and financial resources support relevance and
agility

KPI score

Highly satisfactory

3.62

The World Bank financial and human resources are strategically aligned to its long-term objectives. It is supported by robust
resource mobilisation frameworks that align resources to strategic priorities though commitments to shareholders. The Bank
has an established budgeting process – the “W process” – which serves as a sound and flexible process that aligns strategic
objectives and allocates operational resources. The W process, complemented by strategic staffing that identifies staffing needs
to fulfil its commitments and strategic goals, is used to align, and re-align resources across operations and corporate back-office
support units with organisational priorities. These processes allow for flexibility to deliver on corporate strategic commitments
while accommodating unforeseen developments during the fiscal year.
MI 3.1: Organisational structures and staffing ensure that human and financial resources are
constantly aligned and adjusted to key functions

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: Organisational structure is aligned with, or being reorganised to, requirements set out in the
current strategic plan.
Element 2: Staffing is aligned with, or being reorganised to, requirements set out in the current strategic
plan.
Element 3: Resource allocations across functions are aligned to current organisational priorities and
goals as set out in the current strategic plan
Element 4: Internal restructuring exercises have a clear purpose and intent aligned to the priorities of
the current strategic plan
MI 3.1: Analysis

4
4
3
4
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank’s organisational structure is aligned to its long-term strategic
objectives outlined in the 2013 Strategy. The structure has been rebalanced over the assessment
period to help optimise service to clients, promote knowledge flow in line with the 2013 Strategy
and subsequent IDA replenishment processes, and implications of the 2016 Forward Look and
2018 Capital Package Commitments.
The World Bank’s organisational structure is aligned to the strategic objectives and comparative
advantage set out in the 2013 strategy, including: (i) Regional Vice Presidencies which oversee a range
of operations across more than 130 country offices; (ii) thematic Vice Presidencies which oversee
global practice units and global themes; and (iii) General Management Units that represent corporate
functions, including operations policy and country services.
Over the course of the assessment period, the workforce structure and accountabilities between the
Global Practices and Regional Teams have been rebalanced. The initial reforms implemented at the
outset of the 2013 strategy aimed to remove regional siloes and promote knowledge flow by shifting
operational decision-making to the Global Practices. However, this change carried unintended
consequences, creating siloes between Practice Groups and limiting knowledge flow for multi-sectoral
solutions. Furthermore, staff became increasingly Headquarters-based.

5, 20, 61, 117, 151

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 49

To reverse these trends, the World Bank sought to re-establish responsibility for programmatic decisionmaking to the Regional Vice Presidency Units (VPUs) and enhance the Bank’s “Global Footprint.”
These changes aligned to IDA19 commitments to scale-up staff presence in the field, enabling country
managers to provide better service to clients in Low Income Countries and Fragile States in line with
IDA19 commitments. Resources were shifted to operations and front lines services in order to deliver
on an expanding and more complex work program with rising Board mandated commitments, to grow
the global footprint and expand priority programs in FCS countries and in Africa (which in view of the
strategic importance was split into 2 vice presidencies), South Asia, and the Middle East.
Interaction between the Global Practices and Regional Units is currently elaborated in the World
Bank’s Accountability and Decision-making Framework and is mainstreamed throughout operational
guidance and directives for Country Engagement and the use of different instruments (e.g. Investment
Project Financing and Development Policy Financing).
Specific targets have been set to support decentralisation efforts. The World Bank aims to increase the
proportion of staff in the field from 45 percent to 55 percent by the mid-2020s. Furthermore, it was
expected that all Country Directors and project task managers will be located in country offices, and
well as half of all practices managers by FY22, with one in three located in Africa.
Stakeholders have confirmed the importance of decentralisation, especially in fragile states. In
particular, country teams note how critical it is to be able to liaise with borrowing country counterparts
to respond to emerging needs and troubleshoot implementation. Most survey respondents noted that
the Bank’s staff are in country for enough time to build necessary relationships to deliver its strategy,
with somewhat fewer positive views among representatives of Civil Society Organisations and the
Private Sector.

Q2[03], THE WORLD BANK’S STAFF ARE PRESENT IN COUNTRY FOR A LONG ENOUGH
TIME TO BUILD THE NECESSARY RELATIONSHIPS TO DELIVER
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2: Beyond adjusting its organisational structure over time, the World Bank implements
an annual strategic staffing exercise to ensure placement of staff with the right skills reflect
ongoing operational needs. This exercise helps management reflect on skills required for future
operational trajectories in line with available budget.
The WB uses an annual Strategic Staffing exercise to identify staffing needs to fulfil its commitments and
strategic goals. Strategic Staffing is an important WB management tool that, complemented by budget
and expenditure analysis, matches demand-led, bottom-up analysis from VPUs to corporate priorities
and commitments to determine the number, skill, level and location of staff performing different roles.

5, 20, 61, 117, 151

50 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Workforce planning seeks to align the available unit-level staff mix (of skills, grade level, and location)
with projected needs (demands) to meet corporate commitments, unit work program commitments
and an indicative 3-year pipeline of deliverables. Stakeholders note that the process is an effective
means of responding to bottom-up demand while ensuring that workforce plans are affordable within
the budget trajectories of units in a transparent way. Despite stakeholders describing this annual
workforce planning process as “heavy” and complex, management generally recognises the value of
this process.
The World Bank has also implemented new initiatives to promote the mobility of its existing workforce
and leverage its Performance Management System and talent reviews to increase the exposure and
rotation of highly performing staff. A systemic rotation system has been implemented among existing
staff, including rotations to the field, to help them apply their skills in different operational contexts.
The rotation system helps build incentives to take on posts in different regions for career development
purposes. Stakeholders report that most staff have been open to this system; however, some challenges
remain where staff have negotiated their initial contracts on the basis of a Washington-based post.
Whereas the World Bank currently depends on existing staff to address 80% of staff mobility, recent
experience has demonstrated the need to look outward in order to acquire different skills sets and fill
certain positions (e.g. data analytics). MOPAN’s partner Survey suggests that most key stakeholders find
the Bank staff to have the requisite skills and experience to conduct its work (over 90 percent agree to
some extent), though there is some variation in perceptions to whether the Bank has enough staff to
deliver results (less than 80 percent agree to some extent).

5, 20, 61, 117, 151

Q2[01], THE WORLD BANK HAS A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF STAFF, EITHER IN OR
ACCESSIBLE TO COUNTRIES WHERE IT OPERATES TO DELIVER INTENDED RESULTS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 51

Q2[02], THE WORLD BANK’S STAFF HAVE THE RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND SKILLS
TO WORK SUCCESSFULLY IN THEIR TECHNICAL/SECTORAL CONTEXT
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 3: Alignment of the strategic staffing to the annual budgeting process helps ensure
resource allocation is aligned to institutional priorities and forward-looking operational needs

over time. Several measures were taken to adjust to demands linked to COVID-19, including 5, 20, 61, 117, 151
recruitment of short-term consultants.
The W-process, complemented by a separate strategic staffing exercise (which takes place after
completion of the W process), is used to align and re-align resources across operations and corporate
back-office support units with organisational priorities. These processes allow for flexibility to deliver
on corporate strategic commitments while accommodating unforeseen developments during the fiscal
year (e.g., COVID, food, fuel, finance crises). In the case of deviations from the program on account
of unforeseen events (e.g., localised emergency), an established mechanisms allows for access to the
regional and corporate contingencies, and for major events (e.g., global COVID pandemic), the Bank
may tap into a budget flexibility band, which allows the Bank to overrun or underrun the authorised
budget by up to 2 percent in exceptional circumstances with information to the Board. Annual budget
documents demonstrate how allocation of the administrative budget is aligned to business priorities
and the lending outlook. For example, the FY22 budget identifies key strategic drivers of allocation
of the administrative and operational budget to regional VPUs and Practice Groups, including: (i)
enhancing the global footprint; (ii) integrating IDA and IBRD policy commitments into operations; (iii)
strengthening institutional support; and (iv) supporting client’s long-term pandemic recovery needs.
The World Bank’s Human Resources function adapted to the challenges posed by COVID-19 to continue
delivering its Talent Acquisition Strategy, with stakeholders citing that the function largely remained
resilient despite the challenges faced. For example, decentralisation of key staff such as Country
Directors and Practice Managers continued during the pandemic to approach targets set for the end of
FY22. Recruitment also continued during this time, with virtual onboarding arrangements identified for
new staff.

52 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Despite the Bank’s commitments increasing between 40 and 50% during the pandemic, the overall
number of staff remained relatively stable. During the pandemic, the bank relied more on temporary
staff and consultants to meet the demand. In line with the Bank’s overall shift in expanding its global
footprint, the majority of consultants were recruited in country offices. Several waivers and policy
changes were introduced to address the need for: (i) enhanced duty of care for staff in country offices,
long-term remote work; and (iii) overtime remote work by temporary staff.
Stakeholders note a positive lesson learned from the pandemic in moving to 100% remote virtual
learning for staff, which is thought to have increased access and which the Bank is keen to retain
following the crisis.
Element 4: The World Bank’s restructuring plans have had a clear purpose of focusing on efforts
to serve all clients by enhancing the country footprint and promoting enhanced collaboration
across Global Practices.
The World Bank’s restructuring over the assessment period has sought to align the organisational

structure to “serving all clients,” including increasing the Bank’s global footprint by moving more 5, 20, 61, 117, 151
staff to the field and enhancing implementation support in line with the 2016 Forward Look and 2018
Capital Package Commitments. Other changes have occurred within Practice Groups and regional
teams to address priorities arising from the IDA replenishment cycle without changing the overall
organisational structure of the Bank, as was seen in 2013 changes made to create the Global Practices.
These organisational shifts have been supported by strategic staffing and workforce planning exercises
to take stock of the number of staff and skill sets required across different areas of the Bank.
The Work Force Plan continuously monitors priorities for the implementation of the global footprint
along 5 metrics. For the FY23 – FY25 period the Plan anticipates: (i) a further shift of staff located in
country offices to 50.5% (6,812) in FY25; (ii) a significant increase in field based practice managers
from 70 (39.5%) in FY22 to 98 (53.9%) by FY25; (iii) an adjustment in footprint in country office staffing
responding to shifts in work programs such as suspensions; (iv) an expansion of our shared service
centres in Bulgaria and India that support the Bank; and (iv) increase in staffing in FCV locations by 16%
(179 staff) by FY25.
MI 3.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 3.2: Resource mobilisation efforts consistent with the core mandate and strategic priorities

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.67

Element 1: Resource mobilisation strategy/case for support, with clear targets and monitoring, explicitly
aligned to current strategic plan
Element 2: Resource mobilisation strategy/case for support reflects recognition of need to diversify the
funding base, particularly in relation to the private sector
Element 3: Resource mobilisation strategy/case for support seeks multi-year funding within mandate
and strategic priorities
Element 4: Mechanisms are identified to complement funding from the organisation with funds or
contributions in kind from borrower countries to enhance ownership and/or maximise impact

4
4
3
N/E

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 53

MI 3.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1: Both IDA and IBRD have strong frameworks in place to guide resource mobilisation in
line with its strategic plan and shareholder priorities. The Strategic External Funds Framework
aligns resource mobilisation from trust funds from donors to strategic priorities forward-looking
portfolio.
Under its new hybrid financial model, introduced in 2018, IDA’s resource mobilisation consists of:
• shareholder replenishments on a three-year cycle (though shortened for IDA19 to advance IDA20 as
agreed with donors and borrower representatives in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic);
• market borrowings to support concessional lending, including through bond issuances;
• income transfers from IBRD; and
• reflows and income, including from non-concessional lending.
IDA replenishments serve as a means of engaging stakeholders around institutional priorities over the
medium-term, identifying key policy commitments to be supported by the replenishment envelope
enabled by their financial contributions and well as shifts in institutional structures and strategy to
be pursued in line with policy commitments. Resources from each IDA replenishment set out strategic
objectives and the resources required to achieve said objectives. Special themes and cross-cutting
issues are identified as priority areas of focus within the overall development challenges facing IDA
countries. The IDA RMS, updated with each replenishment cycle (and through Mid-Term Review and
annual updates), provides a transparent means of monitoring progress achieved across IDA countries
and the Bank’s operational effectiveness in supporting these results.
IBRD’s financial framework is geared toward earning adequate income to ensure sufficient long-

8, 21, 23, 30, 40, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 143,
as-needed basis in line with shifts in shareholder priorities, and on needs assessment of resources 166, 200, 246, 271
needed to address those priorities. The most recent Capital Package, agreed in 2018, responded to
term capital is available to support development activities. Capital increases are implemented on an

the requests of shareholders at the 2017 Annual Meetings, with particular emphasis on enhancing the
Bank’s ability to respond to development challenges faced by MICs and scaling up the Bank’s role in
scaling up climate finance.
IBRD is funded by bond issuances on international capital markets at advantageous pricing due to a
record of its high-quality securities and AAA credit status. IBRD’s ability to intermediate funding on the
international capital markets at favourable terms enables it to provide finance to developing member
countries on terms and at tenors that borrowing countries cannot access from other sources. IBRD also
charges fees for reimbursable advisory services (RAS), the reserve assets management program (RAMP)
and Externally Financed Outputs (EFO).
IBRD’s Financial Sustainability Framework, including the identification of a Sustainable Annual Lending
Level (SALL) and annual crisis buffer, plays an important role in ensuring lending remains sustainable and
signalling if/when future capital increases are required. IBRD established a comprehensive monitoring
framework for the implementation of budget commitments under the latest Capital Increase, including
new operational targets for climate commitments and gender as well as implementation of an enhanced
Financial Sustainability Framework. An independent assessment of the implementation is planned for
the 2018 Capital Package after 5 years of implementation.
As part of ongoing Trust Fund reform, the World Bank introduced the Strategic External Funding
Framework (SEFF). The SEFF informs three-year rolling fundraising plans, including the identification
of overall priorities for fundraising, planned volumes linked to planned trust fund portfolio and
breakdown by targeted donors. Individual SEFFs are prepared by Global Practice units and regions,

54 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

working alongside Umbrella Programme managers, to establish new trust funds or make changes to
existing trust funds. SEFFs contribute to the production of Fundraising Initiative Notes (FIN), which help
support fundraising transparency and co-ordination across the Bank. The FIN is marked as completed
for trust funds that plan to discontinue fundraising. An annual Fundraising Activity and Transparency
(FAcT) report summarises all active fundraising for trust funds and selected FIFs.
Element 2: Both IDA and IBRD have increasingly diversified their resources bases beyond shareholder
capital, including through revenue from loan repayment and bond issuances. Furthermore, Trust
Funds increasingly provide a means to mobilise resources from private and non-state entities.
IDA/IBRD strategies, especially those outlined in the Forward Look, underscore the need to diversify
their respective funding bases and ensure that funds are reserved for instances where the private sector
cannot or will not intervene. IDA’s hybrid financial model introduced debt financing to enable it to
leverage shareholder contributions and diversify its resource base. IBRD has a diverse funding base as it
intermediates finance in various currencies in diverse financial markets. This track record has enabled
IBRD to raise additional financing quickly and reliably on short notice such as was the case for COVID-19
financing. A share of the IBRD bond purchasers around from the world are often private institutional
investors interested in secure long-term finance.
Both IDA and IBRD benefit from private foundations which fund special initiatives through Trust Fund
contributions (such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and its support of the Global Education
Policy Dashboard through the Foundational Learning Compact Umbrella anchored by the Systems
Approach for Better Education Results). It is important to note, however that the private sector provides
a much more significant share of trust funds to the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the World
Bank Group’s private finance -facing institution.

8, 21, 23, 30, 40, 87,
88, 89, 90, 117, 143,
Element 3: IDA Replenishment cycles and IBRD Capital Package increases are designed to
166, 200, 246, 271
provide multi-year funding around an evidence-based business case and medium-term priorities
negotiated with shareholders.
Both IDA and IBRD benefit from periodic influx of capital linked to specific commitments in line
with its strategic priorities. IBRD benefits from capital increases accompanied by specific strategic
commitments; the most recent one was approved in 2018, before the global COVID-19 pandemic,
and before the global economic slowdown, which aims to increase paid-in capital by $7.5 billion (and
callable capital by $52.6 billion). These capital increases do not occur on a cycle but are triggered by
more transformative changes such as sustainable delivery of the ambitious global objectives of the
strategic directions entailed in the Forward Look.
IDA operates on a 3-year replenishment cycle (in addition to the hybrid market operations and IBRD/IFC
resource transfers, and optimisation of the IDA balance sheet). Every three years, donors and borrower
members meet to consider performance in delivering the ongoing policy package and program, identify
emerging needs and review IDA’s policy framework, informing replenishment commitments for the
next cycle. The IDA20 replenishment was brought forward by one year in 2021 to address the urgent
needs of IDA countries in responding to COVID-19.
Element 4: Various mechanisms have been identified to facilitate in-kind contributions from
shareholders, including co-financing and counterpart funding.
World Bank financed programs continue to include significant local financial or in-kind contributions
from the recipient country. Counterpart contributions not only increase ownership but also increase
the likelihood of financial sustainability after external financing has ended.
GAP – latest policy / guidance / metrics on counterpart funding
MI 3.2: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 55

MI 3.3: Resource reallocation/programming decisions responsive to need can be made at a
decentralised level

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: An organisation-wide policy or guidelines exist that describe the delegation of decisionmaking authorities at different levels of the organisation
Element 2: Operations are scrutinised from multiple perspectives to promote quality and relevance
prior to Board approval.
Element 3: Evaluations or other reports contain evidence that reallocation/programming decisions
have been made to positive effect at country or other local level as appropriate
Element 4: The MO has made efforts to improve or sustain the delegation of decision-making on
resource allocation/programming to the country or other relevant levels
MI 3.3: Analysis

3
4
4
4
Evidence documents

Element 1: IDA and IBRD possess a comprehensive set of policies, directives and guidelines,
including an Accountability and Decision-making Matrix (ADM) which outline different policy
requirements and roles and responsibilities in the context of operations.
The WB has clear guidelines that establish the decision-making authority at its various levels, with
a considerable amount of authority at the country level. The Accountability and Decision Matrix
(ADM), as defined in the World Bank’s Operational Manual, sets out a framework for the authority and
accountability of staff in a decision-making process within the Bank: when functions are performed,
who performs them and how and when decisions need to be escalated to the next level up.
The ADM outlines five types of roles related to decision-making – recommendation (responsible for
fathering facts analysing informant, and preparing a proposal), advisory (responsible for rendering
relevant and current advice pursuant to their specialty), clearance (responsible for determining that
the proposal complies with essential requirements), concurrence (responsible for revieing the proposal
before it is forwarded to the decider), and decision (responsible for considering the entire proposal
and making a decision). However, per the Articles of Agreement, ultimate decision-making regarding
policies/strategies and agreement to provide resources lies with the Board. Stakeholders mostly agree

that the Bank makes critical strategic or programming decisions in an agile and responsive way in the 25, 40, 61, 93, 96, 99,
102, 108, 292
countries in which it works.
Element 2: IDA and IBRD’s Accountability and Decision-making Matrix identifies how different
parts of the organisation interact in the context of operations to operationalise policy
requirements, supported by a risk-based approval structure.
World Bank operations are subject to multiple levels of review to ensure relevance and quality of
its programs. These include peer reviews by technical and development effectiveness units as well
as reviews by regional and Bank-wide operations committees with mandatory participation of
concerned units (including legal, risk, credit, OPCS, etc.). This process of reviews is meant to promote
“contestability” through airing and debating diverse and conflicting viewpoints over the relevance
and quality of different operations. When operations reach a decision stage, these views have been
documented and integrated into the operation to enhance its quality.
The World Bank’s ADM identifies basic requirements for promoting contestability in operational design,
identifying advisory, concurrence and decision roles among team leaders, practice managers, country
lawyers, environmental and social specialists and financial officers. These roles are identified for
different stages in the project cycle, including initiation, concept review, corporate review, appraisal and

56 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

negotiations and approval. The World Bank’s ADM has evolved over time to reflect the organisational
structure and the deployment of its staff resources.
One of the mechanisms through which the Bank’s matrix structure is leveraged to promote the quality
of operations is through the Quality Enhancement Review (QER). The QER is optional, but encouraged,
for operations and can be conducted at any time during the operational cycle. It is intended to create a
“safe space” to conduct a deeper review of project complexities, risks and implementation challenges,
bringing in expertise from different areas of the Bank. QERs are particularly useful in informing project
restructuring. Evidence of good practice is demonstrated in different regions. For example, the MENA
Region identifies QER as a cross-cutting priority for the portfolio, identifying a standing QER Group to
enhance readiness and implementation of operations.
Element 3: The World Bank has sought to continuously improve its service delivery to clients
building upon evidence from evaluations, consultations with staff and client feedback mechanisms.
Throughout the assessment period, the World Bank has considered multiple internal and external
sources of evidence to examine the relevance and effectiveness of its operating model and enhance
responsiveness to borrower countries.
A 2019 IEG Evaluation on “Knowledge flow and collaboration under the Bank’s new operating model”
noted that the new operating model yielded unintentional impacts with respect to inhibiting collaboration
and contributing to inefficiency, fragmentation and internal competition. Although the report found that
regional siloes had been removed as a barrier to knowledge flow, the 2013 reforms did not succeed in
enhancing collaboration behaviours, change incentives or organisational culture. Furthermore, some
GPs continued to lack coherent, systematic approaches to investing in knowledge. This evaluation,
alongside evidence from the World Bank’s Country Opinion Survey were key drivers in the shifts to the
World Bank’s operating model undertaken the same year to expand the Bank’s global footprint.
The World Bank continues to monitor the effectiveness of its operating model through evaluations and
the Country Opinion Survey. A 2022 IEG evaluation of the World Bank’s Global Footprint, found that
changes to the operating model had:
• helped the World Bank build a strong presence in client countries;
• improved responsiveness to clients;
• provided more regular operational support for projects;
• increased trust between World Bank staff and government counterparts; and
• enhanced collaboration with partners in the field.
Key metrics reflecting responsiveness to clients have been included in the World Bank’s corporate
scorecard. Performance on these metrics have improved steadily since 2018, including:
• Facetime days (staff presence on the ground in FCS); and
• Client feedback on Bank responsiveness and staff accessibility.
Element 4. The ADM World Bank has identified opportunities to delegate decision-making to the
country level for certain operational activities; however, opportunities exist to further delegate.
Since 2018, there have been various changes made to increasingly devolve decision-making authority
to the field in line with the Bank’s priority to expand its global footprint. The ADM identifies the
Country Director in a “decision” role at various stages of the operations cycle, including at initiation,
concept review, appraisal and negotiation. Decisions around corporate review and approval prior to
presentation to the Executive Board remain with Regional Operations Committees and the broader
World Bank Operations Committee.

25, 40, 61, 93, 96, 99,
102, 108, 292

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 57

Additional changes have been made in devolving authority for the restructuring of operations.
Restructuring decisions can increasingly be made at the Country Director level to respond to
findings from ongoing dialogue with borrower countries in the context of implementation support to
strengthen the development effectiveness of projects and address risks and problems arising during
implementation. Restructurings that require Board approval are limited to high-risk changes such as a
change in safeguard category (See KPI 8 for additional discussion on restructuring).
The 2022 IEG Evaluation on “Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Bank’s Global Footprint” notes that,
beyond increasing the physical presence of staff in country offices, Project-level decision-making has
increasingly moved to the field. There has been a steadily upward trend in projects managed by Task
Team Leaders (TTLs) in the field, now accounting for more than 50% of operations. There has also been
increasing delegation of authority for country-focused advisory and analytical services to TTLs.
The evaluation notes that these changes have contributed to:

25, 40, 61, 93, 96, 99,
102, 108, 292

• greater responsiveness to clients;
• more regular operational support for projects;
• increased trust between World Bank staff and government counterparts; and
• enhanced collaboration with partners in the field.
A strong correlation was found between the World bank’s client-facing support and client satisfaction,
particularly in FCS. These findings are corroborated by upward trends in the World Bank’s scorecard
indicators for “Facetime Days” and “Client feedback on Bank responsiveness and staff accessibility”
and “Proactivity.” Stakeholders further confirmed the importance of staff presence to provide
implementation support to clients and enhance the effectiveness of policy dialogue and operations.
MI 3.3: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 3.4: HR systems and policies are performance based and geared to the achievement of results

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.29

Element 1: A system is in place which requires performance assessment of all staff, including senior staff 3
Element 2: There is evidence that the performance assessment system is systematically and
implemented by the organisation for all staff and to the required frequency

3

Element 3: The performance assessment system is clearly linked to organisational improvement,
particularly the achievement of corporate objectives, and to demonstrate ability to work with other 4
entities
Element 4: The performance assessment of staff is applied in decision making relating to promotion,
incentives, rewards, sanctions etc.
Element 5: A clear process is in place to manage disagreement and complaints regarding staff
performance assessments
Element 6: Processes are in place to support Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in the workplace
Element 7: Processes are in place to assess staff engagement and the working environment, including
measures to report and follow up on identified issues in a transparent manner.

3
3
3
4

58 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 3.4: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank implements an annual mandatory performance evaluation for all staff
that builds upon a structured competency framework.
All World Bank Staff (regular, open-ended and term staff, at all levels) take part in a mandatory
performance evaluation at least once during a 12-month period without exception in application.
Performance evaluation is implemented in line with the Bank’s competency frameworks, which
provide a common language for describing technical career paths, including job attributes and areas
of expertise.
The relevant managers (according to the matrix structure) review goals and expected results set at the
beginning of the review period and assesses performance in substantive delivery, as well as in other
behavioural criteria (such as client engagement, teamwork, knowledge sharing etc.) against a curved
rating on a scale of one to five (10% of staff receive a rating of 5 and 25% receive a rating of 4). During
the review, development priorities and performance objectives linked to the World Bank’s corporate
goals are discussed for the upcoming year. Staff receive their appraisal in writing and are expected to
sign. If the staff member refuses to sign, the manager may continue the process while noting reasons
for refusal.
Performance Reviews reflect upon staffs’ achievement of objectives, technical performance and
professional behaviour. Reviews are aligned to a competency framework, including job-specific
competencies for staff that define required technical knowledge and skills for different job families. The
World Bank also possesses a set of Core competencies for staff, including:
• delivering results for clients;
• collaboration within teams and across boundaries;
• lead and innovate;
• create, apply and share knowledge; and
• make smart decisions.
Element 2. Implementation and compliance for performance management is regularly tracked.
Probationary periods and Performance Improvement Plans are used to address instances of
underperformance among staff.
The performance management system is applied to all staff without exception. The performance
management system, its consistent use and its completion rates and timeliness are systematically
tracked by HRS and variances are reported to the concerned units and their line managers. Stakeholders
report that efforts are underway to adjust the performance management system to make it more of a
continuous process rather than an annual discussion. However, these efforts have been delayed due to
the impact of COVID-19.
Data provided by the Bank indicates a high level of implementation for year-end reviews at 90% or
more of staff. However, other stages of the performance evaluation process are implemented less
consistently, including:
• objectives setting (70-82% of staff annually over the assessment period);
• continuous feedback (61-81% of staff annually over the assessment period); and
• check-ins (56-72% of staff annually over the assessment period).
Upon recruitment, staff are subject to a probationary period of one year that can be extended to a
maximum of two years. At any point within that timeframe, the probation period may be ended or the
manager may decide to end the staff’s employment.

105, 128, 129, 130,
131, 132, 133, 157,
158, 192, 205, 217,
222, 231, 232, 233,
252, 257, 258, 259,
262, 267, 273, 281,
284

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 59

If a staff receive an unsatisfactory performance review (a rating of 1 or 2) a performance improvement
plan is identified. The manager states which aspects of performance are unsatisfactory, provides
guidance on expectations for improvement and timelines and identifies the consequences for failure.
Upon continued unsatisfactory performance, the concerned staff member may be reassigned to
another position, assigned to a lower-level position or have their employment terminated.
Element 3: The performance management system links staff learning and career development,
including promotion and rotation of staff.
The WB performance management system ensures that organisational improvement by feeding into
promotion and remediation processes. An annual talent review within vice presidential units and across
complexes (e.g., operations, finance etc.) consider high potential staff for increased exposure and more
challenging assignments, while either reassigning or seeking to exit consistently poor performers.
Consistent superior performance in the annual performance review is a condition for promotion to
higher grades (positions at higher grades GH, GI are further capped).
The World Bank provides staff with a number of opportunities for training and rotation both to address
performance deficiencies and support career development. A new staff rotation system was introduced
allowing staff to rotate to different functions across the bank following a “3-5-7” system. Additionally,
the World Bank’s Open Learning Platform provides staff with a wide range of training and learning
opportunities through MOOCs, in-person and virtual delivery options.
Element 4: The performance management system has a clear link to staff incentives, including
promotions, bonuses and compensation.

105, 128, 129, 130,
Annual performance evaluations are directly linked to structural and supplemental merit increases 131, 132, 133, 157,
(Total Merit Increases). Top performers receive the annual structural adjustment as well as performance- 158, 192, 205, 217,
based awards for superior annual performance linked to the annual performance evaluation process. 222, 231, 232, 233,
Poor performers (rated 1 or 2) do not receive any salary adjustment for the year. Consistently high 252, 257, 258, 259,
262, 267, 273, 281,
performance ratings can be used to justify promotion of staff.
284
Element 5. A clear process exists to manage disagreements with the outcomes of performance
assessment, including protections against retaliation.
In the event of disagreements on annual performance evaluations, staff can access a complaints
process to appeal their ratings. This process is implemented in two stages. The first stage includes an
administrative review process followed by a substantive performance management review to appeal
staff performance evaluations, salary review increases or opportunity to improve.
The Administrative review considers whether management acted within its discretionary authority and
whether the evaluation is fact-based and objective, is non-discriminatory, and has followed due process
(proper procedure). This process is managed by the Bank’s Internal Justice Services with the review
conducted by the World Bank Group Human Resources Vice-president. The Performance Management
Review involves review by an official designated by the Bank HR Vice President as a neutral third-party
reviewer.
Staff may further contest the finding through the Internal Justice System up to final resort of the World
Bank’s Independent Administrative Tribunal (with decisions published on the WBAT website). The WBAT
is an Independent judicial forum of last resort for hearing allegations of non-observance of employment
contracts or terms of appointment. The Statute, rules and procedure for the Administrative Tribunal
is available publicly, with complaints needing to be filed within 120 days of the alleged incident.
Furthermore, the WBAT produces an annual report presenting caseloads, trends and decisions for
notable cases. Cases heard by the administrative tribunal have been stable over time with 25 cases filed
in FY22 and 27 cases filed in FY21.

60 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Retaliation against anyone using these review processes is prohibited and any allegations of retaliation
may be reported to the Office of Ethics and Business Conduct (EBC). In the case of retaliation,
discrimination or harassment in connection with performance review decisions, staff may submit an
application directly to the Administrative Tribunal.
Element 6. The World Bank has a clear statement promoting inclusion in the workplace, supported
by various taskforces and measures.
The World Bank’s Statement on Diversity and Inclusion outlines its commitment to a workplace where
everyone is valued, where differences are respected and celebrated and where opportunity and
equitable treatment is afforded to all.” Furthermore, the Staff Code of Ethics notes the World Bank’s
“zero tolerance” policy on harassment and sexual harassment in the workplace, including harassment,
retaliation, abuse of authority and discrimination. Furthermore, the World Bank has committed to
fighting racism and racial discrimination of all forms and offering a work environment characterised by
openness, trust and respect.
The World Bank’s commitment to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in reflected in indicators and targets in
Corporate Scorecard, including:
• A “Diversity Index,” reflecting the gender balance between women and men within grade groups; and
• An “Inclusion Index,” reflecting feedback from the staff engagement survey on the degree to which
the World Bank creates a diverse and inclusive environment that fosters equal opportunities for
everyone to succeed in the workplace regardless of demographic characteristics.
Trends for these indicators have been positive since FY18 but continue to fall short of expected values.
Several tangible efforts have been made to improve workplace culture, reinforce diversity and inclusion
and address harassment. A major effort was done over the past 15 years to achieve gender equality in
senior management (Director and above) positions and to close the pay gap. Several taskforces have
been established to address emerging issues around harassment, retaliation and abuse of authority
arising from the “Doing Business” scandal and the WBAT Ruling 648 on sexual harassment. These
include:
• Establishment of the WBG Taskforce on Racism on June 2020;
• Creation of an Anti-racism Office in the Office of the Anti-Harassment Co-ordinator; and
• Creation of the WBG Taskforce on improving Organisational Culture.
Following these initiatives, Regional Anti-Racism Task Forces have identified guidance for staff on
how to create an anti-racism environment both for within the Bank and client facing in operations
and policy dialogue. Beyond these corporate-level initiatives, there is also evidence of good practice
implementation in specific regional VPUs. The Latin and Caribbean region implemented a “safe space”
initiative in the VP office to provide staff with a confidential platform to provide feedback on workplace
environment and culture and report unethical or inappropriate behaviour by staff or management or
misconduct. This action has been replicated by all VP units in the Bank.
Analysis undertaken by the Ethics and Business Conduct (EBC) Unit and the Taskforce on Racism
identify important challenges in addressing fear of retaliation, which accounts for approximately one
third of complaints to the Bank’s Anti-Harassment Co-ordinator. The Taskforce on Racism identified
a compendium of recommendations for the WBG to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in 2021.
These recommendations include measures to:
• strengthen staff rules around retaliation;
• provide adequate resourcing to support the function of the Anti-racism Office;

105, 128, 129, 130,
131, 132, 133, 157,
158, 192, 205, 217,
222, 231, 232, 233,
252, 257, 258, 259,
262, 267, 273, 281,
284

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 61

• enhance analysis of use of the Internal Justice System, EBC Unit, Ombudsman and Staff Association
with respect to Racism; and
• diversify appointments across the Internal Justice System, EBC unit and Ombudsman Office; and
• develop targeted training for key staff groups, including Human Resources, Managers, Task Team
Leaders and general staff.
While these initiatives are a clearly positive, the Bank could do more to monitor, evaluate and report
publicly on their implementation and impact.
Element 7. There are multiple touchpoints where staff are able to express their thoughts about
the WB and its working environment, including a regular staff survey, anonymous 360 evaluation
and pulse surveys with transparent management action plans.
The World Bank Group carries out an annual (except during the COVID period) Staff Engagement Survey
(conducted by an independent external service provider). Results are analysed by staff category (e.g.,
gender, grade, or staff location), by unit (within and across similar units), and compared to the previous
Survey results, to the mean and variance of other World Bank units, and where appropriate to external
benchmarks. Results are discussed and units prepare action plans for the top issues of concern raised 105, 128, 129, 130,
by the survey. In addition, managers have an annual, anonymous 360 evaluation which feeds into the 131, 132, 133, 157,
158, 192, 205, 217,
overall assessment of the manager’s performance and development plan.
222, 231, 232, 233,
Interviews noted that the WB is looking into ways to integrate a continuous learning touchpoint 252, 257, 258, 259,
approach into the surveys as opposed to the current annual-biannual approach. This has resulted 262, 267, 273, 281,
in a shift to having the survey align with significant career moments such that it becomes an active 284
management tool.
Staff survey results are integrated into the corporate scorecard, reflecting the World Bank’s commitment
to improving organisational culture. A “diversity index” provides an indication of the weighted balance
of women and men in positions at different grades (FY22 .89, upward trend. An “inclusion index” brings
together seven indicators from the staff survey reflecting the extent to which staff perceive the World
Bank provides an “atmosphere of openness and trust,” the extent to which diverse perspectives are
encouraged within teams and perceived managerial commitment to diversity and inclusion, among
other indicators (FY22, 66% favourable, upward trend).
The results of staff engagement surveys are shared bank-wide and at the level of VP units with written
comments published without personnel identifiers. Survey results are compared year-over-year
to identify notable changes in staff engagement. Following the release of results, VP units establish
working groups to provide guidance in preparing action plans to respond to areas for attention. These
action plans are monitored and reported to HR. For example, in 2021, the Latin and Caribbean Region
established staff working groups around work-life balance, collaboration, learning and development
and corporate processes, identifying staff-driven plans to reinforce staff engagement.
MI 3.4: Evidence confidence

High confidence

62 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

KPI 4: Organisational systems are cost- and value-conscious and enable financial
transparency and accountability

KPI score

Highly satisfactory

3.66

The World Bank has a well-established and reliable system for managing and monitoring the active (disbursing) portfolio and
pipeline of forthcoming commitments. Disbursement profiles for projects are based on experience and evidence, and there
are processes in place to address deviations from the expected standard disbursement rate. Implementation is supported by
internal and external controls for misconduct, fraud and corruption in operations, supported by clear policies and procedures,
training, a tracking and reporting system, and avenues for recourse.
The World Bank has made a clear organisational commitment to address sexual exploitation, abuse, and harassment issues
both internally as well as among suppliers and borrowers. This commitment is formalised into a robust, victim/survivor centred
policy and supported by established, clear structures, roles and responsibilities. Prevention of sexual exploitation, abuse, and
harassment is also embedded in mandatory ESF.
MI 4.1: Transparent decision-making for resource allocation, consistent with strategic priorities
over time (adaptability)

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: An explicit organisational statement or policy is available that clearly defines criteria for
allocating resources to partners
Element 2: The criteria reflect targeting to the highest priority themes/countries/areas of intervention
as set out in the current strategic plan

4
3

Element 3: Resource allocation mechanisms allow for adaptation in different contexts

4

Element 4: The organisational policy or statement is regularly reviewed and updated

4

MI 4.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has identified clear criteria around eligibility for financing and
resource allocation to borrower countries which are applied and communicated transparently.
The World Bank has explicit, transparent resource allocation and eligibility policies and processes for
IDA and IBRD that have been developed and tested over the years. Articles of Agreement, By-Laws, and
Policies around Financing Terms are all publicly available.
Eligibility for financing is clearly stated for both IDA and IBRD in the Articles of agreement.
IDA has a fairly transparent system in place for determining allocation of resources through a Performance
Based Allocation system which takes into account countries’ performance in implementing policies 4, 6, 10, 11, 17, 28, 31,
to promote (a) economic growth and poverty through metrics such as (i) economic management; (ii) 32, 92, 144, 146, 162,
structural policies; (iii) policies for social inclusion and equity; and (iv) public sector management and 163, 164, 165, 166,
institutions; and (b) needs assessed by population and Gross National Income (GNI). These allocations 216, 224, 246, 287
represent the main component of core IDA resources for each of its IDA-eligible countries, namely those
that fall below an annually calculated GNI per capita threshold. IBRD allocates resources to middleincome and creditworthy low-income countries when market conditions prove insufficient, but it is
determined the borrower will be able to meet its obligations. This allocation is pursuant to the following
eligibility criteria: (i) country’s relative poverty, defined as an annually established threshold GNI per
capita, (ii) credit worthiness analysis, (iii) a negative list that protects against financing certain activities
in which the bank does not enter, and (iv) single borrower limits to ensure against overconcentration of
financial resources.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 63

Implementation (commitments) is reported in considerable detail to the Board, and changes to the
policies are periodically reviewed and endorsed by the shareholders. Similar eligibility and allocation
criteria exist for specialised IDA windows (e.g., FCS, Crisis Response, Private sector etc.). Trust Funds
also have specific allocation and eligibility policies and procedures agreed with the donor(s), which are
often informed by Global practice strategies. Implementation of Trust Funds is tracked and frequently
reviewed by senior management and systematically reported (e.g., Annual Trust Fund report). The
majority of Survey respondents agreed that World Bank openly communicates the criteria for approving
operations and allocating financial resources.

Q5[01], THE WORLD BANK OPENLY COMMUNICATES THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVING
OPERATIONS AND ALLOCATING FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2: The World Bank has systematic processes in place for allocating operational resources
in line with strategic priorities and borrower country needs.
The Bank uses the following indicators to track the overall strategic alignment of the budget over time:
• Operational share of unit budgets;
• Client engagement share of operational unit budgets; and
• FCV share of country engagement budgets.
Budget documents show evidence of targeting business priorities, including:
• Funding the rapid operational response to the COVID-19 pandemic;
• Funding program growth and expanded portfolio in the priority areas set out in corporate documents
(IBRD capital package, IDA19 replenishment, and FCV strategy);
• Implementing IDA19 and IBRD capital package policy commitments (new country/regional/
corporate engagement, higher ESF requirements), better leveraging global expertise deployment
and development, implementing global footprint changes, and investing to strengthen institutional
support for delivery.
Administrative budget resources (subject to the above noted policy and processes IDA resources, IBRD
capital allocation, and TFs eligibility and allocation) similarly aims to align the top-down multi-year
strategic priorities (e.g., Fragility, Climate Change) with the demand driven bottom-up process (e.g., as
revealed through the Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), Country Partnership Framework (CPF), GP
strategies and the like) through a series of frequent, formal, inclusive and time-bound engagements in
the annual “W” process.

4, 6, 10, 11, 17, 28, 31,
32, 92, 144, 146, 162,
163, 164, 165, 166,
216, 224, 246, 287

64 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Within the operational envelope, priority will be given to fund poorer and smaller countries and those
affected by fragility, violence and conflict where lending and portfolio volume are growing, and global
priorities and corporate mandates.
The majority of donor and board member survey respondents agreed that the World Bank’s strategic
allocation of resources is transparent and aligned to strategic priorities. This is reported publicly though
annual budget documents. Additionally, commitments and priorities as well as targets are identified
through the IDA replenishment cycle and related reporting processes. Stakeholders among donor
groups generally agree that the Bank’s strategic allocation of resources is transparent and aligned with
agreed strategic priorities (over 70 percent favourable).

Q1[05], THE WORLD BANK’S STRATEGIC ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES IS
TRANSPARENT AND ALIGNED WITH AGREED STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 3. IDA Windows and Trust Funds allow for flexibility to respond to different circumstances.
While the IDA, IBRD and TF allocation and eligibility tools are formal, they also allow for flexibility

to rapidly respond to unforeseen crises (e.g., COVID crisis). For instance, the World Bank was able 4, 6, 10, 11, 17, 28, 31,
32, 92, 144, 146, 162,
to reallocate resources from the Crisis Response Window to support the initial USD 12 billion COVID
163, 164, 165, 166,
response package under the COVID-19 Multiphase Programmatic Approach (MPA). IDA mid-term 216, 224, 246, 287
reviews and regular touchpoints with donors and borrower representatives present opportunities for
necessary adjustments. Similarly, the “W” process also allows for the institution to pivot during the year
to provide additional administrative budget resources to respond to unforeseen crises (e.g. economic
shocks of the war in Ukraine).
A range of IDA windows and envelopes provide additional flexibility for countries to address a range of
development challenges, illustrated in the table below:
Window

Allocation

Regional Window

USD 7.9 billion Provides a top-up to IDA PBAs to help countries address
(IDA20)

Purpose
regional challenges and catalyse regional investments. Can
be used to address regional drivers of FCV, infrastructure
gaps, trade barrier, natural resource management and other
challenges across 2 or more countries.

Window for Host

USD 2.4 billion Helps countries with significant refugee populations address

Communities

(IDA20)

gaps between refugee and host communities and within

and Refugees

communities through a top-up to IDA PBAs.

Crisis Response

USD 3.3 billion Provides additional and predictable financing to IDA-eligible

Window

(IDA20)

countries impacted by crises, including food insecurity, natural
disasters, public health emergencies, economic crises and
others. Countries can access this window when alternative
resources are not available.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 65

Window

Allocation

Purpose

Scale-Up Window USD 6.3 billion Provides IDA financing for transformational country and
(IDA20)

regional operations with strong development impact and high
economic returns.

FCV Envelope

Up to 75% top

Provides targeted and tailored support to IDA countries

up, subject to

facing Fragility, Conflict and Violence through a PBA top up

country caps

addressing three different circumstances: (i) a preventions and
resilience allocation; (ii) remaining engagement during conflict
allocation; and (iii) turn around allocation.

Element 4. Processes are in place to regularly review eligibility for and allocation of IDA and IBRD
resources.
The allocation of and eligibility for IDA and IBRD resources are continually monitored and are updated as
required to meet new challenges – i.e. when major strategic shifts occur – especially, but not limited to,
during IDA replenishment and IBRD capital increases. The eligibility of clients for different mechanisms
and envelopes are reviewed, in part, during the IDA replenishment process. Country allocations are
reviewed every year. There is also an annual update to Annex 2 on IBRD, IDA and Blend Countries: Per

4, 6, 10, 11, 17, 28, 31,
32, 92, 144, 146, 162,
the Financial Terms and Conditions of Bank Financing Directive.
163, 164, 165, 166,
Through the Replenishment Process, IDA identifies new priorities of focus. During Capital Package 216, 224, 246, 287
Capita Income, Lending Eligibility, Maturity Premiums, and Repayment Terms the country income of

Increases, the same has been done for IBRD. Although a mechanism for identifying new policy
commitments and priorities seems to exist, it is not evident that there is a mechanism for integrating
these priorities into the allocation processes.
CPFs guide support to member countries, based on development objectives developed in consultation
between the Country and the Bank. However, the directive does not explicitly state how Bank priorities
are incorporated into these. The World Bank did not develop new windows to respond to the crisis but
reallocated funds from an existing Crisis Response Window in their response. Bank policy stipulates
that the Bank conduct a PLR every 2 years during the implementation of a CPF and undergo a CLR at its
completion. The lessons learned in these reviews are intended to be incorporated into future CPFs. In
the case of Trust Funds, changes to allocation or eligibility of resources as may be warranted are also
regularly reviewed with the Donor(s) and reported to shareholders.
The Strategic External Funding Framework (SEFF) is a management authorisation and reporting tool
that provides three-year rolling strategic fundraising plans and TF Portfolio architecture plans, updated
and approved annually by GPs, GTs, Regions and DEC. The SEFF authorises overarching priorities for
fundraising, planned fundraising volumes and their breakdown by donors, and plans for TF portfolio
consolidation for the upcoming year.
MI 4.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

66 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 4.2: Allocated resources disbursed as planned

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: The institution sets clear targets for disbursement to partners

4

Element 2: Financial information indicates that planned disbursements were met within institutionally
agreed margins as appropriate for different financial instruments.
Element 3: Clear explanations, including changes in context, are available for any variances against
plans
Element 4: Variances relate to external factors rather than internal procedural delays, lack of project
readiness or inappropriate conditions precedent.
MI 4.2: Analysis

4
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank applies evidence-based disbursement profiles, with disbursement
information monitored and made available to clients.
Building on extensive operational experience and historical data, the World Bank has set standard
Disbursement Profiles corresponding to various types of financing instruments (e.g. Development
policy loans/credits, Investment lending, P4R). Disbursements are tracked by operational task teams,
Development Effectiveness teams, Loan Administration and senior management (Ops MD) and is
reported to the Board through the Scorecard. Disbursements by country are estimated as a range with
associated probabilities. Client countries have access to disbursement information through the Client
Portal. To client countries these profiles serve to monitor financing plan of the public sector, and to the
World Bank serve to estimate capital allocation (use).
The majority of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed (over 60%) that World Bank provides
reliable information on when financial allocations and disbursement will happen, and the respective
amounts.

Q5[02], THE WORLD BANK PROVIDES RELIABLE INFORMATION ON WHEN FINANCIAL
ALLOCATIONS AND DISBURSEMENT WILL HAPPEN, AND THE RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS
92, 146, 165, 287

Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2. The World Bank’s portfolio monitoring function helps monitor overall disbursement.
When a Credit/Loan concept is agreed to and added to the pipeline a project code is tracked through the
system in the preparation phase to Board approval. When said Credit/Loan is approved by the Board

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 67

a project number tracks commitments and disbursements through various stages (e.g. Effectiveness,
First disbursement etc.). These are reflected in the MIS systems and Client Portal which allows for
comparison against and deviations from the standard Disbursement Profiles.
As indicated by the Corporate Scorecard, FY22 disbursement ratio exceeded corporate targets at 21%.
Disbursement schedules are identified for different types of financing. Loan administration, the country
team, MD for operation, and the Quarterly Business Review (QBRR) all follow disbursement timelines.
Within the regions the development effectiveness tracks disbursement and report to management and
then to the Board. The disbursements are tracked (and reported) at all levels – project, country, region,
and Bank. There is no conflict of interest between staff and project managers.
Corporate Outlier reporting tracks the four different kinds of outliers from disbursement profiles: (i)
lags from approval to legal effectiveness; (ii) lags from effectiveness to first disbursement; (iii) high
undisbursed amounts; and (iv) zero disbursement. These flags contribute to identifying “problem
projects” which may then be subject to restructuring. Evidence provided by the Bank demonstrated that
disbursement flags are also monitored at the regional level, with some regions like MENA promoting
Quality Enhancement (QER) and proactivity for problem projects.
Element 3. The World Bank has processes in place to address disbursement challenges caused by
changes in context and other issues to promote implementation.
Operational task teams self-monitor disbursements during the project life. A dedicated Development 92, 146, 165, 287
Effectiveness unit in each VPU – reporting to the VP and with dotted line to OPCS – also tracks (among
other items) variances in disbursement rates to spot outliers, and to understand the reasons for
deviations from the profiles (e.g. delays in parliamentary approval, changes in government, credit/
loan conditions/covenants not met, events such as natural or human crises not foreseen during project
preparation). Task teams are encouraged to remedy disbursement issues through closer implementation
supervision, project restructuring, or cancellation (latter two requiring Client agreement). Aggregate
disbursement data are tracked (including in the Client Portal) by Loan Administration and reported to
Senior management (Ops MD) and the Board through the Scorecard.
Element 4. The Bank has a relatively limited number of projects facing implementation and
disbursement delays, partly due to strong portfolio monitoring. Enhanced attention to project
readiness in design has helped remove internal sources of delay.
Portfolio monitoring indicates that approximately 9% of the Bank’s portfolio is experiencing
disbursement-linked delays, with approximately 11% of the portfolio currently in “problem” status.
Monitoring of project “proactivity” in upgrading, cancelling, restructuring or closing projects is actively
monitored at the corporate level, including the number of days in problem status for projects in each
region. Time between approval and first disbursement has decreased significantly over the assessment
period from 10.1 months to 5.5 months due to increased attention paid to readiness for implementation,
demonstrating increased attention paid to addressing internal sources of delay.
MI 4.2: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

68 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 4.3: Principles of results-based budgeting applied

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: The most recent organisational budget clearly aligns financial resources with strategic
objectives/intended results of the current strategic plan
Element 2: A budget document is available that provides clear costs for the achievement of each
management result
Element 3: Systems are available and used to track costs from activity to result (outcome)

4
3
3

Element 4: There is evidence of improved costing of management and development results in budget
documents reviewed over time (evidence of building a better system)
MI 4.3: Analysis

4
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank budget process aligns financial resources with strategic objectives
and policy commitments.
World Bank uses the “W” process with 5-touch points through the year to align corporate strategic
goals and commitments with demands emerging from operations, for the forthcoming fiscal year (FY
t+1) and with an indicative 3-year horizon. The process for allocation of administrative budget (and
therefore staff resources) is overseen and signed off by Senior management before discussion with the
Budget Committee and the full Board as part of the Annual Budget and Work program discussion. The
Annual Budget report reviews past budget information and shows how specific resource allocation
for the forthcoming year (FY t+1) is aligned with strategic priorities identified by Management and
Executive Directors, as well as general Bank strategy and commitments under the Capital Package and
Replenishment Processes. The Budget and Work program reports are publicly disclosed.
Survey results suggest that donor groups generally agree that the Bank applies principles of results-based
budgeting (approximately 13% strongly agree and 39% agree), with some variation among respondents.

Q1[06], THE WORLD BANK APPLIES PRINCIPLES OF RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING
AND REPORTS ITS EXPENDITURES ACCORDING TO RESULTS
5, 16, 117, 121, 125,
148, 160, 242, 125

Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2. Although the budgeting process aligns resources to key results areas, the alignment
between costs and results area is not linear.
While budget allocation considers results, interviews confirmed that this is not a linear relationship. For
example, the Bank examines the strategic alignment with the FCV strategy and progress against it, but
there is no “formula” that allocates resources against it given the wide diversity and related operational
costs of various FCV contexts; Management at the final W stage checks to ensure budget plans in
aggregate are aligned to the FCV strategy. The FY21 budget acknowledges extensively the importance
of combatting COVID-19 effects as a priority and identified measures to provide greater resources to this
effort, while maintaining existing bank priorities. Approximately 70% of survey respondents agree that
the Bank reports its expenditures according to results, to some extent.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 69

Element 3. The World Bank implements ongoing tracking and monitoring of budget execution for
key activity areas; however, the link to results is not linear.
World Bank tracks budget expenditures, including staff costs (TRS) by activity over time and compares
use to historical trend data of ABC. Variances are highlighted and acted on. Budget execution data
are systematically tracked throughout the year and aggregated from the task unit up and included in
periodic (monthly, quarterly, and annual) reports to senior management and the budget committee
and included in the Corporate Scorecard. It should be noted that the line of sight from administrative
budget to outcomes is multi-dimensional and nonlinear (e.g. returns on additional resources to FCV
and decentralisation with respect to outcomes, are of a long-term nature and subject to multiple interconnected factors). Evaluation feedback, when available is reflected in such allocative decisions.
Element 4. Linkages of programme expenditures to results, including linkages to outcomes has
been strengthened over time.
World Bank has tracked budget and staff expenditure at unit and task level over many years, hence has 5, 16, 117, 121, 125,
148, 160, 242, 125
long historical data on trends and variances. Linkages of program expenditures to results (results chain)
and a presentation of outputs and outcomes have been strengthened and become more systematic. A
“Results Secretariat” within OPCS provides methodological guidance and oversight. Interviews indicate
that there have been recent efforts to improve the outcome orientation of the Bank’s programmes and
strategies. There is a robust and open process engaging management and Board to review, learn and
course correct from experiences to be applied to the next cycle. Several (3-4) OPCS reports have been
submitted to CODE and the Board on how to track results.
The Bank has made efforts to improve the budget management, particularly through the framework of
the 2018 Capital Package efficiency and economy of scale savings, the expenditure review completed
in FY18, business reviews of the non-operational units that resulted in increased productivity and
efficiency, the setting of external funds trajectories by VPU, and the introduction of the budget anchor
to ensure budget sustainability (a target zone of expenses over revenue that IDA and IBRD budget are
intended to maintain).
MI 4.3: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 4.4: External audit or other external reviews certify that international standards are met at
all levels, including with respect to internal audit

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

4.00

Element 1: External and internal audit conducted which complies with international standards

4

Element 2: Most recent external and internal audit confirms compliance with international standards
across functions
Element 3: Management response is available to internal and external audits, as appropriate
Element 4: Internal and external audit functions meet international standards, including for
independence and transparency
MI 4.4: Analysis

4
4
4
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank’s Group Internal Audit function is aligned to international standards
and is positioned to perform their role independently.

5, 27, 208, 211, 212,
Group Internal Audit (GIA) has a mandate to serve as an independent and objective assurance and 214, 251, 266, 270,
advisory function; it performs this function in accordance with International Professional Practices 275
Framework of the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). GIA assesses whether the risk management,

70 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

control, and governance processes of the Bank Group entities are adequately designed by Management
and functioning effectively. GIA reports directly to the President of the World Bank under the oversight
of the Board Audit Committee, ensuring their independence.
GIA provides both assurance and advisory services. Internal audit issues an annual report of the
engagements during the year with a summary of findings. According to interviews, the GIA has been
moving from a compliance-based audit to a risk-based one. This allows them to focus on moving from
hindsight to insight and foresight. The GIA has also refined its products in this regard and now have an
“assurance bucket” and “advisory bucket”. Internal Audit engaged in an advisory assessment of WBG
COVID Response to present recommendations for future emergencies/crises.
To complement the internal audit function, externally audited annual financials of IBRD, IDA and Trust
funds are publicly available. External auditors are independent of management and report to the Audit
Committee and the Board.
Element 2. Beyond conforming with international standards, the GIA implements an innovative
advisory approach to enhance uptake for decision-making.
The World Bank External and Internal audit conform to international standards across functions.
Indeed, with recent and on-going reforms, the Group internal audit is perhaps world-class, having
put in place several critical changes, to focus on moving from hindsight to insight and foresight, and
including a dynamic risk assessment program to allow for greater agility “at the speed of risk”, to build
out IT based (ML and IA) audit capability and digital dashboards to allow for more timely and focused
information. To complement this, the Audit team itself has enhanced its skill set in data analytics. A
benefit of the risk-based, advisory approach adopted by GIA is the enhanced potential for uptake to
inform policy development and decision-making.

5, 27, 208, 211, 212,
Element 3. A Management Response is provided to all internal audits, with timelines for 214, 251, 266, 270,
275
implementation tracked and discussed with the Executive Board.
Management response is available to internal and external audits. Management response and
actions are tracked by the auditors and the Audit Committee. As such, internal audit findings and
recommendations are entered into a database and tracked regarding status of recommendations, the
responsible party and timeliness.
At times, follow up to audits is done through advisory work. With this shift to become more agile and
nimble through its advisory capacity, internal audit has facilitated an open dialogue with Management,
garnering trust between the audit function and Management. The Audit Committee is a Board
Committee responsible for overseeing WBG finances, accounting, risk management, internal controls
and institutional integrity and specifically oversee the establishment, maintenance and ongoing
operations of the Internal Audit function to include the review and recommendation to the Board
for approval of the Terms of Reference, the annual work program and budget of GIA, review results
of GIA assurance reports, their implications for the risk and control environment in the WBG, and the
implementation of the resulting Management Action Plans.
Management Response takes a matrix form that is periodically reviewed by board. Reports are derived
from an audit software. The recommendations are in a database and include the responsible unit and
timelines for each recommendation. The status of the implementation of recommendations, including
long-standing (more than 180 days) audit recommendations, are discussed at the Audit Committee and
the Board.
In developing and following up on management responses, GIA works collaboratively with management
to review the robustness of action plans and establish timelines for implementation. There is a
continuous dialogue and follow-up with management on the implementation of all actions. Once an

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 71

action plan has been implemented, GIA validated the implementation by reviewing the evidence
provided. Delayed actions are flagged to the Audit Committee in quarterly reports with an accompanying
root cause analysis to understand the source of delay. GIA is currently working on an Issue and
Management Action Plan Explorer (IME) Dashboard to provide more transparency to management and
the Board. Currently, implementation trends for action plans are positive with very few overdue action
plans, especially among those rated to be of high importance or critical.
Element 4. Internal and external audit functions meet international standards for independence
and transparency.

5, 27, 208, 211, 212,
External audit functions meet international standards, including for independence & transparency. 214, 251, 266, 270,
The external auditor is selected competitively every 5 years by the Board Audit Committee and the 275
incumbent auditor is barred from the internationally competitive rebidding process.
Internal audit is also independent in that, while it functionally reports to the President, substantive
oversight is provided by the Board Audit Committee and provides an independent and objective
assurance and advisory function to the institution. Whereas GIA reports are not made publicly
available, GIA produces an annual report that summarised key audit results for the fiscal year and risk
management, control and governance issues at the institutional level arising from GIA’s body of work as
well as insights on qualitative trends for assurance issues.
MI 4.4: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 4.5: Issues or concerns raised by internal control mechanisms (operational and financial risk
management, internal audit, safeguards etc.) are adequately addressed

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.60

Element 1: A clear policy or organisational statement exists on how issues identified through internal
control mechanisms/reporting channels (including misconduct such as fraud, sexual misconduct) will 4
be addressed
Element 2: Management guidelines or rules provide clear guidance on the procedures for addressing
any identified issues and include timelines
Element 3: Clear guidelines are available for staff on reporting any issues identified
Element 4: A tracking system is available that records responses and actions taken to address any
identified issues

4
3
4

Element 5: Governing body or management documents indicate that relevant procedures have been
followed/action taken in response to identified issues, including recommendations from audits 3
(internal and external) with clear timelines for action
MI 4.5: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank possesses a clear organisational statement with respect to staff ethics
and business conduct.
Staff rule 3.01 sets out the World Bank’ standards of professional conduct for staff. These directives

192, 243, 251, 254,
are complemented by the World Bank Code of Ethics, aligned to the Bank’s core values of impact, 266, 275, 277, 280 273
integrity, respect, teamwork and innovation. Whereas the staff rules provide the basis for determining
misconduct and disciplinary actions, the code of conducts describes the ethical norms and behaviours
expected of each staff member, including those related to:

72 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• Supervisory relationships;
• Conflict of Interest;
• Compliance with fiduciary obligations;
• Outside remuneration;
• Political activities; and
• Use of World Bank services, supplies and facilities.
Staff rule 3.00 sets out the mandate of the Office of Ethics and Business conduct. The Office is responsible
for reviewing and assisting in the resolution of allegations of misconduct, with clear distinctions made
for misconduct investigated by the Integrity office. The Chief Ethics Officer reports directly to the World
Bank President.
Element 2. Each internal control unit has clear policies and procedures in place, including
timelines.
Each of the external and internal control units has specific policies and procedures, timelines and
monitoring and reporting mechanisms. They provide oversight as well as guidance and training to staff
and management to resolve or to prevent recurrence such issues. Complaints on misconduct are to
be made to EBC. Sexual Harassment complaints can be made to the new position of Anti-Harassment
Coordinator. EBC has also moved staff (Regional focal points) to selected offices – two in Singapore,
three in South Africa, one in Vienna, and one in Chennai.
Recognising the importance, the function now called Ethics and Internal Justice, was upgraded into
a VPU in November 2022. From the latest version of staff rules publicly available, criteria to take
up a complaint is dependent on determination that there is enough evidence to proceed with an
investigation. Staff rules outline the right to confidentiality and protection from retribution of people
who report misconduct. This is further highlighted in the code of ethics. Rules also outline the right
of the accused to respond to accusations and to certain rights throughout the investigation process.
Confidentially is assured in the staff rules.
Element 3. The World Bank has transparent processes through which staff can report on internal
control issues.
Guidelines for reporting on control issues – in person or through a hotline – are available to all staff
and managers and are reinforced by training and corporate communications. Furthermore, reporting
has shifted from reactive to proactive to preventative. While staff are encouraged to report, reporting
is no longer discretionary but a managerial obligation to act in the event that they suspect or receives
a report of suspected misconduct. Although there does appear to be a clear process for processing
complaints, no timeline is identified in staff rules.
Interviews noted that the EBC reach out to reporters within 48 hours to set up a consultation which is
typically completed within a week of reporting. The EBC is considering reporting on timelines. The EBC
has also revamped its training program, including creating a new one for the Bank leadership team.
In the past year alone, EBC have reached 16,000 staff. The revamped training program moved from
hypothetical to using actual cases and has been well received according to interviews. The number of
cases has been on the rise, reflecting an increasing trust by staff. There are multiple avenues through
which complaints can be made (an internet web page, email to a dedicated email address or to EBC
staff, a 24/7 hotline administered by a third party, or in-person contacts (phone or walk-ins)). Reporter’s
identity is intended to be confidential and there are avenues for anonymous reporting.
WBG Staff Survey results suggest most staff trust they will have protection from retribution, but this is
not universal. Complaints are reported through many means and decisions are in general posted online
/ in reports and how they were addressed. There is a clear process that complaints go through, but more

192, 243, 251, 254,
266, 275, 277, 280 273

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 73

information is needed regarding specific guidelines. The Annual Report of the EBC outlines the process
for processing and investigating complaints.
Element 4. Clear systems are in place for monitoring and tracking reports while protecting the
confidentiality of complainants.
Each of the control units logs, monitors, tracks and reports in a case management system and typically
issues a publicly available annual report which breaks down how issues were addressed or resolved. The
EBC also monitors the situation after resolution (sometimes up to a year after). EBC produces an annual
report. Based on the annual report, uptake of complaints for investigation is tracked. The appendix
of the annual report shows decisions made on misconduct complaints that were sent to HRDVP.
Misconduct cases that have been closed and the outcomes thereof are presented in the appendix of the
report. More information is needed regarding the system to collect and triangulate complaints. More
information needed specifically regarding complaints in the field.
Element 5. Annual reporting presents actions taken in response to identified issues.

192, 243, 251, 254,
266, 275, 277, 280 273

Management and independent control entities’ documents and annual reports track caseload and
describe actions taken and or issues resolved during the year. These, such as internal or external audit
reports, include Management response and action plans to deal with identified issues. As also noted
in MI 4.4, reports and outcomes of investigations and sanction board decisions are published publicly
online. The Integrity VP also produces a Sanctions Annual Report that summarises the activities
(investigations and decisions) made throughout the year. The GIA annual report provides a highlevel depiction of the audits / assessments that have been done; however, there is no Management
Response in the report. For reports that have a Management Response, it takes a matrix form that is
periodically reviewed by the Board. Reports are derived from an audit software. The recommendations
are in a database and include the responsible unit and timelines for each recommendation. The status
of the implementation of recommendations, including long-standing (more than 180 days) audit
recommendations are discussed at the Audit Committee and the Board.
MI 4.5: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 4.6: Policies and procedures effectively prevent, detect, investigate and sanction cases of
fraud, corruption and other financial irregularities

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

4.00

Element 1: A clear policy/guidelines on fraud, corruption and any other financial irregularities is
available and made public
Element 2: The policy/guidelines clearly define the roles of management and staff and borrowers in
implementing/complying with the guidelines
Element 3: Staff training/awareness-raising has been conducted on policy/guidelines
Element 4: There is evidence of policy/guidelines implementation, e.g. through regular monitoring and
reporting to the governing body
Element 5: There are channels/mechanisms in place for reporting suspicion of misuse of funds (e.g.
anonymous reporting channels and “whistle-blower” protection policy)
Element 6: Annual reporting on cases of fraud, corruption and other irregularities, including actions
taken, and ensures that they are made public

4
4
4
4
4
4

74 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 4.6: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World has a publicly available policy on sanctions for fraud and corruption,
including a process for investigating potential fraud and corruption among staff.
Fraud and corruption are clearly defined in Bank directives, and a robust set of policies and guidelines
are in place and are supported by dedicated and operationally independent organisational units (e.g.
Integrity (INT), Sanctions Board, GIA). Fraud and Corruption are specifically defined as the following
sanctionable practices:
• a “corrupt practice”, defined as the offering, giving, receiving or soliciting, directly or indirectly, of
anything of value to influence improperly the actions of another party;
• a “fraudulent practice”, defined as any act or omission, including a misrepresentation, that knowingly
or recklessly misleads, or attempts to mislead, a party to obtain a financial or other benefit or to avoid
an obligation;
• a “collusive practice”, defined as an arrangement between two or more parties designed to achieve
an improper purpose, including to influence improperly the actions of another party;
• a “coercive practice”, defined as impairing or harming, or threatening to impair or harm, directly or
indirectly, any party or the property of the party to influence improperly the actions of a party; or
• an “obstructive practice”, defined as (i) deliberately destroying, falsifying, altering or concealing
of evidence material to the investigation or making false statements to investigators in order to
materially impede a Bank investigation into allegations of a corrupt, fraudulent, coercive or collusive
practice; and/or threatening, harassing or intimidating any party to prevent it from disclosing its
knowledge of matters relevant to the investigation or from pursuing the investigation, or (ii) acts
intended to materially impede the exercise of the Bank’s contractual rights of audit or access to 101, 208, 213, 218,
227, , 228, 243, 244,
information. Policies are publicly disclosed.
275, 280
• The Policy notes that the degree and length of sanction is proportionate to the act, but there does not
appear to be a clear decision of the sanction that corresponds to each act.
A process for investigating potential fraud and corruption among staff is clearly outlined in the Staff
Rules, which includes a preliminary inquiry to determine whether there is basis for an investigation,
information gathering where the subject of the investigation has a duty to cooperate and a right to
respond to the allegation, and a subsequent notification of decision. Notice is given to interested
parties with a clear outline of the purpose of the investigation.
Fraud and corruption reported against an entity outside the Bank is first investigated by INT to determine
if the allegations are substantiated and then turned over to the Office of Suspension and Debarment
who reviews evidence to determine if the offense constitutes a sanctionable office WBG has a clearly
define whistle-blower policy with specific protections outlined. The policy implies it is systematically
enforced.
Element 2. The ant-corruption policy and guidelines define clear roles for management and staff.
Anti-Fraud and Corruption policies and guidelines establish clear roles and responsibilities to staff and
managers, including the “duty to report”. Additionally, responsibilities of borrowers are identified to
take appropriate measures to:
• prevent corrupt, fraudulent, collusive, coercive and obstructive practices in connection with the use
of loan proceeds;
• adopt appropriate fiduciary and administrate practice to do so; and
• immediately report allegations of fraud and corruption.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 75

Compliance guidelines point to diligence activities for selection, design, and implementation of projects
to minimise risks of fraud and corruption. Risk screening process of suppliers and contractors exist to
detect company riskiness (companies are flagged on the Corporate Risk Database).
The independence of the INT VP and of the Sanctions Board are underscored in its documents and in
its reporting mechanisms. INT reports directly to the WBG President and is under the oversight of the
Audit Committee, and the Sanctions Board members are chosen by the Audit committee. Compliance
guidelines outline the responsibility of management and individuals to the Integrity Compliance
Program, the entirety of the WB’s integrity compliance efforts and functions with the specific objective
to prevent, detect, and remediate corruption, collusion, coercion, and fraud.
Element 3. The Integrity Function implements regular staff training and outreach to companies
to prevent fraud and corruption.
There are extensive awareness raising, information and outreach programs for staff and client countries,
as well as tailored learning and mandatory staff training activities to support implementation.
INT recently revamped its training program – “Integrity is your business” which trains staff and explains
the sanctions ecosystem, reaching 2800 World Bank staff in 2022. Training on the Integrity function
and staff responsibilities is integrated into onboarding of new staff, including specialised sessions for
incoming Executive Directors and Board Officials, country offices and staff working in FCS contexts.
Trainings to raise integrity risk awareness. Organised in collaboration with key Bank units, including
country office staff and Financial Management teams, these trainings raise awareness of INT’s work,
the WBG’s sanction system, and responsibilities among staff, government and private sector officials.
INT’s outreach with companies works to promote integrity compliance principles among businesses
and other stakeholders through various events and champions the adoption of tailored integrity 101, 208, 213, 218,
227, , 228, 243, 244,
compliance programmes to prevent misconduct and react appropriately if misconduct occurs.
275, 280
Element 4. The World Bank possesses a clearly defined process for addressing complaints,
undertaking investigations and applying sanctions, with annual reporting to the Executive Board.
Staff Rule 8.01 defines disciplinary proceedings undertaken to address allegations of misconduct, which
are further informed by judgements issues by the World Bank Administrative Tribunal. The Directive on
Conduct of Disciplinary Proceedings for INT Investigations identifies the rights of staff, complainants
and witnesses and procedural safeguards and limitations on investigative activities to protect the
rights of staff. Staff undergoing disciplinary proceedings have the right to review the draft and final
investigation report.
INT’s Complaints Development Unit (CDU) receives and responds to submissions and develops
actionable complaints as per INT’s mandate. If sufficient evidence is uncovered of one or more
sanctionable practices, the relevant allegations are deemed substantiated. Once an investigation
has been substantiated INT may seek sanctions against the firm or individual in question. A Final
Investigation Report is produced summarising the findings of the investigation for submission to
the appropriate operational staff and the WBG President. In certain cases, INT may conclude that a
negotiated settlement is the appropriate way to address sanctionable conduct taking into account the
nature and gravity of the misconduct and the degree of cooperation provided by the respondent. All
settlements must be cleared by the WBG General Counsel and then reviewed by the Chief Suspension
and Debarment Officer.
Beyond a reactive business model involving investigations, INT increasingly implements a proactive
approach to addressing fraud and corruption. With the creation of a “Data lab” that works exclusively
on extracting insights and analysis -- including forensics /risk tracking, INT is also looking into giving
greater emphasis to prevention.

INT monitor the project pipeline and note where there is an INT

76 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

investigation recently closed or ongoing. This approach allows the team (preparing the project) to
build in mechanisms to monitor / prevent risk in the new project. The information obtained through
investigations is shared with World Bank management and operational counterparts to better equip
them to consider risks during preparation and mitigate them during implementation. According to
stakeholders, it is a good pre-emptive action, and this is a core mandate of the prevention unit.
The INT also target high-risk portfolios to promote prevention. For example, they set up a briefing with
new Country Directors of FCV and provide a much more focused version of the quarterly briefings. INT
plugs into the Bank’s risk screening process in terms of identification of entities that have previously
been debarred or flagging other entities that raise concern.
An Annual report to the Board and to Management provides an overview of complaints received,
investigations conducted, decisions reached, and sanctions administered. This report is publicly
available online. Triaging occurs for external but not internal investigations. Decisions on suspensions
and debarment are rendered public.
Element 5. Clear channels and mechanisms are in place for reporting misconduct and whistleblower protections are in place.
The channels and mechanisms for receiving complaints allow for confidential, and, if desired,
anonymous reporting through Online platforms. The online form is available for use by both the public
and WBG staff. Reporters are confidential and can report anonymously.

101, 208, 213, 218,
A robust whistle-blower policy is in place and clearly defines whistle-blower protections. Staff rule 8.01 227, , 228, 243, 244,
states that acts of retaliation against reporters are prohibited, and instances of retaliation are to be 275, 280
reviewed and investigated by EBC. Protections against retaliation extends also to retaliation against
any person because such person was believed to be about to report misconduct or believed to have
reported misconduct, even if such belief is mistaken. Retaliation is defined as any direct or indirect
detrimental action recommended, threatened, or taken because an individual engaged in a protected
activity. Staff members who report suspected misconduct or provide information regarding suspected
misconduct in the course of an ensuing review or investigation have access to interim protections
during the course of review, including temporary re-assignment.
Element 6. The Integrity function has a system in place to track all allegations, investigations
and resolutions. An annual report is produced and sanctions cases and decisions are reported
publicly.
All fraud and corruption allegations (in-take), investigations and resolution, whether remedies/
sanctions or dismissal, are tracked by INT. INT received 3,380 complaint submissions in 2022, opened
330 external preliminary investigations, started 48 new and closed 31 existing external investigations
and submitted 18 sanctions cases and 12 settlements to the Office of Suspension and Debarment.
Further, World Bank has a cross-debarment agreement with other MDBs. The World Bank and four other
IFIs each recognise each other’s public debarments for a period of one year, serving as an important
deterrent for fraud and corruption. In FY22, the WBG recognised 72 cross-debarments from other MDBs,
and 30 WBG debarments were eligible for recognition.
MI 4.6: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 77

MI 4.7: Prevention and response to sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: Organisation-specific dedicated policy statement(s), action plan and/or code of conduct
that address SEA are available, aligned to international standards, and applicable to all categories of 4
personnel
Element 2: Mechanisms are in place to regularly track the status of implementation of the SEA policy at
HQ and at field levels

4

Element 3: Dedicated resources and structures are in place to support implementation of policy and/or
action plan at HQ and in programmes (covering safe reporting channels, and procedures for access to 3
sexual and gender-based violence services)
Element 4: Quality training of personnel / awareness-raising on SEA policies is conducted with adequate
frequency
Element 5: The organisation has clear standards and due diligence processes in place to ensure that
implementing partners prevent and respond to SEA

3
4

Element 6: The Organisation can demonstrate its contribution to interagency efforts to prevent and
respond to SEA in line with the Joint Statement on Continuous Advancement of Standards to Prevent 4
Sexual Harassment, Abuse and Exploitation.
Element 7: Actions taken on SEA allegations are timely and their number related to basic information
and actions taken / reported publicly
Element 8: The MO adopts a victim-centred approach to SEA and has a victim support function in place
(stand-alone or part of existing structures) in line with its exposure/risk of SEA
MI 4.7: Analysis

3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has made a clear organisational commitment to address Sexual
Exploitation and Abuse and has reflected this in its Staff Rules. The World Bank has developed
and is implementing an action plan for operationalising these commitments.
The World Bank has developed a robust policy and is a leading agency and signatory to Joint Statement
on SEA alongside nine other IFIs. Following allegations of SEA linked to the Uganda Transport Sector
Development Project in 2016, the World Bank established a Task Force on Gender Based Violence with
the purpose of identifying means of preventing SEA as one form of violence against women.
The taskforce identified a series of recommendations aimed at “enhancing social risk management,
strengthening operational systems to enhance accountability, and making the World Bank a responsible

106, 126, 152, 168,
change agent by fostering a shift in culture, behaviour and perceptions”. These recommendations 169, 237, 240, 256,
included:
257
• Developing a methodology for assessing the risk of SEA;
• Developing guidance and training materials to build staff/client capacity to address risks of SEA;
• Developing an internal Reporting and Response Protocol to guide Bank staff in case of incidence;
• Strengthening operational processes to address SEA;
• Developing internal and external outreach campaigns;
• Ensuring budget is available for TF recommendations; and
• Ensuring continuous learning to improve capacity to address SEA.

78 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

SEAH has been incorporated into the Staff Rules and the WBG Code of Ethics, which was developed in
collaboration with staff, ensures that staff have the right to have a workplace free from sexual abuse.
Additionally, Staff Rule 3.00 contains a clear definition of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation aligned
to good practice.
An April 2021 Update to the Executive Board provides clear evidence of progress in implementing these
each of these recommendations. Relevant examples include (discussed further in elements below):
• Development of an online SEA screening tool, allowing for mitigation measures incorporated into
operations design;
• Extensive training delivered to World Bank staff as well as borrower country PIUs;
• Development of an internal reporting protocol for cases of SEA;
• Integration of SEA into the Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF);
• Updated Standard Procurement Documents that include specific qualifications and contractual
requirements around SEA;
• Ongoing work with other IFIs to harmonise approaches.
The Board update additionally identifies key lessons learned and challenges, including:
• the importance of positive messaging from management to destigmatise and encourage internal
reporting;
• the need for country-level GBV service provider mapping in preparation of operations;
• challenges posed by continued variation in standards among development partners; and
• challenges in balancing the survivor-centred approach with the World Bank’s client-focused business 106, 126, 152, 168,
169, 237, 240, 256,
model.
257
Staff Rule 3.00, the SEAH screening tool and the Environmental and Social Framework, along with its
related guidance, are all publicly available documents. Corporate Reporting on the ESF is presented to
the Board every two years, including information about implementation of the Bank’s commitment to
preventing and addressing SEAH. The Bank’s reporting on SEAH through the ESF is presented regularly
to the Board through its operational reporting requirements. Overall reporting on the GBV Action Plan,
however, is more periodic.
The Mid-Term Review of the World Bank’s Gender Strategy provides some early reporting on the
implementation of the GBV Action Plan predating the first update to the Board. Whereas the action plan
stipulates that it will request IEG to conduct an evaluation after 4 years of implementation (October
2021) there is no evidence that such a review has taken place is planned. Although the 2017 Action Plan
is still active, an evaluation would be useful to take stock of progress and lessons and further enhance
the Bank’s approach.
Element 2: The World Bank has clear processes in place to regularly monitor and report on report
on incidents of SEA throughout operations.
Beyond the April 2021 Update to the Executive Board on the implementation of the GBV Action Plan,
a quarterly report to Regional Directors details on Environmental and Social Lending and Portfolio
indicators indicates the number of SEA incidents reported as well as the associated projects (numbers
nor provided due to confidentiality of information). These reports integrate incidents reported across
operations in borrower countries. Furthermore, the Board is provided with an annual update on the
implementation of the ESF, including aggregate incidents of SEA reported for World Bank projects. With
respect to procurement, progress in integrating SEA considerations into the Procurement Framework
was recently presented to the Board and publicly as part of a Five-Year Retrospective.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 79

Reporting on incidents of SEA is also integrated into the World Bank’s systems for ongoing
implementation support monitoring. Mandatory corporate indicators on SEA have been integrated
into the Environmental and Social Review Summary (ESRS) as well as the Implementation Status and
Results Report (ISR). This implementation is primarily facilitated through borrower country systems
where these exist and have been determined to be adequate, with supplementary support provided as
needed through due diligence by Environmental and Social Specialists or Third-Party Monitoring (See
MI 5.7). Stakeholders note that there is a corporate requirement to escalate severe incidents of SEA to
the Vice President level within 72 hours.
Integrating SEAH into procurement in investment projects has meant that mandatory SEA/SH risk
ratings are recorded in the operations portal for all projects and in procurement documents. This
allows for tracking and monitoring of implementation and increases accountability, as non-compliant
projects have been suspended while contractors that have been found non-compliant can be disbarred
Implementation of mitigation measure in operations is closely monitored. It is not clear to what extent
this is reported as part of corporate reporting. The next phase is to develop an evaluation framework to
better link to development outcomes.
Element 3. The World Bank has dedicated resources, tools and policies to support the
implementation of its commitment to addressing SEA.
The Gender Unit, one of the cross-cutting Global Themes, leads a Task Force and works closely with
operational units such as OPCS, ESF, Procurement, the Budget, Strategic Planning and Performance,
Human Development and People and Culture (previously HR) vice-presidencies to deliver appropriate
policy, procedure, knowledge products, and training to deliver on commitments. It also consults
outside stakeholders (e.g. Bank Information Centre). Additionally, the World Bank’s Anti-Harassment 106, 126, 152, 168,
Co-ordinator, who reports directly to the World Bank Chief Ethics Officer, is responsible for reviewing all 169, 237, 240, 256,
allegations of Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse in the workplace or in connection with work are the 257
Bank involving a staff member which are brought to EBC.
Additional focal points have been identified to provide hands-on guidance to staff in addressing specific
implementation challenges and problems and ensuring their resolution, including an OPCS help desk,
an ESF Implementation Support Unit and the Chief Environmental and Social Standards Officer (CESSO).
In the context of operations, Task Team Leaders, Environmental and Social Specialists and Accredited
Procurement Specialists all coordinate to ensure that SEA risks are controlled and monitored as part
of ongoing implementation support. Mechanisms include through regular due diligence conducted
by Environmental and Social Specialists and follow-up on contractual requirements by Procurement
Specialists.
A component of the 2017 action plan stipulates that it will ensure budget is available to implement
the GBV task for recommendations through the allocation of budget for a surge fund (covering onetime costs to develop training materials, guidance notes, etc.) and though ensuring additional cost
associated with high GBV risks are covered as part of the W process. Annual Budget Documents confirm
that the GBV action plan and ESF implementation has been taken into account as part of the budgeting
process. The 2021 Update notes that all Regions have access to SEA expertise. Furthermore, interviews
with country teams confirmed that country teams are aware of the Bank’s policies and reporting
procedures for SEA, which are further implemented through regular operational reporting on the ESF.
Training has been supported by the development of Good Practice Notes (GPNs) and Guidelines for
use by borrowers and Staff. Two GPNs have been developed addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
in IPF involving Major Civil Works and Human Development Operations. These notes provide detailed
guidance to staff on key topics such as:

80 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• Understanding SEA risks;
• Addressing risks and capacities to respond;
• Addressing SEA risks in the context of ESS monitoring, procurement and implementation support;
and
• Responding the SEA allegations.
The GPNs identify that all Investment Projects have a grievance mechanism (GM) in place proportionate
to the potential risks, typically managed by the Implementing Agency. Projects are required to have
multiple complaints channels in place, including the World Bank’s CAO and community-based
mechanisms. Community consultations are used to ensure these mechanisms are known and
trusted. The World Bank assesses available reporting channels for compliance against key standards,
including confidentiality (e.g. no identifiable information on survivors stored). GM mechanisms refer
complainants to GBV service providers identified and assessed during project design and record and
monitor the resolution of the complaint.
Element 4. The World Bank has implemented training across the institution for staff, borrower
Project Implementation Units and contractors since 2018.
Training of staff on SEA was one of the key recommendations of the GBV Action Plan and the
accompanying implementation plan. The 2021 Update to the Board on the implementation of the
Action Plan demonstrates that extensive training has been carried out across the institution on SEAH
Risk Mitigation since 2018, including:
• Training of 344 social development specialists on SEAH Risk Management;
• “Exposure Training” of over 1500 operations staff;
• “Deep dive” training for 80 SEAH specialists;
• Regular 2-hour “ESF and SEAH learning lab” sessions; and
• Participation of over 4000 staff in in-person workshops on the ESF, including SEA.
SEA was integrated into a mandatory core training module on the ESF for operations staff. Additionally,
training has been provided over 200 borrower country PIUs to build their capacity. Interviews with
country team staff confirmed that staff have received training and are aware of the Bank’s policies,
processes and reporting requirements related to SEA.
Element 5. The World Bank has clear due diligence practices in place to ensure borrowers and
contractors prevent and respond to incidents of SEA.
Due diligence for SEA practices of Implementing Agencies and contractors is conducted in the context
of Environmental and Social safeguards monitoring and procurement.
Environmental and Social Monitoring
Addressing risks and incidents of SEA is integrated into the operational design process through the
ESF. During design, operations are subject to an Environmental and Social Assessments (ESA), which
identify potential environmental and social impacts.
Development of an SEA Prevention and Response Plan is required for projects identified as moderate,
substantial and high risk. The Action Plan should mainstream SEA into Stakeholder Engagement,
including awareness raising on how to report, available grievance mechanisms and GBV service
providers. Additionally, these projects are required to identify an Accountability and Response Plan
identifying how allegations are handles, measures for ensuring confidentiality and referral pathways.
As part of developing this plan, the capacity of GBV service providers is assessed.

106, 126, 152, 168,
169, 237, 240, 256,
257

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 81

The Bank’s Good Practice Guidance indicates that a review should be conducted to ensure that the
Implementing Agency has a GBV specialist with an appropriate budget allocation and that a social and
environmental specialist is included in the supervising engineer’s team. Where capacity is low, Task
Teams may recruit the services of Third-Party Monitors or Independent Verification Agents.
During implementation status reporting, project teams monitor the compliance of contractors with
the implementation of their own ESMP (the C-ESMP), including the reception SEA-related complaints,
implementation of Codes of Conduct and the training and sensitisation of workers.
Procurement:
Standard Procurement Documents set out minimum requirements for contractors to prevent and
respond to SEA/SH, including an SEA/SH conference, mobilisation contingent upon a no-objection to the
contractors SEA/SH measures by the engineer, preparation and implementation of a Code of Conduct,
an SEA/SH Response mechanism that allows for a safe and ethical process to receive, investigate and
address allegations, ongoing training on precenting SEA/SH, and engagement of SEA/SH experts for the
duration of the contract.
As part of the “Vendors Code of Conduct”, vendors and their supply chains must not engage in sexual
abuse, exploitation or harassment and put preventative measures in place. Effective January 1, 2021, the
World Bank has an enhanced remedy for non-compliance to hold contractors (and any non-compliant
subcontractor) accountable for fulfilling their SEA-SH obligations during contract implementation –
resulting in disqualification of participating in WB-funded projects for a period of two years. Compliance
is overseen and monitored by the Borrower and its Engineer for the project.
According to interviews, procurement documents / contracts must have an accountability and response
framework on what they will do – steps that they will follow, repercussions, and timeframe. These

106, 126, 152, 168,
169, 237, 240, 256,
instances of non-compliance are found. The majority of survey respondents agreed that the World Bank 257
requires its partners to apply clear standards for preventing and responding to sexual misconduct in
documents strengthen accountability, and, in some instances, projects have been suspended when

relation to host populations (approximately 65%).

Q6[16], THE WORLD BANK REQUIRES ITS PARTNERS TO APPLY CLEAR STANDARDS
FOR PREVENTING AND RESPONDING TO SEXUAL MISCONDUCT IN RELATION TO
HOST POPULATIONS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 6. The World Bank has contributed to inter-agency efforts prevent and respond to SEA
in line with the Joint Statement on Continuous Advancement of Standards to Prevent Sexual
Harassment, Abuse and Exploitation.
In April 2018, the World Bank, along with other IFIs in a Joint-Statement on Continuous Advancement
of Standards to Prevent Sexual Harassment, Abuse, and Exploitation committed to prevent sexual

82 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

harassment, abuse and exploitation, both within their own institutions and in their operations through
a set of seven principles. This was re-affirmed in October 2018 with an update note that provided a
snapshot of the work IFIs are doing to promote, implement and reinforce efforts, including existing
work and work that has stepped-up and became more specific since the April 2018 meeting. As part
of the update, signatory IFIs have committed to focus on this issue through working groups as well as
institution-specific narratives and actions. Although this update did mention that IFIs often participate
in working groups around SEA/SH, evidence did not show that there was an explicit corporate statement
to participate in inter-agency coordination.
The 2021 Update on Implementation of the GBV Action Plan identified that the World Bank organised
a workshop with 10 IFIs on harmonising approaches to address SEA in their respective operations,
including “survivor-centred” approaches. However, there has been no follow-up on the outcomes of the
workshop. Inter-agency co-ordination also occurs in the context of IFI “Gender” and “Environmental
and Social Standards” working group meetings as well as IFI “Heads of Procurement” meetings.
The World Bank has played an active role as part of the Interagency Consortium on SEAH as well as the
OECD PSEA Reference Group and the UK’s 2018 Safeguarding Summit. The Interagency Consortium,
which meets with regularity, has played an important role in sharing lessons, experience and knowledge
products (e.g., the good practice note on civil works) with other IFIs/MDBs. However, stakeholders
indicated the need to do more to support inter-agency co-ordination at the country level, preferably
though joint efforts.
MOPAN survey respondents are generally unsure if the WB participates in joint/interagency efforts at
the HQ level to prevent, investigate, and report on sexual misconduct by personnel in relation to the
host population, with close to 50 percent stating that they did not know or had no opinion, while 8.8
percent strongly agreed, 29 percent agreed, and 9.3 percent somewhat agreed.

Q8[04], THE WORLD BANK PARTICIPATES IN JOINT / INTER-AGENCY EFFORTS TO
PREVENT, INVESTIGATE AND REPORT ON ANY SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY PERSONNEL
IN RELATION TO THE HOST POPULATION (SEA)
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 7. The World Bank has internal reporting protocol in place for SEA allegations, but
requirements around timelines and external reporting are unclear. (needs to be updated based
on additional evidence)
There is a periodic report to the Board of aggregate numbers on GBV and gender (i.e. number of
incidents, resolution etc) which gives an account of progress and highlights issues.
An internal reporting protocol has been established for incidents of SEA identifying guidance and
timelines around initial incident notification, internal reporting, internal and external notification
and monitoring. The World Bank reports on instances of SEA through the “Environmental and Social
Incident Response Toolkit,” which outlines specific requirements for reporting in SEA cases using three
categories:

106, 126, 152, 168,
169, 237, 240, 256,
257

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 83

• “Indicative” events are addressed within the Task Team;
• “Serious” events need to be elevated to the Country Manager/Director, Global Practice Manager,
Social and Environmental Practice Managers, Relevant Program Leaders, and Environmental and
Social Standards Advisor (previously called Regional Safeguards Advisor), who may then advise the
appropriate Vice Presidents; and
•

“Severe” events are reported to the Vice Presidents by the Task Team within 24-48 hours of
notification.

The World Bank provided the assessment team with tangible evidence that these protocols are being
followed, including case details and monitoring at the regional level.
The Bank’s Procurement Regulations stipulate that the Bank may disqualify a firm from being
awarded a contract, financed in whole or in part by the Bank, for a period of two years if the firm has
been determined to be non-compliant with its contractual SEA prevention and response obligations.
Compliance with these obligations is assessed through regular project monitoring linked to the ESF as
well as ongoing involvement by procurement experts throughout implementation.
Element 8. The World Bank adopts a “survivor-centred” approach to responding to SEA, with
guidance available of ensuring grievance mechanisms and support for victims in available in the
context of operations.
The GBV Task Force, and its recommendations, were guided by a set of principles, including ‘Be people
centred’. With this, solutions and recommendations were evaluated “through a survivor-centred lens,
protecting the confidentiality of survivors, recognising them as principal decision-makers, addressing
the special needs and vulnerabilities of women and children (girls and boys), and respecting the dignity
of workers.”1
The GBV Action Plan reiterates that the internal reporting mechanisms and response protocols were
to be developed in a survivor-centred way. Interviews noted that the World Bank’s SEAH approach
is victim-centred, with victims provided access to multiple and holistic support mechanisms and
confidential services. The 2021 Update on the Implementation of the GBV Action Plan indicates that the
World Bank has established a “survivor-centred” approach.
In the context of operations, cases are often resolved through an internal project system. All projects
are recommended to identify available GBV service providers prior to appraisal irrespective of risk level.
Furthermore, all IPF operations are required to identify a Grievance Mechanism (GM), usually operated
by the IA or Project Management Unit (PMU). Operation of GM is accounted for in the project budget. In
instances of high-risk projects, guidance notes advise that consideration should be given to a separate
SEA/SH GM. Furthermore, all operations are advised to have a framework for addressing allegations,
including an identified GBV service providers who are mapped during project design. Survivors are then
referred to the GBV service provider.
Guidelines on implementing a “survivor-centred” approach are provided in the World Bank’s Good
Practice Notes, defined as an approach that:
• recognises that it is essential to respond appropriately to a survivor’s complaint by respecting the
survivor’s choices;
• prioritises the survivor’s rights, needs and wishes are prioritised in every decision related to the
incident;
• treats the survivor with dignity and respect;
1. World Bank Document – GBV Task Force Recommendations for investment projects

106, 126, 152, 168,
169, 237, 240, 256,
257

84 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• protects the safety and wellbeing of the survivor with any action taken with the survivor’s consent;
and
• maintains confidentiality throughout the process.

106, 126, 152, 168,
Project GMs and GBV service providers are assessed for compliance against this standard during project 169, 237, 240, 256,
appraisal as part of the implementation of the Bank’s ESF, with regular project monitoring conducted 257
by a dedicated ESS Officer. Stakeholder and community engagement is used during project appraisal
to identify community-based mechanisms for reporting and providing support to victims and to gauge
and ensure stakeholder trust in reporting mechanisms.
MI 4.7 Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 4.8: Prevention of and response to sexual harassment (SH)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.43

Element 1: Organisation-specific dedicated policy statements and/or codes of conduct that address SH
available, aligned to international standards and applicable to all categories of personnel
Element 2: Mechanisms are in place to regularly track the status of implementation of the policy on SH
at HQ and at field levels

4
3

Element 3: The MO has clearly identifiable roles, structures and resources in place for implementing
its policy/guidelines on SH at HQ and in the field: support channel for victims, a body coordinating the 3
response, and clear responsibilities for following up with victims
Element 4: All managers have undergone training on preventing and responding to SH, and all staff
have been trained to set behavioural expectations (including with respect to SH)
Element 5: Multiple mechanisms can be accessed to seek advice, pursue informal resolution or formally
report SH allegations
Element 6: The organisation ensures that it acts in a timely manner on formal complaints of SH
allegations
Element 7: The organisation transparently reports the number and nature of actions taken in response
to SH in annual reporting and feeds into inter-agency HR mechanisms

3
4
4
3

MI 4.8: Analysis
Element 1. The World Bank has a dedicated corporate statement on Sexual Harassment, which is
reflected in the Staff Rules and Code of Conduct and are operationalised through an action plan.
The WB participated in a Joint Statement on Continuous Advancement of Standards to Prevent Sexual
Harassment, Abuse, and Exploitation in April 2018 and its update in October 2018. In October 2021, the
World Bank issued a specific corporate statement on Sexual Harassment with a corresponding 3-year

action plan (the WBG Action Plan for Preventing and Addressing Sexual Harassment FY19-FY21) aimed 122, 155, 174, 231,
254, 257, 273, 277,
at preventing sexual harassment in the organisation.
283
The action plan, developed and implemented by the Ethics and Business Conduct Department (EBC)
following an independent external review of WBG policies and procedures surrounding SH at the
request of the WBG president, has the concrete deliverables of:
• ensuring all managers are aware of their responsibility to create team environments free from sexual
harassment and providing managers with guidance on addressing cases;

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 85

• complementing the existing system with new people-centred services;
• scaling up and broadening the scope of training;
• transparently and regularly sharing information on the prevalence of sexual harassment and related
sanctions inside the WBG;
• collaborating across departments on enhancing sexual harassment detection and risk assessment;
and
• contributing to international efforts to share best practices.2
The Action Plan appears to promote the principles establish as part of the 2018 joint statement. The
institution defines Sexual Harassment Sexual harassment is currently defined in the as “any unwelcome
sexual advance, request for sexual favour or other verbal, non-verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual
nature which unreasonably interferes with work, alters or is made a condition of employment, or
creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment” in its WBG anti-harassment guidance note
(and reiterated in the action plan), which appears to confirm to international good practice.
Anti-SH is translated into the Bank’s overarching Staff Rules (3.00) and Code of Ethics, such as an explicit
statement that WBG does not tolerate SH in the workplace, assertions that staff have the right to feel safe
in a workplace free from harassment, and that staff have the right to report instances of misconduct,
including sexual harassment. This Code of Ethics takes the place of a Code of Conduct and is applied to
all Bank staff (regular, temporary, and consultants). EBC implements the Action Plan through its annual
programme of work, including staff training and outreach, case intake and triage and investigations.
Beyond the Action Plan, the World Bank is also part of the High-Level Committee on Management of 122, 155, 174, 231,
254, 257, 273, 277,
the United Nations System Chief Executive Board for Coordination where experiences, challenges and
283
best practices are shared, to advance the agenda. developed guidelines and held conversations with
government counterparts to prevent counterparts from sexually harassing World Bank staff.
Element 2. There are resources and processes in place to support and monitor the implementation
of the SH action plan.
With Code of Ethics as central guide, Ethics and Business Conduct (renamed since 11/2022 as Ethics
and Internal Justice vice-presidency) is the lead unit to guide policy and implementation. Four full-time
staff within EBC provide operational oversight. EBC partners with specialised staff, such as the Antiharassment coordinator (AHC) and Respectful Work Advisers (RWA), to allow staff in the line to raise
problematic and inappropriate behaviours before they rise to the level of misconduct.
The WBG Action Plan on Sexual Harassment is a “living document” such that it is intended to be reviewed
and updated on a biannual basis and is monitored by the Working Group on Sexual Harassment. EBC
aggregates data on implementation and highlights progress in its Annual Report, which is provided
to the Executive Board and released publicly. As of FY22, the WBG has completed the implementation
of over 70 recommendations in the Action Plan and continues to work closely with the WBG staff-led
Sexual Harassment Working Group.3
In the field, the anti-harassment coordinator has assisted and continues to assist several groups of staff
in country offices and at headquarters in developing and implementing action plans to prevent and
address harassment as a follow-up to their engagement survey, as part of the action plan. It is unclear
the extent to which implementation progress of the action plan is formally reported to the Board. As
reported in the FY22 EBC Annual Report, beyond direct training and engagement with 3142 staff in

2 WBG Action Plan for Sexual Harassment
3 EBC annual report FY 22

86 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

country offices, implementation of the Action Plan has been further supported by the expansion of
EBC presence within regions and country offices, including EBC focal points in Dakar, Nairobi, Pretoria,
Singapore and Chennai.
Element 3. The Anti-Harassment Co-ordinator supports the implementation of the SH Action Plan
and co-ordinates responses to allegations.
The AHC, created by the Sexual Harassment Action Plan, resides in EBC and bridges the gap for staff
seeking support between the informal services already available (Ombuds, Mediation, advice from EBC)
and the formal investigation process. The role of the EBC Anti-Harassment coordinator is integrated
into the WBG Staff Rules. As noted previously, EBC is an independent accountability unit of the Bank
funded through the Bank’s administrative budget.
The AHC serves as: (i) a one-stop shop within EBC to ensure a consistent approach for all allegations
of sexual harassment and make it easier to support the individual; (ii) support to managers and HR
Business Partners in addressing situations of inappropriate behaviour, even before misconduct rises
to the level of harassment; (iii) a ready contact point that RWAs can provide to staff who need help
to address inappropriate behaviours. Interviews noted a case management system, where reporting
of and cases involving misconduct are monitored. In cases of harassment/misconduct, sanctions are
applied by Human Resources (HRS) and the Internal Justice System (IJS).
Element 4. Training for managers and staff have been developed and implemented.
The policy (Action Plan) stipulates a manager-specific training session occurs. The EBC annual report 122, 155, 174, 231,
254, 257, 273, 277,
notes that training modules have been established4’ and EBC confirms that all staff, including managers
283
are now required to undergo this training. The training, “A Conversation with Managers on Managing
Harassment and Sexual Harassment at the Workplace” is designed as a facilitated conversation with
those with “manager” authority, on how to handle situations related to inappropriate behaviour that
doesn’t constitute harassment, the roles and responsibilities of the manager, resources available to
assist managers, EBC’s misconduct review process, and informal sharing of best practices and strategies.
The policy (Action Plan) stipulates that trainings are made as part of on-boarding, suggesting all new
staff are trained on behavioural expectations. The SH Action Plan identifies a target of increasing
face-to-face trainings to reach at least 40 country offices and 2,000 HQ staff per year, though this is
contingent upon active demand from Country Directors and Managers.5 More recently, trainings have
been augmented by staff guidance on the WBG’s survivor-centred approach to Sexual Harassment.
EBC reported that the AHC team, in cooperation with ATV and other IJS partners, reached over 2,300
staff at headquarters and country offices by engaging in 29 townhalls, team meetings, and participation
in trainings such as Creating a Respectful and Harassment Free Workplace (CRW).6 The CRW training
is one of the most requested EBC trainings and was consistently ranked as one of the top 5 training
courses by attendance in FY21. The EBC FY21 Annual Report describes the training as “a 2.5-hour
facilitator-led conversation with staff designed to help participants understand what harassment is
versus inappropriate behaviour, how the WBG has addressed real situations, learn about bystander
intervention options and new resources available to staff such as the Anti-Harassment Coordinator
role.”7

4 EBC Annual Report FY 20
5 SH Action Plan
6 EBC Annual Report FY 21
7 Ibid.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 87

Interviews highlighted that, to encourage better participation and interaction, trainings use a real-time
anonymous voting tool and anonymised real cases. At the country level, EBC sometimes participates
in staff meetings, providing overview of EBC training products prior to the upcoming country office
engagement. As part of its training efforts for some regional groups and country offices, confirmed
by interviews, EBC has created of a series of cartoons that portray problematic behaviours in the
workplace based on staff experience and identify strategies to address these behaviours. Feedback that
EBC has received from training sessions suggests that staff like the use of anonymised real cases in
training and shows that EBC has had an impact both in increasing awareness of available resources and
in enhancing trust and confidence in the SH response system.
Element 5. The World Bank provides multiple channels through which staff can report incidents
of SH, supported by an anti-retaliation policy.
There are multiple avenues for reporting including through line management, though the EBC (via
email, phone, or in-person), through the Anti-Harassment Coordinator (AHC), via an online form,
or through a 24/7 hotline with an anonymous option. Similarly, these mechanisms are available for
receiving advice, both formal and informal, which has allowed staff to come to the AHC or EBC before
the situation rises to the level of misconduct. Other resources available include:
• Ombuds Services (a confidential, impartial and informal service that facilitates the resolution of
workplace issues, independent from WBG management channels);
• Respectful Workplace Advisors (volunteer peers who serve as an informal and confidential sounding
board, and help colleagues identify options to address workplace concerns by providing information
about available resources);

122, 155, 174, 231,
254, 257, 273, 277,
• Peer Review Services (offers a confidential review of staff’s employment-related concerns before an 283
• Mediation Services (offers mediation, facilitation, training, and team-building services); and
impartial and independent panel of peers).
All of these avenues of advice and reporting are outlined in the Code of Ethics, and EBC-specific avenues
can be found on the EBC website. There is also evidence that these resources are shared as part of
training. It is not clear the extent to which all of these avenues are gender-sensitive.
There has been an increase in reporting, largely attributed to the introduction of the AHC, which has
been highly publicised. Interviews provided evidence of people noting that they feel more comfortable
now reporting cases due to the creation of this position. Interviews further confirmed that this increase
in number of complaints included a lot of reporting on inappropriate behaviours that have not
necessarily risen to the level of harassment yet. Reporting is further supported by an anti-retaliation
policy enshrined in the Staff rules.
EBC regularly provides training to country offices to increase awareness and promote trust in reporting
mechanisms. The FY22 EBC Annual Report indicates that allegations of sexual harassment involve more
alleged offenders in country offices than in headquarters. Given that staff in country offices tend to use
other EBC services less than HQ staff and have reported fewer cases of harassment, the report notes
that further efforts may be necessary to appropriately capture instances of SH in the field.
Element 6. The World Bank seeks to address cases of SH in a timely way and timelines for
resolution are tracked.
The time in responding to allegations of SH and in investigating allegations is tracked. Efforts are
made to reduce the timeline to address allegations of sexual harassment, a priority in the SH Action
Plan. The SH Action Plan stipulates that EBC will EBC will provide a receipt and acknowledgment of an

88 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

allegation within one business day, complete the intake and assessment within 10 days, and complete
the investigation process (excluding report writing) within three months of receipt of the allegation.
EBC further commits to completing preliminary inquiries within one month of receipt of an allegation.
Interviews confirmed that reporters are typically reached out to within 48 hours, a consultation is set
up within a week, and the case comes to a resolution within a month, depending on the resolution
mechanism involved. The AHC plays a key role in facilitating resolutions or referring serious misconduct
cases to investigation. Resolution mechanisms include consultations and advice, warnings, HR
intervention with the alleged offender, management intervention with the alleged offender, referral to
investigations and referral to Internal Justice Services. Providing additional channels for recourse helps
promote a timelier response to complaints.
The total number of cases referred to investigations since the creation of the AHC office in 2020 are
provided in the table below:
Year

FY20

FY21

FY22

Total SH cases reported to AHC

20

26

23

SH cases referred to investigations

18

3

4

EBC reports on the timeframes required for closing Sexual Harassment cases referred for investigation.
In 2022, a single case of sexual harassment was referred for investigation with a report to HRDVP, which
was resolved in 179 days. A single case referred in 2021 was processed in 90 days. Four cases referred
in 2020 were resolved between 108 (after a preliminary inquiry) and 186 days (during investigation).
An annual satisfaction survey is implemented by the AHC for individuals who have used the services of 122, 155, 174, 231,
the office (in 2022, average satisfaction ratings were 4.6/5.0). This information is used to continuously 254, 257, 273, 277,
283
improve the services provided to survivors, including timeliness.
Element 7. The World Bank reports regularly, both internal and externally on the number and
nature of actions taken to address SH.
EBC reports regularly to the Executive Board and to the HR committee of the Board. Numbers regarding
misconduct reported, substantiated, and the subsequent outcomes are reported in EBC Annual Report,
which is publicly available. The EBC also publishes data on the WBG intranet about misconduct more
broadly for cases substantiated by EBC and sanctioned by HRDVP, including location (headquarters or
a country office), type of misconduct found by HRDVP, type of sanction, and the subject’s grade level. In
FY 21, 148 allegations of harassment were made.
The AHC specifically received and addressed 26 situations involving sexual harassment (23 of which
were address in FY21, 6 that were under monitoring at the end of FY21, and 8 that were open at the end
of FY21). Of the situations addressed, 8 were addressed through consultation/advice, 7 cautioned the
subject, 3 were addressed by management in consultation with AHC, 1 advised subject, 1 was addressed
by HR in consultation with AHC, 1 was referred to investigations, 1 was referred to other IJS services,
and 1 was closed without action due to failure of the reporter to respond. Interviews underscored that
EBC considers an increase in reporting as a positive indication of increased trust and confidence of staff
to come forth and raise issues.
Staff rules list the disciplinary measures available to the WBG for instances of established misconduct,
which includes censure, suspension of pay, demotion, restrictions on promotion, loss of benefits,
termination, and loss of future employment and contractual opportunities with WBG; they note that
disciplinary decisions are made on a case-by-case basis depending on the severity of the misconduct.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 89

As noted above, contractors for projects that are funded in whole or in part by the World Bank are
required to prepare and implement a Code of Conduct and SH response mechanism that allows for a safe

122, 155, 174, 231,
254, 257, 273, 277,
not complying with their SH obligations during contract implementation will be disqualified from
283
participating in Bank-funded projects for a period of 2 years. Compliance is overseen by the borrower,
and ethical means of receiving, investigating and reporting allegations. As of January 2021, contractors

with due diligence conducted as part of the Bank’s implementation of its ESF.
MI 4.8: Evidence confidence

High confidence

RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT
Engaging in inclusive partnerships to support relevance, leverage effective solutions and maximise results
KPI 5: Operational planning and intervention design tools support relevance and
agility within partnerships

KPI score

Highly satisfactory

3.64

The Bank’s Country Engagement Model promotes evidence-based and adaptive operations, grounded in country needs and
development priorities. The Country Partnership Framework identifies high-level objectives linking the Bank’s operational
programme to national development plans and the SDGs. The design of CPFs is grounded in evidence from the Bank’s core
diagnostics, feeding into a Systematic Country Diagnostic. In addition to promoting alignment to development needs, this process
provides a means of incorporating cross-cutting issues into the CPF upstream and addressing gaps in borrower country capacity.
The Country Engagement Model supports an adaptive approach to identifying, monitoring and addressing risk across the
operational cycle. Safeguards, including for environmental and social risk, fraud and corruption, misconduct and SEAH
are all integrated into operational processes for programme design, supervision and closure. This model helps respond
to implementation risks and challenges as they arise and adjust to changes in context. Enhanced field presence has further
supported greater responsiveness to client needs.
MI 5.1: Interventions/strategies aligned with needs of beneficiaries and regional/ country
priorities and intended national/regional results

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: Organisation’s country or regional strategies refer to national/regional body strategies or
objectives
Element 2: Reviewed interventions/strategies refer to the needs of beneficiaries, including vulnerable
populations
Element 3: The organisation’s country strategies or regional strategies link targeted results to national
or regional goals
Element 4: Structures and incentives in place for technical staff that allow them to invest time and effort
in alignment process
MI 5.1: Analysis

4
3
4
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has scaled up its global footprint over the assessment period to
support its country-driven business model and “serve all clients,” responding to their national
development plans and priorities through an evidence-based, consultative process.

120, 146, 215, 224,
The World Bank implements its operations through a Country Engagement Model, which was 255
introduced in 2014 and updated in 2021. The Country Engagement model operationalises the Banks
country-driven support through a systematic, selective and evidence-based process culminating in

90 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

the design of a Country Partnership Framework, which lays out the development objectives that WBG
interventions expect to help the country achieve, including a program of indicative WBG operations
supporting these interventions. High-Level Objectives of the CPF are identified in consultation with the
borrower country and are meant to reflect their national development plans and priorities as well as
progress achieved toward the SDGs. Guidance documents emphasise that national development plans
are the starting point for engagement of the borrower countries, which was confirmed in discussion
with country offices.
Since 1997, the World Bank group has sought to decentralise its operations with a particular focus on
IDA and FCS. Following organisational reforms introduced following the introduction of the World Bank
Group Strategy (2013), operational decision-making was shifted to newly established Global Practices
based at Headquarters (See discussion in KPI 3). However, this reform was found to have contributed
to unintentional consequences, including a reversal of decentralisation of staff and decision-making,
weakened influence of Country Directors and siloes limiting knowledge flow across different aspects
of the organisation. In 2019, the Bank reversed some of these reforms in line with its 2018 IBRD Capital
Package Commitments linked to “serving all clients.” Regional Vice Presidencies were once again made
responsible for operational decision-making and the Bank identified new targets for decentralisation,
including increasing the proportion of staff in the field from 45% to 55% before the mid-2020s, including
all Country Directors and half of Practice Managers located in the field.
A 2022 IEG evaluation has noted that the reform has contributed to a gradual increase in staff located in
the field, rising to 47.6% in 2021, with operations managed in the field increasing from approximately
48% to 54% between 2017 and 2021, including for FCS countries. This change was found to have
contributed to a number of positive changes in the ability of the Bank to implement its Country
Engagement Model and support borrowing countries in the implementation of projects, including:
• Greater interaction with and responsiveness to clients;
• More consistent operational support for implementation;
• Increased trust between government and World Bank counterparts; and
• Enhanced collaboration with partners, particularly civil society.

Q4[03], THE WORLD BANK’S WORK IS ALIGNED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS
AND PRIORITIES OF THE COUNTRIES IN WHICH IT WORKS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

120, 146, 215, 224,
255

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 91

These findings are consistent with feedback from the MOPAN Partner Survey and stakeholders in the
field. Stakeholders in the field underscored the importance of staff presence in the field to promote
close collaboration with clients and support the implementation of operations, particularly in FCS
countries. Furthermore, alignment with the needs and priorities of the countries is also perceived
highly favourably by all respondents to MOPAN’s Partner Survey, with almost 100% of borrower country
respondents indicating that the Bank’s work reflects national needs and priorities.
Element 2. Existing processes encourage the participation of beneficiaries in the design of CPFs
and Operations, with attention to key development challenges and outcomes for beneficiaries.
CPFs are informed by a Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), which provides a rigorous, evidencebased analysis of borrower countries’ development agenda, including medium-term and longerterm development challenges. The SCD is informed by feedback from country partners and citizen
engagement, including vulnerable populations, civil society, think tanks and private sector. Although
the national development plan is the starting point for the CPF, issues such as social inclusion and
social welfare considerations are included to ensure alignment with the WBG twin goals. Although there
is no standard template requiring such analysis, the SCD is peer reviewed by at least three staff and
discussed and approved by the Regional Operations Committee where these issues are discussed and
scrutinised.
In the context of operations, Task Teams are directed to identify clear beneficiaries for each project,
including a problem statement reflecting the outcome gap (e.g. rates of access to water and sanitation).
This identification is based on analytical work and evidence collected in the course of preparation and
appraisal. Appraisal documents identify the expected outcomes for beneficiary groups as part of the
Project Development Outcome.

120, 146, 215, 224,
Feedback from stakeholders corroborated that Bank consults systematically with civil society and 255
beneficiaries upstream in the design of CPFs and operations. MOPAN survey results found that the
Bank’s response to the needs of beneficiaries, including the most vulnerable populations, is perceived
highly favourably by all stakeholders including civil society (Q4-01).

Q4[01], THE WORLD BANK’S WORK RESPONDS TO THE NEEDS OF BENEFICIARIES,
INCLUDING THE MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

92 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 3. World Bank Group has sought to enhance the selectivity and outcome orientation of
CPFs, focusing on a limited number of High-Level Outcomes
The country engagement model, as currently practiced, is centred on the results/goals and targets
to be achieved. The CPF links objectives and how they will contribute to high level outcomes at a
strategic level; these feed into project/program interventions. The CLR also requires a discussion on
how the implementation of the CPF facilitated the achievement of results. According to key stakeholder
interviews evidence, “the whole conversation is now about how you have made progress towards your
goals and what changes/tweaks need to be made to achieve these goals.” The timeframe for CPFs has
been extended allowing more systematic and sustained attention to long-term development challenges.
The CPF results framework is linked to and contributes to national goals. IDA20 reflects further progress
toward outcome orientation through a revamped, more ambitious RMF.
Element 4. The review and approval process for CPFs and operations are positioned to bring in
perspectives from different parts of the World Bank, with risk-based review by different levels of
management.
The ADM Matrix for IPF, DPF and PforR operations outlines a risk-based approval tracks for different

120, 146, 215, 224,
255

operations based on size, Environmental and Social Category and other project-specific characteristics
that ensures larger and more risky operations are subject to a higher level of scrutiny by different
Operational Committees before being approved by the Board. Each stage in the approval process
from concept design to approval involves staff from different areas of the Bank in “decision” and
“concurrence” roles. In this way, projects are subject to scrutiny from different angles by different
groups, including Practice Group staff, Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists, Operations
Policy and Country Services and Others. At a minimum, all appraisal documents are subject to Decision
Review by the Country Director, with riskier operations requiring approval by the Regional Operations
Committee (ROC) or Operations Committee (OC). Stakeholders in country offices note that this multistakeholder process for designing operations plays a critical role in promoting the quality of operations
and the uptake of lessons learned.
GAP – Need more information about the Quality Enhancement Review
MI 5.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 93

MI 5.2: Contextual/ situational analysis (shared where possible) applied to shape intervention
designs and implementation

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

4.00

Element 1: Intervention designs contain a clear statement positioning the intervention within the
operating context

4

Element 2: Reflection points with partners take note of any significant changes in context

4

MI 5.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. Both CPFs and operations are grounded in analytical work that establishes the
implementation context and key development challenges.
Context/situational analysis is a vital element of the Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), the core
knowledge output that used to identify the country’s most critical constraints to, and opportunities
for reducing poverty and building shared prosperity sustainably. The SCD feeds into the development
of the Country Partnership Framework (CPF), informing discussions between Country Teams and
governments/stakeholders around how the Bank can best support the country’s efforts to accelerate
progress towards the twin goals and the eventual identification of High-Level Outcomes and
Development Outcomes supported by ongoing and planned activities.
The specific contents of the SDC are country-specific; however, SCDs broadly include discussions of the
following themes:
• a framing of the issues/challenges with respect to achieving the long-term development outcomes
critical to the achievement of the twin goals;
• identification of the critical factors driving or constraining economic growth;
• identification of the critical factors determining the inclusiveness of growth;

Q4[04], THE WORLD BANK’S STRATEGIES AND INTERVENTIONS ARE INFORMED
BY AN ANALYSIS OF SITUATIONS AND NEEDS, INCLUDING THOSE IN THE LOCAL
CONTEXT AS RELEVANT

146, 165, 224, 268,
269, 287

Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

94 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• analysis of the sustainability (environmental, climate change, social and fiscal) of the current pattern
of growth, distribution and poverty reduction; and
• identification of a select set of priorities for the country based on the aforementioned analysis to
achieve high-level outcomes and maximise progress towards the WBG core strategy.
This analysis, alongside other core diagnostic work such as the CCDR, Poverty Assessment and Public
Expenditure Review, helps inform the results framework for the CPF. The results framework is meant to
identify the causal linkages from WBG activities to development outcomes.
Stakeholders in country offices confirm that the development of the CPF and operations are grounded
in analysis of the country context and related development needs. Most Stakeholders (85%) responding
to the MOPAN Survey agree that the Bank’s interventions are informed by an analysis of situations and
needs, including those in the local context as relevant.
Element 2. Partners are consulted throughout the design and implementation of CPFs and
operations to promote selectivity, complementarity and alignment over time.
Bank Guidelines indicate that Country Teams should consult with other development partners in the
process of developing the SCD. This consultation continues in the development of the CPF for the
purposes of ensuring greater co-ordination and coherence across partner institutions in programmes
and operations supporting similar national development objectives. The overall aim of this consultation
is to support the aid effectiveness agenda in terms of:
• ensure alignment with country development priorities;
• promote country-led coordination of development partners;
• reduce aid management and transaction costs;
• strengthening the strategic selectivity of the CPF program; and
• leveraging other development partners’ resources through close coordination.
Each CPF is meant to present the role of different development partners, aid co-ordination and WBG
support for country-led aid management. A specific section is meant to present the activities that other
development partners are pursuing in the country, with mapping of development partner activities
encouraged. This analysis of roles and comparative advantages and activities among development
partners is meant to contribute to the overall selectivity of the CPF. These consultations are meant to
continue in the context of the Performance and Learning Reviews (PLR), Mid-Term Review (MTR) and
Completion and Learning Reviews (CLR), which take stock of feedback and evidence from partners and
identify potential course corrections.
Guidance expressly discourages the development of joint CPFs with other partners, noting that the
main benefits have been closer co-ordination and discussion of complementarity and comparative
advantage. However, join CPFs introduce complications around aligning timelines and financing given
the different business processes of partners – including other MDBs. Complications around joint CPFs
were confirmed by stakeholders in county offices.
At the operational level, the process of preparing Investment Project Finance (IPF) and Development
Project Finance (DPF) is intended to include consultation with partners. Project Appraisal Documents
for IPF operations includes a rationale for Bank involvement as well as a description of other partners
active in the sector who also contribute to the project objectives. For DPF operations, the Bank
has a long history of co-ordination with the IMF and other partners in the harmonisation of policy
actions, results indicators and technical assistance activities. DPF activities are implemented in direct
co-ordination with the IMF to ensure a robust macroeconomic framework is in place and often coincide

146, 165, 224, 268,
269, 287

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 95

with IMF support programmes. Consultations with partners continue in the context of supervision and
the development of the Implementation Status Report (described in detail in KPI 7).
Stakeholders at country level unanimously agreed that development partner consultation and

146, 165, 224, 268,
consultation with civil society occurs regularly; however, the way this co-ordination is implemented 269, 287
varies widely depending on the context and the people involved. In some cases, lack of country
ownership or capacity to co-ordinate development partners poses an important obstacle. Co-ordination
for the purposes of planning is strongest in the context of specific sectors or thematic groups.
MI 5.2: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 5.3: Capacity analysis informing intervention design and implementation, and strategies to
address any weakness found are employed

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

4.00

Element 1: Intervention designs contain a clear statement of capacities of key country partners

4

Element 2: Capacity analysis, from the perspective of using and building country systems, considers
resourcing, staffing, monitoring and operating structure.
Element 3: Capacity analysis statement has been jointly developed with country partners and shared
with development partners
Element 4: Capacity analysis statement includes clear strategies for addressing any weaknesses, with a
view to sustainability, where applicable developed jointly with development partners

4
4
4

Element 5: Reflection points with partners take note of any significant changes in capacity

4

MI 5.3: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has processes and tools in place to systematically assess the capacity
of borrower countries to identify implementation risks.
Borrower capacity is assessed as part of the SCD, and the CPF includes a discussion of issues that may
affect implementation and the use of country systems. In particular, key challenges are identified with
respect to governance (e.g. institutional arrangements, capacity, transparency and accountability).
Guidance states that the CPF may include strategies to strengthen capacity of country systems
(especially for public financial management including procurement, project management, and the
production and use of statistics).
In the context of operations, the preparation of Investment Project Financing is required to include
a technical assessment, including the technical design and approach, borrower organisational and 94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
management structures and implementing capacity. Specific capacity assessments are conducted 127, 165, 169 224,
in the context of borrower systems for environmental and social management, procurement, 256, 268, 287
financial management and monitoring and evaluation capacity. In the case of financial management,
procurement and environmental and social management, oversight of capacity assessments and
implementation arrangements are provided by experts at the regional and country levels as well as
specialised staff in centralised support units. In the context of Development Policy Financing, the Bank
co-ordinates with the IMF to determine the extent to which the borrowing country has an adequate
macroeconomic framework in place prior to approval. Program-for-Results (P4R) financing should also
consider the borrower’s fiduciary and environmental and social systems.
Although there does not seem to be an explicit policy around the use of country systems, efforts for
improving alignment with country systems is considered in rating WBG performance in the Completion

96 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Learning Review at the end of a CPF period. Guidance stipulates that Development Policy (DPF) and
Program-for-Results (P4R) Financing projects should consider an assessment of the Member Country’s
fiduciary systems and environmental and social systems. Guidance states that interventions should
include analytical and technical support aimed at institutional development and capacity-building.
This is intended to feed into the project design/appraisal process. Project design systematically assess
and provide details on the capacity of the implementation unit. While the policies and strategies allow
for capacity building, there is no evidence of a systematic needs assessment (and addressing the gaps)
as it relates to adoption of country systems for investment lending.
Element 2. The World Bank’s Development Policy Financing and Performance for Results Financing
are specifically implemented through country systems and seek to reinforce borrower capacity
through institutional reforms and support programmes. Implementation Support and Technical
Assistance are two tools used to support borrower capacity and the implementation of projects.
The World Bank offers a range of instruments meant to support the strengthening of country systems.
Development Policy Finance and Performance for Results are two instruments which specifically seek
to support the use and strengthening of country systems by supporting the implementation of national
development plans while also supporting key policy and institutional reform and capacity development.
According to a five-year retrospective of the Bank’s Development Policy Financing, between FY16 and
FY21, the Board approved 328 DPFs (an average of 55 per year), representing a total commitment of
$81 billion (an average of $13.5 billion per year) and are increasingly being used in the Africa Region.
DPFs played a particularly important role in addressing the macroeconomic impact of COVID-19, with
101 pandemic-response DPF operations implemented between June 2020 and December 2021 with a
total commitment of USD 27.5 billion. These operations helped address the macroeconomic impact of
COVID-19 and supported the implementation of national responses for health and social protection.

94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
P4R supplies financing to programs that use a country’s own institutions and processes, linking 127, 165, 169 224,
disbursement of funds directly to the achievement of specific program results. The use of the P4R 256, 268, 287
instrument has increased steadily since its introduction in 2012, with 139 active operations as of Q4
2022 totalling USD 44.5 billion.

Q4[06], THE WORLD BANK’S WORK TAKES INTO ACCOUNT NATIONAL/REGIONAL
CAPACITY, INCLUDING OF GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SOCIETY, PRIVATE SECTOR AND
OTHER ACTORS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 97

Ultimately, the selection of the borrowing instrument and use of country systems is a matter of borrower
preference in a country-driven model and the World Bank does not possess a policy requirement or
directive requiring the use of country systems. As confirmed by stakeholders, there are certain MICs
where the World Bank’s programme is almost entirely implemented by external implementation
units. Furthermore, there are some countries which choose not to use development policy finance.
Stakeholders working in particularly challenging settings noted the importance of country presence to
enable hands-on implementation support and troubleshooting for World Bank operations.
Survey Results indicate that a large majority of respondents agree that the Bank’s work takes capacity
of government, civil society, private sector and other actors into account. The vast majority (95%) of
Borrower country respondents agree that the Bank increases the impact of its interventions through
the provision of technical assistance and project preparation support.
Element 3. The Bank has increasingly sought to implement capacity assessments with partners
and harmonise systems and borrower requirements. However, there are further opportunities to
promote use of country systems.
In the context of Development Policy Financing, the Bank co-ordinates with the IMF to ensure that a
sufficiently robust macroeconomic framework is in place as a pre-condition for budget support, with
issues raised by the IMF relevant to the adequacy of the macroeconomic framework communicated to
the Executive Board as an Annex to the Programme Appraisal Document. Furthermore, DPF operations
typically involve negotiations among other MDBs and partners to identify a harmonised policy
framework. Dialogue among the G20, IMF and MDBs providing budget support has increasingly occurred
in the context of the 2017 “principles for effective coordination between the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) in case of countries requesting financing while

94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
facing macroeconomic vulnerabilities.” The principles draw on a stocktaking of the practices of MDBs 127, 165, 169 224,
and the IMF and highlight the importance of co-ordination between these institutions to promote the 256, 268, 287
effectiveness of budget support operations and preserve macroeconomic stability.
Over the assessment period, the World Bank has also made progress in promoting harmonised
approaches and assessments of borrower capacity in the areas of environmental and social
management, procurement and financial management.
Environmental and Social Management
As part of the Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework introduced in 2016, the Bank supports the
use, assessment, development and improvement of borrowers’ environmental and social management
systems. Country systems are used to the extent that they address key risks and impacts in the context
of Investment Project Finance operations. Following an initial assessment for each operation, all or
part of country systems will be used as appropriate. One of the objectives of the new ESF is to improve
policy harmonisation, coherence and alignment with development partners. Work with other MDBs
and bilateral partners has occurred in the context of the MFI Working Group on Environmental and
Social Standards and at the World Bank Annual and Spring Meetings. Partners such as KfW and JICA
have moved to harmonise their approaches with the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Standards.
Furthermore, the Bank has worked with the Inter-American Development Bank in updating their
environmental and social policies and has hosted dialogue events with other MDBs throughout 2019.
Procurement
In 2015, the World Bank introduced an updated Procurement Framework which has allowed for
increased flexibility in the use of borrower and partner systems, avoiding overlapping requirements
and reducing demands on borrowers. The use of Alternative Procurement Arrangements (APAs), which
allow the Bank to rely on the procurement systems of other international partners, grew from 7 in 2018

98 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

to 27 in 2021; however, this number remains low in the context of the World Bank’s broader scope
of operations. Although a five-year retrospective of the Procurement notes that aspects of national
procurement procedures are increasingly being used due to increased thresholds for national contracts
and simplification of requirements for use, there continue to be no examples where the Bank has relied
fully on country systems for procurement. Stakeholders note that progress is being made in increasingly
making use of country systems through the APA, which and was particularly pronounced in the context
of COVID-19. However, they likewise confirmed that there were no cases where country systems have
been adopted in full.
The World Bank has also contributed to the harmonisation of capacity assessments through its
permanent membership on the Methodology for Assessing Procurement Systems (MAPS) Technical
Advisory Group. MAPS is a universal procurement assessment tool that examines: (i) the legal,
regulatory and policy framework for procurement; (ii) the institutional framework and management
capacity; (iii) accountability, integrity and transparency; and (iv) procurement operations and market
practices. The World Bank uses MAPS as a key procurement analysis tool to inform dialogue and
capacity development alongside many development partners and borrower countries, including OECD
members. Stakeholders report that these discussions have made great progress such that there is a
now a high degree of alignment among MDBs and other partners.
Finally, there has been clear process in harmonising procurement arrangements in the context of
operations. Since 2016, 12 MOUs have been signed with various UN agencies to allow the use of their
procurement systems in joint operations. The total value of borrower agreements with UN Agencies
over the past 5 years using the Standard Agreement developed by the Bank has exceeded 3.17 billion
over the assessment period and were particularly important in the context of COVID-19. In the context
of COVID-19, the Bank participated in bi-weekly procurement roundtables with various development 94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
127, 165, 169 224,
partners to help further harmonise approaches and support procurement through national systems.
256, 268, 287
Financial Management
The Bank’s Financial Management Policy puts in place expectations for borrower financial management
systems in the areas of accounting, reporting and audit, with implementation support used to
address oversight and technical assistance needs. The World Bank is a signatory of the Memorandum
of Understanding to Strengthen Accountability and Improve Collaboration (MOSAIC), for which 13
signatories include international bodies for accounting and MDBs. MOSAIC is meant to provide a
common basis for collaboration among standards bodies, donors and the international development
community for financial management capacity development.
The World Bank’s growing role in supporting crisis response has pushed it harmonise approaches with
UN agencies to support operational collaboration in the context of grants and trust funds, notably
through the UN Financial Principles Accord (UNFPA) and the Financial Management Framework
Agreement (FMFA). Stakeholders in country offices confirm that, although challenges remain, progress
is increasingly being made in ensuring harmonisation of expectations and approaches when working
with UN agencies.
Element 4. The Bank implements initiatives to strengthen country systems as standalone
activities and in the context of specific operations.
For Investment Project Finance, management of certain aspects of implementation, including
environmental and social monitoring, financial management and monitoring and evaluation is
generally expected to proceed using country systems. Where appropriate, country systems are used
to support procurement, particularly for national contracts. The Bank provides support for the use
of country system both within the context of implementation support for specific operations and as
standalone advisory services and analytical work (ASA).

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 99

Implementation Support Plans
In this context, Implementation Support Plans identify key risk management measures to help increase
the likelihood that project development outcomes will be achieved. These plans help identify solutions
that balance compliance oversight activities with technical support provided by World Bank experts and
consultants. Risk mitigation measures may include considerations for team membership (e.g. ensuring
appropriate expertise is available to support innovative procurement arrangements) or recruitment
of experts (e.g. third party monitoring arrangements). In other cases, “twinning” arrangements (e.g.
across sub-national bodies) may be implemented to support transfer of lessons. A key resource in
building country capacity and supporting implementation is Technical Assistance financed from the
administrative budget special grant programmes or Trust Funds to:
• help borrowers properly design, prepare and implement lending operations;
• undertake analytical work to underpin reforms; or
• build institutional capacity for implementation.
Procurement
Over time, the Bank’s procurement support to projects has transitioned from a “compliance” focus
to hands-on support, policy dialogue and capacity building. The Project Procurement Strategy for
Development (PPSD) requires borrowers to undertake a strategic approach to procurement planning,
including an analysis of target supply markets and identification of a procurement strategy, helping
them to attract the right bidders and contribute to development objectives such as gender equality
and climate change mitigation / resilience. A Five-Year retrospective of the Procurement Framework
suggests that the PPSD is reinforcing Value for Money in borrower country procurement systems with

94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
127, 165, 169 224,
Under the new Procurement Framework, Hands-on Expanded Implementation Support (HEIS) was 256, 268, 287
introduced to enable staff to provide an expanded scope of direct support to borrowers. In some ways,
respect to significant reductions in contract completion time overrun and price overruns.

HEIS formalises, mainstreams and expands the support the Bank provides to its clients in this area. Using
HEIS, bank staff can support client countries in activities such as drafting procurement documents and
contracts and attending bid openings and contract negotiations, among other activities. The use of HEIS
has scaled up from 6 projects in FY17 to 75 in FY21. Additionally, Bank-Facilitated Procurement (BFP) was
introduced to help borrowers gain access to markets with a better purchasing position by assisting clients
in sourcing supplies and negotiating contacts. Bothe HEIS and BFP played an important role in the COVID19 response to help Bank clients source medical supplies in difficult markets. Additionally, stakeholders
confirm the importance of HEIS and the expansion of staff in country offices to support operations in FCS.
Financial Management
In the context of World Bank operations, Financial Management Specialists work with borrower
countries to design financial management and disbursement arrangements and support Supreme
Audit Institutions (SAI) to strengthen capacity for external audit of government bodies.
Additionally, the World Bank supports the production of analytical work in co-operation with partners
to help inform public financial management (PFM) reform and capacity building. The World Bank works
through multi-donor partnerships to deliver the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA)
Assessment, which provides a harmonised diagnostic of PFM capacity and performance across 7 pillars.
It is a key tool to assess the results achieved of institutional support and budget support initiatives
targeting PFM. The World Bank works with the IMF to deliver the Report on Observance of Standards and
Codes (ROSC), which helps strengthen financial systems by improving compliance with international
recognised standards in the areas of accounting, auditing, anti-money laundering and countering the
financing of terrorism.

100 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Environmental and Social
The new Environmental and Social Framework includes and expectation to expand the scope of
activities managed through borrower systems. New initiatives introduced include:
• A borrower Guidance Note for the Environmental and Social Framework in Investment Projects;
• An awareness programme for borrower, which had over 6000 participants from different levels of
government across borrower countries between FY18 and FY19;
• The provision of overview assessments of a country system at the borrower’s request to help inform
and plan capacity building support; and
• A Borrower Capacity Building Programme, launched in FY21 to embed good practices in national
systems.
Stakeholders report that significant progress has been made in the use of country systems for the
management of environmental and social risks and impacts, including for complex resettlements.
Element 5. Assessment of partner capacity building needs and the adequacy of implementation

94, 107, 101, 111, 113,
127, 165, 169 224,
In the context of operations, the Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR), completed every 6 256, 268, 287
support is mainstreamed throughout the project supervision.

months, explicitly examines and rates project implementation in four key areas: financial management;
procurement, project management and monitoring and evaluation. For each area, the report identifies
issues with current implementation arrangements and issues for attention of management. Issues of
client capacity are taken up again in the context of the Mid-Term Review (MTR), which assesses the
relevance of technical assistance and capacity building activities as well as project implementation
support arrangements and compliance with fiduciary and safeguard requirements. These assessments
may inform restructuring of projects as required (see KPI 7).
The CPF undergoes a periodic review (every 2-years or at mid-term) in the form of a PLR and MTR. This
process is implemented in consultation with the borrowing country and relevant country stakeholders.
As part of this review, partner capacity may be assessed, though it is not systematically included in the
PLR process. Another tool for addressing borrower capacity issues is the Country Portfolio Performance
Review (CPPR), conducted every 12-18 months to engage the borrower country in dialogue around
good practices and implementation issues to identify means of addressing them, including through
implementation support.
MI 5.3: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 5.4: Detailed risk (strategic, political, reputational, operational) management strategies
ensure the identification, mitigation, monitoring and reporting of risks

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for operational risk

4

Element 2: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for environmental,
social and governance-related risks
Element 3: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for political risk

4
3

Element 4: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for reputational risk n/a
Element 5: Intervention design is based on contextual analysis including of potential risks of sexual
abuse and other misconduct vis-à-vis host populations

4

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 101

MI 5.4: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The Bank implements a tool to manage operational risk systematically across the
country engagement and operations cycle.
The Systematic Operations Risk-Rating Tool (SORT) is the World Bank’s primary tool for managing
operational risks across operations. The tool is implemented and updated throughout the operations
life cycle to help staff and clients consistently manage and monitor risks across all operational
instruments and country programmes.
The SORT primarily identifies and monitors Development Outcome Risk: the risk to the borrower’s
ability to achieve expected outcomes in WB-supported projects and programmes. The SORT is
integrated into all CPFs, CENs and PLRs at the country-level. For operations, the SORT is implemented
across preparation, appraisal and during implementation, recognising that risk is dynamic throughout
the project lifecycle. SORT ratings for individual programmes may be aggregated at portfolio level
through CPPRs and Regional reviews to examine the portfolio against risk tolerance levels.
THE SORT is a matrix consisting of nine risk categories as well as an overall risk assessment. The
specific risk categories covered include Political and governance, Macroeconomic, Sector strategies
and policies, Technical design of project or program, Institutional capacity for implementation and
sustainability, Fiduciary, Environment and social, Stakeholders, and Other, overall considering the risks
to achieving the intended results and the risks of adverse unintended consequences. Risk ratings are
provided for each risk which specify the likelihood that the risk will materialise and the impact on the
achievement of the Project/Programme Development Outcome.
Risk ratings are validated as part of the concept review, decision review, ISR advice and decision and CPF
progress report decision. The risk assessment is further validated by the Operational Risk Department
that reviews quarterly the rolling Bank-wide pipeline of high and substantial risk operations and CPFs
identified by regions. OPCS also reviews the highest risk operations in the portfolio as part of the
“corporate risk list” validation. Risk is further a criterion that determines the pipeline for full Executive
Board discussion of projects. While there is no direct link to the budget, SORT helps to identify high risk
operations that may benefit from enhanced implementation support.
The Operational Risk Department ensures the consistent application of the SORT and guides business
units to ensure its consistent application. The Department also provides guidance for identifying
and prioritising significant operational risks and supports monitoring and reporting of risks through
appropriate metrics and guidance on appropriate risk mitigation and response actions. Until recently,
a corporate operational risk report aggregating key operational risks was prepared for review by an
Operational Risk Committee responsible for monitoring significant operational risk matters on a
quarterly basis, chaired by the Chief Risk Officer.
Over 95% of Borrower country respondents to the Survey agree that the Bank appropriately manages
risk in the context of its work in the countries (Q 4-11). According to key stakeholder interviews, the Bank
is implementing the SORT systematically, but needs to do more to understand which risk mitigation
measures are successful and engage borrower countries around enhancing risk mitigation strategies.

97, 107, 113, 165, 225,
237, 268, 287

102 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Q4[11], THE WORLD BANK APPROPRIATELY MANAGES RISK WITHIN THE CONTEXT
OF ITS WORK IN COUNTRY
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 2. The World Bank implements a comprehensive framework to manage environmental,
social and governance risks throughout the project lifecycle.
Environmental and Social Risks
The World Bank has a collection of 11 Operational Policies that outline the Bank’s safeguards policies
for all operations. The World Bank manages the Environmental and Social Risks of Investment Projects,
including those implemented by Financial Intermediaries, through its Environmental and Social
Framework (ESF), which builds upon a compendium on 11 Operational Policies that cover the Bank’s
safeguards obligations. Development Policy Financing and Performance-for-Result Financing, for
which environmental and social risks are generally lower, are managed through a separate process
whereby the project is screened for environmental and social risks at concept review and reviewed by
Environmental and Social Specialists.

97, 107, 113, 165, 225,
The ESF, approved in 2016, is applied to all investment project financing and lays out the World Bank’s 237, 268, 287
vision for sustainable development, with emphasis on supporting borrower governments to:
• Reduce poverty in a sustainable manner;
• Meet national and internal social environmental and social obligations;
• Enhance non-discrimination, transparency, participation, accountability and governance; and
• Enhance sustainable development outcomes through ongoing sustainable engagement.
Projects ongoing during the introduction of the ESF have been managed under the previous
Environmental and Social Standards in parallel until completion.
The ESF outlines a comprehensive approach, including a set of 11 Environmental and Social Standards
which lay out expectations for the borrower regarding the management of environmental and social
risks throughout the lifecycle of the project, including comprehensive standards addressing a range of
specific risks. The ESS include:
• ESS 1: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts;
• ESS 2: Labour and Working Conditions;
• ESS 3: Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Management;
• ESS 4: Community Health and Safety;
• ESS 5: Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement;
• ESS 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources;
• ESS 7: Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved Traditional Local Communities;

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 103

• ESS 8: Cultural Heritage;
• ESS 9: Financial Intermediaries; and
• ESS 10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure.
The ESF is implemented and monitored throughout the project lifecycle in a risk-driven manner.
Borrowers are required to conduct an assessment of each project proposed for Bank support and
are obligated to prepare and implement projects in line with the requirements of each ESS. Based on
this assessment and additional evidence as necessary, the Bank classifies all projects according to
their risk level (High, Substantial, Moderate, Low) on the basis of type, location, sensitivity, scale, and
nature / magnitude of potential risks. Additionally, the Bank assesses the capacity and commitment
of the borrower to manage environmental and social risks in a way that is consistent with the ESS. The
Borrower establishes an Environmental and Social Commitment Plan (ESCP), which lays out material
and verifiable measures the borrower will undertake to meet the ESSs throughout the project lifecycle.
Before a project is approved, it must be demonstrated that the ESCP outlines a process that allows for
adaptive management to unforeseen circumstances or changes to the project.
This risk classification is reviewed throughout implementation through the Bank’s environmental and
social due diligence, building upon the use of borrower systems. The extent of due diligence responds
to the risk classification of the project and borrower capacity. Through its due diligence, the Bank
reviews the information provided by the borrower on environmental and social impacts and requests
additional information as required. Furthermore, the Bank provides guidance to borrowers on how to
develop and implement appropriate measures to address risks. In cases where borrower capacity is
inadequate, the Bank may conduct a gap analysis against the ESS for ongoing work or recruit third
party supervision. The Bank monitors implementation of the ESCP and the project is not considered
“complete” until all measures have been fulfilled.
The Bank has made considerable progress over the assessment period in reinforcing internal capacity to
manage environmental and social risks. The Bank hired 100 new Environmental and Social Specialists
between FY17 and 20, with the majority based in country offices. The Bank introduced a professional
accreditation programme for Environmental and Social Specialists, with over 200 staff being accredited.
New mandatory and optional training has been implemented for both IPFs and DPF/P4R activities.
Additionally, staff have access to a range of good practice guidance notes, an ESF helpdesk, and ESF
Implementation Support Unit and a Chief Environmental and Social Standards Officer (CESSO).
Governance Risks
Governance risks are managed through the World Bank’s SORT tool (described above), which is
implemented and updated throughout project preparation and implementation. Governance risks are
defined as “risks that inadequacy in the legal system, in transparency, accountability and participation
or fraud and corruption could undermine the achievement of Development Objectives.” Governance
risks are deemed to include security risks such as the risk of armed conflict, terrorism and interpersonal
violence affecting the achievement of development objectives.
Project Teams are supported in the identification and management of governance risks by the
Preventative Services Unit of the Integrity Vice Presidency, which provides advice and assistance on the
design of projects using lessons from its investigations and diagnostic work. The PSU provides practical
advice as well as staff training and knowledge products pertaining to the management of governance
risks. Stakeholders report that this work has intensified, including upstream interaction and guidance
with teams prior to the approval of a project to ensure potential risks are identified and addressed.

97, 107, 113, 165, 225,
237, 268, 287

104 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 3. Political risks are addressed through the World Bank’s SORT approach throughout the
design and implementation of the CPF and operations.
Political risk is addressed among the risk categories in the World Bank’s SORT tool (described above)
for the World Bank’s CPFs and operations. The World Bank defines political risk as risks of political
developments that could impact the government’s priorities with respect to CPF objectives or operations.
For example, an upcoming change in government of minister could undermine political commitment
and ownership of the WBG programme or specific operations, threatening successful implementation.
An additional risk may be that political instability directly undermines implementation of an operation.
In the context of DPF operations, risks related to the adequacy of the macroeconomic framework are
also assessed as political risks. World Bank staff may receive additional support on identification and
management of political risks from the CMU or from the Global Governance Practice. As noted above,
identification and management of risks through SORT are managed throughout the project design and
implementation, with oversight at the country, regional and corporate levels.
Element 4. Reputational Risk is not addressed Directly through the SORT.
Reputational risk is not directly addressed as part of the Bank’s operational risk processes. This element
is therefore unrated.
Element 5. The World Bank has integrated the identification and management of SEA/SH risks
throughout its operational risk, safeguards and procurement mechanisms, including capacity
building for borrowers.
SEA/SH and Gender Based Violence risks are fully integrated into the Bank’s existing risk management
processes.
Integration of SEA/SH into SORT
As recommended by the Bank’s GBV task force in 2017, SEA risks are identified and addressed as part
of the SORT, with the Bank providing guidance for the integration of SEA and GBV risks, particularly
those related to refugee protection. In accordance with the SORT process, these risks are identified and
validated at project design and are monitored throughout implementation through regular supervision.
Integration of SEA/SH into the ESF
SEA/SH risks are also fully integrated into the Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF). The
Bank has produced two widely Good Practice Notes in this area for addressing SEA risks in Investment
Projects with Major Civil Works and Human Development Projects. These notes help define SEA risks in
these contexts and lay out in detail good practices for addressing SEA risks throughout project design
and implementation.
At the outset of a project, Implementing Agencies are expected to be sensitised and made aware of
their role in addressing SEA/SH risks. The Project Social Assessment includes an assessment of SEA/
SH risks as well as a mapping of all actors providing SEA prevention and response services in country/
project area. A specific SEA/SH Risk Assessment Tool has been created to help Task teams assess
potential project risks. Where risks are identified, an SEA/SH Prevention, Response and Action Plan and
Accountability and Response Framework is developed to manage risks throughout implementation.
The capacity of the Implementing Agency to implement the response Environmental and Social
Commitment Plan / ESMP. SEA considerations are also integrated into Stakeholder Engagement and
the Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Where civil works are implemented, a Contractor ESMP is produced,
including responses to SEA risks.

97, 107, 113, 165, 225,
237, 268, 287

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 105

The ESMP/ESCP is followed up through the Bank’s regular supervision processes, with the supervision
team including a Social Specialist. Oversight arrangements may also be made through Third Party
Monitoring or Independent Verification Agents to support regular monitoring and evaluation of
progress.
Integration of SEA/SH into the Procurement Framework
All works-related Standard Procurement Documents were revised to add specific qualifications, bidder

declarations and contractual requirements related to SEA extending to all contractor personnel, 97, 107, 113, 165, 225,
237, 268, 287
including a Code of Conduct. As of November 2020, a contractor disqualification remedy was launched
enabling the Bank to disqualify contractors / sub-contractors from Bank-funded work who fail to
comply with their obligations for a period of two years. During supervision, the Accredited Procurement
Specialist coordinates with the Task Team to ensure SEA risks are being managed in compliance with
contractual requirements. Stakeholders report that, in addition to these mechanisms, the Procurement
Team has implemented awareness raising and training of contractors to enhance familiarity with SEA
risks and the World Bank’s requirements and disqualification mechanism.
MI 5.4: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 5.5: Intervention designs include the analysis of cross-cutting issues (as defined in KPI 2)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.50

Element 1: Approval procedures require an assessment of the extent to which cross-cutting issues have
been integrated in the design

4

Element 2: Plans for intervention monitoring and evaluation include attention to cross-cutting issues

3

MI 5.5: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank promotes the integration of cross-cutting issues into the design of
projects through providing knowledge upstream, combined with corporate incentives.
The World Bank increasingly addresses the integration of cross-cutting themes through an upstream
approach that combines knowledge and analysis, staff training and awareness and specific
mainstreaming tools.
First, the World Bank has been active for producing specific country and regional-level knowledge
products that both complement and inform Systematic Country Diagnostics (SCD), including the
country gender assessment, Country Climate Development Reports (CCDRs) and Risk and Resilience
Assessments (RRA; fragility). Together, these products help:
• Identify and prioritise the most impactful actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and boost
adaptations while driving broader development goals;
• Identify gender gaps, identify innovative good practices and provide concrete examples of projects
with a strong gender results chain;
• Identify social and political drivers of fragility and identify strategic and operational entry points to
promote prevention and strengthen resilience.
Both as standalone products and through the SCD, these knowledge products are intended to inform
dialogue with borrower countries and inform the development of the CPF. Guidance documents require
the CPF to address cross-cutting themes directly, including through identified operations, results
indicators and gender-disaggregated data. The CLR, completed at the end of the CPF cycle requires
explicit consideration of alignment with the WBG’s corporate goals, including gender and climate.

28, 59, 268, 269, 281

106 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

At the project level, corporate policies and targets, supported by validation tools, have helped ensure
the integration of cross-cutting themes into operations.
The World Bank “gender tag” is used to identify projects with a results chain that analyses a gender
gap, develops an activity to respond to the gap and identifies a corresponding indicator in the results
framework. Gender tagged operations are measured as part of the World Bank Group’s corporate
scorecard. The proportion of “gender tagged” projects has risen from 54% in FY18 to 92% in FY22,
including 96% in FCS countries. With respect to climate change, the World Bank identifies financing
with “climate co-benefits” based on a common methodology for identifying projects contributing to
climate change adaptation or mitigation developed by a Joint MDB Working Group on Climate Finance.
Currently, 37% of the World Bank’s total commitments contain climate financing, increasing from 33%
in FY18. Integration of fragility components is driven by OP2.30, which identifies requirements for Bank
operations to adopt different approaches to address drivers and impacts of conflict in countries that are
vulnerable to conflict, currently in conflict or in transition from conflict.
Element 2. Integration and ongoing monitoring of cross-cutting themes is facilitated by support
provided by specialised Bank staff as well as Implementation Support to borrowers in the
monitoring and evaluation of cross-cutting themes.
In addition to providing upstream knowledge, the World Bank promotes the integration of cross-cutting

issues into project through upstream support from expert staff. Gender experts located in Global 28, 59, 268, 269, 281
Practices and Regional Teams provide support to operational staff to identify opportunities to address
gender gaps. Gender Innovation Labs (GILs) and Regional Platforms provide best practice guidance and
showcase innovative projects. Similarly, stakeholders note that the Bank’s Climate Team is structured
to assist project teams on a range of issues, including helping operationalise and measure impact,
access trust funds and disseminate knowledge and good practice. More recently, projects with at least
20% climate finance are required to identify a related indicator in their logical framework. A similar
approach is being employed for Fragility, Conflict and Violence, with ongoing engagement between the
Fragility Team and different Global Practices. For each cross-cutting theme area, the Bank has identified
a range of mandatory and optional training.
Monitoring and Evaluation of operations, including of project impacts and environmental and social
issues is typically conducted through country systems to the extent feasible. The Bank provides
Implementation Support as necessary to support the implementation capacity of borrowers and
enable the collection of data for cross-cutting issues. Implementation Support arrangements are
updated through regular supervision to take stock of emerging issues and provide additional support
as required. While there is no specific guidance on specialists that need to be involved in supervision
(other than safeguards, procurement and financial experts), the Country Director is responsible for
ensuring an appropriate skills mix among project teams.
MI 5.5: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 107

MI 5.6: Intervention designs include detailed, realistic measures to ensure sustainability (as
defined in KPI 12)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: Intervention designs include statement of critical aspects of sustainability, including
institutional framework, resources and human capacity, social behaviour, technical developments and 3
trade, as appropriate
Element 2: Intervention design defines key elements of the enabling policy and legal environment
required to sustain the expected benefits of successful implementation
Element 3: The critical assumptions that underpin sustainability form part of the approved monitoring
and evaluation plan
Element 4: Where shifts in policy and legislation will be required for sustainability, the intervention plan
directly addresses these reforms and processes in a time-sensitive manner
MI 5.6: Analysis

3
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. Management of sustainability risks is integrated throughout the country engagement
cycle and operations cycle.
Assessment of sustainability is integrated throughout the IDA Replenishment, country engagement and
operational cycle. CPFs assess key country-level risks that can impact the ability of a country to support
the sustainability of projects following closure, including:
• the macroeconomic environment, including debt sustainability and resilience to macroeconomic
shocks which can disrupt the ability of the borrower to sustain implementation and maintenance
following project closure; and
• fiduciary risks, including low borrower implementation capacity.
Each CPF is required to demonstrate the alignment of development objectives and activities to
sustainable development, linked to the WBG’s Corporate Goals.
For IPF projects, the Project Appraisal Document contains a dedicated section on sustainability that
describes the borrower’s commitment to / ownership of project and targeted outcomes and critical
factors linked to the sustainability of the project’s objectives. Evidence of borrower commitment may 146, 165, 215, 268,
include relevant policies that are expected to be maintained over the long-term or plans to cover 287
project-related costs (e.g. maintenance) following completion. Financial analyses must be presented
for implementing entities that depend on commercial operations / cost recovery.
Although generally positive, there is variation among stakeholders with regards to perceptions that
the Bank designs and implements its work in such a way that its effects and impacts are likely to be
sustained over time. (13% strongly agree, 37% agree, 33% somewhat agree, 9% somewhat disagree,
2% disagree/strongly disagree, 6% don’t know.)
Element 2. Sustainability risks are integrated into the World Bank’s Operational Risk Management
processes.
Sustainability considerations are also mainstreamed into the World Bank’s risk management throughout
the operational lifecycle through the SORT. Key sustainability risks addressed by the SORT include:
• macroeconomic risk, including the risk that counterpart funding, inadequate funding or deteriorating
macroeconomic conditions will impede implementation and the sustainability for development
outcomes;

108 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• policy risks, including the extent to which sector strategies or policies are adequate to support
implementation and long-term sustainability and the risk that they may change over time; and
• risks related to inadequate institutional capacity of the borrower to sustain implementation and
delivery following project closure.
As noted above, the SORT contributes to the development of Implementation Support Plans to help
address risks, particularly those related to borrower capacity. Ongoing project supervision (e.g. ISRs)
and portfolio monitoring (e.g. CPPRs) take stock of how sustainability risks evolve over time and are
used to engage borrower governments in dialogue to address important risks and challenges.
Element 3. Sustainability is addressed in the monitoring and evaluation of CPFs and operations.
In the context of CPFs, period CPPRs and PLRs take stock of changes in the broader macroeconomic
environment and policy context to determine the extent to which the existing CPF and engagement
remains relevant, including risks for implementation and sustainability. At completion, CLRs reflect
upon the alignment of the CPF objectives with the World Bank’s corporate goals, including the likelihood
that development outcomes will be sustainable.
In the context of operations, guidance on monitoring and evaluation for IPF projects indicate that
sustainability risks should be considered among the critical assumptions in developing the project
TOC and results framework. The risks identified in the SORT are monitored and updated periodically
through regular supervision and are reflected in the ISR rating related to the likely achievement of
project development outcomes. Factors contributing to the likely sustainability of project development
objectives are again considered in the context of ICRs. For DPF operations, supervision and completion
reports reflect upon changes to the policy environment and prospects for sustainability.

146, 165, 215, 268,
Country Engagement Guidance stipulates that links to sustainability should be articulated in CPF 287
results frameworks and measured by relevant indicators. This is a key factor considered in examining
alignment to corporate goals. During project implementation, the Bank monitors all implementation
aspects that include a system of flags to draw attention to the key implementation risks, including
sustainability.
Element 4. The Bank assesses the policy environment annually through the Country Policy and
Institutional Assessment. There is evidence that the Bank’s DPF operations have contributed to
long-term strengthening of the policy environment in borrower countries.
The World Bank’s Annual Country Policy and Institutional Assessment plays an important role in IDA
Performance-Based Allocations, which contributes to allocating IDA funds to countries with a supportive
policy environment with a track-record of good portfolio performance.
Changes in the policy environment are usually addressed through Development Policy Financing,
for which policy changes are often triggers for disbursement of traches. First, DPFs require assurance
from the IMF that an adequate macroeconomic framework is in place to ensure public debt remains
sustainable. Changes in the policy environment and prospects for sustainability are addressed at
completion in the ICR. However, a five-year retrospective of the World Bank’s DPF between 2016 and
2021 indicated that DPFs targeting fiscal and debt-related policy changes and creation of a businessenabling environment were linked to sustained improvements in the policy environment as measured
by CPIA scores for the economic management and public sector management and institutions subscores as well as reduced business costs. Although no enhancement of CPIA scores was noted for the
CPIA dimension on social inclusion and equity, this may be observed in future given the sharp uptake
social protection. measures implemented through DPF operations during COVID-19.
MI 5.6: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 109

MI 5.7: Institutional procedures (including systems for hiring staff, procuring project inputs,
disbursing payment, logistical arrangements etc.) positively support speed of implementation
and adaptability in line with local contexts and needs

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: The organisation has internal standards set to track implementation speed

4

Element 2: Institutional procedures are adaptable to local contexts and needs

4

Element 3: Organisation benchmarks (internally and externally) its performance in supporting
implementation of operations by Borrowing Countries, including through client feedback mechanisms.
Element 4: Evidence that procedural delays have not hindered speed of implementation across
interventions reviewed
MI 5.7: Analysis

4
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The Bank uses disbursement profiles based on historical data to help identify and
address potential problem projects.
The Bank pays systematic attention to the issue of timely and efficient implementation – starting with
addressing the project’s readiness for implementation during appraisal and continuing throughout
the supervision process. BP 10.00 notes that the Bank develops standard disbursement profiles for
operations based on historical trends. These profiles are used to help establish realistic assumptions for
the design of new projects with respect to project costs, financing plans, rates of return, closing dates
and disbursement projections. Disbursement profiles are established for:
• Lending instruments by IDA/IBRD;
• Bank-wide lending by sector and sub-sector;
• Regional lending by sector and sub-sector; and
• Investment lending by country.
The pace of disbursement is tracked as part of the disbursement profile which is updated regularly at
a sector, regional and global level to facilitate portfolio management. Project outliers and flags that
go into the identification of potential problem and problem projects for enhance supervision and
implementation support include:
• zero disbursement;
• high undisbursed balance against profile; and
• lag from loan effectiveness to disbursement.
OP13.05 notes that the Bank may cancel an amount of its loans where disbursement has been suspended
for at least 30 days, where a surplus amount is not required for financing project costs, and where an
amount remains undisbursed after closing date, among other reasons not linked to disbursement
timeframes.
Element 2. The Bank implements a range of policy exceptions and products that promote
flexibility when operating in difficult contexts and crisis situations.
The World Bank’s Policies on Investment Project Financing and Development Policy Financing identify
alternative requirements for projects “in situations of urgent need of assistance or capacity constraints”
and countries in situations of “conflict or crisis.”

15, 215, 224, 261, 268

110 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The Bank may provide support through IPF under normal policy requirements with some exceptions in
situations of urgent need of assistance or capacity constraints where the Bank deems that the borrower
country: (i) is in urgent need of assistance because of a natural or man-made disaster or conflict; or
(ii) is experiencing capacity constraints because of fragility or specific vulnerabilities (e.g. small states.
Exceptions include that:
• Certain fiduciary and environmental and social requirements (with the exception of projects with risk
of high impact) may be identified during project implementation rather than during preparation; and
• When the beneficiary’s capacity to implement needed activities in insufficient, the Bank may, at
the request of the borrower/beneficiary, agree to enter into implementing arrangements with other
international or national agencies, private entities or third parties.
Such flexibilities are increasingly combined with enhanced implementation support such as HEIS and
BFP as well as support from Financial Management Specialists to help support the implementation of
Bank-funded projects in difficult contexts.
In the context of Development Policy Financing, contingent emergency response features may be
embedded in ongoing operations under a “catastrophe deferred drawdown option based on prespecified triggers. Where countries are facing situations of conflict or crisis, some design considerations
for DPFs (e.g. fiduciary arrangements, effects on natural resources and the environment, stakeholder
consultation) may be waived on an exceptional basis. However, the project document should specify
how and when such design considerations would be addressed.
The World Bank’s ability to respond to changing needs was demonstrated during the COVID-19 crisis,
during which the Bank sought a series of waivers to speed up the approval of projects supporting the
COVID-19 response and used flexible instruments such as the innovative Multi-Phase Approach under
the COVID-19 Fast-Track Facility and catastrophe deferred drawdowns to provide support to borrower
countries at unprecedented speed. This mechanism allowed World Bank support to reach over 100
countries by May 2020.
Stakeholders confirmed the importance of flexible project conditions and new support mechanisms
such as HEIS in cases of conflict and fragility to enable the Bank to respond to needs rapidly. Most
stakeholders view positively the Bank’s adaptability towards changing context, with some variation
among Donors, CSOs, the Private Sector, Knowledge Partners.
Element 3. The World Bank implements an annual Country Opinion Survey Programme to track
and respond to changes in client perceptions and needs.
The World Bank has implemented the World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey Programme
throughout the assessment period as part of an ongoing effort to systematically gauge and track the
perception of the Bank’s clients and partners over time. Each year, a sample of countries are included,
including 35 countries in 2017, 39 in 2018, 45 in 2019, 25 in 2020 and 39 in 2021.
The survey presents client perceptions in response to key issues around development needs, the
comparative value of the Bank and implementation effectiveness (e.g. perceptions of overall effectiveness,
responsiveness, flexibility, accessibility, implementation speed and collaboration with other donors.
There is tangible evidence that client feedback through the survey and other mechanisms have
influenced changes to the Bank’s institutional policies and processes. The change in the Bank’s business
model in 2019 to expand the global footprint and serve all clients was partly driven by client feedback.
Client feedback is incorporated into Tier 3 of the corporate scorecard in terms of:
• Overall client perceptions on the World Bank’s effectiveness and impact on results (scale of 1-10; 7.7
in FY22, upward trend);

15, 215, 224, 261, 268

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 111

• Overall client feedback on the accomplishment of objectives for Advisory Services and Analytical
(ASA) products (scale of 0-100, 91 in FY22, steady);
• Overall client perception that ASA products incorporate global expertise (scale of 0-100, 90 for FY22,
downward trend).
Element 4. The World Bank monitors responsiveness to the needs of clients, disbursement and
reactivity to project problems as part of the corporate scorecard.
The World Bank tracks several key measures of implementation speed and responsiveness, including
client perceptions as part of Tier 3 of the corporate scorecard. Measures included are:
• Client perception of World Bank responsiveness and staff accessibility (scale of 1-10, 7.3 FY22, upward
trend);

15, 215, 224, 261, 268

• Disbursement ratio – ratio of disbursement during the fiscal year against the undisbursed balance at
the beginning of the fiscal year for Investment Project Finance (0-100, 21 FY22, steady); and
• Proactivity Index – ratio of disbursed projects in actual problem status for which one of the following
actions was taken within the next 12 months: upgrading; closure; partial cancellation; suspension;
and restructuring (0-100, 82.3 FY 22, upward trend).
This approach helps demonstrate the extent to which the Bank is adhering to disbursement profiles
overall (with an ongoing target of 20%) and is using project supervision and restructuring to improve
implementation speed and effectiveness.
MI 5.7: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

KPI 6: Working in coherent partnerships directed at leveraging and catalysing the use
of resources

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.28

Beyond country engagement, the Bank works in partnership with donors, other development partners, regional organisations
and civil society. At the project level, accountability to beneficiaries and citizen engagement are embedded into the operational
cycle. Furthermore, CPFs and operations are designed and implemented in consultation with other development partners. The
Bank is rated highly for the transparency of its operational activities, making a wide range of data publicly available. In the
case of trust funds, recent reforms have sharpened the Bank’s comparative advantage, reduced fragmentation and increased
alignment of these partnerships to the priorities of the Bank, donors and borrower countries.
However, there is room to strengthen how the Bank’s partnerships at the global and regional level and its advisory services
and analytics contribute to development effectiveness. Although efforts have recently been made to identify a central focal
point for global partnerships with other MOs, the Bank lacks an overall framework to guide the selectivity and results focus
of its partnerships beyond trust funds. There are also opportunities to better position and strengthen incentives for regional
operations to address transboundary issues. Although the Bank has recently designed a Strategic Framework for Knowledge,
there remain important gaps in demonstrating how Advisory Services and Analytics are taken up to contribute to policy
development, organisational learning and development results.

112 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 6.1: Planning, programming and approval procedures make partnerships more agile when
conditions change

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.67

Element 1: Procedures in place to encourage joint planning and programming among Borrower
Countries and Development Partners.
Element 2: Mechanisms, including budgetary, in place to allow programmatic changes and adjustments
when conditions change
Element 3: Institutional procedures for revisions permit changes to be made at the appropriate level to
ensure efficiency
MI 6.1: Analysis

3
4
4
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank’s global footprint country engagement model promote co-ordination
with partners in responding to client needs.
Collaboration in the context of Country Partnership Frameworks and Operations
The World Bank has a clear organisational structure with country level responsibilities vested in country
managers or country directors. The WB has more than 130 country offices which facilitate consultation
with partners.
The Country Engagement policy and guidance documents require consultation and coordination with
development partners and borrower countries in the preparation of CPFs. CPF Guidance specifically
stipulates that, throughout the preparation, the team “engages in consultations and appropriate
collaborative processes with the government (usually through several ministries and agencies and at
various levels), the private sector, civil society, development partners, and other stakeholders in the
country.” This is formalised upstream, with SCD guidance indicating that inputs should be solicited
from other development partners.
Similar consultations are also expected to take place in the context of Country Engagement Notes
(CEN) in contexts where countries are going through an unusually uncertain period, including cases of

transition from conflict or political crisis where the Bank may lack the knowledge required to establish 108, 186, 224, 268,
269
medium-term objectives.
CPFs take into account the operations of other key development partners as development partners are
often contributing to the same high-level objectives. The objective of such co-ordination is to:
• ensure alignment with a country’s development priorities and promote country-led coordination of
development partners;
• reduce aid management and delivery transaction costs, and
• strengthen the strategic selectivity of the CPF program, thus supporting the aid effectiveness agenda.
Stakeholders note that any “division of labour” with development partners based on comparative
advantage is informal rather than formal. CPF guidance stops short of promoting Joint CPFs with other
development partners. Lessons from previous joint-initiatives indicate that the advantages gained
have largely been due to closer co-ordination, whereas formalising joint CPFs resulted in delays and
increased transaction costs due to incompatible processes and timelines.
Stakeholders in country offices reported a high degree of engagement and collaboration with partners
in the context of sector working groups and co-ordination with humanitarian partners in FCS contexts.
However, most noted that such co-ordination is often context-specific and depends on personalities.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 113

Element 2. Institutional processes provide an opportunity to review the CPFs and operations to
adjust to changes in context.
The financial envelope of a CPF is reviewed for adequacy during the Performance Learning Review
(PLR), a mid-course review used to identify lessons, respond to changes in context and identify midcourse corrections. Country managers/directors have the responsibility to propose changes in the
country framework as the country context changes. Budget flexibility exists at the level of the Region
and the Bank to adapt to changed conditions and processes are in place for making such changes.
A CPF can be adjusted through a PLR which:
• takes stock of and report on the evolution of objectives that the CPF seeks to contribute to;
• adjusts the CPF objectives and program as needed if new analytics or changes in country
circumstances, or in the development landscape, have shed a new light on how best the program can
be positioned to contribute to HLOs;
• reflects on progress in filling knowledge gaps and consider whether new knowledge gaps have
emerged; and
• makes the necessary adjustments to the results framework.
Although guidance on implementing the PLR promotes close co-ordination with the borrower
government, it is silent on the extent to which inputs from development partners are sought and
considered.
Element 3. Clear rules and accountabilities around the restructuring of operations promote
delegation of authority to the country level.
In the context of operations (including Investment Project Financing, Development Policy Financing 108, 186, 224, 268,
269
and Programme for Results Financing), restructuring is often used to address “problem” projects facing
implementation challenges. In particular, restructuring may be used to address risks and problems that
have arisen during changes in context.
In 2017, a decision was taken to streamline the restructuring process to promote the use of restructuring
to address problem projects and support implementation. This decision was made based on a
recognition that projects are implemented in a dynamic policy and institutional environment that
required a means of adapting the original design and modifying components during implementation
to improve performance and development impact. Furthermore, evidence at the time suggested that
restructurings were not being pursued frequently due to confusing and complex processes as well as a
perception that restructuring was linked to poor performance.
This change allowed for certain low-risk restructuring decisions to be made at the country level by
Country Directors upon agreement by borrower countries. This change was expected to increase
responsiveness to clients by reducing the number of required reviews. High-risk restructurings
involving a change in safeguard category, extension of a guarantee expiration, reliance on alternative
procurement arrangements, the addition of new borrowers or a change in a Multi-Phase Programmes
development objectives continue to be submitted for consideration by the Executive Board. Country
teams estimate that between 10 and 25% of operations are restructured.
Although all restructurings are pursued in co-ordination with borrower countries, it is not clear how other
development partners who are not directly co-financing a project are engaged in this process. Stakeholders
on the ground suggest that other development partners are typically only involved in monitoring and
restructuring where projects are co-financed. However, restructuring is often informed by Implementation
Status Reporting and Mid-Term Reviews, which are implemented in context with partners.
MI 6.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

114 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 6.2: Partnerships are based on an explicit statement of comparative or collaborative
advantage i.e. technical knowledge, convening power/partnerships, policy dialogue/advocacy

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: Corporate documentation contains clear and explicit statement on the comparative
advantage that the organisation is intending to bring to a given partnership
Element 2: Corporate documentation contains a clear and explicit statement on the collaborative
advantage that the organisation intends to realise through a given partnership
Element 3: Resources/competencies needed for intervention area(s) are aligned to the perceived
comparative or collaborative advantage

4
4
4

Element 4: Comparative or collaborative advantage is reflected in the resources (people, information,
knowledge, physical resources, networks) that each partner commits (and is willing) to bring to the 3
partnership
MI 6.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

The World Bank does not have an overall framework or policy to govern its global, regional and countrylevel partnerships. This MI has been interpreted in light of the World Bank’s Trust Funds, including Financial
Intermediary Funds.
Element 1: The World Bank has increasingly sought to build upon its comparative advantage for
the management of trust funds by streamlining their management and enhancing selectivity.
By partnering with the World Bank through a trust fund, donors benefit from the World Bank’s global
footprint, operational knowledge and expertise, financial framework and governance systems to
support shared development priorities. Additionally, partnering with the World Bank allows donors
to: (i) access the World Bank’s senior management in the context of policy and strategic dialogue; (ii)
collectively address global development challenges and achieve results at scale; (iii) improve visibility
for development partners; and (iv) supporting knowledge sharing on key development issues.
In building upon the World Bank’s comparative advantage, a key aim of trust fund reform has been to
strengthen the selectivity of trust funds as well as their alignment to strategic priorities. This initiative
seeks to group funds around fewer, larger and more flexible trust funds. Furthermore, the introduction 116, 139, 180, 234,
of the Strategic External Funds Framework (SEFF) helps ensure trust funds continue to respond to 245, 249, 263, 264,
country demands and contexts and form the basis for annual fundraising plans. A key aspect of ensuring 271, 276
this selectivity is putting limitations on the establishment of single donor “stand-alone” trust funds with
some exceptions. Proactive review and closure of trust funds following the end of their disbursement
timeframe also helps promote selectivity.
Similarly, the Bank updated its FIF management framework in 2019 to address proliferation of FIFs
contributing to fragmentation and unintended consequences for borrower countries. Reforms were
introduced to bring enhanced clarity regarding the scope of different roles the Bank plays in the
management of FIFs as well as enhanced internal review and decision-making processes around their
establishment.
FIFs benefit from the Bank’s technical expertise (in an advisory capacity), financial management capacity
(as trustee), facilities (where it houses secretariats) and administrative and due diligence processes (where
is handles recruitment of staff and administration). One of the key changes made has been to improve
the flow of information between FIFs and the Bank to help ensure the Bank can manage emerging risks.
New FIFs require Board approval except where strategic, operational and financial risk is assessed as low.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 115

Element 2: The World Bank has a clear vision for the collaborative advantage to be realised from
trust funds.
World Bank’s Trust Fund Policy was updated in light of its “Umbrella Programme” initiative seeking to
reduce fragmentation and transaction costs and enhance the strategic alignment of the World Bank’s
Trust Funds.
The Policy identifies a clear collaborative advantage for trust funds supported by donor contributions
and managed by the Bank, including: (i) complementing IDA and IBRD operations; (ii) reinforcing
country capacity and ownership; (iii) fostering harmonisation and alignment of aid modalities (e.g.
contributions from more than one donor; and (iv) reducing transaction costs to ensure efficient
administration and portfolio consolidation.
Similarly, FIFs can play an important role in catalysing a variety of public and private resources in
support of international initiatives. Because they are often launched at high-level, multilateral forums,
they operationalise political will around a coordinated response to shared global priorities.
Element 3: The Umbrella Funds Programme has sought to increase the efficiency the Bank’s
governance of Trust Funds.
A new cost recovery framework for trust funds was introduced in 2021 to streamline the cost recovery
framework, introduce economies of scale and enhance predictability for both the Bank and partners.
The new framework introduces a graduated approach that increases the recovery of the Bank’s trust
funds over time.
Key to this streamlining is a single governance structure (a Partnership Council) for each Umbrella Fund. 116, 139, 180, 234,
245, 249, 263, 264,
The Partnership Council provides strategic direction on the implementation of Umbrella Fund activities,
271, 276
with options for development partners to express preferences for specific themes or geographic areas.
Each Umbrella Programme, in theory, has a unified results framework designed in consultation with
development partners. Unified reporting ensures a focus on results and is meant to limits bilateral
reporting requirements.
The Bank is also seeking to apply lessons learned to support a more consistent design of FIFs, thereby
reducing unnecessary customisation and enabling greater efficiency. The methodology to determine
cost recovery for trustee services has been simplified while ensuring continued cost recovery. An
enhanced communication framework and three-year annual reporting on FIFs encourages ongoing risk
management and proactive discussion as FIFs evolve over time to ensure the arrangement remains in
line with the Bank’s comparative advantage.
In streamlining the management of FIFs, the Bank has sought to ensure that:
• FIFs are only created when no other reasonable alternative could achieve the stated objectives to
avoid further fragmentation in the global aid architecture;
• The establishment of FIFs should be driven by client demand rather than donor convenience;
• Assurance of large-scale funding and a reasonable case for financial sustainability; and
• FIFs allow for large-scale implementation across a large number of Implementing Entities.
Stakeholders indicate that, while the Umbrella reforms may have yielded efficiency gains at the global
level, country teams sometimes struggle with avoiding bilateral reporting requirements imposed on
them by specific donors.

116 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 4: The Bank has sought to rationalise its role in supporting FIFs to better align to its
comparative advantage and avoid risk.
With respect to Financial Intermediary Frameworks, the Bank has sought to clarify the role their
governance role. For all FIFs, the Bank acts as a limited trustee. However, the Bank may also serve as
Implementing Entity, Secretariat and Independent Evaluation Office. Where the Bank holds multiple
roles, it can be challenging to balance implications for governance and comparative advantage in line 116, 139, 180, 234,
with other corporate interests and existing processes. The new framework requires that, when FIFs 245, 249, 263, 264,
are identified, the Bank’s participation must be consistent with their mandate, strategic priorities and 271, 276
comparative advantages. Furthermore, the Bank’s participation must not conflict with their broader
risk appetite and tolerances.
Recommended hosting arrangements have been identified to help ensure alignment with these
principles and avoid conflicts of interest arising from the Bank’s role and reduces policy and procedural
complexities related to the implementation of FIFs.
MI 6.2 Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 6.3 Demonstrated commitment to furthering development partnerships for countries (i.e.
support for South-South collaboration, triangular arrangements, and use of country systems)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.25

Element 1: Clear statement on how the organisation will support principles of collaboration with
countries on their development agenda (Nairobi Principles, 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda)
Element 2: Clear statement/guidelines for how the organisation will support development partnerships
between countries

4
3

Element 3: Clear statement/guidelines for how the organisation will use country systems

3

Element 4: Internal structures and incentives supportive of use of country systems, where appropriate

3

MI 6.3: Analysis

Evidence documents

This MI will focus on how the World Bank works to build the governance and implementation capacity of
borrower countries, including for public financial management and domestic resource mobilisation as
well as tools and mechanisms to work regionally and address transboundary issues.
Element 1. The World Bank supports countries in strengthening public financial management,
domestic resource mobilisation and statistical capacity development, supporting country-led
development.
The World Bank supports collaboration with borrowers in line with the Nairobi Principles and the

Sustainable Development Agenda through its activities in Governance and Statistical Capacity Building. 15, 22, 25, 28, 34, 38,
43, 94, 161, 193, 197,
Governance has remained an important strategic priority for the Bank throughout the assessment
236, 253, 279, 281,
period, including throughout subsequent IDA replenishments.
289, 290
The COVID-19 crisis exposed important vulnerabilities in core governance systems, with governance
and institutions identified as a cross-cutting theme in the context of the IDA 20 replenishment.
Particular emphasis is placed on debt management in light of the impact of COVID-19 on rising sovereign
debt. This includes a target to support 50 IDA countries in publishing comprehensive reports on public
and publicly guaranteed debt and fiscal risk. DRM equally remains a priority, particularly among
countries which mobilise tax revenues of less than 15% of GDP. Development Policy Financing has
been an important instrument for supporting public management reforms, including programmatic

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 117

DPFs promoting long-term structural reforms. Additionally, the World Bank’s Development Data Group
provides ongoing capacity development for building statistical capacity to inform development policies.
Support for strengthening the governance of borrower countries is reflected in the World Bank’s
Corporate Scorecard, including:
• Countries provided with statistical capacity building to support the implementation of household
surveys;
• Countries with improved transparency of public finances and budget execution; and
• A Statistical Performance Indicator.
The World Bank’s Global Governance Practice supports the development of capable, efficient, open,
inclusive and accountable institutions. Key priority areas include:
• Strengthening public financial management;
• Domestic resource mobilisation (DRM);
• Strengthening State-Owned Enterprises;
• Strengthening public institutions;
• Decentralisation and sub-national governance;
• Anti-corruption, openness and transparency;
• Procurement reform; and
• Political economy analysis.
15, 22, 25, 28, 34, 38,
43, 94, 161, 193, 197,
among borrower countries and with civil society to strengthen governance and accountability. These
236, 253, 279, 281,
include:
289, 290
Additionally, the Governance GP supports several partnership initiatives to strengthen collaboration

• The Global Partnership for Social Accountability, which facilitated collaboration of civil society
organisations with governments, allowing for joint, iterative problem solving with local input;
• The GovTech Global Partnership, which supports countries in adopting sound practices and solutions
in GovTech through exchange and transfer of knowledge and good practice;
• The Public Expenditure Management Peer Assisted Learning Network, a multilateral capacity building
partnership where reform experienced are shared among countries in Central Asia and Central and
Eastern Europe;
• The Public Expenditure Network in Asia, a peer learning network of PFM officials and experts in the
Asia-Pacific region, including two Communities of Practice on treasury functions.
Element 2. Whereas the World Bank’s support to regional operations has increased over time,
there remain important challenges detract from the Bank delivering on its comparative advantage
in this area.
In the context of regional operations, the World Bank plays three roles: (i) an enabler of upstream
support (through knowledge) to enhance awareness of opportunities; (ii) a financier of downstream
activities; and (iii) a convener of key stakeholders. Given its global reach, convening abilities, sectoral
expertise, track record of producing knowledge products and potential to work across the public and
private sectors, the World Bank has a potential comparative advantage in working to address regional
and transboundary development challenges.
This element is examined in terms of the Bank’s strategic orientation, instruments and results
measurement for regional operations.

118 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Strategic Orientation
The World Bank does not have a specific organisational policy or strategy that addressed regional
operations and regional cooperation objectives with a global scope.
There has been evidence of good practice in specific regions with respect to how the World Bank
engages with countries to support regional cooperation and address transboundary issues; however,
these practices are not systematic.
In 2018, a Regional Integration Cooperation Assistance Strategy for Africa was introduced for the period
of 2018-2023. Although support has always been envisioned for shared natural resources and global
public goods, regional integration activities have typically focused on infrastructure development
and trade, seeking to remove physical and institutional barriers to trade, investment and growth.
The Strategy was subsequently revised in 2020 to place more emphasis on supporting the continent’s
recovery from COVID-19 and other emerging crises by building human capital and resilience. Feedback
from stakeholders in the region indicate that the strategy has increasingly provided a basis for regional
activities in other sectors, including food security.
In the Middle East and North Africa, there is no separate strategy document to guide regional
coordination. However, the existing regional strategy identifies regional cooperation initiatives in the
energy sector, water and education sectors and these are cascaded down to specific projects at the
country level. However, the regional scorecard and results framework does not provide an indication of
outcomes achieved, but rather only Project Development Outcome ratings (e.g., MS).
There may be scope to build upon and strengthen these practices and apply them more consistently in
other regions.
Instruments:
The IDA Regional Window, introduced in IDA16, provides a PBA top-up to IDA countries to support multicountry investments to support regional integration, including regional infrastructure, trade and public
goods / bads. Traditionally, 75% of the resources from this window have been devoted to operations
in the Africa regions. The size of this window recently increased from USD 5 billion in IDA18 to USD 7.6
billion for IDA20. Since its creation, the regional window has supported 95 projects and 38 regional
organisations with a total volume of US 1.2 billion.
In order to receive support under the IDA Regional Window, an operation must demonstrate clear
economic or social externalities across countries, support regional policy and regulatory coherence
and demonstrate strong country ownership. Whereas projects must involve multiple countries, projects
involving a single country may be supported on an exceptional basis. For IDA20, key changes were made
to the eligibility requirements for the regional window, including:
• The number of countries required was reduced from 3 to 2;
• A requirement was put in place that there must be at least one Project Development Objective-level
indicator capturing externalities; and
• Grants may be provided to regional organisations with a suitable legal status (credits may be provided
to credit-worthy organisations where activities are economically viable).
Previously, the World Bank was able to work with regional organisations through a waiver under the
IDA Scale Up window to finance affordable housing projects by the West African Development Bank and
through a credit to the Bank of Central African States to strengthen Financial Institutions in the Central
African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC).

15, 22, 25, 28, 34, 38,
43, 94, 161, 193, 197,
236, 253, 279, 281,
289, 290

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 119

The changes made to the IDA Regional Window allow for the Bank to work with regional organisations
on a larger scale without the need to seek a waiver. For example, the West Africa Food Systems Resilience
Programme involves components that are co-led by regional organisations, including ECOWAS. This
option has also been used in the Latin and Caribbean Region to support the Organisation of Eastern
Caribbean States as well as the World Bank’s engagement with Africa CDC to support COVID-19 vaccine
acquisition and delivery. The need to work closely with regional organisations to address global public
goods and “bads” was one of the World Bank’s key lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, such support is capped at 10% of the regional allocation for the period.
Regional operations often proceed as parallel Investment Project Financing (IPF) projects launched
in each participating countries. This modality was widely noted by country-level stakeholders to
pose several challenges, notably due to the complexity of navigating different government systems,
requirements, capacities and procedures in parallel across countries. The added complexity of these
operations was noted to create important disincentives for World Bank staff to engage.
Regional Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA) was recently identified by the Bank as a new taxonomy
for ASA products. There has been evidence of its use in the MENA Region to support policy coherence
in the energy sector. There has been increasing recognition of the importance of regional Development
Policy Financing to promote policy and regulatory coherence as well as increased uptake of the Bank’s
Multi-Phase Approach to provide flexibility for longer-term regional IPF operations. However, DPF
operations are capped at 10% of the regional allocation over the period.
An important challenge remains with respect to the fact that there are more limited incentives for

15, 22, 25, 28, 34, 38,
regional operations in IBRD countries, which do not have access to concessional support under the 43, 94, 161, 193, 197,
IDA window. In this context, regional trust funds such as the MENA Regional Umbrella Multi-donor 236, 253, 279, 281,
Trust Fund has played an important role in supporting Regional ASA to support policy and regulatory 289, 290
coherence in the energy sector.
Results Measurement
Arrangements for results measurement of regional operations has strengthened over time but remains
a challenge.
Under the IDA20 Regional Window, implementation guidelines identify guidance for the development
of PDO-level indicators to measure regional externalities in the results framework for results linked
to connectivity and collective-action. Suggested indicators by sector capture cross-border activities,
services and harmonised standards. However, it remains unclear whether specific indicators are
mandatory for certain types of activities and how these indicators are to be reflected in regional and
corporate results frameworks, including the corporate scorecard.
A particular challenge lies with the measurement of results for Regional ASA. Currently, results
measurement for ASA is output-linked with a client perception rating on the extent to which the output
achieved its development objective. The identification of other results indicators is optional. This
output-driven nature is reflected in the MENA Regional Scorecard and Results Report for the MENA
Regional Umbrella MDTF, which recounts the number of products delivered and a results indication of
“MS.” However, it remains difficult to ascertain the extent to which Regional ASA has been taken up to
inform policy changes or reform and what have been the resulting externalities. Given the importance of
regional ASA for supporting regional cooperation in IBRD countries due to the lack of other concessional
financing, this is a potential areas for attention in future.

120 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 3. Although the World Bank lacks a clear corporate statement and policy, it provides a
range of instruments designed to strengthen institutional capacity and support implementation
though country systems.
Despite a reported commitment to the use of country systems, the Bank lacks an overarching corporate
statement, definition and targets in this regard.
Commitments through instruments such as DPFs and PforRs which help strengthen and build upon
the use of country systems have increased over the assessment period. PforR operations provide an
alternative means of supporting the use of country systems with a clear results focus such that this
instrument uses country systems that are responsible for the programme being supported and does not
insist that these systems be at the same standards as the Bank’s own policies and procedures for IPF
operations. There is not, however, an organisational policy or statement that prioritises the use of DPFs
or PforRs over Investment Project Financing.
Additionally, the Bank provides technical assistance (TA) to complement its lending activities,
helping borrowing countries to: (i) strengthen the design, preparation and implementation of lending
operations; (ii) undertake analytical work to support reform and policy development; and (iii) strengthen
their human and institutional capacity. Borrowers play an active role in designing and implementing TA
programmes, including determining the nature of TA and the outputs and milestones by which to assess
progress. Technical Assistance is financed through both the administrative budget, Bank-executed trust
funds and Financial Intermediary Funds.
Additionally, the Bank may make a Preparation Advance to a borrower to support preparatory and

limited implementation activities for IPF, DPF and PforR financing or activities that strengthen the 15, 22, 25, 28, 34, 38,
43, 94, 161, 193, 197,
capacity of borrower institutions to carry out targeted operations. PAs are made only when there is a
236, 253, 279, 281,
strong possibility that subsequent lending will be approved. If a Bank loan does not materialise, the PA 289, 290
is repaid by the borrower.
Element 4. Although progress is being achieved in some areas, the World Bank lacks a clear
statement and incentive framework promoting the use of country systems.
Bank policy demonstrates a longstanding drive to enhance the use of country systems for environmental
and social management (e.g. Bank Operational Policy 4.00). However, the Bank otherwise lacks a clear
organisational statement and incentive around the use of country systems. Furthermore, key metrics
around implementation using country systems versus external PIUs is not tracked systematically. Use
and development of country systems does not appear in either the Corporate Scorecard nor the IDA
RMS. Furthermore, there is no explicit preference for instruments and tools that use country systems,
including Development Policy Financing and P-for-R.
However, important progress is being seen in promoting the use of country systems in some key areas,
including the management of environmental and social risks under the Environmental and Social
Framework as well as the use of country systems for financial management. By comparison, progress in
promoting the use of country systems for procurement has been more modest.
With respect to promoting the use of country systems, stakeholders sometimes note challenges related to
borrower preferences with some large MIC borrowers preferring to use external Project Implementation
Units. Additionally, there are some countries which refuse to engage in DPF operations with the Bank.
Furthermore, both external PIUs and those for Implementing Agencies often prefer to use Bank systems
(e.g. for procurement) do to enhanced clarity and efficiency relative to national systems. Stakeholders
note that this approach can favour development efficiency for development effectiveness.
MI 6.3: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 121

MI 6.4: Strategies or designs identify and address synergies with development partners, to
encourage leverage/catalytic use of resources and avoid fragmentation in relation to 2030
Sustainable Development Agenda implementation

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

2.75

Element 1: Strategies or designs clearly identify possible synergies with development partners and
leverage of resources/catalytic use of resources and results

3

Element 2: Strategies or designs clearly articulate responsibilities and scope of the partnership

2

Element 3: Strategies or designs are based on a clear assessment of external coherence

3

Element 4: Strategies or designs contain a clear statement of how leverage will be ensured

3

MI 6.4 Analysis

Evidence documents

This MI has been interpreted in light of the World Bank’s strategy priority to “Maximise Finance for
Development,” supporting Private Capital Mobilisation by working more closely as One Bank Group in line
with its comparative advantage.
Element 1. The World Bank has identified a clear process for identifying synergies between IFC,
MIGA and the World Bank in the development of Country Partnership Frameworks.
This element has been interpreted in the World Bank context as the extent to which Country Partnership
Frameworks (CPFs) are designed jointly between the World Bank, IFC and MIGA to promote private sector
mobilisation.
Joint World Bank Group CPFs play an important role in Bank’s vision to support Private Capital
Mobilisation. Since 2014, all World Bank Country Partnership Frameworks are produced jointly by IFC,
the World Bank and MIGA. Each are expected to reflect the development objectives of IFC, MIGA and the
World Bank’s work.
This co-ordination has been facilitated through an upstream approach, notably the development
of Country Private Sector Diagnostics (CPSDs). CPSDs were introduced with IFC 3.0 in 2016 with the

1, 2, 3, 21, 36, 51, 56,
60, 78, 82, 83, 84, 196,
The CPSDs are conducted jointly by IFC and the World Bank and specifically seek to identify how World 206, 207, 235, 238,
Bank programmes could be leveraged to support upstream reforms that can promote market creation 246, 281, 291, 293
intention of moving IFC toward greater strategic country engagement.

and private investment. They provide the analytical basis to shape the Bank’s approach to policy
dialogue with governments, focusing on key “enabling sectors” that play a role in promoting private
investment in other sectors and “productive sectors” that build on a country’s potent to tap global
markets. CPSDs include:
• An assessment of the state of the private sector;
• An identification of economy-wide and sector-specific constraints;
• An identification of near-term and longer-term opportunities for private sector engagement; and
• Policy recommendations to remove policy and regulatory barriers to mobilise private investment.
CPSDs go on to inform the development of Systematic Country Diagnostics, a key input for engagement
with borrower countries and development of the CPF.
Stakeholders consulted in Country Offices unanimously confirmed that IFC has been increasingly
engaged in the development of CPFs upstream. Evidence from a 2017 IEG review similarly indicates
that IFC and MIGA participation in SCDs and CPFs has been increasingly evident and more substantive

122 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

that under the Country Assistance Strategy approach, with an established workflow for this new
approach. Teams responsible for developing CPFs increasingly include expertise from IFC and MIGA.
However, the report noted that discussion in CPFs of private sector development still tends to be driven
by a World Bank perspective. Areas for improvement were noted with respect to the reflection of IFC
and MIGA operations in CPF results matrices. Part of these challenges were thought to have stemmed
from an emphasis in SCDs on general policy constraints rather than a more granular analysis of the
country’s private sector.
Element 2. Processes aimed at enhancing collaboration across IFC, the World Bank and MIGA to
promote private capital mobilisation at the operational level are implemented in an opportunistic
rather than a systematic way.
This element has been interpreted with respect to the extent to which the World Bank has clear processes
in place to promote a systematic “One Bank Group” approach to promoting private capital mobilisation
in the context of operations.
As part of operationalising Mobilising Finance for Development, the World Bank Group adopted the
“Cascade Approach” in 2017, which is meant to provide a model for making World Bank, MIGA and
IFC collaboration in the context of operations more systematic and thereby enhance private capital
mobilisation. This approach aims to maximise the impact of scarce public resources by first seeking to
mobilise commercial finance, supporting by upstream reforms as required.
The Cascade Agenda involves an approach whereby programming is guided by a decision tree, including:
• Is there a sustainable private sector solution that limits public debt and contingent liabilities? If yes, 1, 2, 3, 21, 36, 51, 56,
60, 78, 82, 83, 84, 196,
pursue a private sector solution.
206, 207, 235, 238,
• If no, is this because of policy or regulatory gaps or weaknesses? If yes, see whether World Bank 246, 281, 291, 293
support can target these.
• If this is not possible, proceed with public funding as required.
A recent IEG report affirmed that projects which involve World Bank, IFC and MIGA collaboration
yield better outcomes for PCM, particularly in the energy sector. This includes policy work through
Development Policy Operations and technical assistance that supports critical reforms to sector policy
frameworks and deliberate joint collaboration between the World Bank, IFC and MIGA to enhance the
enabling environment. The report also determined that task teams were increasingly applying the
Cascade approach to identify opportunities to support an improved investment environment and
also engaged in joint upstream institutional capacity building and strengthening to this effect. Such
collaboration was also noted in some sample countries for the assessment.
However, feedback from stakeholders was mixed with respect to increased collaboration between the
World Bank, IFC and MIGA for specific operations. In general, this coordination remains opportunistic,
with several stakeholders noting that the Cascade “approach” is often not practical. In countries where
the CPF emphasises various aspects of improving the investment environment, stakeholders noted
regular collaboration. However, many stakeholders perceived a mismatch between the operational
incentives of World Bank and IFC, with the Bank prioritising longer-term development outcomes
while IFC performance incentives remain linked to new commitments. Doubts about the extent of a
systematic “One Bank” approach is also reflected in the WBG corporate scorecard under the indicator
“Staff perception of Bank Group collaboration (%),” with just 44% of staff responding positively to the
staff engagement survey question: “Colleagues across the World Bank Group work together effectively.”

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 123

Element 3. The World Bank promotes external coherence and harmonisation among other MDBs
in the context of PCM.
This element has been interpreted in light of the extent to which the World Bank has effectively co-ordinated
with other development partners in promoting PCM.
The World Bank has supported external coherence by working with other MDBs to establish shared
definitions and principles for PCM and common methodologies for measurement.
In the context of operationalising “Maximising Finance for Development” the World Bank contributed to
the establishment of the “Principles for MDBs’ Strategy Crowding in Private Sector Finance for Growth
and Sustainable Development” (the Hamburg Principles). As part of the Hamburg Principles, the Bank
and other MDBs jointly commit to:
• Work with client countries to strengthen their governance of sustainable infrastructure, including
through project preparation facilities and capacity building;
• Review their range of credit enhancement products and expand where feasible;
• Review and strengthen internal incentives for mobilisation of private sector financing;
• Identify additional opportunities to provide complementary advisory and financing products where
appropriate; and
• Pursue opportunities for standardisation, harmonisation and standard-setting as appropriate.
In line with these commitments, the Bank co-ordinated with other MDBs in the context of an inter-agency
task force to identify harmonised definitions, metrics, means of attribution and basis for comparison
with respect to PCM. This harmonised approach has been applied in the context of Joint MDB reporting

1, 2, 3, 21, 36, 51, 56,
60, 78, 82, 83, 84, 196,
Finally, the World Bank contributes to financing for development through co-ordination platforms, 206, 207, 235, 238,
246, 281, 291, 293
such as:
on mobilisation of private finance.

• The Global Infrastructure Facility, which facilitates the preparation and structuring of complex
infrastructure PPPs to enable mobilisation of private finance. The GIF primarily provides advisory
support that enables the development of a pipeline of high-quality, bankable and sustainable
projects; and
• The Global Infrastructure Forum, which brings together members of the infrastructure community
to help enhance the development and delivery of infrastructure worldwide. The Forum facilitates
enhanced coordination among MDBs.
Element 4. The World Bank possesses a series of tools to contribute to PCM, including in
collaboration with IFC and MIGA. PCM is integrated into the Bank’s Corporate Results Frameworks.
This element has been interpreted in light of the World Bank’s resources, instruments, tools and results
frameworks to support PCM.
Financial Instruments and Resources
IDA and IBRD primarily contribute to PCM through guarantees which help de-risk and increase the
bankability of proposed projects. The World Bank Guarantee Programme provide “AAA” risk mitigation
on obligations from government and government-owned entities to private investors. They mobilise
private investment through:
• Mitigating key government-related risks to enable financial viability and long-term sustainability;
• Enhancing the credit quality of sovereign and sub-sovereign borrowers; and
• Reducing the costs and improve financing terms for projects.

124 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

In this context, the Bank’s comparative advantage is established through its AAA credit status, ability to
provide guarantees for long tenors (up to 35 years) and ability to provide concessional rates.
The Bank provides both project-based guarantees and policy-based guarantees. Project-based
guarantees which are applied in the context of specific investment projects where governments wish to
attract private investments. Policy-based guarantees are applied in the context of development policy
operations, wherein the Bank provides risk mitigation to commercial lenders with respect to debt
service payments by the government. To be eligible for a guarantee, a project must be implemented
by an eligible country for IBRD / IDA support and have a clear and defined development impact. There
must be a clear need to mobilise private investment or mitigate government payment risk and there
must be clear ownership from the government involved.
The USD 2.5 billion IDA Private Sector Window (PSW; introduced during IDA18) is another de-risking
tool implemented in collaboration with IFC to “allow IDA to operate in the space where public policy
and private investment meet and make use of scarce public resources to catalyse private investment
in challenging markets.” The PSW supports the Cascade process and is meant to IFC investment in IDA
and IDA-eligible FCS.
The PSW consists of three IDA facilities (and one MIGA facility) that allows a portion of the risk of an
individual transaction to be transferred to IDA from IFC and the private investor, thereby making an
otherwise risk-prohibitive, but impactful project viable. Additionally, IDA participation through the PSW
can have broader spill-over effects, including reduced investor risk perceptions, demonstration effects
for “first movers.”
Whereas an IEG report found that implementation and usage of the PSW had a slow start (approximately 1, 2, 3, 21, 36, 51, 56,
55% of IDA funds allocated between FY18-20), the PSW played an important role in supporting IFC’s 60, 78, 82, 83, 84, 196,
COVID-19 Fast-Track Facility and that PSW-supported projects constituted higher risk projects than the 206, 207, 235, 238,
246, 281, 291, 293
rest of IFC’s portfolio.
Staff and expertise
Staff capacity for PCM is concentrated in the World Bank Treasury Department, with support provided to
operational teams in applying these instruments by the Financial Products and Client Solutions team.
Additionally, expertise is located within the infrastructure, Public-Private Partnerships and Guarantees
Unit of the World Bank.
Corporate Results Frameworks
In line with the 2018 Capital Package Commitments, the World Bank has identified corporate targets for
PCM, which is reflected in the World Bank corporate scorecard through three indicators:
• Total direct mobilisation by Bank operations (financing from commercial entities on commercial
terms due to active, direct involvement of World Bank leading to commitment);
• Total private capital mobilisation ratio of IBRD-supported operations (the ratio of total private capital
mobilised by IBRD commitments to total IBRD commitments); and
• Total private capital mobilisation (PCM) of Bank-supported operations.
However, the Five-Year Retrospective of the Bank’s DPF Operations notes that the Bank’s Corporate
Results indicators for PCM are very narrowly defined and there is additional scope for better monitoring
the impact of DPF Operations supporting the creation of a Business Enabling Environment (BEE) on
PCM attributed to an overall improvement in the business climate.
GAP – Tracking of MFD Enabling Projects / PIM for IDA / IBRD
MI 6.4 Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 125

MI 6.5: Key business practices (planning, design, implementation, monitoring and reporting)
co-ordinated with relevant partners

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: Active engagement in joint exercises/mechanisms (planning, coordination, monitoring,
evaluation) to support external coherence
Element 2: Participating in joint monitoring and reporting processes with key development partners
Element 3: Identifying shared information or efficiency gaps with development partners and developing
strategies to address them
MI 6.5: Analysis

3
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The Bank participates in coordination platforms intended to promote external
coherence with development partners
The Bank engages in numerous platforms to promote external coherence with partners in different
contexts. For example:
• The World Bank and the IMF have produced a joint Debt Sustainability Framework and collaborate
on debt databases such as the Quarterly External Debt Statistics and the Quarterly Public Sector Debt
(WB and IMF 2021);
• The WB and IMF, in response to COVID-19, “have worked together to help countries benefit from
the G20 Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI), enhance debt transparency and build capacity to
manage debt by pursuing a multi-pronged approach” (WB and IMF 2021);
• The World Bank participated in the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A) and the Multilateral
Leaders Taskforce to promote co-ordination among multilateral organisations for the development,
production and delivery of COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics; and
• Since 2017, the United Nations-World Bank Partnership Framework for Crisis-Affected Situations 36, 79, 91, 186, 268
has provided an important platform to facilitate the engagement of UN agencies in Bank-financed
operations while also strengthening joint efforts, engagement, and cooperation.
These partnerships have sought to promote coherence between the Bank and other partners in line with
its comparative advantage to address global development challenges. These platforms have involved
joint planning and coordination (e.g. ACT-A, DSSI), monitoring (DSSI, Multilateral Leaders Taskforce and
UN Partnership).
Element 2. Operations are monitored in close co-ordination with implementing agencies and
joint monitoring among partners is encouraged.
The Bank’s CPF guidance encourages close coordination with partners throughout design and
implementation. The MOPAN Survey results show that a large majority of the respondents from peer
development organisations and operational partners agree that the Bank jointly monitors progress on
shared goals in country with local and regional partners (Q6-12). However, there is no evidence of joint
planning (e.g., CPFs) or joint missions with other MDBs. This point was underscored in interviews, where
country-level stakeholders confirmed that joint monitoring typically occurs only during supervision.

126 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Q6[12], THE WORLD BANK JOINTLY MONITORS PROGRESS ON SHARED GOALS IN
COUNTRY WITH LOCAL AND REGIONAL PARTNERS
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 3. Joint knowledge products provide important means of identifying opportunities to
co-operate and address gaps and challenges.
In the context of global co-ordination to promote external policy coherence, production of joint
knowledge work and diagnostics is increasingly being implemented for the purpose of identifying

36, 79, 91, 186, 268

opportunities and removing barriers for future collaboration as well as supporting advocacy around
key issues. Key examples include:
• The 2018 joint UN-World Bank Group Report “Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches to Preventing
Violent Conflict;” and
• The World Bank, UN, the European Union (EU), and African Development Bank collaborated on the
first-ever Prevention and Peacebuilding Assessment (PPBA).
• Increasingly, core knowledge products such as the CCDR and Risk and Resilience Assessments are
being implemented in collaboration with other development partners.
Feedback from borrower country stakeholders emphasise the importance of the Bank continuing
to implement its core knowledge work in partnership with others to help promote coherence and
uptake. Borrower countries are faced with an increasing range of advice from development partners
that is sometimes conflicting. Working in partnership with others is an important means of promoting
coherence and uptake.
MI 6.5: Evidence confidence
MI 6.6: Key information (analysis, budgeting, management, results etc.) shared with strategic/
implementation partners on an on-going basis

Medium confidence

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.67

Element 1: Clear corporate statement on transparency of information is aligned to the International Aid
Transparency Initiative
Element 2: Information is available on analysis, budgeting, management in line with the guidance
provided by the International Aid Transparency Initiative
Element 3: Responses to partner queries on analysis, budgeting, management and results are of good
quality and responded to in a timely fashion

3
4
4

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 127

MI 6.6: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The Bank has a clear corporate statement on the transparency of information.
The Bank’s Access to Information Policy “allows access to any information in its possession that is not
on a list of exceptions,” which are detailed within the policy (World Bank, Access to Information Policy,
2015). The Access to Information Policy sets out an appeals mechanism which is easily accessible.”
The Access to Information Policy sets out an appeals mechanism which is easily accessible. It sets
out timelines and requirements to file an appeal. Appeals are adjudicated based on if the information
release would violate the AI policy and if the information is in the public interest.
The WB was a founding member of IATI in 2008. Information is made available through several World
Bank databases including Documents and Reports (D&R) website (the official disclosure mechanism for
the Access to Information Policy) and the Open Knowledge Repository (OKR) in addition to IATI’s Open
Data Portal.
Element 2. The World Bank provides a wide range of information on analysis, management and
budgeting.
Over the course of the assessment period, the World Bank has consistently ranked highly on the Aid
Transparency Index, improving from a rank of 6th in 2018 to 2nd in 2020 and 2nd in 2022. The World Bank
has been rated as “very good” by IATI since 2014.
The 2022 assessment indicates that the World Bank publishes to the IATI registry on a monthly basis,
ranking in the top five for reporting components on “finance and budgets,” “joining up development
data,” “performance,” and “project attributes.” Data are provided at the project level, including
baselines, targets and progress against Project Development Objectives.
The World Bank lost points due to the content of its Access to Information Policy. The AIP includes a 98, 115, 142, 181, 182,
prerogative to restrict access to information at the discretion of the Bank, potentially undermining the 199, 209
policy’s presumption in favour of disclosure. Furthermore, the exceptions criteria were deemed not to
apply an “objective harm” test to confidentiality of third-party information provided.
More than 60% of stakeholders surveyed responded favourably as to whether the Bank was sharing
information with partners in line with the IATI requirements (11% strongly agree, 37 agree, 17%
somewhat agree).

Q6[07], THE WORLD BANK SHARES KEY INFORMATION (ANALYSIS, BUDGETING,
MANAGEMENT, RESULTS) WITH PARTNERS IN LINE WITH IATI REQUIREMENTS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

128 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 3. Evidence suggests that the World Bank respond to requests for information in a
comprehensive and timely fashion.
The World Bank’s Directive and Procedure on Access to Information is publicly available. It provides full
instructions on how to file requests for information as well as appeals. Clear timelines are provided for
resolution of requests, including an initial response within 5 days and a more comprehensive response
in 20 days. Notifications are provided for denied requests and, if a request is dismissed, an appeal may
be filed with the Access to Information Appeals Board within 45 days.
In FY21, the Bank handled 589 access to information requests, 94% of which were closed. Of the requests

98, 115, 142, 181, 182,
199, 209

that were closed, 449 provided sufficient information and were handled by the AI system, with 442
requests fulfilled in whole or in part and 7 requests denied. The Bank acknowledges receipt of written
requests for information within five working days, and endeavours to provide a more comprehensive
response within 20 working days. Of the cases closed in FY20, 86% were closed within 20 working days
and 14% were closed after 20 working days. No evidence was found regarding the quality of responses
to partner queries.
MI 6.6: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 6.7: Clear standards and procedures for accountability to beneficiaries implemented

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.60

Element 1: Explicit statement available on standards and procedures for accountability to beneficiary
populations i.e. Accountability to Affected Populations
Element 2: Staff guidance is available on the implementation of the procedures for accountability to
beneficiaries
Element 3: Training has been conducted on the implementation of procedures for accountability to
beneficiaries
Element 4: Programming tools explicitly contain the requirement to implement procedures for
accountability to beneficiaries
Element 5: Approval mechanisms explicitly include the requirement to assess the extent to which
procedures for accountability to beneficiaries will be addressed in the intervention
MI 6.7: Analysis

4
4
4
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has a clear commitment, standards and procedures for accountability
to beneficiary operations through the Environmental and Social Framework. Increased emphasis
has additionally been placed on Citizen Engagement.
The World Bank’s commitment and standards for accountability to beneficiaries is reflected in the
Environmental and Social Framework. ESS10 on Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure
identifies clear commitments throughout the lifecycle of operations, including:
• Consultation informing the stakeholder analysis;
• Disclosure around the nature of the project, including its design, and environmental and social risk;
• Engagement around how community feedback was integrated into design;
• Consultation throughout implementation and supervision; and
• Ex-post review of stakeholder engagement.

37, 80, 81, 107, 110,
111, 127, 194, 195,
204, 223, 224

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 129

The 2020 implementation update of the ESF notes that all projects now have a Stakeholder Engagement
Plan (SEP).
In the context of bank-funded projects, borrowers are required to establish accessible grievance
mechanisms to address environmental and social risks. The Bank runs a separate Grievance Redress
Service which provides an avenue for people and communities to raise environmental and social issues
if they believe a World Bank financed operation has or is likely to adversely affect them. The GRS has
four functions: (i) handling complaints by facilitating prompt responses to grievances; (ii) advisory
support by identifying systemic issues and lessons learned; (iii) monitoring and reporting, including
monitoring the implementation of agreements reached between borrowers and complainants; and (iv)
outreach and communications, including how to file a complaint.
The Bank’s 2014 Strategic Framework for Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement in World Bank Operations
identifies key entry points for citizen engagement throughout the operational cycle, seeking to move
engagement from a risk management approach to a more proactive approach. A 2018 IEG Report noted
that this effort had largely been successful, with a substantial increase in citizen engagement activities
on top of those required under the ESF.
There is evidence of regional good practice in promoting Citizen Engagement. For example, the MENA
Regional Strategy targets 100% citizen engagement throughout operations.
Finally, the World Bank engages Civil Society through its Civil Society Partnership Forum (CSPF), a
key event during the World Bank Spring and Annual Meetings. The CSPF provides a space for CSOs to
engage the World Bank Group in dialogue alongside their peers, government delegations and other
stakeholders.

37, 80, 81, 107, 110,
111, 127, 194, 195,
Element 2. Staff Guidance is available on implementation of procedures for accountability to
204, 223, 224
beneficiaries.
The World Bank’s Good Practice Note on ESS10 provides detailed guidance to staff on implementing
requirements for stakeholder engagement and establishing grievance mechanisms. Templates have
been designed to further support these activities. Environmental and Social Specialists are integrated
into the project team for high-risk operations and provide continual input and guidance throughout
implementation.
Additionally, the Bank’s 2014 Strategic Framework for Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement in World
Bank Operations provides guidance on key entry points. Support is also available through the Bank’s
Citizen Engagement and Social Accountability Team.
Element 3. Training on the ESF is mandatory for operational staff.
Training on the ESF, including stakeholder engagement, is part of mandatory core training for
operational staff. Additionally, innovative optional training is available through Learning Labs and Deep
Dives provided by through the Bank’s Open Learning Channel (OLC). Training on Citizen Engagement
was noted by the IEG Report as being a key challenge. Although training is available through the OLC,
it is not mandatory.
Element 4. Stakeholder engagement and citizen engagement are key requirements of Bank
operations and the project and country level.
Adherence to the ESF requirements around stakeholder engagement is essential for IPF operations.
Citizen engagement is also mainstreamed throughout the design of CPFs and DPFs, including and the
SCD stage, including the requirement that one CPF indicator address citizen engagement.

130 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 5. Adherence to ESF requirements is ensured through the Bank’s approval mechanisms.
Environmental and Social Specialists have a clear concurrence role in the World Bank’s ADM for the 37, 80, 81, 107, 110,
approval of projects beginning at the Concept Development stage. The Directive has been applied to all 111, 127, 194, 195,
204, 223, 224
new IPF operations with Concept Note Meetings held on or after October 1, 2018.
GAP – review of citizen engagement as part of QER
MI 6.7: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 6.8: Participation with national and other partners in mutual assessments of progress in
implementing agreed commitments

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

2.67

Element 1: Participation in joint performance reviews of interventions e.g. joint assessments

3

Element 2: Participation in multi-stakeholder dialogue around joint sectoral or normative commitments 2
Element 3: Use of surveys or other methods to understand how partners are experiencing working
together on implementing mutually agreed commitments.
MI 6.8: Analysis

3
Evidence documents

This MI will focus on co-ordination with partners at country-level for monitoring and evaluation as well as
joint programming.
Element 1. Ongoing engagement and joint monitoring with the borrower countries occurs
throughout the operations cycle. However, there is no clear guidance on joint monitoring with
development partners.
Ongoing engagement with the borrower country is integrated throughout the implementation and
closure of operations. Key tools such as the Country Portfolio Performance Reviews (implemented every
12-18 months for large portfolios), Implementation Status Reporting (implemented every 6 months),
Performance and Learning Reviews (PLRs), Mid-Term Reviews (MTRs), Implementation Completion and
Results Reporting (ICRs) and Completion and Learning Reviews (CLRs) are each implemented in close
collaboration with the borrower and provide an opportunity to learn from implementation experience
and discuss key project specific and systemic issues.
However, it is unclear to what extent each of these tools are implemented jointly with other 50, 219, 268, 278
development partners. Such co-ordination is not required or encouraged by existing guidance except
during the design of CPFs and operations. With respect to joint operations, a 2017 noted challenges in
understanding the full scale of joint operations as these are not tracked across World Bank operations.
Available directives and guidance for IPFs, DPFs and PforR are silent on joint monitoring for operations
with other development partners. Country-level stakeholders confirm that this typically only.
Element 2. The Bank has recently introduced means of promoting a more strategic and selective
approach to partnership with other multilateral organisations; however more needs to be done
to position partnerships to contribute to development results.
The World Bank engages extensively with other partners through sector and global platforms fir multistakeholder dialogue around joint and normative commitments. Approximately 72% of respondents to
MOPAN’s Partner survey agreed (at least somewhat) that the World Bank convenes partners to promote
a coherent response to development challenges.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 131

However, until recently, such partnerships were not being selected or managed in a coherent way. A
2020 IEG Report on the World Bank’s Global Convening Power identified a non-exhaustive list over
200 different global convening initiatives mapped to the SDGs where the World Bank plays an active
leadership role. The World Bank convenes partners for a variety of purposes, including: (i) sharing
knowledge and data analytics; (ii) dialogue and information sharing; (iii) providing innovative financial
solutions; (iv) advocacy for shared goals and normative commitments; and (v) investment platforms
through Financial Intermediary Funds.

Q6[06], THE WORLD BANK CONVENES DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS TO PROMOTE A
COHERENT RESPONSE TO DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

There is no formal organisational process for selecting or prioritising convening initiatives – each is at
the discretion of individual business units on a case-by-case basis. Although this approach is meant
to promote agility, there are some important drawbacks: (i) it is hard to delimit engagements, making
exits and “wind-downs” difficult; (ii) there are no organisations processes or mechanisms to manage
or monitor convening platforms over their life-cycle; (iii) there are few mechanisms to cascade global
commitments and priorities to the country-level; and (iv) rather than promoting agility, this informality
an contribute to challenges in obtaining needed consensus across operational units.
These challenges persist with regard to sector-wide and normative engagements at the country
level. Although stakeholders in country offices noted that they actively convene and co-ordinate
with development partners around sectoral and thematic issues, there are few guidelines to identify
which engagements to prioritise, for what purpose and how to engage. Often, these interactions are a
matter of personalities and opportunities. While stakeholders note the value and effectiveness of many
partnerships, there is no formal means of considering the results achieved, identifying lessons learned
and optimising value.
The 2021 and 2022 IEG Management Action Record reports indicate that, aside from the progress made
in implementing trust fund reform, limited progress had been made in addressing the issue of providing
overall strategic oversight and guidance for the Bank’s partnerships.
In January 2023, the Managing Director for Partnerships announced the creation of the Multilateral
Affairs Unit to provide oversight and coordinate the World Bank’s engagements. This unit enhanced a
previously existing function which coordinated the Bank’s multilateral engagements through a central

50, 219, 268, 278

132 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

communications and engagement function. Currently, all new partnerships must be approved at the
Managing Director level based on a clear demonstration of the Bank’s comparative advantage. This
measure is intended to enhance selectivity of the Bank’s multilateral engagements.
However, stakeholders confirm that there continues to be no results focus to identify how a particular
partnership is expected to contribute to development results or the delivery of the Sustainable
development agenda through activities and outcomes such as sharing knowledge and evidence,
promoting policy and operational coherence, removing barriers to joint programming and increasing
transparency and accountability. Having such a framework would allow the Bank to identify lessons
and good practices to enhance the effectiveness of its future partnership activities.
Element 3: At the country level, the World Bank takes stock of partner experiences through the
Country Opinion Survey. However, similar mechanisms are not implemented in the context of
global or regional partnerships.
Additionally, the World Bank implements a Country Opinion Survey to better understand the experience
of partners in working with the Bank. Respondents include representatives from borrower governments,
project management units overseeing the implementation of World Bank projects, local governments,
the judicial system, state-owned enterprises bilateral and multilateral agencies, the financial sector and
private sector organisations, NGOs and community-based organisation, youth groups, academia and
others. Each year, the survey is implemented in a rolling sample of countries.
The survey asks stakeholders to provide feedback on:
• The World Bank’s overall effectiveness;
• Valued aspects of the World Bank’s role in-country;
• Extent to which World Bank staff are well prepared to address national development challenges;

50, 219, 268, 278

• Responsiveness to needs;
• Collaboration with government and other development partners;
• Responsiveness when circumstances change;
• Openness and sharing of information; and
• The technical quality of projects and knowledge work.
However, it is not clear that the World Bank has a systematic process of seeking feedback from partners
in the context of its global and regional partnerships. An IEG evaluation noted that, although 13% of
the operating budget goes toward global engagements, there is no clear system to track convening
initiatives or their results.
Despite the absence of such a system, there are readily available examples of World Bank joint
monitoring of commitments and experiences working together with other partners, although it is not
clear that this practice is implemented systematically. Relevant examples include:
• Bi-annual Global Monitoring Reports on Universal Health Coverage and Financial Protection in Health
(with WHO);
• Joint Monitoring on the World Bank Partnership Framework for Crisis Affected Situations (with
various United Nations agencies);
• The Education Finance Watch (with UNESCO);
• The Multilateral Leaders Taskforce for COVID-19 Vaccines, Diagnostics and Therapeutics; and
• External Evaluation of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator.
MI 6.8 Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 133

MI 6.9: Use of knowledge base to support policy dialogue and/or advocacy

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.17

Element 1: Statement in corporate documentation explicitly recognises the organisation’s role in
knowledge production and identifies operational frameworks and resources to support the production 4
of knowledge work.
Element 2: Knowledge products produced and utilised by both the organisation and partners to inform
action
Element 3: Knowledge products generated and applied to inform advocacy, where relevant, at country,
regional, or global level
Element 4: Knowledge products generated are timely/perceived as timely by partners
Element 5: Knowledge products subject to a quality review process and are perceived as high quality
by partners

2
3
3
4

Element 6: Knowledge products are produced in a format that supports their utility to partners

3

MI 6.9: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. Whereas corporate documentation notes the Bank’s role and comparative advantage in
producing knowledge work, it currently lacks a clear framework for maximising the contribution
of its knowledge work to the achievement of development results.
The World Bank’s operational policy on Technical Assistance (OP 8.40) identifies analytical work as a
critical input to underpin policy reforms and policy development in borrower countries. The policy
identifies that the Bank uses its research policy work and economic and sector work to: (i) promote
a dialogue with governments on creating a reform agenda; and (ii) help borrowers define their needs
and priorities. Borrowers are intended to play a decisive role in defining the nature of analytical work,
including the means of support, outputs, milestones and development objectives.
Under the 2013 Strategy, deep sectoral and operational knowledge is considered to be a critical part of the
Bank’s comparative advantage as a “solutions bank.” As part of the 2018 Capital Package Commitments,
the World Bank committed to developing a Strategic Framework for Knowledge, including knowledge
generation and sharing. The ultimate aim of this commitment was to reposition the strategic direction
of knowledge for development and propose reforms for enhancing the quality, development impact of 64, 124, 183, 184, 189,
knowledge work and enhancing co-ordination throughout the Bank for the development of knowledge. 190, 272, 281, 294
As evidence of this commitment, spending on knowledge activities has increased considerably over the
past decade, from USD 0.5 billion in 2010 to approximately USD 1 billion in 2020. Over the course of the
assessment period, the Bank has made an important investment in its core knowledge work, including
over USD 165 million in resources across 16 different core knowledge products.
The Bank’s commitment to Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA) is reflected in the Corporate Scorecard.
Tier 3 of the scorecard includes three indicators, including:
• Client ratings for achievement of ASA objectives (FY22 91%);
• ASA bringing global expertise (FY22 90%); and
• Volume of Reimbursable Advisory Services (FY22 88 USD billion).
The Strategic Framework for Knowledge, released in 2021, is an important first step in this regard. It
maps the Bank’s various knowledge products at the country, global and regional levels in addition
to uncodified operational knowledge. It also identifies key challenges in using knowledge to provide

134 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

integrated development solutions and enhance development effectiveness. The Framework identified
three key objectives for “realising the Bank’s full knowledge potential:” (i) increasing relevance, quality
and impact; (ii) improving knowledge flows and collaboration across the Bank; and (iii) realising the
World Bank’s potential to learn from its operations. Activities to support these objectives are identified
under three pillars; however, the Framework stops short of identifying an itemised and timebound
action plan nor a results framework for operationalising the Framework.
Feedback from stakeholders on the progress achieved in identifying a strategic framework for the Bank’s
knowledge activities is mixed. While many stakeholders note the importance of new products such as
the CCDR for informing upstream integration of climate change issues into Country Programmes, some
stakeholders feel that the Bank continues to lack a concrete framework and action plan for translating
its knowledge work into global influence and development impact in borrower countries. As with other
partnerships, an important challenge in this regard remains striking the appropriate balance between
corporate and strategic priorities and responding to the needs of borrower countries across a global
scope of operations.
Element 2. Whereas there is a clear link between the World Bank’s knowledge work and its
operations at country level, challenges remain in demonstrating the extent to which ASA is taken
up to inform operations and contributes to the achievement of development outcomes.
The World Bank produces a wide range of knowledge products that are positioned to inform decisionmaking by both staff and borrower countries. These products range from project-specific research to
support an ongoing or future operation to global topical flagship reports that consolidate experience
and data across multiple regions. Furthermore, the Bank produces internal knowledge products
with the intention of building the capacity of Bank staff and providing relevant knowledge to inform 64, 124, 183, 184, 189,
190, 272, 281, 294
operations.
The clearest links between the World Bank’s knowledge work and operations occurs at the country
level. There is a clear link between core diagnostic products and development of Country Partnership
Frameworks. These products are funded through the Bank’s administrative budget to inform
programme and policy dialogue with borrower countries. These products provide Bank-endorsed
recommendations and constitute the formal opinion of the Bank on core development issues. Key
examples including public expenditure reviews, poverty assessments, country environmental analyses
and Country Climate Diagnostic Reports (CCDRs). These products are an important input into Systematic
Country Diagnostics, providing a means for knowledge and evidence to influence Country Partnership
Frameworks upstream. The World Bank currently implemented more than 16 different types of core
diagnostics.
At the operational level, advisory work and analytics are implemented with the objective of shaping
borrower country development policies, strategies or reforms. The products are highly variable, but
typically involve the application of pre-existing knowledge customised as needed to the context. Full
stocktaking of these activities is difficult to achieve; however, over 1600 individual products were
produced in FY19 in more than 150 countries.
An increasingly important sub-set of the Bank’s ASA work at country level are Reimbursable Advisory
Services (RAS), which are designed to meet the needs of middle-income and high-income countries for
which ASA work cannot be fully funded from the Bank’s country programme, including for borrower
countries that have graduated from the Bank. In addition to national governments, RAS may be
provided to sub-national governments, State Owned Enterprises, Non-governmental organisations and
other multilateral institutions. The Bank recovers the full cost of providing RAS.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 135

However, an ongoing challenge remains in identifying clear metrics for demonstrating the strategic
alignment and uptake of knowledge work. Whereas uptake of core diagnostics can be demonstrated
in SCDs and the development of CPFs, there are few metrics for examining the impact of standalone
ASAs produced in the context of individual countries. ASA are not subject to the same requirements
for monitoring and evaluation as other operations. Although a Project Development Objective needs
to be identified, there is no requirement for identifying a results framework or indicators to examine
achievement. Currently, clients are asked to provide feedback on the extent to which the product
achieved its intended development objective. Furthermore, the Strategic Framework for knowledge
notes challenges in ensuring that existing ASA is used to inform future products and that lessons from
previous operations are scrutinised and taken up for new projects.
This challenge was reinforced by regional scorecards and monitoring systems for the Bank’s knowledge
work, which are often output-based. Performance is rated using a composite indicator which does
not necessarily identify how knowledge work has been taken up to contribute to outcomes related to
regional cooperation, policy reform and coherence. There is anecdotal evidence that CCDRs are making
a clear contribution to climate change-related policy reforms, but this evidence is currently not be
captured in a systematic way beyond country case studies.
Element 3. The World Bank produces a range of global and regional knowledge products to
contribute to global advocacy and policy development.
At the global level, the World Development Reports and Policy Research Reports represent the World
Bank’s most well-known contribution to thought leadership for development. This report is produced
annually, providing an in-depth analysis and policy recommendations on specific and timely issues
for economic development. These reports are intended to be used by multilateral and bilateral

development institutions, national governments, scholars, civil society and other development actors 64, 124, 183, 184, 189,
190, 272, 281, 294
to influence decision-making. Global research reports are one of the key means through which the Bank
acts as a convener, seeking to promote coherence and advance to global development agenda around
specific issues.
However, the Strategic Framework for Knowledge underscores the challenges associated with measuring
the contribution of global policy research and flagship reports to development effectiveness. Although
these reports are widely cited by different stakeholders, including governments and academia, there
are ongoing challenges in measuring the impact of these reports beyond quantitative indicators such
as downloads and citations.
At the country-level, there have been important challenges in understanding the contribution of ASA to
High-Level Development Objectives and policy reform. This challenge was underscored in the 2022 IEG
Results and Performance report (RAP), which noted that the majority of CPFs they examined insufficiently
leveraged ASA products in their results frameworks, relying mostly on lending operations. Furthermore,
only 1/3 of CLRs reported on the uptake of ASA with respect to policy influence. The RAP makes a strong
statement: “the historical lack of ASA monitoring raises questions about the Group’s ambitions to be a
knowledge bank and its ability to strategically use ASA to improve country-level impact.”
Element 4. The timeliness of World Bank knowledge products is driven by responsiveness to
client needs.
At the Global level, the selection of themes for work development reports is intended to reflect upon
timely and critical development issues. At the country level, the timeliness of the World Bank’s ASA is
driven by responsiveness to client needs. This is particularly true of RAS products, which are financed
by clients to meet particular knowledge requirements. Over 80% of respondents to MOPAN’s partner
survey agreed that World Bank knowledge products are timely.

136 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Q6[03], THE WORLD BANK’S KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTS ARE TIMELY
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Element 5. World Bank knowledge products undergo a quality process that varies in the level of
rigour; however, available evidence indicates that ASA is generally perceived to be relevant and
of high quality.
The World Bank Guidelines for ASA at the country level, including RAS, identify a quality review process
at concept stage and completion through the identification of at least two internal peer reviewers and 64, 124, 183, 184, 189,
one external reviewer. These peer reviewers advise provide advice on the technical quality and strategic 190, 272, 281, 294
relevance of the document. The Country Director plays a deciding role.
Global flagship products, including the World Development Report, Policy Research Reports and Global
Financial Development Reports undergo a more thorough quality review, including input from multiple
areas of the Bank. This vetting process is co-ordinated by the Development Research Unit of the
Development Economics Vice Presidency, which also provides support to Global practices and Regions
in the development and quality assurance of regional knowledge products.
The vast majority of respondents to the MOPAN Partners agreed (80% at least somewhat to strongly)
that the Bank produces high quality inputs to global policy dialogue, suggesting that most stakeholders
perceive the Bank’s knowledge products to be of high quality. Stakeholders within the Bank, however,
provided more mixed feedback, noting challenges around the rigour of quality review for ASA versus
other Bank activities.
There are limited institutional metrics or data to establish the quality of the Bank’s knowledge work. As
part of the client feedback survey, the World Bank asks the borrow country to rate the extent to which
the World Bank brought global expertise to support the ASA activity (FY22 90% agree or strongly agree).
The IEG 2022 RAP examines alignment of ASA to CPF Development Objectives, noting that alignment
was demonstrated for 80% of the ASA products reviewed.
A range of initiatives have recently been implemented to enhance the quality of the Bank’s knowledge
outputs. GPs have increased support to task teams, particularly for core ASAs through the establishment
of resource centres, including peer review databases enabling TTLs to easily identify peer reviewers
with specialised technical skills. Guidance on the quality of summaries and abstracts and positioning
of ASA products to produce policy uptake have also recently been identified. However, the extent of
implementation is unclear.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 137

Element 6. The World Bank’s knowledge work includes dissemination strategies and many official
reports are available publicly through different platforms. However, not all ASA is produced for
external dissemination.
For each ASA product produced at the country level, a dissemination strategy is required for approval at
the concept note stage. Deliverables are not considered to be “complete” until the deliverable has been
accepted by the client and the dissemination strategy is fully implemented.
Not all ASA products are produced for external dissemination, including some important pieces such
as Risk and Resilience Assessments. RAS products pose a particular challenge as legal terms do not
currently permit public disclosure.
Products for external dissemination are communicated via several platforms, including blogs, tweets
and videos. The World Bank’s “Documents & Reports” site is an official disclosure mechanism and
repository for the World Bank’s official documents and reports to help share the institution’s knowledge
base. Over 80% of respondents to MOPAN’s Partner Survey agreed (at least somewhat) that World Bank
knowledge products are provided in a format that make them easy to use.

Q6[02], THE WORLD BANK’S KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTS ARE PROVIDED IN A FORMAT
THAT MAKES THEM EASY TO USE

64, 124, 183, 184, 189,
190, 272, 281, 294

Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

MI 6.9: Evidence confidence

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Medium confidence

138 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Systems geared to managing and accounting for development and humanitarian results and the use of performance
information, including evaluation and lesson-learning
KPI 7: Strong and transparent results focus, explicitly geared towards function

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.29

The World Bank has a clear policy commitment to Results Based Management (RBM) at the operational and strategic levels,
with RBM integrated throughout the operations lifecycle through mandatory supervision and self-evaluation of operations.
Quality of the design and implementation of the monitoring remains challenging but is improving notably with staff training.
CPFs serves as the main instrument for identifying and delivering development results, with results frameworks negotiated
at the country level cascading down to individual operations. However, as results indicators must be selected in partnership
with borrower countries, there can be conflict with the implementation of corporate strategies. Data quality is monitored
throughout the country engagement and operations cycle with demonstrated improvement over the assessment period.
Performance information plays a role in planning at the corporate, country and shareholders levels and informs adjustments to
ongoing operations through processes for supervision and restructuring. Performance is communicated through the Corporate
Scorecard, which brings together key indicators, and analysed in the WB Annual Reports. IEG provides further analysis on Bank
performance in its WBG Results and Performance Reports.
MI 7.1: Leadership ensures application of an organisation-wide RBM approach

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.67

Element 1: Corporate commitment to a result culture is made clear in strategic planning documents

4

Element 2: Clear requirements/incentives in place for the use of an RBM approach in planning and
programming
Element 3: Guidance for setting results targets and developing indicators is clear and accessible to all
staff

4
3

Element 4: Tools and methods for measuring and managing results are available

4

Element 5: Adequate resources are allocated to the RBM system

3

Element 6: All relevant staff are trained in RBM approaches and method

4

MI 7.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank has a clear policy commitment to Results Based Management (RBM)
at the operational and strategic level.
OP 13.60 on Monitoring and Evaluation identifies the Bank’s commitment to Results Based Management
at the operational level. The Bank’s policy is to monitor the performance of operations throughout their
life cycle. Project designs are expected to incorporate a framework for M&E, including: the expected
results of Bank support; indicators for outputs and outcomes; baseline data; and milestones and

14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 239,
timelines for progress. During project preparation, the Bank designs a system for monitoring progress 246, 260, 262, 285
through collecting, analysing and reporting data in partnership with borrower governments. Similar
requirements are in place for Country Partnership Frameworks (CPF), which are similarly required to
include a results framework. All operations are required to undergo a self-evaluation at closure through
an Implementation Completion Report (ICR, for operations) or Completion and Learning Review (CLR,
for CPFs). These requirements are mainstreamed into Directives for Country Engagement, Investment
Project Financing, Development Policy Financing and PforR programmes.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 139

At a strategic level, the World Bank monitors progress against its strategic commitments through the IDA
Results Measurement System (RMS) to track progress in implementing replenishment commitments.
The World Bank Group corporate scorecard is used to track the implementation of IBRD capital increase
commitments. The overall purpose of the IDA RMS is to measure and steer the progress of IDA operations
in achieving High-Level Outcomes. The IDA20 RMS is grouped into three tiers that are linked vertically to
provide an intervention logic for IDA operations. Tier 1, drawn from the World Development Indicators,
reflects the long-term development outcomes achieved by IDA countries. Tier 2 addresses IDAsupported development results in borrower countries that reflect cross-cutting development results
across operations and sectors (e.g.). Tier 3 measures IDA’s operational and organisational effectiveness
with respect to:
• financing outcomes (e.g. budget to portfolio ratio, private mobilisation);
• monitoring outcomes (e.g. proportion of projects with satisfactory outcomes, gender tagged projects,
projects with substantial climate co-benefits); and
• “implementing for outcomes” (e.g. disbursement ratio, client and partner feedback, share of projects
with beneficiary feedback at design).
The RMS brings together information from multiple evidence sources, including project and programme
results frameworks, self and independent evaluation, feedback from clients and thematic and regional
reports.
Finally, the World Bank Group (including IFC and MIGA) has a corporate scorecard, complemented by
an individual scorecard for each institution. The scorecard provides an overarching view of results and
performance for the Executive Board, Management and the general public across the institution through
three tiers. The first tier reflects the overall development context and progress toward the twin goals over

time in strategic areas such as “sustainable and inclusive growth” and “resilience and sustainability” (29 14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 239,
indicators). The second tier reflects the results delivered through WBG operations (20 indicators for the 246, 260, 262, 285
World Bank), reflecting the World Bank Group’s contribution to the changing development context. The
final tier reflects the World Bank’s operational and organisational effectiveness, including the share
of operations achieving satisfactory development outcomes, share of climate-related financing and
private direct mobilisation (33 indicators for the World Bank).
100 percent of operational partners and over 80 percent of donors, borrower countries, board members,
and peer organisations surveyed agreed that the World Bank prioritises a results-based approach – for
example when engaging in policy dialogue or planning and implementing interventions.

Q7[01], THE WORLD BANK PRIORITISES A RESULTS-BASED APPROACH – FOR
EXAMPLE WHEN ENGAGING IN POLICY DIALOGUEOR PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTING
INTERVENTIONS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

140 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 2. The World Bank applies a clear system for operationalising results-based management
in its monitoring, including periodic monitoring of the quality of M&E arrangements.
Country Partnership Frameworks
Country Partnership Frameworks (CPFs) are required to illustrate the results chain between the
World Bank’s activities in a country supporting CPF development objectives that contribute to the
achievement of High-Level Objectives (HLOs), reflecting longer-term, sustainable development results.
Development objectives are derived from the evidence-based Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD).
Each CPF contains a results matrix, including a summary of the results chain, indicators associated with
each CPF objective and data sources. The CPF also describes any specific arrangements for monitoring
and evaluation (M&E), including third party monitoring or social audits, and describes the borrower’s
M&E capacity and statistical systems and the monitoring plan (how the country team and borrower will
review progress during implementation).
Every two years, CPFs are subject to a Performance and Learning Review (PLR), which involves
engagement with a range of country stakeholders to review performance and identify possible course
corrections. The PLR may involve a portfolio review with the client and consideration of results, but
primarily focuses on implementation progress and challenges and alignment to the country context.
Following completion, each CPF undergoes a mandatory self-assessment called a Completion and
Learning Review (CLR), which assigns a rating for the achievement of development outcomes on a
6-point scale based on a detailed consideration of verifiable evidence aligned to the results framework
as well as additional sources. Additionally, the CPF rates the Bank’s performance in implementation,
including how the Bank adapted to changing circumstances and risks.
Investment Operations and Performance for Results
Each operation is required to develop a theory of change explaining the causal pathways of an operation’s
expected results and specify Project Development Objectives indicating the specific and measurable
benefits that primary beneficiaries will realise from the operation. During operational design, a
results framework is elaborated to monitor the achievement of results and inform management of the
operation. The results framework includes:
• A logical framework that identifies project outcomes, outputs, targets and indicators illustrating the
vertical logic of the operation.
• An assessment of the borrower’s existing M&E system, including institutional arrangements and
costs;
• An M&E plan, which specifies how each indicator will be measured, including data sources,
methodology, baseline values, targets, frequency / timeline for data collection and roles and
responsibilities.
Guidelines on the implementation of M&E emphasise the collaborative nature of M&E plans, including
use of country systems and data as possible. Indicators and targets are meant to be identified in
collaboration with borrower governments. Where gaps are identified in the M&E capacity of borrowers,
task teams are encouraged to identify support to build M&E capacity as part of the project, including
through the provision of technical assistance.
Results frameworks for operations are scrutinised during project design, with input from different
stakeholders, including Practice Leaders and Country Management Unit. During implementation, ISRs
completed every 6 months and MTRs completed at least 2 years following loan effectiveness take stock
of the quality of implementation for the M&E system, including the extent to which data have been
collected and analysed as anticipated. These reports take stock of issues in implementing the M&E plan

14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 239,
246, 260, 262, 285

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 141

and flag issues for follow-up. Upon the completion, a mandatory Investment Completion Report (ICR)
rates the overall quality of the M&E system and identifies lessons learn around three criteria:
• Quality of design (e.g. clear theory of change, appropriateness of indicators);
• Implementation (e.g. data were collected and analysed in a sound manner); and
• Utilisation (e.g. whether M&E was used to inform decision-making by Bank staff and borrower
countries).
Advisory Services and Analytical Products
The exception is Advisory Services and Analytical work (ASA), including Reimbursable Advisory Services
(RAS) for which expected results and outcomes are identified in Concept Notes, but neither a detailed
results framework nor indicators are mandatory save for specific cases. ASA is monitored through an
annual Progress Review which considers whether the product is on-track with regard to deliverables,
timeline and budget and identifies next steps (whether the deliverable is accepted, needs changes or
is dropped). Upon completion, an Activity Completion Summary (ACS) is completed, including a selfassessment of development effectiveness, results, lessons learned and compliance with timeline and
budget. A client satisfaction survey and is completed as well as a survey for Task Leaders, managers and
directors associated with the product.
Element 3. The implementation of results-based management throughout operations is
supported by a set of corporate guidance documents.
Staff have access to a range of corporate guidance documents on implementation of results-based
management for the use of Corporate Results Indicators (CRIs) as well as the implementation of M&E
for investment projects, development policy financing and performance-for-results programmes. 14, 19, 26, 41, 58, 239,
Additionally, guidance is available for implementing M&E across a range of cross-cutting issues, 246, 260, 262, 285
including fragility, gender and climate. These documents identify suggested indicators for different
themes across operations and provide guidance on addressing common challenges for data collection
in different contexts. The Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) also plays an important role in providing
guidance and learning about implementing M&E in difficult contexts, including during COVID-19.
Outside of input Task Team and other operational colleagues, staff have access to a help desk
management by the Operations and Country Services (OPCS) Team through which staff can submit
queries regarding operations and processing issues, including monitoring and evaluation. OPSC also
provides feedback on results frameworks during the design of operations.
Element 4. Results-based management is integrated throughout the operations lifecycle through
mandatory supervision and self-evaluation of operations.
Building upon the M&E framework established during project design, the Bank’s mandatory supervision
of projects (typically every 6 months) and mandatory self-evaluation of operations are the main tools
through which RBM is implemented. Operations supervision is supported by the Implementation
Progress Report (IPR) template, through which Task Teams work with borrowers to take stock of
progress achieved toward delivering Project Development Objectives, using the indicators set out in the
operations results framework. The IPR also provides a means of examining progress in implementing
the M&E plan through a set of standard criteria and ratings. Similarly, the Implementation Completion
Result (ICR) template requires teams to reflect on the overall M&E quality, providing a structured rating
on a four-point scale that considers the quality of design, implementation and utilisation (described
above). Each template encourages Task Teams to identify lessons and issues pertaining to the
operationalisation of RBM at the project-level.

142 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Another tool available to Country Teams to reflect upon and address M&E challenges is the Country
Portfolio Performance Review, which provides an opportunity for country teams to engage borrowing
countries in dialogue around portfolio implementation issues, including the quality of M&E.
Element 5. Resources for supervision are identified from the Bank’s Administrative Budget as
part of Country-level Annual Work Programmes.
Planning for supervision begins after project preparation, and in the year the project goes to the Board
for approval. A Project Implementation Plan includes an overall plan for supervision agreed between
the World Bank and borrower country. The Annual Programme of Work specifies resources allocated for
supervision, including key milestones and outputs given the nature, complexity and size of operations
as well as potential risks. The Country Director is responsible for ensuring each Task Team Leader has
adequate resources to supervise projects, including an appropriate skills mix among the supervision
team.
Resources for supervision are allocated by CMUs from the administrative budget on an annual basis.
These funds can sometimes be supplemented by available trust funds. Funds for supervision are
fungible such that resources allocated to one project can be reallocated to another by the practice
manager and Regional Director. Stakeholders report that, although resources are aligned to the
complexity of a project, there incentives are sometimes mixed in practice as high supervision budgets
can undergo additional scrutiny.
Element 6. Operations staff are required to undergo basic RBM training as part of a core curriculum.
A range of additional optional training opportunities are provided through different platforms.
Training on results-based management is provided through mandatory core operations training for Task
Team Leaders. Additionally, the World Bank’s Open Learning Campus provides hundreds of additional
non-mandatory training on a range of RBM issues (e.g. Data Quality Monitoring, M&E for Climate Risk
Management), including monitoring and evaluation for different country contexts and cross-cutting
themes. As part of their mandate to promote learning, the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) also
provides a range of workshops and learning events pertaining to evaluation.
MI 7.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 7.2: Corporate strategies, including country strategies, based on a sound RBM focus and logic

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

2.80

Element 1: Organisation-wide plans and strategies include results frameworks

2

Element 2: Clear linkages exist between the different layers of the results framework, from project to
country and corporate level

3

Element 3: An annual report on performance is discussed with the governing bodies

4

Element 4: Corporate strategies are updated regularly

2

Element 5: The annual corporate reports show progress over time and notes areas of strong performance
as well as deviations between planned and actual results

3

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 143

MI 7.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. Corporate-wide strategies identify process-driven targets that promote the uptake of
evidence and good practice in country-level operations.
The World Bank’s main instrument for identifying and delivering development results is through
Country Partnership Frameworks (CPFs). CPFs are required to identify a results framework, including
High-Level Outcomes and progress indicator aligned to country needs (explained above). These results
frameworks cascade down to individual operations within the country. This approach in in keeping with
the World Bank’s country-driven business model.
Although all strategies are required to have a Mid-Term Review, not all active strategies have a results
framework (e.g. the Strategic Framework for Knowledge). Corporate Strategies for cross-cutting
solutions areas, including the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP), Gender Strategy and Fragility,
Conflict and Violence Strategy often include a results framework, but identify results targets that speak
process-related issues such as:
• the provision and uptake of tools to guide operations at country-level; and
• targets for how different sector issues and cross-cutting themes are addressed through operations.
In the case of cross-cutting themes, these indicators are sometimes reflected in the Corporate Scorecard:
Strategy

Indicative targets

2016-2023 Gender

• Uptake of guidelines for reporting gender equality outcomes in all ISRs,

Strategy

MTRs and ICRs.
• All projects collect sex-disaggregated data on person-level beneficiaries.

2021-2025 Climate
Change Action Plan
2020-2025 World Bank
Group Strategy for
Fragility, Conflict and
Violence

• Increase climate finance to 35% of all lending on average between
2021‑25, including at least 50% for mitigation.
• All CPFs, CENs and PLRs to report on how the WBG in collaboration with
partners addresses FCV drivers and sources of resilience
• Development and implementation of at least three regional initiatives to
be informed by Risk and Resilience Assessments.

Stakeholders note that the positioning of sector and cross-cutting strategies within the World Bank is
not as well defined. Strategies are created on a demand-driven basis at the request of the Executive
Board, but the authorising environment in terms of accountability and follow-up is not always clear.
Furthermore, it can be difficult to prescribe sector-level actions at a global level given the Bank’s
country-driven business model.
Element 2. The Corporate Scorecard brings together key indicators from the IDA20 RMS and the
2018 IBRD Capital Package. These indicators are cascaded to operations through mandatory
Corporate Results Indicators at the operational level.
The corporate scorecard incorporates several key indicators from the IDA20 RMS (across Tiers 1 and 2)
as well as commitments from corporate strategies and the IBRD 2018 Capital Package (Tier 3).
Key indicators for the Corporate Scorecard are cascaded to operations through the Corporate Results
Indicators (CRIs), which are regularly reviewed to align to changes in the scorecard. The CRIs are a set
of standard indicators at the output and outcome level across different sectors and themes which help
cascade the Bank’s priorities and results-based management from the strategic level to the operational
level. Use of CRIs is required for all operations greater than USD 5 million, with these indicators being
aggregated for reporting against Tier 2 of the Corporate Scorecard. Global Practice staff are responsible
for ensuring the appropriate use of CRIs throughout operations results frameworks during design and

4, 24, 187, 198, 200,
203, 210, 221, 239,
246, 268

144 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

preparation. Stakeholders note, however, that applying the CRIs can be difficult in practice given the
need to agree with borrowing countries on the use of specific indicators in the results framework.
Element 3. The World Bank produces a series of annual results reports to report against corporate
monitoring frameworks and reflect on overall performance of operations.
The Bank produces a series of Annual Performance Reports to reflect on performance against its
corporate results frameworks. An annual results report is presented to the Executive Board that presents
overall performance against the Corporate Scorecard, explaining discrepancies against target and
identifying proposed changes. For example, the 2022 report proposes substantive changes in how the
Bank measures climate change impacts. Similar annual reports are produced to reflect on performance
against the IDA RMS and delivery of the 2018 Capital Package Commitments.
IEG produces and Annual Results and Performance Report (RAP) for lending, advisory services and
analytics, IFC/MIGA investments and WBG country partnership frameworks. This report considers
IEG validations of Implementation Completion Reports (ICRs) and Project Performance Assessment
Reports and well as validated Completion and Learning Reviews (CLRs) and Country Programme
Evaluations for a sample of countries. The report identifies the proportion of operations and WBG CPFs
rated moderately satisfactory or better for the achievement of development outcomes, disaggregated
by different contexts (LIC and FCS). This indicator is fed into the World Bank’s Corporate Scorecard
to provide an overall indication of the effectiveness of the Bank’s operations. Other issues examined
include the proportion of operations with moderately satisfactory ratings for quality at entry and
quality of monitoring and evaluation.
Follow-up: Process of reporting on results to the Board is in the process of shifting – more 4, 24, 187, 198, 200,
information needed.
203, 210, 221, 239,
246, 268
Element 4. Corporate results frameworks and Country Partnership Frameworks identify timebound results indicators. Corporate strategies are more inconsistent in this regard.
Annual corporate reporting for the Corporate Scorecard and IDA RMS builds upon baseline data for
most indicators throughout their three tiers. Annual targets are identified for corporate scorecard each
year in discussion with the Board taking into consideration corporate commitments, including the IBRD
Capital Package Commitments and the forward-looking portfolio. Over the course of the assessment
period annual reporting against the IDA RMS is similarly supported by baseline data and timebound
targets for the replenishment period. Additionally, the corporate scorecard has been updated for the
period of 2020-2022 to reflect the World Bank’s contribution to fighting COVID-19.
The picture is less clear for sector and thematic strategies. All strategies are meant to be subject to
a mid-term review. Cross-cutting strategies such as the Gender Strategy, Climate Change Action Plan
and Fragility Strategy each have defined sunset periods and have historically been updated on a timely
basis. Other strategies such as the Strategic Framework for Knowledge and Green, Resilient and Inclusive
Development do not specify a clear timeframe nor indicators to assess implementation. Other times,
it is not clear that existing strategies remain operational in light of changing priorities; for example,
the future renewal of the World Bank’s 2012-2022 Environment Strategy “Toward a Green, Clean and
Resilient World for All” in light of the 2021-2025 Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) and Green, Inclusive
and Resilient Development (which does not mention the Environment Strategy).
As noted above, stakeholders note that part of this ambiguity arises from the country-driven nature
of the World Bank’s activities, which has been further reinforced in recent years. The mandate and
accountabilities for strategies are sometimes less clear as a result.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 145

Element 5. Corporate results frameworks report transparently on trends and lessons learned
over time while responding to evolving priorities.
As noted above, annual reporting on the Corporate Scorecard and IDA RMS takes stock of trends over
time, building upon baseline data and timebound targets. Additionally, data are disaggregated to reflect
corporate policy commitments, identifying results and targets that are gender-disaggregated where
appropriate or reflect operations in IDA countries and FCV contexts. Results reports have increasingly
taken stock of discrepancies in performance against targets and discuss contributing factors. Annual 4, 24, 187, 198, 200,
IEG Results and Performance Reports similarly report on trends in outcome achievement over a period 203, 210, 221, 239,
of time and take stock of lessons learned across reviewed operations and CPFs.
246, 268
These annual touchpoints are also used as opportunities to take stock of and improve scorecard
indicators. For example, the 2022 Results Report proposed a revised set of climate-related indicators to
reflect the outcome of COP27, building upon the climate co-benefits approach to reflect direct benefits.
Additionally, individual regions prepare briefs that feed into reporting at the Annual and Spring
Meetings. However, regional strategies are not formally monitored and reported against in the same
way as CPFs and operations, which remain the driving unit of performance for the Bank.
MI 7.2: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 7.3: Results targets set on a foundation of sound evidence base and logic

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: Targets and indicators are adequate to capture causal pathways between interventions and
the outcomes that contribute to higher order objectives
Element 2: Indicators are relevant to expected results to enable the measurement of the degree of goal
achievement

3
3

Element 3: Development of baselines are mandatory for new Interventions

3

Element 4: Results targets are regularly reviewed and adjusted when needed

3

Element 5: Results targets are set through a process that includes consultation with beneficiaries

3

MI 7.3: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. The World Bank identifies causal pathways, including targets and indicators.
Country Partnership Documents are required to include a theory of change intervention logic that
describes the result pathways for achieving the program objectives, contributing to High-Level
Objectives linked to borrower countries’ national development plans and the SDGs. CPFs include results
frameworks with indicators, baseline data, and targets that are monitored. Intervention designs, which
are intended to achieve CPF priorities include expected outputs, intermediate results, and outcomes
and includes a Results Framework with specific indicators, baseline values, and targets.

48, 49 64, 144, 171
Each operation appraisal for Investment Project Financing and Performance for Results operations 210, 224, 268, 294
is expected to explain the causal pathways of the operation’s expected results, including a theory of
change. Corporate Results Indicators, which are linked to Tier 2 of the Corporate Scorecard and IDA
RMS, are required to be used in intervention design when relevant.
Development Policy Finance operations set out a policy and results matrix which sets out the details of
the country programme that is being supported and the expected results. The matrix includes policy
and institutional actions that borrower countries commit to undertake that are critical to achieve the

146 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

expected results, justified by analysis undertaken by both the Bank and the borrower. Measurable
indicators are identified for monitoring the implementation of policy actions and assessing results
with progress monitored during regular supervision, including compliance with legal covenants and
fulfilment of policy conditions.
Advisory Services and Analytical (ASA) operations, including Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS), are
not required to develop a full theory of change nor specify indicators and targets for expected outcomes.
Element 2. Although guidance is available to staff and indicators are reviewed during the design
of operations and CPFs, the quality of results indicators remains an important challenge.
Guidance provided on the development of Theories of Change, Results Frameworks and Monitoring and
Evaluation Frameworks for Development Policy Financing and Investment Project Financing provide
guidance on the selection of indicators. Similar guidance is provided for the development of results
frameworks for Country Partnership Frameworks. Guidance specifies that indicators should be SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Adequate, Reliable and Targeted). Feedback on results frameworks is provided
by Task Team members, reviewers and OPCS and is discussed during decision meetings.
The quality of monitoring and evaluation is reflected in ICRs and CLRs following the closure of operations
and CPFs. Ratings are subsequently validated by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). IEG Results
and Performance Reports have noted that, whereas the quality of monitoring and evaluation for
projects has been steadily increasing, with 64% of IPFs and PforR projects receiving a rating of “high” or
“substantial.” However, IEG’s RAP 2021 found that “the World Bank and IEG could pay more attention
to how well indicators measure project objectives,” including their appropriateness. The quality of
monitoring and evaluation for CPFs was identified as an important challenge in the 2022 IEG RAP,
particularly with respect to the quality of indicators. The review noted several challenges pertaining 48, 49 64, 144, 171
to the ambition, quality, relevance and measurability of indicators as well as indicators which are not 210, 224, 268, 294
reflected in borrower country M&E systems.
Element 3. Although baseline data is required for quantitative indicators, the presence of
baselines is more variable in practice.
OP13.60 and Guidelines for the Country Partnership Frameworks and Monitoring and Evaluation in the
context of Investment Project Financing, Development Policy Financing and Performance for Results
Operations each specify that quantitative indicators should have baseline measurements.
In practice, however, IEG Results and Performance Reports have noted the absence of baseline data as
an important constraint, particularly for CPFs. The Guidance for CPFs note that some indicators may
not identify a baseline measure at preparation, especially where it is linked to a pipeline of projects
that are still under development. Stakeholders note that the actual practice can vary depending on the
type of operation. Investment Projects are sometimes approved on the basis that baseline data will be
collected at a later time, whereas DPOs and PforR projects often require baselines and targets to be
identified in advance to demonstrate clear triggers for the disbursement of tranches. ASA work does not
require either indicators or baselines in most cases.
Element 4. Tools and processes are in place to support the ongoing review and adjustment of
results frameworks for CPFs and operations with the exception of ASA activities.
CPFs undergo a performance learning review (PLR) every two years as well as a mandatory mid-term
review (the date of the review is set at approval). These reviews take stock of the change in context for
the borrower country, review programme and portfolio progress and identify mid-course adjustments,
including updating the results framework as required. Corporate strategies are required to undertake
a mid-term review, often in the form of an independent evaluation. However, the 2022 IEG Results and

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 147

Performance Report notes that such adjustments can also create risks for the overall performance of
the CPF where they are not sufficient to reflect changes in the portfolio or country context. The report
notes a number of projects were re-purposed in the context of COVID-19, but it is too early to assess the
impact on outcome achievement and the quality of results frameworks.
Results tracking is optional for ASA operations save for programmatic engagements and where such
reviews are required by specific trust funds.
Element 5. Results indicators are required to the developed in partnership with borrower
countries, with evidence suggesting that this occurs in most cases.
The World Bank’s Guidelines on Country Partnership Frameworks and for Monitoring and Evaluation
in Investment Projects and Development Policy Operations indicate results indicators for CPFs and
operations should be selected in consultation with the borrower country stakeholders. This approach
is partly justified by practical considerations; implementation and monitoring are primarily undertaken
by the borrower. Stakeholders report that this requirement has at times limited the implementation of
Corporate Results Indicators as the World Bank cannot mandate the inclusion of these indicators where
they don’t align with country M&E systems.

48, 49 64, 144, 171
Approximately 85 percent of operational partners, 95 percent of borrower countries, and nearly 210, 224, 268, 294
70 percent of donors and peer organisations surveyed agreed that the World Bank consults with
stakeholders on the setting of results targets at country level. IEG Results and Performance Reports,
however, indicate that some indicators continue to be misaligned with country M&E systems limiting
the quality of M&E frameworks, particularly for CPFs.

Q7[02], THE WORLD BANK CONSULTS WITH STAKEHOLDERS ON THE SETTING OF
RESULTS TARGETS AT COUNTRY LEVEL
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

MI 7.3: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 7.4: Monitoring systems generate high-quality, useful performance data in response to
strategic priorities

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.25

Element 1: The corporate monitoring system is adequately resourced

3

Element 2: Monitoring systems generate data at output and outcome levels of the results chain

3

Element 3: Reporting processes ensure data is available for key corporate reporting and planning,
including for internal change processes
Element 4: A system for ensuring data quality exists

4
3

148 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 7.4. Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. There are a variety of structures and resources throughout the Bank who provide
support and oversight for RBM, including a dedicated unit for managing the IDA RMS and
Corporate Scorecard.
The Operations, Strategy, Risk, Results and Learning Unit (OPSRL) are responsible for overall
management of corporate results reporting. In particular, they play a key role in consolidating data
from across the Bank, transforming it and assessing its quality.
Inputs to the Scorecard and IDA RMS are linked to the management of RBM throughout the Bank.
Resources for RBM exist throughout the World Bank at various levels across corporate functions (e.g.
Operations and Country Services Vice Presidency), regional VPUs, Country Teams and Project Teams
as well as with IEG. One of the advantages of this decentralised approach is the multiple sources of
advice and support available to staff and management as well as structures for review. However, some
stakeholders also noted a constraint stemming from the decentralised nature of how RBM is managed
such that there is no consistent approach for reviewing the adequacy of results frameworks during the
design and implementation of operations.
Element 2. The Corporate Scorecard generates data about outputs and outcomes with a view
toward illustrating the World Bank’s contribution to addressing global development challenges.
Tier 2 of the corporate scorecards and IDA RMS identify indicators at the output and outcome level.
The majority of indicators speak to beneficiaries reached or gaining access to services (output-level)
whereas others speak to behaviour changes at the outcome level such as “farmers adopting improved
agricultural technology” and “countries instituting disaster risk reduction as a national priority.” Tier 49, 55, 64, 187,198,
1 indicators are linked to longer-term outcomes reflecting the broader development context across 201, 202, 210
countries. A similar approach is taken for the IDA RMS, for which several indicators are also reflected in
the Corporate Scorecard. The logic behind this approach is to reflect global progress on key development
challenges while providing a realistic reflection of the WBG’s contribution.
As noted above, the Corporate Scorecard is reviewed annually with incremental changes implemented
to respond to changing contexts (e.g. in the case of climate). The IDA RMS is reviewed annually and
redesigned every three years in line with the replenishment cycle and evolving policy commitments.
Element 3. The World Bank implements a series of standard results indicators across operations
to help ensure consistent data are available for corporate reporting.
As noted above, the Bank’s Corporate Results Indicators (CRIs) are intended to help cascade corporate
priorities and results to the operational level, helping to ensure that data are available to report against
indicators in the Corporate Scorecard and IDA RMS. Although there are sometimes challenges in applying
these indicators in all cases based on the need to negotiate results frameworks with borrowers, they
provide a means of ensuring a line of sight between corporate outputs and outcomes and operational
results.
Other important standardised indicators that help contribute to corporate reporting include IEG’s
validation of outcome achievement among CPFs and operations through ICRRs, CLRRs and the RAP
as well as the “gender tag” and “climate co-benefit” review processes (discussed in KPI 2) which help
monitor the extent to which the World Bank’s portfolio reflects key policy commitments.
However, these indicators reflect inputs and alignment only.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 149

Element 4. Data quality is a known challenge among World Bank operations data. The Bank
takes stock of data quality throughout the Country Engagement and Operations cycle with
demonstrated improvement over the assessment period. These reviews are complemented by
upstream and corporate activities.
Data quality is recognised as “foundational to the World Bank’s comparative advantage,” in terms of
its operational work and its delivery of knowledge. Data quality is considered at multiple points in
the operational cycle. Guidelines on Systematic Country Diagnostics (SCD) advise that SCD concept
notes should take stock of the available data and its quality. Furthermore, SCDs are meant to take stock
of data quality as a potential constraint. For operations and CPFs, ICRs and CLRs take stock of M&E
Implementation, which is meant to reflect upon data quality. These challenges are also reflected in IEG
validations and RAPs, which indicate a steady improvement in M&E quality for operations and CPFs
over the course of the assessment period. Just 44% of operations were rated Moderately Satisfactory

or better for M&E quality in 2017 versus 56% in 2020. Stakeholders note, however, that data quality 49, 55, 64, 187,198,
201, 202, 210
remains an important challenge, particularly with respect to consolidating data for corporate reporting.
The World Bank addresses data quality from an upstream perspective through its in-depth engagement
in statistical reforms and statistical capacity-building efforts. A 2018 IEG evaluation underscored the
importance of these activities in stimulating the institutional, legal and human capital development
necessary to produce quality, timely and reliable data. These efforts go on to influence the corporate
data environment at the World Bank due to the importance of country M&E systems in generating data
on operations’ contribution to outcomes.
Beyond these efforts, the World Bank has had a data governance body in place since 2014, which
developed a refreshed World Bank data roadmap in 2022. Beyond initiatives to develop the capacities of
developing countries to collect and deliver high quality data on development challenges, the roadmap
seeks to promote an enabling environment for data within the Bank by strengthening data governance
and the data literacy of staff, thereby bolstering data quality for organisational impact.
MI 7.4: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 7.5: Performance data transparently applied in planning and decision-making

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: Planning documents are clearly based on performance data

3

Element 2: Proposed adjustments to interventions are clearly informed by performance data

4

Element 3: At corporate level, management regularly reviews corporate performance data and makes
adjustments as appropriate

4

Element 4: Performance data support dialogue in partnerships at global, regional and country levels

4

MI 7.5: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. Performance information plays a role in informing planning at both the corporate
level and country level.
On a corporate level, portfolio performance information is integrated into the W-process upstream and
provides an indication of country demand and priorities, pipeline and forward-looking operations and 24, 117, 125, 171, 187,
the instrument mix. Stakeholders note that this data helps inform the indicative lending outlook and 210, 268
initial discussions around corporate priorities and planning. Annual budget documents also integrate
corporate performance information, taking stock of the World Bank’s progress in delivering on IDA
replenishment and IBRD Capital Package policy commitments.

150 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

At the country level, SCDs, PLRs and CLRs play and important role in shaping dialogue with borrower
countries in developing new CPFs to outline a selective and flexible programme of indicative operations.
For each High-Level Objective in CPFs, results matrices identify a list of ongoing, pipeline and indicative
operations supporting the objective.
Element 2. Performance data informs adjustments to ongoing operations through processes for
supervision and restructuring.
As noted above, project supervision resulting in an Implementation Support and Results Report (ISR)
and mid-term reviews (MTRs) for operations provide an opportunity to take stock of the relevance and
performance of ongoing operations and monitor ongoing implementation risks. These touchpoints
are used to make decisions about potential cancellation or restructuring of projects to help ensure
continued relevance and promote the achievement of development results. Similarly, PLRs and MTRs
implemented in the context of CPFs provide an opportunity to identify course corrections in agreement
with borrowing countries.
Element 3. Corporate results information is regularly reviewed, with lessons learned informing
evolution of the Bank’s strategic and operational priorities.
As noted above, annual reports are produced for both the World Bank Corporate Scorecard and are
discussed with the Executive Board. These discussions provide an opportunity to reflect on challenges and
lessons learned and identify incremental changes to the Scorecard indicators (e.g. in the area of climate).
IEG complex and high-level evaluations as well as Annual Results and Performance Results identify key
lessons learned from operations to inform corporate reporting and ongoing discussions around the
Bank’s strategic and operational priorities. IEG’s consultative work programme planning process helps
align planned evaluations to management needs while ongoing engagement around the implementation
of Management Actions helps promote an outcome-driven approach to ensuring uptake of lessons and
recommendations throughout the Bank’s activities (see further discussion under KPI 8).
Element 4. Several tools are applied to take stock of performance to support dialogue in
partnerships with borrower countries.
At the country level, SCDs and lessons learned identified in CLRs and Country Partnership Evaluations
are a key starting point for dialogue with borrower countries around the development of new CPFs.
During implementation of CPFs, the Country Portfolio Performance Review (CPPR) is another key means
through performance data helps inform country partnerships during the implementation of Country
Partnership Frameworks. Furthermore, the CPPR gives an opportunity for the borrower to identify and
raise issues it has working for the Bank. These discussions take stock of project and systemic issues and
identify a timebound remedial action plan. OP 13.16 identify the objective of CPPRs as:
• learning from implementation experience to enhance the implementation of the existing portfolio
and enhance the quality of future operations;
• reinforcing borrower ownership of Bank-financed projects;
• identify potential changes to the Bank’s Country Partnership Framework; and
• ensure the continued relevance of the portfolio.
For countries with portfolios with more than 20 projects ongoing and more than USD 1 billion in
outstanding loans, CPPRs are expected to be conducted every 12-18 months, but may be conducted
less frequently for countries with smaller portfolios. These reviews are accompanied by Performance
and Learning Reviews (PLRs) occurring every 2 years and Mid-Term Reviews (MTRs) which provide
systematic touchpoints for reviewing the performance and relevance of the portfolio and making
adjustments as necessary.

24, 117, 125, 171, 187,
210, 268

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 151

At the global level, performance information consolidated through reporting on the World Bank’s
Corporate Scorecard and IDA RMS play an important role in engaging with shareholders, particularly in
the context of replenishments. Annual results reporting and Mid-Term reviews provide the opportunity
for shareholders to reflect on the Bank’s strategic priorities and their relevance in light of the evolving
context for global development.
The Bank is currently seeking to enhance results measurement at the country-level through the
introduction of High-Level Outcomes (HLOs) to CPFs. HLOs will seek to reflect the contribution of 24, 117, 125, 171, 187,
the Bank’s CPFs to sustainable, long-term development goals aligned to the SDGs. These include 210, 268
transformative changes required to achieve a country’s long-term vision for development. These
outcomes will be tracked over subsequent CPF periods using a range of evidence sources, including
the Bank’s core diagnostics, self-evaluation using contribution analysis, topical deep-dive reporting,
country narratives, and regional and global analytical reports. These evidence sources will complement
the Bank’s existing self-evaluation tools and IEG reports to scale-up the availability of ex-ante
performance evidence across the Bank’s portfolio.
MI 7.5: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

KPI 8: Evidence-based planning and programming applied

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.20

IEG has a clear mandate which ensures its operational and financial independence from WBG Management and is provided
unrestricted access to information and WBG staff to conduct its work. Although the WBG has no formal institutional evaluation
policy, it has Evaluation Principles that define the purpose of evaluation, the roles of stakeholders, evaluation modalities,
standards and quality assurance, and the main types of evaluations delivered. IEG’s workplan is prepared independently in
consultation with Management and the Board to identify and prioritise its engagements. This workplan allows for validation of
all ICRs and CLRs, with strategic considerations driving the selection of other types of evaluations. IEG reports annually on its
activities and on management uptake of evaluation recommendations. This reporting does not always provide full transparency
on the delivery of its work programme.
IEG reports increasingly present methodological limitations and are generally perceived as objective, with clear linkages
between evidence and conclusions. IEG mainly uses, in its higher-level evaluations, a composite project performance criterion
better adapted to the summative than to the formative function of evaluation. All IEG reports include recommendations and a
management response, including the extent of agreement and actions to be undertaken. IEG reports on the implementation
of recommendations and actions through a self-assessment process and an outcome-driven validation report. IEG has been
increasingly active in disseminating lessons from evaluations. Self-evaluation reports and CPFs are expected to identify lessons
from previous operations, though it is unclear how this requirement is supported, scrutinised and tracked. IEG disseminates its
work to stakeholders through a range of message-driven communications tools, with supported by required dissemination plan.

152 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 8.1: A corporate independent evaluation function exists

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: The evaluation function is independent from other management functions (operational and
financial independence)
Element 2: The head of evaluation reports directly to the governing body of the organisation (structural
independence)
Element 3: The evaluation office has full discretion in deciding the evaluation programme
Element 4: Evaluations are submitted directly for consideration at the appropriate level of decisionmaking for the subject of evaluation
Element 5: Evaluators are able to conduct their work during the evaluation without undue interference
by those involved in implementing the unit of analysis being evaluated (behavioural independence)
MI 8.1: Analysis

3
3
3
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1: The World Bank’s IEG has a clear mandate from the Executive Board, with operational
and financial independence from World Bank Management.
The authorising environment for independent evaluation is provided by OP 13.60 on Monitoring and
Evaluation, reinforced by the IEG mandate.
OP 13.60 establishes the roles and responsibilities for self and independent evaluation across the
World Bank. All operations are required to undergo a self-evaluation (in the form of an Implementation
Completion Report (ICR)) following closure. The independent evaluation function is responsible for
validation of the bank’s self-evaluation activities as well as undertaking separate assessments of the
relevance, efficacy and efficiency of Bank operational activities and processes. The policy affirms the
DGE’s direct reporting line to the Executive Board, which approves the DGE’s mandate, IEG’s Terms of
Reference and annual work programme.
A 2015 External Review of the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) indicated that the lack of a specific
evaluation policy that provides a framework outlining the principles, criteria and accountabilities for

33, 45, 54, 62, 77, 98,
evaluation across the organisation potentially undermines the independence of the function. Following 241
the review, the Board approved a mandate for IEG and IEG established it Evaluation Principles,
which further elaborates the methods, quality criteria, processes and roles and responsibilities for
independent evaluation.
IEG’s mandate, issued in 2018, indicates that IEG is responsible for the assessment of the relevance,
efficacy and efficiency of the World Bank Group’s operational policies, programmes and activities and
their contribution to development effectiveness. IEG has a dual mandate to promote both accountability
and learning across the World Bank Group. The Mandate states that IEG carries out its responsibilities
and functions under the oversight of the Board Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE),
securing its independence from management.
Although the World Bank continues to lack an Evaluation Policy, stakeholders note that its mandate
serves the same purpose, bearing a different format only because policies have traditionally been
reserved for operations activities. Between OP13.60 and the Evaluation Mandate, IEG’s independence
is assured.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 153

Element 2: IEG demonstrates structural independence with respect to the selection and reporting
lines of the Director General for Evaluation and IEG staff.
The IEG mandate lays out the responsibilities of the Director-General, Evaluation (DGE), who is
responsible for managing the personnel and budget of IEG under the oversight of CODE in consultation
with the Vice President Human Resources. In this space, the DGE makes decisions independent from the
management of each WBG institution, reporting directly to the Executive Board.
The DGE is appointed by the Board for a non-renewable six-year term and reports directly to the Board
through CODE. The selection process and performance review of the DGE are managed under the
oversight of CODE with the advice of the Vice President, Human Resources. Only the Board may remove
the DGE, for cause.
With respect to the management of staff, the DGE selects the IEG Directors in consultation with the
Vice President, Human Resources, and the Chair of CODE on a non-objection basis. IEG Directors are
responsible for the selection, performance evaluation, salary review and promotion for IEG Staff, with
the oversight of the DGE.
Element 3: IEG demonstrates financial independence. Its work programme and budget are
prepared independently from the rest of the WBG for endorsement by the Executive Board.
IEG’s work program is prepared independently from the WBG’s budgets, under the oversight of the
DGE, for endorsement by CODE and the Budget Committee and ultimate approval by the Board. IEG
prepares the IEG annual work program and provides an indicative workplan for the following two fiscal
years in consultation with management. IEG’s evaluation products are the responsibility of the Director
responsible for the evaluation in question, under the oversight of the DGE, who transmits reports to the
Board, following an opportunity for management to review and comment.

33, 45, 54, 62, 77, 98,
IEG demonstrates financial independence such that its work programs and budgets are prepared 241
independently from the WBG’s budgets. The Board approves IEG’s budget, which is ring-fenced and
commensurate with its work programme. Stakeholders confirmed that the Executive Board is proactive
in ensuring that resources are sufficient for IEG to carry out its core work and expressed few concerns
over the availability of resources. However, trade-offs are sometimes required learning engagements.
Element 4. IEG evaluations are submitted directly to the Board Committee on Development
Effectiveness. However, IEG engages in a consultative process with management to promote the
relevance and usefulness of its reports.
As per OP13.60, and reinforced by the IEG mandate, all IEG evaluations are submitted directly to CODE
for consideration and approval and are not subject to approval by management. Stakeholders at IEG
reported few concerns regarding their ability to report independently to CODE.
However, the 2015 External Review of IEG noted that independence, interpreted strictly, can have
unintended consequences for promoting learning. More limited engagement with management in
the course of delivering its work programme contributed to a relationship with management that was
describes as “unproductive and confrontational.” Over the course of the assessment period, IEG has
sought to enhance engagement with management throughout the evaluation lifecycle to promote the
uptake of recommendations and lessons while preserving independence. The IEG mandate notes that
IEG endeavours at all times to maintain close and continuing contact with World Bank Group staff so
that their views are adequately considered in IEG reports and the analysis and findings of their reports
are understood.
This more nuanced understanding of independence has contributed to IEG’s effectiveness in
implementing its dual mandate. Stakeholder perceptions of engagement are monitored through IEG’s
annual stakeholder survey, with 72% of management reporting they are satisfied with the extent of

154 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

engagement throughout the process, which has remained relatively constant since 2018. Stakeholders
at IEG report that there has been an increased openness to uptake of evaluation recommendations over
the past few years, but there is room for further improvement.
Element 5: IEG staff are supported by institutional policies that allow for unrestricted access to
information and staff in conducting their work.
Both OP13.60 and the IEG Mandate confirm that IEG has unrestricted access to the staff and records 33, 45, 54, 62, 77, 98,
241
on the Bank and may consult with borrower governments, beneficiaries, co-financers and other
stakeholders as well as operational managers, peer reviewers and other stakeholders as required to
discharge its responsibilities. Moreover, IEG has access to official records of the WBG and its staff to
enable their work as evaluators, in accordance with applicable Institutional policies and rules governing
such access as determined by the Institution. Interviews with IEG staff confirm that they are generally
able to access required information to perform their role as intended.
MI 8.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 8.2: Consistent, independent evaluation of results (coverage)

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: An evaluation policy describes the principles to ensure the coverage, quality and use of
findings, including in decentralised evaluations
Element 2: The policy/an evaluation manual guides the implementation of the different categories of
evaluations, such as strategic, thematic, corporate level evaluations, as well as decentralised evaluations
Element 3: A prioritised and funded evaluation plan covering the organisation’s planning and budgeting
cycle is available
Element 4: The annual evaluation plan presents a systematic and periodic coverage of the MO’s
interventions, reflecting key priorities
Element 5: Evidence demonstrates that the evaluation policy is being implemented as required across
operations
MI 8.2: Analysis

3
3
3
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1: In addition to the OP 13.60 and IEG Mandate, the IEG Evaluation Principles define the
purpose of evaluation, roles of various stakeholders, evaluation modalities, rigor, standards and
quality assurance.
The IEG Mandate is complemented by an Evaluation Principles (2019) document, which defines the
purpose of evaluation, the core principles evaluations will adhere to, defines the roles of various
stakeholders, and the role of knowledge management and learning/feedback loops.
The Evaluation Principles distinguish between three main evaluation modalities: independent

39, 45, 46, 52, 54, 62,
evaluation, mandatory self-evaluation, and demand-driven self-evaluation. The principles are aligned 77, 241, 248
with international evaluation best practices and policies and draw on international norms and
standards developed by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD-DAC), the Evaluation Cooperation Group, the United Nations
Evaluation Group, and the American Evaluation Association, as well as evaluation policies developed
by other international organisations.
There are core principles defined for credibility, including a collaborative approach, rigorous design
and quality assurance. The evaluation principles specify three key feedback loops through which

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 155

independent evaluation promotes organisational learning and four measures to strengthen, engaging
key stakeholders’ active participation in and ownership of evaluations with respect to the selection and
methodology, and discussions around their findings.
With respect to self-evaluation, OP 13.60 lays out key principles and expectations that support the
results culture of the WBG, specifying that operations are subject to mandatory supervision and
self-evaluation. OP 13.60, together with the Operational Policies for Development Policy Financing,
Investment Project Financing and Programme-for-Results Financing as well as the Guidelines and
Directives for Monitoring and Evaluation, sets out the expectation that all operations are subject to
a completion report. The independent evaluation function validates these self-evaluation activities,
verifies their results and undertakes separate high-level assessments of the relevance, efficacy and
efficiency of Bank operational activities and processes.
Element 2: Operational Policy and the Evaluation Principles identify roles and responsibilities for
the self and independent evaluation functions as well as core evaluation principles and the main
types of evaluations delivered.
OP 13.60 distinguishes between self-evaluation, which is mandatory, and independent evaluation,
for which work programmes are established in consultation with management. The independent
evaluation function is directly responsible for:
• appraising the Bank’s operations self-evaluation;
• assessing whether the Bank’s programmes and activities are producing the expected results;
• incorporating evaluation assessments and findings into recommendations designed to improve the
development effectiveness of the Bank’s activities and their responsiveness to country needs;
• reporting periodically to the Executive Directors on measures taken to improve overall operations 39, 45, 46, 52, 54, 62,
77, 241, 248
evaluation system; and
• assisting developing member countries in building effective monitoring and evaluation capacity.
Enhancing the monitoring and evaluation capacity of borrowing member countries makes a critical
contribution to the bank’s results culture by enhancing the availability of quality evidence on
development results.
The 2019 IEG Evaluation principles establish core evaluation principles to help ensure quality and
effectiveness, including utility, credibility and independence. They also identify a set of principles
for enhancing the use of evaluation through planning and selection, implementation and reporting.
Evaluations are expected to:
• have a collaborative approach, including use of local expertise;
• meet internationally agreed norms and standards, including a rigorous methodological design; and
• have a clear and efficient quality assurance process, including careful documentation of designs and
methods and peer review at different stages of the evaluation process.
Four different levels of evaluation are identified, including sector, thematical country and operational.
Element 3: IEG prepares its workplan independently in consultation with management and the
Executive Board to identify and prioritise its engagements.
IEG’s work programs and budgets are prepared independently from the WBG’s budgets. Its work
program is developed in consultation with management and other stakeholders. IEG annually prepares
the IEG annual work program and provides an indicative workplan for following two fiscal years, which
are made publicly available. IEG’s work programmes seek to strike a balance between emerging and
long-standing organisational priorities. In the case of COVID-19, IEG shifted its work programme to

156 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

provide evidence-based inputs and lessons to inform decision-making and highlighted COVID-relevant
lessons in its ongoing evaluations. In FY 22, its work programme noted a shift toward issues emerging
form IDA20, including its special themes and the Green, Resilient and Inclusive Development (GRID)
Framework.
As noted above, the Board approves IEG’s budget, which is ring-fenced and commensurate with the IEG
work program. Stakeholders reported limited challenges in securing sufficient budget to cover their
core work.
Element 4: Whereas IEG maintains full coverage for validation of Investment Completion Reports
and Completion and Learning Reviews, the selection of other types of evaluations is driven by
strategic considerations. Coverage gap analyses help ensure evaluation coverage across the
Bank’s portfolio.
There is an expectation that 100% of operations will be subject to self-evaluation. Over the course of
the assessment period, IEG has consistently sought to validate 100% of Investment Completion Reports
and Completion and Learning Reviews for Country Partnership Frameworks.
However, there are no specific coverage requirements for other independent evaluations. The IEG
mandate notes that, following consultation with external stakeholders, the Board and World Bank
management, IEG will propose strategic choices about its work programme. These choices aim to strike
a balance between resources and organisational needs to ensure the World Programme’s relevance,
alignment with institutional strategic priorities and alignment with the main development challenges
affecting member countries.
As part of the FY21 work programme, IEG conducted a Gap Analysis examining its coverage of the WBG 39, 45, 46, 52, 54, 62,
77, 241, 248
portfolio demonstrating strong overall alignment with the portfolio across sectors, notwithstanding
some gaps for specific thematic areas. IEG’s FY22 work programme similarly focuses on keeping “a line
of sight to other emerging and longstanding corporate priorities including the IDA 20 special themes
and cross-cutting areas, climate change ambition, concerns on debt sustainability, the Green, Resilient,
Inclusive Development (GRID) framework, the new WBG knowledge framework and the outcome
orientation agenda.”
However, there are important trade-offs between the validation of 100% of the Bank’s operations versus
CPEs and other evaluations that are critical for identifying lessons and identifying the sustainability
of the Bank’s operations and their contribution to cross-cutting themes. Given the global scale and
complexity of the Bank’s operations, stakeholders note that 100% coverage through CPEs would
unlikely be feasible given the level of resources required. This same complexity makes it very difficult
to have a representative sample of ICRs and CLRs for validation – necessitating at least 80% coverage.
Element 5: IEG reports on the activities it delivers each year as well as management uptake of
evaluation recommendations; however, this reporting does not always provide full transparency
on the delivery of its work programme.
IEG produces an annual report that identifies the delivery of different activities over the fiscal year,
including different types of evaluations, learning engagements and evaluation lessons to inform ongoing
operational activities, and capacity development activities. Aside from reporting on the completion
rate for ICR and CLR validations, the annual report does not necessarily compare completed high-level
evaluations against the annual work plan. Furthermore, work plans and annual reports do not report
on the status of evaluations from previous years or challenges in delivering on the work programme.
MI 8.2: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 157

MI 8.3: Systems applied to ensure the quality of evaluations

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.40

Element 1: Evaluations are based on design, planning and implementation processes that are inherently
quality-oriented
Element 2: Evaluations use appropriate methodologies for data collection, analysis and interpretation
Element 3: Evaluation reports present the evidence, findings, conclusions, and where relevant,
recommendations in a complete and balanced way
Element 4: The methodology presented incudes the methodological limitations and concerns

3
4
3
3

Element 5: A process exists to ensure the quality of all evaluations, including decentralised evaluations 4
MI 8.3: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1: The Evaluation Principles identifies processes for design, planning and implementation
of evaluation that are aligned with best practice, including checks and balances to ensure quality
and end-to-end stakeholder engagement.
The IEG’s Evaluation Principles are aligned with international evaluation best practices and policies and
draw on international norms and standards developed by the OECD-DAC, the Evaluation Cooperation
Group, the United Nations Evaluation Group, and the American Evaluation Association, as well as
evaluation policies developed by other international organisations. IEG has an expert to review and
advise on methodology.
However, unlike peer organisations, IEG does not provide ratings against each evaluation issue. ICR
and CLR validations address a composite rating based on the achievement of Project Development
Outcomes, which combines elements of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. IEG has long used this
composite indicator, which is identified through a matrix rating structure that balances the relevance
and performance of the Bank’s operations. This indicator has been endorsed by CODE over time to
provide a clear and simple means of identifying the general performance of operations over time.
Country Partnership Evaluations are centred around two questions: (i) What was the political, social, and
economic context during the evaluation period? And (ii) What were the main development challenges and
constraints to making progress on those challenges? However, these reports also conduct a deep analysis
of other evaluation issues to draw lessons from operations over a longer-term (10 year) timeframe.
High-level and strategic level evaluations address a limited number of questions reflecting the DAC
criteria, but do not provide ratings on these issues, particularly around likely sustainability. This is a
departure to how evaluation issues are addressed in peer organisations and, although geared toward the
uptake of lessons by management, raises questions of trade-offs between accountability and learning.
IEG employs a multi-layered approach to quality assurance model for evaluations that includes in-depth
review of intermediate and final evaluation products by internal and external reviewers. Additionally,
the Principles emphasise the importance of stakeholder engagement in promoting quality and utility. A
key point of entry is to engage stakeholders in reflecting on what to evaluate, which questions to focus
on and the potential uses of the evaluation.
Stakeholder engagement in the detailed planning of an evaluation can constitute a platform for capacity
building and a source of additional data.” The 2022 External Review of the evaluation function notes
that IEG has made important progress in “moving away from isolation” by engaging and collaborating
with stakeholders throughout the full evaluation cycle and sharing Approach papers for discussion
prior to implementation.

35, 53, 68, 86, 248

158 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Element 2: IEG has made concerted efforts to enhance evaluation methodology and promote
clear triangulation of data; however, there continues to be opportunities for improvement.
Since the previous external review of IEG in 2015, a Methods Advisory Function (MAF) has been established
to help strengthen the methodological rigour and quality of IEG reports. IEG Methodological advisors
provide advice to evaluation teams on methodology to promote rigour as well as opportunities to
employ new methods and technologies. Furthermore, IEG conducts meta-evaluations of its evaluation
activities implemented over a defined period of time with respect to their rationale, focus, use of
innovative methods, design and quality (reliability, validity and consistency). The most recent metaevaluation, published in 2022, covered evaluations published between FY15 and FY19 and served as an
input to a broader external review of IEG.
The 2022 meta-evaluation notes that the range of methods used to respond to evaluation questions
has generally been appropriate, including notable innovation in methods use for data collection and
analysis (85% of all evaluations linked the methodological strategy to the evaluation questions).
However, there is some room for improvement with respect to how different data sources and methods
are used to address specific evaluation questions and how evidence form different sources has been
triangulated to substantiate evaluation findings. Recommendations included:
• fully articulating data collection and data analysis and how they and brought together to inform
judgements; and
• identifying clear principles for triangulation and syntheses.
Furthermore, the review notes that “while the evaluations examined in the sample were generally
robust in addressing data analysis validity, data quality concerns and strategies to mitigate potential
biases resulting from weaker data came up as areas of concern.”
Element 3: IEG reports are generally perceived as objective with clear linkages between evidence
and conclusions.
The recent Meta-Evaluation noted that concluded that IEG reports are generally consistent in their
rationale, scope, questions, methods, findings and recommendations, including a logical fit between
methods, data sources and evaluation questions with recommendations that flowed logically from
findings. However greater clarity could be achieved in describing assumptions underlying the theories of
change. In some cases, triangulation of evidence was found to be insufficient in certain contexts with the
report noting that “a number of evaluations still do not show sufficient clarity on how different methods
help answer specific evaluation questions and how evidence from different sources is triangulated and
used to substantiate evaluation findings.” Nevertheless, IEG’s 2022 client survey results are positive in
this area, with over 80% of Board members, internal staff and external stakeholders reporting that IEG
reports provide an objective analysis based on relevant information and provide a clear link between
the evidence and conclusions.
Element 4: IEG evaluations increasingly present methodological limitations in a transparent way.
IEG’s Meta-Evaluation of IEG Evaluations (Fiscal Years 2015–19) found that most evaluations addressed
limitations “in a meaningful and convincing manner.” IEG evaluations increasingly provide a clear
description of limitations, increasing from 60% of evaluations produced in 2015 to over 80% produced
in 2019. Of note, whereas the Evaluation Principles note that evaluation methodologies must be
transparent and rigorous, there is no specific statement on the need to present limitations. IEG’s Client
survey respondents generally felt that reports present the methodology clearly, with over 80% of Board
members, internal staff and external stakeholders reporting that they are satisfied with the clarity of the
methodology in IEG’s reports.

35, 53, 68, 86, 248

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 159

Element 5. Beyond implementing a quality assurance process for its own evaluations, IEG also
assesses the quality of ICRs and CLRs.
In addition to implementing quality assurance processes for its own reports, IEG plays an important
role in promoting the quality of ICRs produced following the closure of operations through its validation
activities in line with the ECG Good Practice Standards. The Implementation Completion Results Report
Review (ICRR) is an independent, desk-based, critical evaluation of the ICR content and ratings. Based

on the evidence provided and an interview with the task team leader, IEG provides its own rating for 35, 53, 68, 86, 248
each project. The process is implemented against the same criteria used for ICRs using a documented
approach, with IEG publishing guidelines to implement the reviews for Development Policy Financing
and other project types. IEG has consistently completed this review for 100% ICRs completed each
fiscal year. Additionally, IEG has also consistently conducted validations of all Completion and Learning
Reviews (CLRs) produced for CPFs. A disconnect is calculated, reflecting the difference between the
outcome rating the World Bank assigns and the rating IEG assigns through the validation.
MI 8.3: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 8.4: Mandatory demonstration of the evidence base to design new interventions

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: A formal requirement exists to demonstrate how lessons from past interventions have been
taken into account in the design of new interventions
Element 2: Independent evaluation functions communicate lessons learned through various
dissemination activities to inform project design
Element 3: Lessons from past interventions inform new interventions and strategies, with incentives to
promote uptake
Element 4: Learning products are developed and disseminated to address common challenges for
results management and evaluation and improve quality
Element 5: The number/share of new operations designs that draw on lessons from evaluative
approaches is made public
MI 8.4: Analysis

3
3
3
4
2
Evidence documents

Element 1: Self-evaluation reports are expected to identify lessons from operations, which
are validated by IEG. There are also formal requirements in place for new Country Partnership
Frameworks to demonstrate uptake of lessons from previous operations.
Staff guidance and templates for Completion and Learning Reviews and Performance and Learning
Reviews for CPFs and Investment Completion Reports each require lessons from operations to be
identified. IEG reviews and validates individual project and country program completion reports
from the World Bank, IFC, and MIGA. IEG’s annual report on the Results and Performance of the World 35, 65, 67, 69, 71, 75,
Bank Group summarises lessons and recommendations that emerge from syntheses of portfolio-wide 76, 224, 248, 268
reviews of individual projects and country program performance.
The World Bank’s Directive on Country Engagement requires that lessons learned from Completion
and Learning Reviews are reflected in the design of the following Country Partnership Framework.
This requirement is reflected Guidance for Country Engagement as well as in the templates for Country
Partnership Frameworks, Completion and Learning Reviews and Performance and Learning Reviews.
With the exception of projects implemented under a Multi-Phase Programmatic Approach (MPA), simila

160 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

requirements do not exist for Investment Projects, Development Policy Operations or Performance for
Results; however, project appraisal document templates identify a section where lessons from previous
operations should be described.
Element 2. IEG has been increasingly active in disseminating lessons from evaluations through
different mediums and in collaboration with WBG management.
The 2022 External Review of IEG notes that IEG has been active in deploying new and innovative means
of disseminating its findings and transmitting conclusions and key messages. As part of its annual
work programme, IEG identifies a number of learning engagements to share lessons from evaluation,
including events that respond to demand among WBG management. IEG produces a series called
“Project Lessons” on World Bank Group’s projects to assess what has worked, what didn’t, and why, to
better inform future projects and investment based on PPARs. IEG also has a weekly blog, ‘#whatworks’
IBRD, focusing on “understanding what works and why, to draw lessons and good practices from
experience, deepening the evidence base to inform decision making and future action.” IEG also
produces a podcast dedicated to lessons learned. These products cover a variety of sectors and themes.
For example, IEG has also created a lessons library for COVID-19 bringing together a range of evaluations
of responses to past global crises such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2006 Avian Influenza, to make
the lessons generated more accessible.
The 2022 External Review of the IEG indicates that uptake of learning from evaluations has been “sparsely
documented” and is less visible as a result. The 2021 IEG client survey suggests that IEG reports remain
the main means through which staff engage with IEG, with 55% of staff respondents reporting that they
had read IEG reports between 2018-21, while 22% reported watching presentations and videos and
18% reported attending Brown Bag Lunch events. IEG has implemented a strategy of increasing uptake

of evaluation lessons by enhancing engagement with management throughout the evaluation cycle. 35, 65, 67, 69, 71, 75,
76, 224, 248, 268
Satisfaction with IEG engagement is monitored as a criterion for assessing the perceived quality of IEG
evaluations among different stakeholder groups. In 2021, 77% of staff responding to the survey were
satisfied with the level of engagement from IEG.
Element 3. There is a formal requirement to take up lessons in the design of new operations and
CPFs, it is not clear how this requirement is supported with tools, scrutinised and tracked.
As noted above, operation supervision reports (ISRs), ICRs and CLRs are all required to demonstrate
relevant lessons learned. Similarly, new operations and CPFs are required to demonstrate how new
lessons are incorporated into the design.
However, it is not clear how uptake of lessons is scrutinised, nor is uptake tracked systematically. For the IEG
client survey for 2022, 72% of staff indicated that IEG reports, including their lessons and recommendations
influence World Bank activities. Utility of lessons from IEG evaluations at the project level was less clear
and appears to be declining, with 30% of staff agreeing that lessons and recommendations from IEG
evaluations are incorporated into project designs, down from 57% in 2018. A major barrier is a perceived
disconnect between IEG lessons and recommendations and operational realities.
While there is a database of ICR Reviews available to staff, there is no easily searchable database
that helps staff access lessons from other, similar projects to inform design and/or implementation
arrangements of new interventions. Meta-evaluative and synthetic analyses of self-evaluations (e.g. on
the quality of monitoring, evaluation and of reporting), lessons learned from validations, and findings
and recommendations from different evaluations are discussed with Management and operational
units across the World Bank Group. Stakeholders questioned the value of having a searchable database
of lessons, noting the contextual specificities of different operations. Instead, stakeholders note the
value of having staff from different disciplines involved in the development and review of operations is

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 161

an effective means of bringing in relevant lessons and adapting them to context. Furthermore, uptake
of key lessons is often scrutinised by the Board in the approval of operations and CPFs.
While there is a database of ICR Reviews available to staff, there is no easily searchable database
that helps staff access lessons from other, similar projects to inform design and/or implementation
arrangements of new interventions. Meta-evaluative and synthetic analyses of self-evaluations (e.g. on
the quality of monitoring, evaluation and of reporting), lessons learned from validations, and findings
and recommendations from different evaluations are discussed with Management and operational
units across the World Bank Group. Stakeholders questioned the value of having a searchable database
of lessons, noting the contextual specificities of different operations. Instead, stakeholders note the
value of having staff from different disciplines involved in the development and review of operations is
an effective means of bringing in relevant lessons and adapting them to context. Furthermore, uptake
of key lessons is often scrutinised by the Board in the approval of operations and CPFs.
Element 4. IEG has increasingly been active in disseminating lessons through communications
and knowledge management activities to disseminate lessons and raise awareness of IEG’s
activities.
IEG’s work programme reflects a co-ordinated approach to ensure stakeholders are aware of, 35, 65, 67, 69, 71, 75,
understand and can use knowledge produced by IEG, including through short-reports, Brown Bag 76, 224, 248, 268
Lunches (BBLs), podcasts, webinars, videos and blogs. The IEG newsletter, BBLs and IEG website and
consolidated lessons library for COVID-19 have been found to be particularly important for raising
awareness of IEG’s work. The 2022 External Review recognises that IEG has significantly intensified its
work in communication and dissemination to intended users and the broader evaluation community.
Stakeholders confirmed that importance of these products to help digest the larger evaluation reports.
In its 2022 stakeholder survey, stakeholders identified improving outreach as the most important
means through which IEG can help improve the effectiveness of the WBG.
Element 5. There is no consistent tracking of uptake of lessons from self or independent evaluation
to inform the design of new operations
Although CPFs and new operations are required to identify how lessons from previous operations
were taken up to influence design, neither World Bank management nor IEG formally track the uptake
of lessons across individual projects or make this information public. IEG’s client survey tracks selfreported use of lessons from evaluations to inform the design of new operations and is reported
publicly. Furthermore, evidence from stakeholders suggests that failure to demonstrate uptake of
lessons can result in failure of a project of CPF to progress toward Board approval.
MI 8.4: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 8.5: Poorly performing interventions proactively identified, tracked and addressed

Score

Overall MI rating

Highly satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.75

Element 1: A system exists to identify poorly performing interventions

4

Element 2: Regular reporting tracks the status and evolution of poorly performing interventions

4

Element 3: A process for addressing poor performance exists, with evidence of its use

4

Element 4: The process clearly delineates the responsibility to take action

3

162 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

MI 8.5: Analysis

Evidence documents

Element 1. World Bank-funded projects are expected to be supervised every 6 months. The
supervision process takes stock of implementation progress, achievement of development
outcomes and key risk areas for project implementation.
Bank Operations Policy 13.05 states that the Bank supervises borrowers’ implementation of Bankfinanced projects. Bank projects are required to undergo supervision at least annually, with good
practice being that projects are supervised every six months or more frequently as needed by the
Project Task Team and led by Task Team Leader. The first supervision report should be completed in the
first 3 months after Board Approval.
Projects are supervised using the Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR). These reports
present ratings for key aspects of project implementation on a scale from Highly Satisfactory to Highly
Unsatisfactory, including: (i) implementation Progress; (ii) progress toward Development Outcomes;
(iii) compliance with safeguards policies; (iv) compliance with legal covenants; (iv) audited financial
statements; and (v) disbursements, among others. The ISR also involved follow-up on key risks
identified during project preparation through the Bank’s SORT tool. Projects with delayed supervision
reports are flagged as outliers for follow-up.
In responding to MOPAN’s Partner Survey, nearly 85 percent of borrower country and 90 percent of
Board member survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the World Bank supports project
implementation through regular supervision. Donors and peer organisations surveyed also agreed, but
to a lesser extent. Over 80 percent of Board members and over 90 percent of borrower country survey
respondents agreed (strongly to somewhat) that the Bank identifies poorly performing projects. Only
around 65 percent of donor and peer organisation respondents agreed with this statement.
108, 144, 163, 172,
210, 268

Q8[01], THE WORLD BANK SUPPORTS IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH REGULAR
SUPERVISION OF PROJECTS
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Q8[02], THE WORLD BANK CONSISTENTLY IDENTIFIES WHICH INTERVENTIONS ARE
UNDER-PERFORMING
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 163

Element 2. The World Bank has a systematic way of identifying problematic and potentially
problematic projects and improving their performance.
World Bank management reports to the Executive Board on problematic and potentially problematic
projects through a quarterly operations update. Problematic and potentially problematic projects are
identified through a system of flags. Outlier reports, which identify all flagged projects are accessible to
all staff. Among the project flags is an overdue supervision report.
Problematic projects include those which are rated “moderately unsatisfactory” or lower in terms
of progress toward Project Development Outcomes (PDO) and/or Implementation Progress in the
Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR). Potential Problem Projects are projects with risk
factors that have historically been associated with unsatisfactory outcomes, even if they have a rating
of “satisfactory” for progress toward its PDO. A project is considered a potential problem if it has 3 of the
risk flags identified below for Investment Projects and 2 of the risk flags below for Development Policy
Operations Risk Flags include:
• Non-compliance with critical legal covenants;
• Moderately unsatisfactory or lower ratings on safeguards, counterpart funding, monitoring and
evaluation, financial management, procurement or project management in the previous ISR;
• Implementation Progress or Development Outcomes rated moderately unsatisfactory or lower for
any 24 months cumulatively during the project life;
• Loan effectiveness delays;
• Disbursement delays;
• Country environment risks; and
• Overall country performance record (e.g. countries with a history of unsatisfactory projects).
The distinction between Problem and Potential Problem Projects are a means for the World Bank
to manage ongoing issues and potential operational risks more proactively. Problem and Potential
Problem Projects are subject to more intense supervision to help improve performance, including
dialogue, training and implementation support provided to counterparts with additional resources
that can be allocated to support supervision as needed. At country level, Country Management Units
(CMUs) conduct regular Country Portfolio Performance Reviews (CPPRs) with counterparts that include
discussions on problem projects and action plans to resolve implementation bottlenecks. These tools
provide an opportunity to review the loan portfolio alongside counterparts to discuss challenges
and exchange views on how to address them. Feedback from stakeholders at the country level on
the usefulness of CPPRs for this purpose was mixed, but most agreed that they are useful to discuss
ongoing implementation issues.
Element 3. Alongside more frequent supervision, the World Bank can use project restructuring
to improve the performance of problem projects. Clear guidelines are in place to promote
transparency around restructuring.
The Bank’s Policies on Investment Project Financing, Development Policy Finance and Project for
Results Financing each state that projects can be restructured during implementation upon agreement
between the Bank and the borrower country in order to:
• strengthen its development effectiveness;
• modify its development outcomes;
• improve project performance;
• modify indicators;

108, 144, 163, 172,
210, 268

164 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

• address risks and problems that have arisen during implementation;
• make appropriate use of undisbursed proceeds of a Bank Loan or cancel unwithdrawn amount prior
to the closing date; and/or
• extend the closing date; or
• otherwise respond to changed circumstances.
These restructurings are made at the discretion of Country Directors, helping to make restructuring
easier and providing an incentive. High-risk restructurings involving a change in safeguard category,
extension of a guarantee expiration, reliance on alternative procurement arrangements, the addition
of new borrowers or a change in a Multi-Phase Programmes development objectives are submitted for
consideration by the Executive Board.
Stakeholders note that Mid-Term Reviews are often used as an important tool to inform restructurings;
however, restructuring can take place at various points in the project cycle as a proactive measure. The
World Bank has undertaken efforts to use the problem project classification to incentivise actions to
help enhance implementation and impact or make more efficient use of resources. Training provided to
Task Managers identify a range of options, including upgrading, closing, cancelling or suspending. The
importance of candour in reviewing the project is emphasised.
The Corporate Scorecard’s “Proactivity Index” measures responsiveness to project problems within a
12-month timeframe. Results for FY22 indicate that approximately 82% of projects identified as having
“problem” status are addressed within 12 months through actions such as restructuring, upgrading,
suspension or cancelation. The Proactivity Index demonstrates an upward trend, increasing from 77%
in 2018. Over 60 percent of survey respondents agreed that the World Bank addresses any areas of
intervention under-performance, for example, through technical support or changing funding patterns
if appropriate. Stakeholders noted that, although restructuring is increasingly being implemented, the
need to agree with borrowers (who can be hesitant to cancel operations) sometimes limits important
changes.

Q8[03], THE WORLD BANK ADDRESSES ANY AREAS OF INTERVENTION UNDERPERFORMANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THROUGH TECHNICAL SUPPORT OR CHANGING
FUNDING PATTERNS IF APPROPRIATE
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

To help support transparency and accountability, IEG guidelines note that where a project’s objectives
have been formally revised, the project outcome will be assessed against both the original and
revised project objectives, with separate ratings provided and weighted in light of the share of actual
disbursements made in the periods before and after the restructuring. Part of the rationale behind this
practice is to incentivise early project restructuring when it is needed.

108, 144, 163, 172,
210, 268

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 165

Element 4. The Bank’s supervision system identifies clear roles and responsibilities for addressing
problem projects and implementation challenges.
In each ISR, Task Team Leaders are responsible for identifying key implementation issues and tangible
remedial actions for follow-up, including an agreement with counterparts on which corrective actions
will be taken and by whom. An overall summary of the supervision findings is communicated to the
borrower government in an Aide Memoire, to which the borrower government is encouraged to respond.
Overall responsibility for following up on problem projects across the portfolio rests with Regional VPUs

and Country Management Units (CMUs). The overall proportion of problem and potential problem 108, 144, 163, 172,
210, 268
projects across the Bank are reported to the Executive Board through quarterly reporting. Since FY17,
the proportion of problem projects has fluctuated between 12% and 18% without a clear upward or
downward trend. There is no Bank-wide tolerance threshold for problem projects; however, Regional
VPUs and Country Management Units set their own thresholds based on the characteristics of their
portfolio and operating context. Beyond, the responsibility of Task Team Leaders to follow-up on issues
identified throughout implementation, a Development Effectiveness Unit in each region monitors the
pipeline and portfolio, including projects across countries. This process is supported by the Country
Portfolio Performance Reports delivered by Country Management Units.
MI 8.5: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 8.6: Clear accountability system ensures responses and follow-up to and use of evaluation
recommendations

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.00

Element 1: Evaluation reports include a management response (or has one attached or associated with it) 3
Element 2: Management responses include an action plan and/ or agreement clearly stating
responsibilities and accountabilities
Element 3: A timeline for implementation of key recommendations is proposed
Element 4: An annual report on the status of use and implementation of evaluation recommendations
is made public
MI 8.6: Analysis

3
3
3
Evidence documents

Element 1. All IEG Reports include recommendations as well as a publicly accessible management
response.
Each IEG evaluation report has an associated management response that is presented publicly
with the rest of the evaluation report. IEG and World Bank management interact throughout the
process of implementing thematic / sectoral and major evaluation. Prior to submitting a report
to CODE, management elaborates a Draft Management Response that addresses the findings and
recommendations stating their extent of agreement with each recommendation. After CODE meets to
discuss the evaluation with IEG and management, a Board report is drafted summarising the discussion
and IEG publishes the report alongside the management response.
Element 2. Management responses note the extent of agreement or disagreement and actions
that will be undertaken. The World Bank implements a strategic and outcome-driven process to
monitor the uptake of recommendations collaboratively with management.
Over the assessment period, there has been a shift in how management responses are prepared,
facilitating more constructive dialogue between IEG and Management. Under the previous system,

47, 57, 156, 248

166 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Management has 90 days following the discussion of a report at CODE to issue an action plan identifying
timelines and responsible parties for implementation of the management response. These reports
provided an itemised action plan with timelines for implementation and were presented to the Board
through quarterly updates. IEG would follow-up and rate implementation through an annual report and
track progress for implementation through a consolidated database.
In reforming the Management Action Record system (MAR), a number of changes were agreed among
management to make the system more strategic and effective. IEG recommendations are now fewer in
number and more outcome-oriented. Management responses used to only reflect either full agreement
or disagreement but may now reflect partial disagreement with aspects of recommendations.
Management Action Plans and IEG ratings of implementation progress were discontinued. Instead,
Management now submits annual self-assessments that are strategically focused on the intended
outcome of recommendations which are then validated by IEG. These annual reports and IEG’s
validation are presented to the Board annually. World Bank management and IEG discuss and agree
when recommendations should be retired either because the outcome has been achieved or because
they are no longer relevant.
The 2022 External Review of IEG notes that the reform process has limited the overall number of
recommendations, giving a clearer and more credible review of measures put in place to address
previous evaluations. This change responded to a perception among management that IEG
recommendations were sometimes too prescriptive or inappropriate. It remains a challenge to report
on the impact of these initiatives at a strategic level to understand what is not working and why or
clarify what additional changes are needed to deliver the intended outcome of a recommendation or
action. However, overall, the review noted that the reformed MAR is reinforcing both accountability and
learning and is better positioned to documenting adaptive learning from evaluations, including course- 47, 57, 156, 248
corrections as needed.
Element 3. There is a clear timeframe for outcome-driven follow-up on evaluations and
management responses.
Under the previous system, Management Action Plans provided a timeline for implementation, but this
clarity was undermined by the limited quality of evidence and buy-in for the process more generally.
The new MAR system maintains a reporting period of five years (with monitoring beginning the year
after completion of the evaluation, resulting in four follow-up reports), after which recommendations
are formally retired. Recommendations may be retired prior to the end of this period upon agreement
by Management and IEG. This process allows for the organisation to implement course-corrections and
respond to changes in context as required.
Element 4. IEG reports on the implementation of recommendations and management actions
annually through a self-assessment process and an outcome-driven validation report.
Throughout the assessment period, IEG has implemented a process for following up on the
implementation of Management Actions. Under the previous system, IEG would provide ratings for
follow-up on specific recommendations based on submissions from management and present an
annual report to CODE. Evidence suggested that, although the process was implemented consistently,
it was failing to deliver on its intended purpose. The 2018 Results and Performance Report noted that
after 4 years, only 52% of Management Actions had been implemented. Furthermore, the evidence
provided on implementation was relatively weak, providing insufficient evidence to the Board on actual
follow-up or on the extent to which intended outcomes underlying the recommendations had been
achieved and why. Furthermore, the system was inflexible and did not respond to shifts in context over
time. Senior management engaged in this process to a very limited extent, limiting its strategic value.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 167

Under the new system, IEG issues an annual report validating management’s self-assessment of
implementation against outcome-focused recommendations. This process involves a process of
engagement and discussion between IEG, technical staff and senior management to help better
understand results and barriers in addressing strategic outcomes. The new MAR Validation report
provides a high-level summary of progress toward outcomes in each thematic area covered by active
recommendations. Furthermore, the approach reinforces the oversight role of CODE in promoting the

47, 57, 156, 248

uptake of evaluation lessons. One of the benefits of this system has been strengthening the quality
of evidence about implementation due to a more collaborative process. The process is still being
piloted and is iterative, identifying a range of issues for discussion with CODE on how follow-up can be
strengthened to report on specific issues such as implementation delays.
MI 8.6: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 8.7: Uptake of lessons learned and best practices from evaluations

Score

Overall MI rating

Satisfactory

Overall MI score

3.25

Element 1: A complete and current repository of evaluations and their recommendations is available
for use
Element 2: A mechanism for distilling and disseminating lessons learned internally exists
Element 3: A dissemination mechanism to partners, peers and other stakeholders is available and
employed
Element 4: Evidence is available that lessons learned and good practices are being applied to strengthen
the evaluation function, including dissemination and uptake of reports
MI 8.7: Analysis

3
3
3
4
Evidence documents

Element 1. All core accountability and learning products are available on IEG’s website.
IEG’s evaluations, work programmes, management action record validations, ICR Reviews, CLR Reviews
and Annual Results and Performance Reviews are all available publicly on the website. Additionally, IEG
provides the results of its stakeholder surveys, publicly accessible evaluation methods resources, blogs,
podcasts and an overview of evaluation lessons by thematic area. Overall, the database of available
evaluations is up-to-date.
Element 2. IEG evaluations are required to have a dissemination plan and are increasingly
communicated through diverse platforms through products geared toward uptake.
IEG’s Evaluation Principles require evaluations to have a dissemination plan, requiring that:

53, 54, 57, 62, 65, 66,
• “findings should be publicly disclosed for independent evaluations and demand-driven self- 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74,
75, 156, 225, 248
evaluations;” and
• “findings and lessons learned should be made accessible to relevant internal and external target
audiences.”
These dissemination plans are developed in collaboration between evaluation teams and IEG’s
knowledge and dissemination team.
Element 3. IEG disseminated its work to stakeholders through an increasingly diverse range of
message-driven communications tools.
The 2022 External Review recognises that the World Bank has increasingly ramped up and strengthened
its knowledge and communications activities to reach stakeholders and make them aware of IEG’s work.

168 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Evaluations are communicated through blogs, podcasts, lessons learned series, and lessons databases.
IEG’s learning and dissemination activities respond to contemporary issues and are reflected in IEG’s
Work Programme. For example, a COVID-19 lessons library brings together a range of evaluations of
responses to past global crises such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2006 Avian Influenza, to make
the lessons generated more accessible. IEG’s Annual Results and Performance Report distils high-level
lessons from its validation of ICRs and CLRs. However, IEG could strengthen the communication and
uptake of lessons by providing an easily searchable tool for staff in line with peer organisations.
Element 4. IEG implements periodic internal and external reviews, following on a recommendation
from the 2015 External Review of IEG.
IEG has undergone a series of external reviews since the first such assessment was completed in 2005.
Following the 2015 External Review, it was agreed that IEG would undertake regular, periodic external
reviews.
In 2014, the World Bank’s CODE commissioned an external review of IEG conducted by an independent
expert panel. The review was conducted for the purpose of identifying suggestions and recommendations
to the Board of Executive Directors to enhance IEG’s impact, strengthen its role and independence and
clearly identify IEG’s main strengths and areas for improvement. The 2015 Report’s recommendations
emphasised:
• The importance of IEG’s dual mandate for accountability and learning, with an enhanced means of
ensuring the quality, relevance, usefulness, credibility and influence of IEG’s work;
• Regular independent external reviews should be conducted every 5 years;
• The need for a principle-based living evaluation policy, including Terms of Reference and a five-year 53, 54, 57, 62, 65, 66,
strategy for IEG;
68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74,
75, 156, 225, 248
• The need to strengthen oversight from CODE; and
• The need for IEG to build M&E capacity in client countries in partnership with the WBG, peers and
borrower countries.
IEG submitted a management response to CODE broadly agreeing with the proposed directions. IEG
reports on implementation on the recommendations through its annual reports and annual work
programmes.
A follow-up to the 2015 report was completed and published in 2022, which follows up on the
implementation of recommendations from the 2015 report, noting that substantial progress has been
made. The review also addresses a limited range of deep dive issues, including:
• The IEG’s Response to COVID-19;
• Outcome orientation and implications for IEG;
• Evaluation of MIGA and IFC activities;
• IEG’s Contribution to knowledge and strategic issues across the WBG; and
• The IEG and Evaluation Capacity Development.
The report makes a number of recommendations for follow-up in the next review, including increasing
the oversight role of CODE; increasing the visibility and clarity of resource allocation for learning
activities; improving collaboration between the IEG, IFC and MIGA to promote an evaluation culture;
better defining IEG’s role in informing WBG strategic shifts relative to other accountability and research
functions; supporting the WBG’s shift in outcome orientation through evaluation; and strengthening
engagement in evaluation capacity development.
8.7: Evidence confidence

High confidence

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 169

RESULTS
Achievement of relevant, inclusive and sustainable contributions to humanitarian and development results are
achieved in an efficient manner
The results performance area explores to what extent relevant, inclusive and sustainable contributions to humanitarian and
development results are achieved in an efficient manner. This area is assessed through the four key performance indicators
specified below dealing with the corresponding OECD/DAC criteria: Effectiveness, Relevance, Efficiency and Sustainability.
The MOPAN methodology states that assessment of the results performance area should only be based on published documents,
excluding interviews and surveys.
IEG uses the concept of (overall) outcome as a composite indicator of project performance, integrating the evaluation criteria of
relevance, efficacy (effectiveness) and efficiency. It addresses the sustainability criterion through a broad definition of ex-ante
risk assessment. The assessment team did not find evaluations or analyses of each of these components (the DAC criteria)
above the project level corresponding to the period under review. This led to using indirect approaches to assess some KPIs
listed below. These analyses help draw some lessons and suggest that limited published information does not necessarily mean
poor performance in that field. However, some of these indirect approaches do not lead to a rating due to the limited published
evidence provided by the Bank.
Strategies, resources mobilisation and the main outputs related to the outcomes analysed below have been presented and
assessed above under previous KPIs.

KPI 9: Development and humanitarian objectives are achieved, and results contribute
to normative and cross-cutting goals

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.00

IEG’s Results and Performance (RAP) reports, centred around a composite indicator for performance that brings together
aspects of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency, indicate that the performance of the Bank’s operations and CPFs is broadly
satisfactory and relevant to the needs of countries, improving over the assessment period. The proportion of projects as rated
MS+ or higher for the achievement of outcomes increased from 80 to 85% between FY17 and FY21, with CPF increasing from 63%
to 72% MS+ since 2011. Client perceptions of the extent to which the Bank’s ASA has contributed to their intended outcome have
remained strongly positive over the assessment period, fluctuating between 90 and 95% agreement.
Whereas sufficient evidence is not yet available to rate the Bank’s contribution to outcomes for gender and climate definitely,
the overall trajectory is positive. The 2016-23 Gender Strategy and the 2015-20 and 2021-25 CCAPs, reinforced by the corporate
scorecard and IDA RMS have created strong incentives for the alignment of operations. IEG RAPs have noted increased integration
of gender into operations and CPFs and the Bank provided USD 26 billion in financing for climate mitigation and adaptation in
2021 alone. Number contribution stories at the project level indicate positive outcomes are being achieved.
Independent evaluations indicate that the Bank has been effective in preserving hard-won development gains and supporting
critical service delivery in FCV contexts. IEG RAPs indicate that the proportion of projects in FCS countries rated MS+ for the
achievement of project development objectives increased from 77% from FY17-19 to 74% in FY21. Performance has tended to
be lower in conflict-affected countries, ranging from 56% MS+ for DPFs to 66% MS+ for IPFs. Furthermore, it has leveraged trust
funds to work effectively in partnerships with humanitarian entities to expand access and reach of operations.
Furthermore, improvements in the Bank’s overall disbursement ratio, positive trajectory for ratio of administrative budget
to projects under supervision and decreased timeframes between approval and first disbursement all suggest the Bank is
delivering results in an increasingly efficient way; however, evidence is not available to identify the extent to which outcomes
are sustainable across the portfolio.
The World Bank’s move to strengthen the Outcome Orientation of the Bank is an important step toward strengthening reporting
on contribution to outcomes, including for cross-cutting theme. This change will see the identification of High-Level Outcomes
across CPFs originated after June 2021 reflecting long-term, sustainable outcomes aligned to countries’ achievement of the

170 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Sustainable Development Goals. There are opportunities to make more systematic use of decentralised evaluations to provide
a more holistic picture of how ASA, trust funds and lending operations are contributing to the achievement of outcomes at the
country level.
MI 9.1: Interventions assessed as having achieved their objectives, and results (analysing
differential results across target groups, and changes in national development policies and
programs or system reforms)

Score

MI rating

Satisfactory

MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: The organisation achieves all or almost all intended significant development,
normative and/or humanitarian objectives at the output and outcome level. Results are differentiated
across target groups.
3. Satisfactory: The organisation either achieves at least a majority of stated output and outcome
objectives (more than 50% if stated) or the most important of stated output and outcome objectives
is achieved
2. Unsatisfactory: Half or less than half of stated output and outcome level objectives is achieved
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Less than half of stated output and outcome objectives has been achieved,
including one or more very important output and/or outcome level objectives
MI 9.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

Two important considerations must be taken into account while assessing MI 9.1:
1.	IEG uses the concept of (overall) outcome, integrating the evaluation criteria of relevance, efficacy
(effectiveness) and efficiency, as a composite indicator of project performance. It bases most of
its publications and analyses on this composite concept of outcome. Unlike other IFIs, its RAPs,
corporate scorecards or other transversal portfolio analyses do not speak to the relevance,
effectiveness efficiency or even sustainability of its interventions. The analysis below is based on
the above WB synthetic definition of outcomes, since the assessment team could not access to
analyses based on each of the DAC criteria.
2. A study published by IEG in 2020 about the WBG orientation at the Country level questions
the extent to which the current country-level system does capture the WBG contribution to
country outcomes sufficiently and even questions the relevance of rating the outcomes at that
level. Management recognised these limitations but did not accept to replace but proposed to
complement the results rating system with the more analytical approach proposed by IEG. IEG
does no longer provides ratings at the country level.
The sections below discuss the performance of World Bank operations, Country Partnership Frameworks
(CPFs) and Advisory Services and Analytical Work (ASA).
World Bank Operations: Performance ratings for the World Bank operations is largely satisfactory
and has improved over the assessment period.
Looking back over a 10-year period, outcome ratings for operations declined from 71 percent moderately
satisfactory or better (MS+) for project closures in FY09 to 68 percent MS+ in FY13, and increased to 81
percent MS+ in FY18, 79 percent in FY19, and 85 percent in 2021. Up to FY19, outcome ratings evolution
curves were parallel for IBRD and IDA but showed a slightly better performance for IBRD projects than
for IDA.
The average outcome rating (as defined above) of the World Bank projects improved significantly
over the four most recent RAPs and the 2022 Corporate Scorecard. The proportion of projects rated

9, 35, 40, 41, 42, 48,
49, 55, 64, 86, 281

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 171

MS+ evolved from 80 to 85% between FY17 and FY21, surpassing the target indicated in the corporate
scorecard. The curve shows a sharp improvement in the last 2 years, heavily impacted by the COVID
crisis. According to the 2021 RAP, this evolution is not an effect of a change in the self-evaluation or
the rating system due to the COVID context but rather to factors such as the project’s novelty and the
selection of outcome types, indicators and targets.
Ratings for quality of monitoring & evaluation also improved significantly during the same period,
suggesting that enhanced M&E could contribute to improving the efficacy of the project. According to
the RAP, the correlation between the two evolutions is clear, but the causality between improving M&E
and better outcome ratings is not demonstrated. The proportion of effective projects (projects achieving
outcomes rated S+) has grown faster than the reduction of poorly performing projects (outcomes rated
MU-), suggesting that performance has improved over time. Between 2017 and 2021 for the proportion
of projects rated MS+ is 85/80= 1.06, while the same ratio for S+ is 58/40=1.45.
Four “outcome types” tend to have higher efficacy ratings than others among World Bank projects,
notably due to higher evaluability at entry and M&E quality: expanded access to services; increased
human capital; improved enterprises and sector performance; and enhanced equity and inclusion.
In contrast, outcomes, targets and related indicators definitions are less reliable for projects with
institutional strengthening objectives. In FY20, the average rating for all Practice Groups increased
based on high ratings among Sustainable Development PG, which represented by far the largest share
of the portfolio. The rating of operations in FCS and, more generally, in IDA countries and for the largest
projects (> USD 100 million) increased. However, ratings decreased for the smallest projects (< USD10
million). Europe and Central Asia and Western and Central Africa represented the largest share of the
portfolio and obtained the highest average outcome ratings.
IEG validations of Investment Completion Reports are reflected in the World Bank Corporate Scorecard.
The scorecard demonstrates that validated performance ratings for World Bank Group operations have
improved between FY18 and FY22 from (6.9 to 7.6 on a scale of 1-10).
Country Partnership Frameworks: There has been a similar improvement in the performance of
CPF ratings over time.
The 2022 RAP suggests that there has been a steady improvement in the Bank Group Country
Partnership Frameworks (CPF) development outcome ratings since FY11. The share of development
outcome ratings increasing from has increased from 63% in 2011 to exceed the target of 70 percent
between FY17 and 2021. The 2022 Corporate scorecard confirms the average proportion of 72% of
CPFs rated MS+ for the period FY 19-22. The gap between the WB projects and the WBG CPF ratings is
narrowing but remains at about 10%.
According to the RAP 2022, the overall positive trend is tempered by the following findings:
• When individual CPF objectives were considered over the 10-year period (FY13–22), nearly half of
them were rated partially achieved or not achieved.
• There was a lack of selectivity among CPF objectives (e.g. too many or too broad);
• Insufficient preparedness to respond to changes;
• Overestimation of implementation capacity and underestimation of political economy challenges; and
• The CPFs and their results frameworks relied overwhelmingly on the World Bank lending portfolio
and insufficiently integrated ASA and the support provided by IFC and MIGA;
The One Bank Group approach remained a work in progress. In particular, historical lack of ASA results
monitoring raises questions about the Bank Group’s ambitions to be a “knowledge bank” and its
ability to strategically use ASA to improve country-level impact. The Bank Group lacked procedures or
guidance to anticipate possible risk scenarios and propose appropriate program adjustments.

9, 35, 40, 41, 42, 48,
49, 55, 64, 86, 281

172 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The 2022 ICAI review of UK support to IDA highlights most of the above analyses; however, it also notes
that the focus of most IDA results targets are outputs and intermediate outcomes, not final development
impacts. Steps are being taken to increase its outcome orientation, including by more systematic
integration of lessons from impact evaluations. The same report also provides a reality check on the
distribution of project objectives by level of outcome. On a four-point scale ranging from 1 (outputs) to
4 (near-final outcomes), most Bank project objectives were found in this report to be clustered around
level 2, and in some cases, level 3, meaning intermediate outcomes primarily involving improved
access to public infrastructure and services. In the case of development policy operations, the level
of ambition shifts to a much higher share of level 3 and even a substantial share of level 4, higher-level
outcome objectives. Understandably, the average success rate in the case of policy reform operations
was found to be lower than for investment projects.
ICAI also notes positively that IDA has been expanding its ambitions on emergency response by increasing
the budget of its Crisis Response Window (to $2.5 billion during IDA19) and introducing new mechanisms
for supporting early responses to food security crises and disease outbreaks. In IDA19 the Early Response
Financing mechanism had an aggregate cap of $500 million. The outcome of these interventions is not
known yet, but IEG has launched an evaluation of the WBG response to the COVID 19 crisis.
According to the 2022 RAP, the World Bank’s production of Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA) peaked
in 2016 and, to a lesser extent, in 2019, but has declined since that time. A qualitative analysis was
undertaken on the use or influence of ASA based on the CLR Reviews for a random sample of 50 countries.
More than 80 percent of the cases exhibited a good match between ASA topics and the topics covered by
government policies and programs, and between ASA topics and topics of CPF objectives/development
outcomes and World Bank operations. However, less than half of the CLR Reviews reported on these

higher levels of ASA influence such as influence on policy dialogue, uptake in government programs and 9, 35, 40, 41, 42, 48,
policies, and uptake in CPF objectives and World Bank operations. Of those that did, ASA was found to 49, 55, 64, 86, 281
be influential in most cases.
The performance of ASA is monitored as part of the Corporate Scorecard. The Scorecard indicates that
the overall share of completed ASAs for which clients strongly agree that the activity strongly achieved
its intended outcome declined slightly since FY18 (95%) but remained high overall at 90%. Furthermore,
91% of ASA clients agreed that the World Bank brought global expertise to support this activity.
The WBG is also a major producer of public documents. According to the 2019 IEG study of the knowledge
flow and collaboration under the World Bank’s new operating model, the WB does not produce good
metrics of the knowledge activities performance. The recommendations of this study suggest that
there is still significant room for progress to increase the internal and external effectiveness (in terms of
influence) of knowledge production and improve its measurement.
According to a note from the CODE dated September 2022 on the SFK implementation update between
April 2021 and June 2022, significant efforts have been made since April 2021 to better realise the
potential of WBG knowledge work at country, regional, and global levels across Regions, PGs, DEC, IFC
and MIGA:
1. FY22 evidence of focus on strategic, high-quality and impactful knowledge work:
• Consolidated ASA portfolio; spending more on fewer, more impactful products; focus on core and
extended-core country analytics; and new CCDRs.
• Thematic concentration on corporate priorities and emerging issues; and integrative GRID lens.
• Enhanced oversight of global knowledge; greater outcome orientation and focus on global public
goods; and leadership in global fora.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 173

2. Efforts to promote knowledge flow: management signalling; peer reviewer database; scaled-up
data portals and knowledge platforms; new technology platforms and tools; new guidelines; and
alignment of internal incentives.
3. Work has progressed to introduce adaptive, real-time, impact evaluation of projects to learn from

9, 35, 40, 41, 42, 48,
49, 55, 64, 86, 281

projects, spur innovation and optimise impact.
MI 9.1: Evidence confidence

High confidence

MI 9.2: Interventions assessed as having helped improve gender equality and women’s
empowerment

Score

MI rating

Unrated

MI score

N/E

4. Highly satisfactory: Interventions achieve all or nearly all of their stated gender equality objectives
3. Satisfactory: Interventions achieve a majority (more than 50%) of their stated gender objectives
2. Unsatisfactory: Interventions either lack gender equality objectives or achieve less than half of
their stated gender equality objectives. (Note: where a programme or activity is clearly gender-focused
(maternal health programming for example) achievement of more than half its stated objectives
warrants a rating of satisfactory
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Interventions are unlikely to contribute to gender equality or may in fact lead
to increases in gender inequalities
MI 9.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Gender has been a priority for the Bank throughout the assessment period and integration of
gender into the Bank’s projects and Country Partnership Frameworks. 8
The World Bank approved their latest gender strategy in 2015 for FY16-F23 with four objectives:
“improving human endowments, removing constraints for more and better jobs, removing barriers to
women’s ownership of and control over assets, and enhancing women’s voice and agency and engaging
men and boys.”
The 2018 RAP found that “gender was an explicit part of project development objectives for one or more
project components” in 26 percent of the cases reviewed during FY14–18.” However, this proportion
dropped between FY15 and FY17. Additionally, among those projects with a gender component only
“65 percent had gender-related indicators in the completion report.”
The 2019 IEG report, learning from IDA Experience, found that “discussion of gender issues has
increased significantly over time, featuring in virtually all country strategies by 2016 compared with 64
percent in 2005.” The report also found that although gender issues were strongly integrated into SCDs,
CPFs varied in quality in terms of gender integration. For example, many CPFs “have not necessarily
identified specific strategic priorities and entry points for addressing them.” However, “compared with
the previous incarnation of country strategy documents (Country Assistance Strategies and CPSs),
CPFs have better articulated Bank Group interventions to address specific gender inequalities and
have made more comprehensive use of gender-disaggregated indicators. Nevertheless, the alignment
between the actions proposed and indicators in the results frameworks was often weak.” The 2020 RAP
found that the Bank “clearly articulates higher-level outcomes for its global and thematic work in key
thematic areas such as...gender.”

8 The Gender dimension is also analysed under MI 5.5

41, 42, 48, 59, 295

174 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

One of the four main highlights of the 2021 mid-term review of the gender strategy stated that “although
significant attention is devoted to monitoring commitments and assessing project design, less attention
is paid to monitoring implementation. This reduces the Bank Group’s ability to gauge the outcomes of
projects and, ultimately, the outcomes of implementing the strategy.” The other three highlights are:
• Commitment to the gender strategy by stakeholders has resulted in improved progress following
plans, good practices in implementing the strategy, and improvements in project design. However,
the review noted that “implementation actions do not consistently match this commitment, nor are
they commensurate with the level of ambition in the strategy.”
• Implementation of the country-driven approach “has been hindered by competing priorities, limited
familiarity with the gender gap approach, and variability in the support models across regions”
• “Well-organised support for closing gender gaps is evident in…some World Bank Regions and Global
Practices,” however “staff designated to support work on gender are constrained in their ability to
provide optimal support by the lack of clear selection criteria, insufficient time to complete required
functions, limited professional development opportunities, and little recognition within performance
management processes.”
In terms of gender-tagging projects, the mid-term review noted that:
• The corporate target for gender-tagged projects is currently 55 percent for World Bank, IDA, and IBRD
projects,
• Only 24 percent of World Bank projects that closed between FY12 and FY14 had applied a gender lens
in analysis, action, and monitoring.
• Between FY17 and FY19, the number of projects that received the tag increased by 16 percentage 41, 42, 48, 59, 295
points (49 to 65 percent).
• Of the 573 gender-tagged projects between FY17 and FY19, 478 (83 percent) were investment projects.
• Between FY17 and FY19, the prevalence of gender tagging was greater in IDA (59 percent) and in
fragile and conflict-affected situation (FCS) countries (59 percent) than in International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development and non-FCS countries.
To date only 10% of the 1,600 gender tagged projects have been completed since the inception of the
gender tag in FY17. With an average implementation period of five years for IPF projects, the projectlevel results on closing gender gaps are just beginning to be observed. With only 148 completed projects,
assessing results at an aggregate level would be premature. A limited review of ICRs conducted at the
beginning of FY23, indicated however that 70% of the projects report on the gender results. As part of
the Gender Strategy Update, work is underway to identify challenges and opportunities to strengthen
implementation.
The RAPs 2021 and 2022 do not report on gender-related results. The Corporate Scorecard 2022 only
provides a small number of gendered indicators in Tier 1 (at the country level), but none directly related
to the outcomes of the Bank activities. This is also true for the CS 2020. The CS 2021 does not provide
any value under “female” for Tier 1, but give two gender-linked indicators under Tier 2 (student reached
and access to HNP services).
If a general assessment of the outcomes obtained by the Bank in terms of improvement of gender
equality and empowerment are not publicly available a few less publicly accessible sources provide
some elements in that field, notably the following.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 175

IDA19 GENDER SPECIAL THEME
FINAL IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE ON POLICY COMMITMENTS
JULY 2022
In July 2022, the Bank produced a table presenting an update of the final implementation of the policy
commitments made in the framework of the IDA19
Policy Commitment

Target

Actual

Achievement

10

11

Achieved

50%

68%

Achieved

30%

70%

Achieved

PC4: Women’s increased access to and usage of digital services.

100%

100%

Achieved

PC5: Strengthening women’s land rights.

50%

81%

Achieved

5 HNP

5 HNP

5 EDU

5 EDU

PC1: Access to quality reproductive, adolescent, and primary
health care.
PC2: Women’s access to higher productivity jobs through digital
skills.
PC3: Employment opportunities for women in infrastructure
operations.

PC6: GBV prevention and response.

Achieved

41, 42, 48, 59, 295

IDA achieved all six policy commitments under the Special Theme, with several far exceeding the target.
However, despite increasing integration of gender into programming, systemic challenges in
monitoring gender outcomes prevents a synthetic analysis around the achievement of gender
objectives.
Of the mid-term review’s sample of 68 IDA/IBRD projects tagged/flagged for gender approved in FY17-19
only 13 already reported progress on indicators related to gender gaps, 54 had not reported progress,
and 1 did not track gender gap indicators in their Implementation Status and Results Report or in
internal supervision reports. This implies that being gender tagged does not ensure that a project will
be properly monitored and produce the expected gender data.
The mid-term review’s assessment of “seven Country Partnership Frameworks found that they did
not fully monitor gender gaps identified in their pillars. A review of 97 IFC and World Bank projects
also implies there has been limited measurement of two of the four gaps: voice and agency, and
specific human endowments at a country level. Of these projects, 72 had yet to report any progress
or were not intending to track gender gaps at all. Additionally, 69 had no plans to undertake their own
project evaluations beyond reporting requirements.” Budget limitations were noted as the reason for
preventing adequate monitoring during supervision.
MI 9.2: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 9.3: Interventions assessed as having helped improve environmental sustainability/tackle
the effects of climate change

Score

MI rating

Satisfactory

MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: Interventions include substantial planned activities and project design criteria
to achieve environmental sustainability and contribute to tackle the effects of climate change. These
plans are implemented successfully and the results are environmentally sustainable and contribute to
tackling the effects of climate change

176 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

3. Satisfactory: Interventions include some planned activities and project design criteria to ensure
environmental sustainability and help tackle climate change. Activities are implemented successfully
and the results are environmentally sustainable and contribute to tackling the effects of climate change
2. Unsatisfactory: EITHER Interventions do not include planned activities or project design criteria
intended to promote environmental sustainability and help tackle the effects of climate change. There
is, however, no direct indication that project or programme results are not environmentally sustainable.
AND/OR The intervention includes planned activities or project
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Interventions do not include planned activities or project design criteria
intended to promote environmental sustainability and help tackle climate change. In addition, changes
resulting from interventions are not environmentally sustainable/do not contribute to tackling climate
change.
MI 9.3: Analysis

Evidence documents

The evolution of the Bank contribution to mitigate climate change and to help its client to adapt
to its consequences is a major feature of the last decade.
The evolution already identified in the previous MOPAN assessment of the Bank’s dedication to
addressing environmental degradation issues, including climate change, has considerably accelerated
during the period under review. The general message delivered by the RAPs and thematic evaluations is
that more consistent strategies and action plans have been elaborated, financial instruments have been
adapted and the amounts invested have considerably increased.
Climate Change
The World Bank Group is the world’s largest multilateral financier of climate action in developing
countries, providing over $26 billion in 2021 alone. In 2020, The Bank Group accounted for over half
of multilateral climate finance to developing countries and over two-thirds of adaptation finance. The
World Bank Group committed to increasing climate finance from 20% of lending in 2016 to 28% by
2020. This target was exceeded each year for the last three consecutive years.
The CCAP 2016-2020 covered four priority areas: (1) support transformational policies and institutions; 9, 41, 48, 63, 119, 185,
(2) leverage resources; (3) scale up climate action; and (4) align internal processes and work with others. 274, 288, 296
The WBG met 90 percent of its monitored targets under all four priority areas.
The achievement (activities and outputs) of the WBG CCAP 2016-2020 are presented as follows in the
CCAP 2021-2025.
Information about the outcomes of this action plan are still limited as results take time to materialise.
On the mitigation side, corporate score cards reporting on the Bank contribution to Climate Change
mitigation shows that the Bank has contributed to an emissions reduction of 194 million t CO2eq per

year over the period FY19-FY22. The Bank also contributed to an expansion of the renewable energybased power generation of 42,000 GW. hours/year, but also to an annual increase of the conventional
capacity of 434,000 GW. hours.9
A note dated March 2023 also lists examples that can help illustrate the Action Plan outcomes at the
project and country level, including10:
Benin:. More than 113,000 tons of CO2 emissions have been avoided because of the improved efficiency
of lighting and appliances.

9. PowerPoint reporting on the WBG CCAP 2021-2025 progress
10. World Bank Demonstrated Climate Impact for Client Countries Highlighted Results March 2023

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 177

Achievements under the WBG CCAP 2016-2020
Renewable

World Bank added 18 GW of variable renewable energy into grids and 16 GW of

Energy

renewable energy generation; IFC added 8 GW and MIGA added over 5 GW of
generation and integration; totaling 48 GW for WBG of renewable energy to help
communities, businesses and economies thrive.

Adaptation

Boosted adaptation support from 40% of climate finance in 2016 to 52% in 2020.

Finance

IFC and MIGA diversified their support for climate financing, expanding beyond the
renewable energy sector.

Hydromet

Ensured that 120 million people in 50 countries gained access to hydrometeorological data and early warning systems crucial to saving lives in disasters.

NDCs

9, 41, 48, 63, 119, 185,
274, 288, 296

Supported 30 countries to implement or enhance NDCs and supported over 35
national or sub-national governments in their efforts to put a price on carbon.

Green

World Bank issued $5.9 billion equivalent in green bonds in 17 currencies; IFC issued

Bonds

more than $6.6 billion equivalent in green bonds in 18 currencies; and MIGA’s issued
its first greenfield infrastructure project bond in Turkey.

Green

IFC and MIGA advanced certification programs, and scaled investments in green

Buildings

buildings, and continued to green the financial sector through investments in

& FIs

Financial Intermediaries and through the Sustainable Banking Network

China: The World Bank-supported Innovative Financing for Air Pollution Control Program has financed
investments in energy efficiency, renewable energy and emissions control and supported China’s
efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 2.5 million tons a year.
Additionally, in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the concentration of fine particulate matter was reduced
by nearly 40 percent.
Vietnam: The World Bank helped develop the Trung Son hydropower plant, which has supplied 1 billion
kilowatt-hours (kWh) of low-cost electricity since 2017, improving the livelihoods of 3,400 households
and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 1 million metric tons annually.
Serbia: The World Bank’s Floods Emergency Recovery project supported Serbia after the devastating
floods of 2014. This Climate Change adaptation project helped Serbia to build back and improve its
resilience through the rehabilitation of the flood protection infrastructure, protecting from future
floods over 360,000 people, of which 30 percent are women.

9, 41, 48, 63, 119, 185,
Mexico: The metropolitan areas of Ciudad Juárez, Monterrey, León, and Puebla have completed 274, 288, 296
non-motorised transport plans encompassing more than 100 km of new pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure. Monterrey and León, by adopting more efficient transit operations, reduced the
greenhouse gas emissions of their bus rapid transit systems by more than 62,000 tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent per year.
However, despite the availability of promising country-level evidence, these case studies do not enable
a consolidated picture of the Bank’s global contribution. As implementation of the CCAP continues, it
will be important that the Bank continues to strengthen its tools for reporting on its contribution to
outcomes at the country, regional and global level.
Natural Resource Degradation and Vulnerability
The Bank approved 253 projects and financed $ 33 billion between 2009 and 2019 to address Natural
Resource degradation and vulnerability (NDRV). The evaluation of the NRDV nexus carried out in 2020

178 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

shows gaps in the relevance and effectiveness of the World Bank’s support for reducing natural resource
degradation and the associated human vulnerability of resource users. The World Bank has been
effective at improving natural resource management practices, but there is little attributable evidence
of a reduction in natural resource degradation or in the associated human vulnerability of resource
users. Most evaluated NRDV projects were rated at least moderately satisfactory.. However, NRDV
projects do not adequately identify, address, or assess heterogeneous effects on different subgroups
of vulnerable resource users.
Disaster Risk Reduction
A recent evaluation of the Disaster Risk Reduction activities of the Bank communicates very much the
same message: most DRR operations are not providing sufficient information to understand the level of
DRR being achieved (for example, reduced exposure and vulnerability), which inhibits an understanding 9, 41, 48, 63, 119, 185,
of DRR contributions to development impacts (reduced economic loss and mortality). Although most 274, 288, 296
DRR IPFs have outcome-oriented objectives, such as building resilience or reducing exposure or
vulnerability to disasters, it is too early to assess the extent to which these goals are met. Although 89
percent of all IPFs have some DRR indicators in their project documentation, for 61 percent of these,
indicators are often articulated only at an output level. For DPOs, only 35 percent of operations had at
least one outcome indicator. DPOs supporting DRR policy reforms have achieved nearly three-quarters
of their DRR indicator targets, but only a small number of these indicators captured downstream results.
Although there is evidence that the Bank’s projects in the areas of climate change mitigation and
adaptation, natural resource degradation and vulnerability and disaster risk reduction are delivering
project-level results, there is a need to better capture the Bank’s contribution to country-level, regional
and global outcomes.
MI 9.3: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 9.4: Interventions assessed as having helped improve FCV situations

Score

MI rating

Satisfactory

MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: Interventions include substantial planned activities and project design criteria
to improve FCV situations. These plans are implemented successfully and the results have helped
improve FCV situations.
3. Satisfactory: Interventions include some planned activities and project design criteria to improve
FCV situations. These activities are implemented successfully and the results have helped improve FCV
situations.
2. Unsatisfactory: EITHER Interventions do not include planned activities or project design criteria
intended to improve FCV situations. There is, however, no direct indication that project or programme
results will not improve FCV situations, AND/OR The intervention includes planned activities or project
design criteria intended to improve FCV situations but these have not been implemented and/or have
not been successful
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Interventions do not include planned activities or project design criteria
intended to improve FCV situations. In addition changes resulting from interventions do not improve
FCV situations

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 179

MI 9.4: Analysis

Evidence documents

The performance of World Bank projects in FCV countries has significantly improved over the
assessment period, with most projects and CPFs rated moderately satisfactory or better.
Outcome ratings for World Bank projects in FCV countries have significantly improved between FY15
and FY21 with an apparent peak in 2020. Indeed, in FY21 74 percent of projects were rated MS+ in FCS
countries (World Bank RAP 2021) compared to 82% in FY 2020, 77 percent in FY17-19 and 65 percent in
FY15–17 (RAP2022, 2020 and 2018). The share of projects in FCS countries also increased from 15 to 23
percent between FY19 and FY20. However, projects in non-FCS countries continue to be rated higher
with 85% percent rated MS+ in terms of outcomes in 2021 (RAP 2022).
However, the same improvement is not seen in country program outcome ratings: “Bank Group
country program outcome ratings increased from 51 percent MS+ in FY09 to 74 percent in FY17 across
all reviewed country program cycles and remained flat since then. For the FY 19-22, the proportion of
CPFs rated MS+ was 72%. The same ratio was only slightly lower (70%) for the FCF countries (Corporate
scorecard 2022).
However, there is some uncertainty linked to uneven implementation of self-evaluation.
A 2022 IEG evaluation indicates that the World Bank has been effective in preserving hard-won
development gains and supporting critical service delivery in conflict settings. Furthermore, it has
leveraged trust funds to work effectively in partnerships with humanitarian entities to expand access 42, 48, 55, 58
and reach of operations. However, working with de facto governments involved in conflict has at times
contributed to a perception of “taking sides,” contradicting humanitarian principles. Disagreements
sometimes arise in partnerships with humanitarian entities with respect to the implementation of
environmental, social, security and fiduciary safeguarding policies. As the World Bank’s engagement
in conflict situations increases, there are opportunities to enhance cross-learning to identify good
practices and contribute to a more consistent approach.
Fifty percent of projects closed during FY10– 20 in conflict-affected countries did not have an ICR.
Additionally, as “IEG only validates projects with an ICR that are financed at a level of $5 million or
more, only 37 percent of all closed projects were validated, compared with 52 percent in all IDA or blend
countries.” The IEG evaluation found that “expanding the share of projects in conflict situations that are
evaluated and validated and revising evaluation guidance would provide a more accurate picture of
outcomes and contribute to learning.”
The 2021 evaluation found that in terms of achieving their development objectives as articulated in
project results frameworks, performance was lower in conflict –affected countries for which 56 percent
of outcomes in DPFs and 66 percent of IPFs were rated MS+ by IEG compared to fragile countries,
regardless of their conflict status (74 percent of IPF and 68 percent of DPF in those countries had
outcomes rated MS+).
MI 9.4: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

180 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

KPI 10: Interventions are relevant to the needs and priorities of partner countries and
beneficiaries, as the organisation works towards results in areas within its mandate

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.00

Based on the analysis of two composite WB evaluation criteria and the operations identification process embedded in a
participatory CPF formulation, operations seem to meet the conditions to be relevant. This overall assessment has to be
qualified especially when CPFs are too ambitious, not flexible enough, implemented in FCVs and dealing with the environmental
degradation/vulnerability nexus.
MI 10.1: Intervention objectives and design assessed as responding to beneficiaries’, global,
country, and partner/institution needs, policies, and priorities (inclusiveness, equality and
Leave No One Behind), and continuing to do so where circumstances change

Score

MI rating
MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: Systematic methods are applied in intervention design (including needs
assessment for humanitarian relief operations) to identify target group needs and priorities, including
consultation with target groups, and intervention design explicitly responds to the identified needs and
priorities
3. Satisfactory: Interventions are designed to take into account the needs of the target group as
identified through a situation or problem analysis (including needs assessment for relief operations)
and the resulting activities are designed to meet the needs of the target group
2. Unsatisfactory: No systematic analysis of target group needs and priorities took place during
intervention design or some evident mismatch exists between the intervention’s activities and outputs
and the needs and priorities of the target groups
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Substantial elements of the intervention’s activities and outputs were
unsuited to the needs and priorities of the target group
MI 10.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

The World Bank assesses the relevance of its projects. However, as already identified in the 2016
MOPAN assessment, the Bank does not publish synthesis documents analysing the projects’ relevance
separately. Assessing the evolution of the relevance of the Bank’s projects requires, therefore, building
on what is published about the evolution of two composite project assessment criteria, which include
projects’ relevance as a component: outcome and quality at entry. Indeed, “outcome” brings together
three dimensions: relevance, efficacy (achievement of objectives), and efficiency, and some of the
dimensions of the notion of quality at entry are determinants of the project’s relevance.
As presented under MI 9.1, the outcome rating has been improving during the period under review,
especially in FY 20 and 21, during which the proportion of projects rated MS+ went up from 80 to 85%.
The proportion of projects rated satisfactory or highly satisfactory increased from 54% to 58% between
FY20 and FY21. For fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS), however, the percentage of projects rated
MS+ in FY21 was 74%, compared with 82% in FY20. Projects quality at entry was high (80%) in FY20
and increased to 86% in FY21. These numbers suggest that the average relevance of the WB project was
good and improving during the period under review.
The World Bank maintains an active policy dialogue with its client countries at the highest level.
It formulates country diagnostics, Country Policy and Institutional Assessments. The Bank is well
informed, notably thanks to its collaboration with the IMF, about the macro-economic situation, the
public finance resources and constraints, and the debt sustainability situation. The Bank formulates
Country Partnership Strategies, which are reviewed through Performance and learning reviews and IEG

9, 41, 42, 48, 55, 58,
63, 64, 288

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 181

Completion and Learning Reviews. Projects are formulated at the request of the governments in that
context of active policy dialogue. Their alignment on these country strategies, the national priorities
and the Bank’s overall objectives are tested. One can assume that most conditions of relevance are met:
clear understanding of the context and its dynamics, ownership by the Government, realistic perception
of the public finance and institutional capacities, and a context of active policy dialogue.
However, the RAP 2022 identified some challenges for country program relevance. These included lack
of selectivity (such as too many Country Partnership Framework (CPF) objectives or CPF objectives
that were too broad); adaptiveness (such as insufficient preparedness to respond to changes in
country conditions, government commitment, or Bank Group priorities); and realism in programs and
projects (such as operations that overestimated implementation capacity and underestimated political
economy challenges).
A disconnect between project and country strategy ratings can reflect an incomplete alignment of
project portfolio objectives and the priorities identified in the associated CPF. This disconnect was
more systematically explored by the IEG study on the WBG Outcome Orientation at the Country level.
The analysis of Tier 3 of the 2022 Corporate Scorecard confirms the gap between project and countrylevel outcome ratings.
Flexibility and capacity to adapt to a fluid context is increasingly important. As stated in the RAP 2020,
Project outcomes can be achieved despite serious challenges if the task team can identify risks early,
elicit support from managers, and act quickly to mitigate these risks. An analysis of projects rated
highly satisfactory found that these projects often benefited from collaborative supervision and timely
reactions to challenges. The worse performance in FCV-affected countries can be explained by a vicious
cycle that these countries face in which large shocks prevent them from building capacity and improving
governance. This has to be understood in a context of a somewhat rigid results framework architecture 9, 41, 42, 48, 55, 58,
that requires forecasting results and is not sufficiently adaptable to dynamic circumstances, shocks, 63, 64, 288
and high levels of uncertainty. Overburdened country programs performed worse in response to large
shocks and crises. In this context, overburdened refers to FCV-affected country programs with weak
relevance and selectivity. Bank Group country programs performed better during shocks when they
limited and consolidated interventions.
However according to a recent evaluation by IEG of the WB engagement in situations of conflict (IEG,
World Bank Engagement in Situations of Conflict, 2021), the relevance of interventions in that kind of
context is improving. “The identification and analysis of fragility factors and conflict drivers, relevant
for achieving development effectiveness, have improved over the evaluation period. This is due to IDA
FCV policy commitments, the development of the FCV strategy, country management commitment,
and the elevation of the Risk and Resilience Assessments (RRAs) to a core diagnostic to inform lending.
Compared with those of the first half of the evaluation period (2010–15), more recent conflict analyses
are twice as likely to identify relevant factors of fragility and to articulate specifically how these factors
influence conflict and violence.”
When dealing with the natural resource degradation and vulnerability nexus, the Bank seems to have
more difficulty to correctly identify the problems to address and design relevant responses. Indeed,
a recent evaluation in that field (The Natural Resource Degradation and Vulnerability Nexus: An
Evaluation of the World Bank’s Support for Sustainable and Inclusive Natural Resource Management
(2009–19) concludes that the WB adequately diagnoses and addresses forest soil and land degradation
issues but not groundwater and small-scale fisheries issues. The Bank does not adequately address
the vulnerability of resource-dependent people where resource degradation threats are prominent.
SCDs and CPFs tend not to jointly analyse resource degradation and associated human vulnerability.
SCDs, CPFs, and lending programs for sustainable land management (SLM), forest resources, and

182 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

groundwater are not addressing many of the underlying factors that drive resource degradation. SLM
projects that aim to enhance the value of degraded land are not designed with an understanding of the 9, 41, 42, 48, 55, 58,
coping strategies of vulnerable resource users who access these lands as a social safety net nor do they 63, 64, 288
address overlapping land claims.
MI 10.1: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

KPI 11: Results are delivered efficiently

KPI score

Satisfactory

3.00

The overall assessment of the extent to which results are delivered efficiently is positive. Institutional efficiency is assessed
based on two different indicators: the disbursement ratio at the project level, which has significantly improved during the period
under review, and the administrative budget by USD bn under supervision, which has decreased.
Improvements in the Bank’s overall disbursement ratio, positive trajectory for ratio of administrative budget to projects under
supervision and decreased timeframes between approval and first disbursement all suggest the Bank is delivering results in an
increasingly efficient way; however, evidence is not available to identify the extent to which outcomes are sustainable across
the portfolio.
MI 11.1: Interventions/activities assessed as resource-/cost-efficient

Score

MI rating

Satisfactory

MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: Interventions are designed to include activities and inputs that produce outputs
in the most cost/resource efficient manner available at the time
3. Satisfactory: Results delivered when compared to the cost of activities and inputs are appropriate
even when the programme design process did not directly consider alternative delivery methods and
associated costs
2. Unsatisfactory: Interventions have no credible, reliable information on the costs of activities and
inputs and therefore no data is available on cost/resource efficiency
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Credible information is provided which indicates that interventions are not
cost/resource efficient
MI 11.1: Analysis

Evidence documents

IEG does consider the efficiency of projects when evaluating them, however it only publicly provides
project “outcome” ratings which bring “together three underlying dimensions: relevance, efficacy
(achievement of objectives), and efficiency” (RAP 2021).
Although project efficiency indicators are not available from IEG, the World Bank’s corporate scorecard
does consider one measure of efficiency, the disbursement ratio. The disbursement ratio, measured
as the ratio of disbursements during the fiscal year to the undisbursed balance at the beginning of the
fiscal year for investment project financing operations, has grown from 8.4 percent in FY16 to 21 percent
in FY22 (surpassing the target of 20 percent).
The World Bank also reports overall institutional efficiency of the Bank indicators in its annual budget
documents:
• The World Bank has decreased its administrative budget per US$ billion of portfolio under supervision
since FY15, from 13 million to $10 million in FY22.

55, 148, 281, 286

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 183

• The World Bank has decreased its administrative budget per US$ billion of portfolio committed since
FY15, from $59 million to $48 million in FY22. There has been an increase in administrative budget
per US$ billion of portfolio committed since the start of the COVID pandemic, but it is expected to
stabilise at pre-pandemic levels.
• The administrative budget per number of projects under supervision has been relatively stable since
FY15 but did decrease during the pandemic due to the large increase in COVID projects.

55, 148, 281, 286

• The administrative budget per lending project approved (defined as Total Administrative Budget (BB)
per lending project approved (FY21 US$ million)) has decreased from 9.4 million in FY15 to 6.7 million
in FY22. This indicator did decrease during COVID due to the large increase in projects, however it had
been on a declining trend prior to FY20.
MI 11.1: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

MI 11.2: Implementation and results assessed as having been achieved on time (given the
context, in the case of humanitarian programming)

Score

MI rating

Satisfactory

MI score

3.00

4. Highly satisfactory: All or nearly all the objectives of interventions are achieved on time or, in
the case of humanitarian programming, a legitimate explanation exists for delays in achieving some
outputs/outcomes
3. Satisfactory: More than half of the intended objectives of interventions are achieved on time, and
this level is appropriate to the context that existed during implementation, particularly for humanitarian
interventions.
2. Unsatisfactory: Less than half of the intended objectives are achieved on time but interventions
have been adjusted to take account of the difficulties encountered and can be expected to improve the
pace of achievement in the future. In the case of humanitarian programming, a legitimate explanation
exists for delays
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Less than half of stated objectives of interventions are achieved on time, and
no credible plan or legitimate explanation is identified that would suggest significant improvement in
achieving objectives on time
MI 11.2: Analysis

Evidence documents

Available information suggests that the extent to which the Bank’s operations deliver results
efficiently is improving. IEG does consider the efficiency of projects when evaluating them. However,
it only publicly provides project “outcome” ratings, which include efficiency, but does not give it much
visibility. Two indicators allow for assessing the evolution of the institutional efficiency of the Bank:
(i) the disbursement ratio which increased to 21 percent in FY22 surpassing the target of 20%; and (ii)
the World Bank administrative budget by USD billion under supervision decreased by 23% between
FY15 and FY22. The administrative budget per number of projects under supervision has been relatively
stable since FY15 but decreased during the pandemic due to the significant increase in commitments
and disbursements during the pandemic.
Project Readiness and overall time from approval to first disbursement is improving. While the
elapsed time for project preparation is no longer reported in the corporate scorecard, internal reports
indicate the time lag is declining. The time for projects (all instrument types) from concept note
to first disbursement declined from 23 months in FY17 to 15.1 months in FY22. For IPF, the elapsed
time declined from 25.6 months to 18.7 months. These improvements are largely due to greater focus

42, 48, 239, 281

184 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

on implementation readiness during project preparation stage. Other contributing factors include
intensified supervision efforts early in the implementation cycle, use of fast disbursing IPFs (expected
to disburse 50% in the first 2 years from Board approval), and reinforced efforts by different Regions
and GPs in cross-learning and applying good practices which informed design of operations, including
through Quality Enhancement Review (QER) of projects.

AVERAGE TIME FROM PCN TO FIRST DISBURSEMENT (IPF ONLY)
30.0
25.0

25.6

24.3

23.8

19.7

21.8

18.7

20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0

42, 48, 239, 281
2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

However, Timeliness of achievements in the field was rated low by clients in 2020 in both FCV and nonFCV countries. According to the client survey the speed of things achieved in the field, on a 10-point
scale, was rated 5.93 for FCV countries and 6.09 for non-FCV countries (of the 10 items rated, this item
was rated as third lowest for non-FCV and fourth lowest for FCV countries) (RAP 2020). Over-optimistic
implementation schedules were noted as a challenge in the 2018 RAP.
Through 2017, the World Bank’s Corporate Scorecards included an indicator tracking time elapsed
between the development of concept notes and the first disbursements in Bank-supported projects.
In FY16 it was 27.7 months and in FY17 it was 25.4 months, this indicator was marked as off-track in
both years (the target was 18 months by FY17). No corporate scorecard was published in 2018. Since
2019, the corporate scorecards no longer include this indicator. Such an indicator or other information
on project implementation tracking and timelines would be necessary to verify client perceptions on
timeliness.
MI 11.2: Evidence confidence

Medium confidence

KPI 12: Results are sustainable

KPI score

Unrated

N/E

The Bank does not provide direct synthetic assessments of the extent to which the results of its operations are sustainable. What
we know about the conditions of project identification, formulation and implementation and detailed ex-ante risk assessments
suggest that it could be the case. However, the absence of ex-post assessments of the sustainability of the outcomes of the
Bank’s operations does not provide sufficiently reliable evidence to rate this KPI.

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 185

MI 12.1: Benefits assessed as continuing, or likely to continue after intervention completion
(Where applicable, reference to building institutional or community capacity and/or
strengthening enabling environment for development, in support of 2030 Sustainable
Development Agenda)

Score

MI rating

Unrated

MI score

N/E

4. Highly satisfactory: Evaluations assess as likely that the intervention will result in continued benefits
for the target group after completion. For humanitarian relief operations, the strategic and operational
measures to link relief to rehabilitation, reconstruction and, eventually, development are credible.
Moreover, they are likely to succeed in securing continuing benefits for the target group. Sustainability
may be supported by building institutional capacity and/or strengthening the enabling environment
for development.
3. Satisfactory: Evaluations assess as likely that the intervention will result in continued benefits for the
target group after completion. For humanitarian relief operations, strategic and operational measures
link relief to rehabilitation, reconstruction
2. Unsatisfactory: Evaluations assess as a low probability that the intervention will result in continued
benefits for the target group after completion. For humanitarian relief operations, efforts to link the
relief phase to rehabilitation, reconstruction and, eventually, to development are inadequate. (In some
circumstances such linkage may not be possible due to the context of the emergency. If this is stated in
the evaluation, a rating of satisfactory is appropriate)
1. Highly unsatisfactory: Evaluations find a very low probability that the programme programme/
project will result in continued intended benefits for the target group after project completion. For
humanitarian relief operations, evaluations find no strategic or operational measures to link relief, to
rehabilitation, reconstruction and, eventually, to development
MI 12.1: Analysis
According to the MOPAN definition of the sustainability of intervention’s results, which corresponds to
the one agreed upon by the members of the OECD/DAC, interventions’ results are deemed sustainable
if their benefits are assessed as continuing or likely to continue after intervention completion. IFC and
MIGA report, notably in the RAPs and the corporate scorecards, on the “economic sustainability” of their
interventions, which can be considered close to the MOPAN/DAC definition, but as already highlighted
in the previous MOPAN Assessment (2016), the WB does not. The RAPs, the corporate scorecards or IEG
thematic evaluations do not provide syntheses or analyses focused on the sustainability of the Bank
intervention’s results in line with the above definition. Direct assessment of KPI 12 based on highly
reliable information is, therefore, not possible.
The evidence density matrix annexed to the MOPAN 3.1 methodology shows that the assessment of the
KPIs related to the Results performance area should only be based on documents, which prevents the
assessment team from analysing the perception of the external stakeholders, WB staff and management,
of the sustainability of WB interventions through the survey of interviews.
A more indirect approach to address KPI 12 is, therefore, necessary but can only provide low evidence
confidence. According to the WB annual Report 2022, the mission of the WBG centres on achieving two
overarching goals in a sustainable way: end extreme poverty and promote shared prosperity. The report
provides several references to sustainability at different levels: debt sustainability, public finance/fiscal
sustainability, sustainable/ resilient response to crises, sustainable growth, sustainability of public
services (health, education, social safety nets), environmental sustainability, sustainable use of nature,

Evidence documents

186 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

sustainable landscapes, sustainable value chains and infrastructure, sustainable cities, sustainable data.
The report, as well as the previous ones, describes what the Bank is doing to contribute to improving
these different levels of sustainability, provides information about the evolution of some indicators
related to these dimensions of sustainability and resilience in the different regions of intervention, but
does not provide evidence of the causal link (actual contribution) between the Bank’s interventions
to these evolutions. As said above, the RAPs, the corporate scorecards or IEG synthesis evaluations
provide very little information to fill that gap.
Projects designed in the conditions described above (see KPI10) are likely to be relevant and benefit
from a good level of government ownership. If they are also effective, which is generally the case (see MI
9.1), one can assume that most conditions of sustainability are met: i) ownership by the Government, ii)
good level of relevance (good understanding of the problems to address and alignment on policies), iii)
realistic perception of the public finance and institutional capacities, and iv) a context of active policy
dialogue.
However, if risks are identified ex ante at different levels, the extent to which they have materialised
and the consequences on the sustainability of the outcomes of the projects is not made explicit. Some
of these risks are high, especially in FCV countries, and likely to impact on project’s sustainability,
particularly when they are related to the long term political support to the project, the capacity /
willingness to finance the necessary running cost after the end of the WB support, notably when the
project involves the participation of the private sector, the institutional capacity to manage the project
without the support and incentives provided by the Bank, evolution of prices and market conditions or
climate related risks.
The conclusion is that the Bank does not provide enough evidence to allow for rating this KPI.
MI 12.1: Evidence confidence

N/A

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 187

ANNEX B: D O CUM E N T L I ST
No.
1

Reference
“Joint MDB Statement of Ambitions for Crowding in Private Finance” (2016), https://www.bundesfinanzministerium.
de/Content/EN/Standardartikel/Topics/world/G7-G20/G20-Documents/Hamburg_reports-mentioned/Joint-MDBStatement-of-Ambitions.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 (accessed 11 May 2022)

2

“MDB Harmonized Definition for Private Mobilisation – Reference Guide” (n.d), https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/
page/672516/mdbs-private-investment-mobilisation-guide.pdf (accessed 22 May 2022)

3

Cordella, Tito (2018) Optimizing Finance for Development; Optimizing Finance for Development. Policy Research
Working Paper; No. 8320, World Bank Group , Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/859191517234026362/pdf/WPS8320.pdf

4

IBRD (2012), IBRD Articles of Agreement, IBRD, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/
doc/722361541184234501-0330022018/original/IBRDArticlesOfAgreementEnglish.pdf

5

IBRD (2020), Management’s Discussion & Analysis and Financial Statements, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

6

IBRD (2021a), IBRD By-Laws, IBRD, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/
da5e82c51598fb16e522651f2944e5f1-0330032021/original/IBRD-By-Laws.pdf

7

IBRD (2021b), Management’s Discussion & Analysis and Financial Statements (Fiscal 2021), World Bank Group,
Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/9e6e5c7c885899cba176dd6e1409cbeb-0040012021/original/
IBRD-Financial-Statements-June-2021.pdf

8

IBRD (2022), Management Discussion and Analysis and Financial Statements, IBRD, Washington, DC

9

ICAI (2022), “Report: The UK’s support to the World Bank’s International Development Association,” https://icai.
independent.gov.uk/html-version/the-uks-support-to-the-world-banks-international-development-association/”
(accessed 22 June 2023)

10

IDA (1960), Articles of Agreement, IDA, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/
doc/2a209939e876fdcd0d957036daebff6e-0410011960/original/IDA-Articles-of-Agreement-English.pdf

11

IDA (1981), IDA By-Laws, IDA, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/
doc/664b427750bddc333db3b84fb12176da-0330031981/original/IDA-By-Laws.pdf

12

IDA (2016), IDA18 Special Theme: Gender and Development, IDA, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/
curated/en/846661468196734005/pdf/106181-BR-IDA-18-Gender-Development-PUBLIC-disclosed-6-2-2016-11-31PMIDA-SecM2016-0114-Box360260B.pdf

13

IDA (2019a), IDA 19 Special Theme: Climate Change, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/697881563778032139/pdf/IDA19-Second-Replenishment-Meeting-Special-Theme-ClimateChange.pdf

14

IDA (2019b), IDA 19 Special Theme: Fragility, Conflict & Violence, IDA, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.
org/curated/en/515831563779134705/pdf/IDA19-Second-Replenishment-Meeting-Special-Theme-Fragility-Conflict-andViolence.pdf

15

IDA (2020), IDA 19: An Overview – Ten Years to 2030: Growth, People, Resilience, IDA Washington, DC, https://
documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/459531582153485508/pdf/Additions-to-IDA-Resources-NineteenthReplenishment-Ten-Years-to-2030-Growth-People-Resilience.pdf

188 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

16

IDA (2020a), Management’s Discussion & Analysis and Financial Statements, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

17

IDA (2020b), Report from the Executive Directors of the International Development Association to the Board of
Governors – Additions to IDA Resources: Nineteenth Replenishment – IDA19: Ten Years to 2030: Growth, People,
Resilience, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

18

IDA (2021a), IDA 20 Special Theme: Climate Change, IDA, Washington, DC

19

IDA (2021b), IDA 20 Special Theme: Fragility, Conflict & Violence, IDA, Washington, DC

20

IDA (2021c), IDA 20 Special Theme: Gender and Development, IDA, Washington, DC

21

IDA (2021d), IDA 20: An Overview – Building Back Better from the Crisis: Towards a Green, Resilient, and Inclusive Future,
IDA, Washington, DC

22

IDA (2021e), IDA18 Retrospective Investing in Growth, Resilience, and Opportunity through Innovation, IDA, Washington,
DC

23

IDA (2021f), IDA19 Implementation Review and Launch of IDA20 Replenishment, Virtual Meeting – April 14-15, 2021,
Co-Chairs’ Summary, IDA, Washington, DC

24

IDA (2021g), IDA19: Implementation of Policy Commitments and Results Update, IDA, Washington, DC

25

IDA (2021h), IDA19: Implementation Status and Proposed Reallocations, IDA, Washington, DC

26

IDA (2021i), IDA20 Results Measurement System, IDA, Washington, DC

27

IDA (2021j), Management’s Discussion & Analysis and Financial Statements (Fiscal 2021), IDA, Washington, DC

28

IDA (2022a), Additions to IDA Resources: Twentieth Replenishment – Building Back Better from the Crisis: Toward a
Green, Resilient and Inclusive Future, IDA, Washington, DC

29

IDA (2019c), IDA19 Special Theme: Gender and Development, IDA, Washington, DC

30

IDA (2022c), Management Discussion and Analysis and Financial Statements, IDA, Washington, DC

31

IDA (n.d.a), “Resource Management,” https://ida.worldbank.org/en/financing/resource-management (accessed 31 May
2022)

32

IDA (n.d.b), Annex 2: IDA’s Performance Based Allocations System for IDA 19, IDA, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.
worldbank.org/en/doc/79cd8ebb4261ba33ba5f2968f783657c-0410012020/original/ida19-replenishment-reportannex-2.pdf

33

IEG (2011), Access to Information Policy, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

34

IEG (2016), Program-for-Results An Early-Stage Assessment of the Process and Effects of a New Lending Instrument,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

35

IEG (2017), Draft Guidelines for Reviewing Implementation Completion and Results Reports – A Manual for IEG ICR
Reviewers, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/More-on-IEG/
icrr_evaluatormanual_august2018.pdf

36

IEG (2017b), World Bank Group Joint Projects: A Review of Two Decades of Experience Lessons and Implications from
Evaluation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC. https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/Evaluation/
files/lp_wbgjointprojects.pdf

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 189

No.

Reference

37

IEG (2018), Engaging Citizens for Better Development Results – An Independent Evaluation, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

38

IEG (2019a), IDA Regional Window Program 2003-17 Lessons from IEG Evaluations, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

39

IEG (2019b), IEG Annual Report 2019: Transforming Evidence into Better Outcomes, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

40

IEG (2019c), Knowledge Flow and Collaboration Under the World Bank’s New Operating Model – An Independent
Evaluation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

41

IEG (2019d), Learning from IDA Experience – Lessons from IEG Evaluations with a focus on IDA Special themes and
Development Effectiveness, World Bank Group, Washington, DC,

42

IEG (2019e), Results and Performance of the World Bank Group 2018, World Bank Group, Washington, DC,

43

IEG (2019f), Two to Tango An Evaluation of the World Bank Group Support to Fostering Regional Integration, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/Evaluation/files/Regionalintegration.pdf

44

IEG (2020a), Approach Paper: Enhancing the Effectiveness of the World Bank’s Global Footprint, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

45

IEG (2020b), IEG Workprogram and Budget (FY20) and Indicative Plan (FY21-22), World Bank Group, Washington,
DChttps://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/329871561057187414/pdf/Independent-Evaluation-Group-IEG-WorkProgram-and-Budget-FY20-and-Indicative-Plan-FY21-22.pdf

46

IEG (2020c), Insights for a Rapidly Changing World: IEG Annual Report 2020, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

47

IEG (2020d), Management Action Record Reform – IEG’s Validation Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

48

IEG (2020e), Results and Performance of the World Bank Group 2020, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

49

IEG (2020f), The World Bank Group’s Outcome Orientation at the Country Level,World Bank Group, Washington, DC

50

IEG (2020g), The World’s Bank An Evaluation of the World Bank Group’s Global Convening, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.
org/sites/default/files/Data/Evaluation/files/WBG_Convening_Power.pdf

51

IEG (2020h), World Bank Group Approaches to Mobilize Private Capital for Development An Independent Evaluation,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

52

IEG (2021a), A Bridge to the Future – Learning from the Past through Evaluation: IEG Annual Report 2021, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

53

IEG (2021b), A Meta-Evaluation of Independent Evaluation Group Evaluations (Fiscal Years 2015–19), World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

54

IEG (2021c), FY21 Workprogram and budget – FY22-23 Indicative Plan, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://ieg.
worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/reports/iegworkprogramfy21.pdf

55

IEG (2021d), Results and Performance of the World Bank Group 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

56

IEG (2021e), The World Bank Group’s Experience with the IDA Private Sector Window An Early-Stage Assessment, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

57

IEG (2021f), Validation of Management’s Progress on Independent Evaluation Group Recommendations – An
Independent Evaluation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/
Evaluation/files/MARValidation2021.pdf

190 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

58

IEG (2021g), World Bank Engagement in Situations of Conflict – An Evaluation of FY10–20 Experience, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/Evaluation/files/SituationsofConflict.pdf

59

IEG (2021h), World Bank Group Gender Strategy Mid-Term Review an Assessment by the Independent Evaluation Group,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/d396bffb-da2e5afc-96cf-5dbd7e819490/content

60

IEG (2022a), Approach Paper International Finance Corporation Country Diagnostics and Strategies under IFC 3.0: An
Early-Stage Assessment, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

61

IEG (2022b), Enhancing the Effectiveness of the World Bank’s Global Footprint, World Bank Group, Washington, DC,

62

IEG (2022c), FY22 Workprogram and budget – FY23-24 Indicative Plan, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://ieg.
worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/reports/iegworkprogramfy22-24.pdf

63

IEG (2022d), Reducing Disaster Risks from Natural Hazards An Evaluation of the World Bank’s Support, Fiscal Years 2010–
20, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

64

IEG (2023), Results and Performance of the World Bank Group 2022, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

65

IEG (n.d.a), “Blogs,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/blogs (accessed 22 May 2022)

66

IEG (n.d.b), “Brenda Barbour,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/expert/brenda-barbour (accessed 22 May 2022)

67

IEG (n.d.c), “Evaluation Methods Resources,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/methods-resources (accessed 22 May 2022)

68

IEG (n.d.d), “External Reviews,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/external-reviews (accessed 22 May 2022)

69

IEG (n.d.e), “Introduction: What have we learned” podcadst, https://whathavewelearned.podbean.com/e/introductionwhat-have-we-learned/ (accessed 22 May 2022)

70

IEG (n.d.f), “Management Action Record Database (Fiscal Years 2012 – 2018),” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/
managementactionrecord (accessed 22 May 2022)

71

IEG (n.d.g), “News,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/news (accessed 22 May 2022)

72

IEG (n.d.h), “Search – ICRR,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/ieg-search-icrr (accessed 22 May 2022)

73

IEG (n.d.i), “Search,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/ieg-search (accessed 22 May 2022)

74

IEG (n.d.j), “Topics,” https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/topics (accessed 22 May 2022)

75

IEG (n.d.k), IEG Lessons Library, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/topic/covid-19-coronavirus-response (accessed 11 May
2022)

76

IEG (n.d.l), Lessons from Fragility, Conflict and Violence (FCV) for COVID–19: A Reference Guide Navigating IEG’s Evidence
to Inform the COVID-19 Responses, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

77

IEG (n.d.m), Management Action Record (webpage), (accessed 11 May 2022)

78

IFC (n.d.n), “Country Private Sector Diagnostic (CPSD),” https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/publications_ext_
content/ifc_external_publication_site/publications/cpsds (accessed 22 May 2022)

79

IMF and World Bank (2021), Guidance Note on Information Sharing between IMF and World Bank Staff, IMF and World
Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/780681645634519627/pdf/GuidanceNote-on-Information-Sharing-Between-IMF-and-World-Bank-Staff.pdf

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 191

No.

Reference

80

Inspection Panel (n.d.a), “How to File a Complaint (Request for Inspection),” https://www.inspectionpanel.org/how-tofile-complaint (accessed 22 May 2022)

81

Inspection Panel (n.d.b), “The Inspection Panel,” https://www.inspectionpanel.org/ (accessed 22 May 2022)

82

Mobilisation of Private Finance by Multilateral Development Banks and Development Finance institutions (2016), World
Bank Group , Washington, DC

83

Mobilisation of Private Finance by Multilateral Development Banks and Development Finance institutions (2017), World
Bank Group , Washington, DC

84

Mobilisation of Private Finance by Multilateral Development Banks and Development Finance institutions (2019), World
Bank Group , Washington, DC

85

MOPAN (2016), MOPAN 2015-16 Assessments – The World Bank – Institutional Assessment Report, MOPAN, Paris, https://
www.mopanonline.org/assessments/worldbank2015-16/Mopan%20World%20Bank%20interactive%20final.pdf

86

OVE (2022), OVE’s Review of Project Completion Reports and Expanded Supervision Reports: The 2022 Validation Cycle,
Washington, DC, https://www.ecgnet.org/sites/default/files/OVEs-Review-of-Project-Completion-Reports-PCRs-andExpanded-Supervision-Reports-XSRs-The-2022-Validation-Cycle.pdf

87

Standard and Poors (2022a), S&P Global Ratings – International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

88

Standard and Poors (2022b), S&P Global Ratings – International Development Association

89

Standard and Poors (2023a), S&P Global Ratings – International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

90

Standard and Poors (2023b), S&P Global Ratings – International Development Association

91

World and the United Nations (2021), United Nations – World Bank Partnership Framework for Crisis-Affected Situations
– 2020 UN-WB Partnership Monitoring Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

92

World Bank (2006), Disbursement Handbook for World Bank Clients, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://www.
eximb.com/upload/app_links/1241.pdf

93

World Bank (2013a), Guidance on the Accountability and Decision Making Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

94

World Bank (2013b), Operational Manual OP 8.40 – Technical Assistance, , Washington, DC, https://ppfdocuments.
azureedge.net/1754.pdf

95

World Bank (2014a) Guidance: Policy and Procedure Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

96

World Bank (2014b) QER Guidance Note, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

97

World Bank (2014c), Interim Guidance Note Systematic Operations Risk-Rating Tool (SORT), World Bank Group,
Washington, DC, https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/SORT_Guidance_Note_11_7_14.pdf

98

World Bank (2015), Bank Policy- Access to Information, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

99

World Bank (2016a) Accountability and Decision Making (ADM) Roles (presentation), World Bank Group, Washington, DC

100

World Bank (2016b) Guidance on the Accountability and Decision Making Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

101

World Bank (2016c), Bank Directive – Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects
Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

192 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

102

World Bank (2016d), The World Bank’s Risk Framework for Operations – Update on the First Year of Implementation,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

103

World Bank (2016e), World Bank Strategy to Address Conflict and Fragility in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

104

World Bank (2017a) Maximising Finance for Development: Leveraging Private Sector Growth and Sustainable
Development, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

105

World Bank (2017b) Guidance – Anti-Harassment, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

106

World Bank (2017c), Global Gender-Based Violence Task Force: Action Plan for Implementation, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/206731510166266845/pdf/121031-WP-PUBLIC-GenderBased-Violence-Task-Force-Action-Plan.pdf

107

World Bank (2017d), The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

108

World Bank (2017e), Streamlining Restructuring Policies and Procedures for Investment Project Financing and
Programme for Results Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/372071500929803067/pdf/Streamlining-restructuring-final-for-Board-07192017.pdf

109

World Bank (2018a), Policy Research Paper: Optimising Finance for Development, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

110

World Bank (2018b), “World Bank Group Statement on Policies, Accountability Mechanisms and Stakeholder
Participation in WBG Projects”, World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/
press-release/2015/06/22/world-bank-group-statement-on-policies-accountability-mechanisms-and-stakeholderparticipation-in-wbg-projects

111

World Bank (2018c), Guidance Note for Borrowers – Environmental & Social Framework for IPF Operations – ESS10:
Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/476161530217390609/ESF-Guidance-Note-10-Stakeholder-Engagement-and-InformationDisclosure-English.pdf

112

World Bank (2019a), Reserves Advisory and Management Programme, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

113

World Bank (2019b), “Environmental and Social Framework” Factsheet, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://
thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/725431477511695716-0290022019/original/ESFfactsheetEnglish.pdf

114

World Bank (2019c), Annual Report 2019: Ending Poverty, Investing in Opportunity, World Bank Group, Washington,
DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/156691570147766895/pdf/The-World-Bank-Annual-Report-2019Ending-Poverty-Investing-in-Opportunity.pdf

115

World Bank (2019d), Bank Directive/Procedure – Access to Information Directive/Procedure, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

116

World Bank (2019e), Financial Intermediary Fund Management Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://
fiftrustee.worldbank.org/content/dam/fif/documents/fif-framework.pdf

117

World Bank (2019f), FY20 World Bank Budget, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

118

World Bank (2019g), Update: Realignment of Practice Group Management Responsibilities, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 193

No.

Reference

119

World Bank (2020a), “5 Years of Climate Leadership: The World Bank Group’s First Climate Action Plan,” https://www.
worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2020/09/08/5-years-of-climate-leadership-the-world-bank-groups-firstclimate-action-plan (accessed 22 May 2022)

120

World Bank (2020b), “Citizen Engagement and Stakeholder Consultations during COVID-19 – Factsheet, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/875401606251371090-0090022020/original/
FactSheetCitizenEngagementandStakeholderConsultationsduringCOVID19.pdf

121

World Bank (2020c), “Our Organisation,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/annual-report/ourorganisation#:~:text=The%20%E2%80%9CW%E2%80%9D%20process%20is%20anchored,stronger%20World%20
Bank%20Group%20collaboration (accessed 1 April 2023)

122

World Bank (2020d), Annual Report 2020: Supporting Countries in Unprecedented Times, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

123

World Bank (2020e), Atlas of the Sustainable Development Goals from the World Development Indicators, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://datatopics.worldbank.org/sdgatlas/

124

World Bank (2020f), Bank Directive – Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS), World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

125

World Bank (2020g), FY21 World Bank Budget, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

126

World Bank (2020h), Good Practice Note – Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse and Sexual Harassment
in Investment Project Financing Involving Major Civil Works, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.
worldbank.org/en/doc/741681582580194727-0290022020/original/ESFGoodPracticeNoteonGBVinMajorCivilWorksv2.
pdf

127

World Bank (2020i), The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) – Implementation Update, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC.

128

World Bank (2021a), Latin and Caribbean Region Anti-Racism Taskforce, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

129

World Bank (2021b) Latin and Caribbean Region Working Group on Collaboration, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

130

World Bank (2021c) Latin and Caribbean Region Working Group on Institutional Processes, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

131

World Bank (2021d), Latin and Caribbean Region Working Group on Training and Learning, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

132

World Bank (2021e), LCRVP Safe Space Announcement, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

133

World Bank (2021f), Middle East and North Africa Region Staff Engagement Survey Action Plan, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

134

World Bank (2021g), Country Framework on Gender – West Bank and Gaza FY21-23, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

135

World Bank (2021h), Country Framework on Gender for Egypt, Yemen and Djibouti FY21-23, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

136

World Bank (2021i), Masreq Framework on Gender, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

137

World Bank (2021j), Regional Action Plan on Gender-based Violence in the Middle East and North Africa, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

194 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

138

World Bank (2021k), Risk and Resilience Assessment Methodology, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

139

World Bank (2021l), Trust Fund Policy, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/987411611543659040/pdf/Trust-Fund-Policy.pdf

140

World Bank (2021m), World Bank Trust Funds: New Cost Recovery Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://
thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/1ddff870f2ebee8ec76dfb7383d67c96-0060072021/original/CR-Fact-Sheet-2021.pdf

141

World Bank (2021n), The Value of Trade and Regional Investments in the Pan-Arab Electricity Market – Integrating Power
Systems and Building Economies, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

142

World Bank (2021o), Access to Information Annual Report Fiscal Year 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

143

World Bank (2021p), Annual Report 2021: From Crisis to Green, Resilient and Inclusive Recovery, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

144

World Bank (2021q), Bank Directive – Investment Project Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

145

World Bank (2021r), Bank Directive: Cost Recovery for Trust Funds, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

146

World Bank (2021s), Bank Policy – Investment Project Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

147

World Bank (2021t), Climate Change Action Plan for the Latin America and Caribbean Region, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

148

World Bank (2021u), FY22 World Bank Budget, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

149

World Bank (2021v), Impact Report: Sustainable Development Bonds and Green Bonds, World Bank Group, Washington,
DC

150

World Bank (2021w), Middle East and North Africa Climate Change Roadmap, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

151

World Bank (2021x), Organisational Chart Effective June 1, 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, , World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

152

World Bank (2021y), Procurement Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and Sexual Harassment (SEA/SH):
Prevention and Response Measures – Questions and answers for Borrowers and contractors, , World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/844301612216257638-0290022021/original/
QAsSEASHpreventionProcurementforborrowerscontractors.pdf

153

World Bank (2021z), Resilience Rating System: A Methodology for Building and Tracking Resilience to Climate Change,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

154

World Bank (2021aa), Sustainable Development Bond Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

155

World Bank (2021ab), World Bank Group Statement on Sexual Harassment, , World Bank Group, Washington,
DC, https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2021/10/06/world-bank-group-statement-on-sexualharassment#:~:text=WASHINGTON%2C%20October%206%2C%202021%E2%80%94,to%20report%20allegations%20
of%20wrongdoing.

156

World Bank (2021ac), Using Evaluative Evidence to Deliver Development Outcomes – A World Bank Group Management
Report on Implementation of IEG Recommendations FY17 -21, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

157

World Bank (2022a), Engagement Survey Action Planning Guide, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

158

World Bank (2022b), Supporting Anti-Racism in Client Facing Work, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 195

No.

Reference

159

World Bank (2022c), Annual Report 2022: Helping Countries Adapt to a Changing World, World Bank Group, Washington,
DC

160

World Bank (2022d), FY23 Budget, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

161

World Bank (2022e), “Africa Centres for Disease Control Receives a $100 Million Boost from the World Bank to
Strengthen Continental Public Health Preparedness,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/07/21/
africa-centres-for-disease-control-receives-a-100-million-boost-from-the-world-bank-to-strengthen-continental-publichea (accessed 22 May 2022)

162

World Bank (2022f), Bank Directive – Financial Terms and Conditions of Bank Financing, World Bank Group, Washington,
DC

163

World Bank (2022g), Bank Directive – Program-for-Results Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

164

World Bank (2022h), Bank Policy – Financial Terms and Conditions of Bank Financing, World Bank Group, Washington,
DC

165

World Bank (2022i), Bank Policy – Program-for-Results Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

166

World Bank (2022j), Bank Procedure – Strategic External Funding Framework and Fundraising Initiative Notes, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

167

World Bank (2022k), Evolving the World Bank Group to Better Response to an Evolving World, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

168

World Bank (2022l), Good Practice Note – Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse and Sexual Harassment
in Human Development Operations, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/
e2ff01be0f07c82d73bc0c5e7ddf394f-0290032022/original/ESF-Good-Practice-Note-on-Addressing-SEA-SH-in-HDOperations-First-Edition-September-16-2022.pdf

169

World Bank (2022m), Procurement in World Bank Investment Project Financing – Review of Results After Five Years of
Implementation of the Procurement Framework FY17 – FY21, , World Bank Group, Washington, DC. https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/099344407222215011/pdf/IDU036bdc0a7080b0b4a8022d1048861d5.pdf

170

World Bank (2022n), Strategic External Funds Framework 2.0 User Guide, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

171

World Bank (2022o), Strengthening the Outcome Orientation of the World Bank – A Roadmap, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

172

World Bank (2022p), WBG and World Bank Corporate Scorecards – Tracking the WBG Contribution to Development
Outcomes in a World in Flux, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

173

World Bank (2022q), World Bank Organisational Chart 2022, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

174

World Bank (2023a), A Survivor-Centred Approach to Sexual Harassment – Guidance for World Bank Group Staff, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

175

World Bank (2023b), Catalysing Transformative Initiatives in the Middle East and North Africa Region – MENA Regional
Umbrella MDTF Annual Report (2021-22), World Bank Group, Washington, DC

176

World Bank (2023c), Guidance: World Bank Paris Alignment in Investment Project Financing, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

196 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

177

World Bank (2023d), IDA19 Retrospective – Responding to Multiple Crises on the Road to 2030: Growth, People,
Resilience FY21-FY22, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

178

World Bank (2023e), Paris Alignment of World Bank Operations (presentation), World Bank Group, Washington, DC

179

World Bank (2023f), Potential Indicators related to Climate Change in the new Corporate Scorecard, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

180

World Bank (n.d.a), “2018-2019 Trust Fund Annual Report – Financial Intermediary Funds (FIFs) Reform,” https://www.
worldbank.org/en/publication/trust-fund-annual-report-2019/tf-fif-reforms/FIF (accessed 22 May 2022)

181

World Bank (n.d.b), “Access To Information – Appeals,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/access-to-information/
appealsprocess (accessed 22 May 2022)

182

World Bank (n.d.c), “Access To Information – Disclosure,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/access-to-information/
disclosure (accessed 22 May 2022)

183

World Bank (n.d.d), “Advice and Analytics,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/what-we-do/products-and-services/
advisory-services (accessed 22 May 2022)

184

World Bank (n.d.e), “Annual Report 2022 – Putting Knowledge to Work,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/annualreport/development-knowledge (accessed 22 May 2022)

185

World Bank (n.d.f), “Climate change,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/overview#3 (accessed 22
May 2022)

186

World Bank (n.d.g), “Contacts,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/contacts (accessed 22 May 2022)

187

World Bank (n.d.h), “Corporate Scorecard – About,” https://scorecard.worldbank.org/about (accessed 22 May 2022)

188

World Bank (n.d.i), “Country Climate and Development Reports (CCDRs) – About,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/
publication/country-climate-development-reports (accessed 22 May 2022)

189

World Bank (n.d.j), “Development Economics – About DEC,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/unit-dec#1
(accessed 22 May 2022)

190

World Bank (n.d.k), “Development Economics – Development Research,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/
unit-dec#4 (accessed 22 May 2022)

191

World Bank (2022r), Bank Directive – World Bank Trust Funds, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

192

World bank (n.d.m), “Ethics and Business Conduct Department,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/ethics_
and_business_conduct (accessed 22 May 2022)

193

World Bank (n.d.n), “Governance,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/governance/overview#2 (accessed 22 May 2022)

194

World Bank (n.d.o), “Grievance Redress Service – Finding Solutions Together” Brochure, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/
en/doc/bb2e4345aa86a6e92414ce9041c3048f-0290022021/original/GRS-brochure-2021-english.pdf (accessed 22 May
2022)

195

World Bank (n.d.p), “Grievance Redress Service,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/products-andservices/grievance-redress-service (accessed 22 May 2022)

196

World Bank (n.d.q), “IBRD Financial Products,” https://treasury.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/treasury/ibrd-financialproducts/creditenhancement (accessed 22 May 2022)

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 197

No.

Reference

197

World Bank (n.d.r), “IDA Regional Window,” https://idastg.albankaldawli.org/en/replenishments/ida19-replenishment/
ida19-regional-window (accessed 22 May 2022)

198

World Bank (n.d.s), “IDA19 Results Measurement System,” https://ida.worldbank.org/en/rms (accessed 22 May 2022)

199

World Bank (n.d.t), “Open about what we do and open about what we’ve done,” https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/
open-about-what-we-do-and-open-about-what-we-ve-done (accessed 22 May 2022)

200

World Bank (n.d.u), “Replenishments” https://ida.worldbank.org/en/replenishments (accessed 22 May 2022)

201

World Bank (n.d.v), “RMS – Tier 2,” https://ida.worldbank.org/en/rms/tier2 (accessed 22 May 2022)

202

World Bank (n.d.w), “Scorecard – Tier 2 Client Results,” https://scorecard.worldbank.org/en/scorecard/tier2 (accessed
22 May 2022)

203

World Bank (n.d.x), “Scorecard,” https://scorecard.worldbank.org/ (accessed 22 May 2022)

204

World Bank (n.d.y), “The World Bank Accountability Mechanism – About Us,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/
accountability/brief/about-us (accessed 22 May 2022)

205

World Bank (n.d.z), “The World Bank Administrative Tribunal,” https://tribunal.worldbank.org/(accessed 15 Novembe
2022).

206

World Bank (n.d.aa), “The World Bank and Private Sector – For Investors,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/
partners/the-world-bank-group-and-private-sector/investors (accessed 22 May 2022)

207

World Bank (n.d.b), “Treasury – About – Organisation,” https://treasury.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/treasury/about/
what-we-do (accessed 22 May 2022)

208

World Bank (n.d.ac), “World Bank Group Sanctions Board,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/sanctionssystem/sanctions-board#4 (accessed 12 June 2022)

209

World Bank (n.d.ad), “World Bank ranked among top positions in the International Aid Transparency Index (IATI),”
https://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/world-bank-ranked-among-top-positions-international-aid-transparency-index-iati
(accessed 22 May 2022)

210

World Bank (n.d.ae), Measuring & Reporting Results in the World Bank Factsheets, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

211

World Bank (n.d.af), “Combatting Corruption,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/governance/brief/anticorruption#:~:text=The%20World%20Bank%20Group%27s%20approach%20to%20fighting%20corruption,reduce%20
possible%20corruption%20risks%20that%20have%20been%20identified (accessed 31 May 2022)

212

World Bank (n.d.ag), “Integrity Vice Presidency,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/integrity-vice-presidency#2
(accessed 31 May 2022)

213

World Bank (n.d.ah.), “Office of Suspension and Debarment,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/unit/sanctionssystem/osd#6 (accessed 20 May 2022)

214

World Bank (n.d.ai), “World Bank Group Finances, “ https://financesapp.worldbank.org/summaryinfo/financialresults/
(accessed 31 May 2022)

215

World Bank (n.d.aj), “World Bank Group Project Cycle,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/productsand-services/brief/projectcycle (accessed 12 October 2022)

198 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

216

World Bank (n.d.ak), CPIA Criteria 2020, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/
d2dc7f5d00617e0d8a3f3bcbeca5a67f-0290032021/original/CPIA-Criteria-2020.pdf

217

World Bank (n.d.al),World Bank Group Statement of Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC, https://www.worldbank.org/en/about/careers/diversity-inclusion#:~:text=We%20are%20
committed%20to%20a,treatment%20is%20afforded%20to%20all.

218

World Bank Group (2010), Summary of WBG Integrity Compliance Guidelines (2010), World Bank Group, Washington, DC
https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/06476894a15cd4d6115605e0a8903f4c-0090012011/original/Summary-of-WBGIntegrity-Compliance-Guidelines.pdf

219

World Bank Group (2012), OP 13.16 – Country Portfolio Performance Reviews, http://web.worldbank.org/archive/
website01541/WEB/0__CO-95.HTM (accessed 12 April 2022)

220

World Bank Group (2013a), A Stronger, Connected, Solutions World Bank Group: An Overview of the World Bank Group
Strategy, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

221

World Bank Group (2013b), World Bank Group Strategy, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://openknowledge.
worldbank.org/entities/publication/84e1a000-3069-512c-873a-f58c2922a01f.

222

World Bank Group (2014a), IBRD/IFC/MIGA Directive – Staff Rule 6.01 – Compensation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

223

World Bank Group (2014b), Strategic Framework For Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement in World Bank Group
Operations, World Bank Group, Washington, DC https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/266371468124780089/
pdf/929570WP0Box380ategicFrameworkforCE.pdf

224

World Bank Group (2014c), World Bank Group Directive – Country Engagement, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

225

World Bank Group (2015), External Review of the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank Group – Report to
CODE from the Independent Panel, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/752241468185384036/pdf/99101-BR-REVISED-Box393188B-PUBLIC-disclosed-8-24-15-R2015-0157-1.pdf

226

World Bank Group (2016a), Forward Look: A Vision for the World Bank Group in 2030, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

227

World Bank Group (2016b), Guide to the Staff Rule 8.01 Investigative Process (Fourth Edition), World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/206451544726861592-0240022018/original/
INTGuidetotheStaffRule801InvestigativeProcessAugust2016.pdf/

228

World Bank Group (2016c), WBG Policy: Sanctions for Fraud and Corruption, , World Bank Group, Washington, DC

229

World Bank Group (2016d), World Bank Group – Gender Equality, Poverty Reduction, and Inclusive Growth – 2016-2023
– Gender Strategy, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

230

World Bank Group (2016e), World Bank Group Climate Change Action Plan 2016-2020, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

231

World Bank Group (2016f), World Bank Group Directive – Staff Rule 8.01 – Disciplinary Proceedings, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

232

World Bank Group (2016g), World Bank Group Directive – Staff Rule 9.06 – Administrative Review of Performance
Management Decisions, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

233

World Bank Group (2016h), World Bank Group Directive – Staff Rule 9.07 – Performance Management Review, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

234

World Bank Group (2017i), 2017 Trust Fund Annual Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 199

No.

Reference

235

World Bank Group (2017j), Maximising Finance for Development: Leveraging the Private Sector for Growth and
Sustainable Development, World Bank Group , Washington, DC https://www.devcommittee.org/sites/dc/files/
download/Documentation/DC2017-0009_Maximising_8-19.pdf

236

World Bank Group (2017k), Supporting Africa’s Transformation: Regional Integration and Cooperation Assistance
Strategy for the Period FY18-FY23, World Bank Gorup, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/512161528428646624/pdf/REGIONAL-INTEGRATION-12212017.pdf

237

World Bank Group (2017l), Working Together to Prevent Sexual Exploitation and Abuse: Recommendations for World
Bank Investment Projects, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

238

World Bank Group (2017m), World Bank Group Country Engagement An Early-Stage Assessment of the Systematic
Country Diagnostic and Country Partnership Framework Process and Implementation (2017)

239

World Bank Group (2017n), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – October 2017, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

240

World Bank Group (2018a), “Joint Statement on Continuous Advancement of Standards to Prevent Sexual Harassment,
Abuse, and Exploitation,” https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2018/04/24/joint-statement-of-ifis-oncontinuous-advancement-of-standards-to-prevent-sexual-harassment-abuse-exploitation (accesssed 10 June 2022)

241

World Bank Group (2018b), IBRD/IDA/IFC/MIGA Policy – Independent Evaluation Group Mandate, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

242

World Bank Group (2018c), Report to Governors at 2018 Spring Meetings – Sustainable Financing for Sustainable
Development: World Bank Group Capital Package Proposal, World Bank Gorup, Washington, DC

243

World Bank Group (2018d), Staff Rule 8.02 – Protections and Procedures for Reporting Misconduct (Whistleblowing),
World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://ppfdocuments.azureedge.net/c83a8618-27c1-4d4e-910c-4f73ae1246ab.pdf

244

World Bank Group (2019a), Brief – What happens when I submit a complaint to the World Bank Group’s Integrity Vice
Presidency (INT), , World Bank Group, Washington, DC

245

World Bank Group (2019b), Financial Intermediary Funds: A Unique Instrument in the Aid Architecture, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/db0d20470511aa9abe16c9fbf708ab39-0060052020/
original/TFReform-FIF-Reform-Overview-Aug-2019.pdf

246

World Bank Group (2019c), Report to Governors at 2019 Spring Meetings -World Bank Group Update: The Forward Look
and IBRD-IFC Capital Package Implementation – April 2019, , World Bank Group, Washington, DC

247

World Bank Group (2019d), The Sustainable Development Agenda and the World Bank Group: Closing the SDGs
Financing Gap, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

248

World Bank Group (2019e), World Bank Group Evaluation Principles, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

249

World Bank Group (2020a), Trust Fund Reform Brief – Umbrella 2.0 Programs: A Flexible Instrument for Aligning and
Managing Development Resources for Results at Scale, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

250

World Bank Group (2020b), 2020 Trust Fund Annual Report – Moving the Needle for Greater Impact, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

251

World Bank Group (2020c), Group Internal Audit – FY2020 Annual Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

252

World Bank Group (2020d), IBRD/IFC/MIGA/IDA Directive – Staff Rule 5.05 – Promotion, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

200 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

253

World Bank Group (2020e), Supporting Africa’s Recovery and Transformation: Regional Integration and Cooperation
Assistance Strategy Update for the Period FY21–FY23, , World Bank Gorup, Washington, DC, https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/249911623450779120/pdf/Supporting-Africa-s-Recovery-and-Transformation-RegionalIntegration-and-Cooperation-Assistance-Strategy-Update-for-the-Period-FY21-FY23.pdf

254

World Bank Group (2020f), World Bank Group Code of Ethics, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

255

World Bank Group (2020g), World Bank Group COVID Response Approach Paper – Saving Lives, Scaling-up Impact, and
Getting Back on Track, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

256

World Bank (2020), Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.
worldbank.org/en/doc/178331533065871195-0290022020/original/ProcurementRegulations.pdf

257

World Bank Group (2020i), World Bank Group Directive – Staff Rule 3.00 – Office of Ethics and Business Conduct (EBC),
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

258

World Bank Group (2020j), World Bank Group Directive: Staff Rules 5.03 – Performance Management Process, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

259

World Bank Group (2020k), World Bank Group Staff Code of Conduct, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

260

World Bank Group (2020l), World Bank Group Strategy for Fragility, Conflict, and Violence 2020-2025, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

261

World Bank Group (2020m), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – December 2020, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

262

World Bank Group (2020n), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – November 2020, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

263

World Bank Group (2021a), 2021 Trust Fund Annual Report – Toward Greater Resilience, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

264

World Bank Group (2021b), 2021 Trust Fund Annual Report Supplement – Lessons From the Umbrella 2.0 Transition,
World Bank Group, Washington, DC

265

World Bank Group (2021c), Corporate Scorecards November 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

266

World Bank Group (2021d), Group Internal Audit – FY2021 Annual Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

267

World Bank Group (2021e), IBRD/IFC/MIGA Directive Staff Rule 4.02, Probation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

268

World Bank Group (2021f), IBRD/IFC/MIGA/IDA Guidance – Country Engagement , World Bank Group, Washington, DC

269

World Bank Group (2021g), IBRD/IFC/MIGA/IDA Guidance – Systematic Country Diagnostic, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

270

World Bank Group (2021h), Modified Cash Basis Trust Funds – Report on Internal Control over Financial Report
Statements of Receipts, Disbursements, and Fund Balance FY21,World Bank Group, Washington, DC

271

World Bank Group (2021i), Partnering with the World Bank through Trust Funds – Transitioning to an Umbrella 2.0based Portfolio – Guide for Development Partners, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/
en/doc/7de2d3f16b058ddce723a38a15832ed4-0060052020/original/TFReform-Transition-Guide.pdf

272

World Bank Group (2021j), Realizing the World Bank Group’s Knowledge Potential for Effective Development Solutions :
A Strategic Framework, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

ANNEX B – EVIDENCE LIST . 201

No.

Reference

273

World Bank Group (2021k), Upholding Our Values to Improve Our Workplace Culture – Ethics and Business Conduct
Annual Report 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/documents/
sanctions/other-documents/osd/WBG%20Policy%20-%20Sanctions%20for%20Fraud%20and%20Corruption%20
(June%2013,%202016).pdf

274

World Bank Group (2021l), World Bank Group Climate Change Action Plan 2021–2025: Supporting Green, Resilient, and
Inclusive Development, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

275

World Bank Group (2021m), World Bank Group Sanctions System Annual Report Fiscal Year 2021, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

276

World Bank Group (2022a), 2022 Trust Funds Annual Report -Navigating Uncertainty on the Path to Recovery, World
Bank Group, Washington, DC

277

World Bank Group (2022b), Enhancing Institutional Resilience – Ethics and Business Conduct Annual Report, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/ba784ef0d11a7a43ce1c2d15617bcef4-0090012022/
original/EBC-Annual-Report-FY2022.pdf

278

World Bank Group (2022c), FY 2022 Bangladesh Country Opinion Survey Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

279

World Bank Group (2022d), Navigating Multiple Crises, Staying the Cource on Long-term Development the World
Bank Group’s Response to the Crises Affecting Developing Countries – The World Bank Group’s Response to the Crises
Affecting Developing Countries, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/
en/099640108012229672/pdf/IDU09002cbf10966704fa00958a0596092f2542c.pdf

280

World Bank Group (2022e), World Bank Group Sanctions System Annual Report 2022, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

281

World Bank Group (2022f), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – October 2022, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

282

World bank Group (n.d.a), World Bank Group I World Bank, Corporate Scorecards, Supplemental Document – Data Table
& Definitions, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

283

World Bank Group (n.d.b), WBG Action Plan for Preventing and Addressing Sexual Harassment FY19-21, World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

284

World Bank Group Administrative Tribunal (2021) “FW and FX vs International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development”, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

285

World Bank Group (2019f), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – November 2019, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

286

World Bank Group (2016i), World Bank Group/World Bank – Corporate Scorecards – April 2016, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

287

World Bank (2017f), Bank Policy – Development Policy Financing, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://
ppfdocuments.azureedge.net/b98d432b-7471-441b-9f39-36b7c380bd05.pdf

288

IEG (2021i), The Natural Resource Degradation and Vulnerability Nexus An Evaluation of the World Bank’s Support for
Sustainable and Inclusive Natural Resource Management (2009–19), World Bank Group, Washington, DC

202 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

No.

Reference

289

IDA (2017), Report from the Executive Directors of the International Development Association to the Board of
Governors -Additions to IDA Resources: Eighteenth Replenishment – Towards 2030: Investing in Growth, Resilience and
Opportunity, IDA, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/348661486654455091/pdf/112728correct-file-PUBLIC-Rpt-from-EDs-Additions-to-IDA-Resources-2-9-17-For-Disclosure.pdf

290

World Bank (2021ad), Development Policy Retrospective 2021, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/099623509132210285/pdf/IDU0249804670b2fc0466f083850d1aad1818915.pdf

291

World Bank (2020j), “Private Sector Window”, https://ida.worldbank.org/en/financing/ida-private-sector-window
(accessed 10 December 2022)

292

World Bank (2022r), ADM for ASA and IP, World Bank Group, Washington, DC

293

World Bank Group (2017o), Operationalizing the IDA18 IFC -MIGA Private Sector Window, World Bank Group,
Washington, DC

294

World Bank (2018d), Advisory Services and Analytics (ASA), Including Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS), World Bank
Group, Washington, DC

295

IDA (2022d), IDA19 Gender special theme final implementation update on policy commitments

296

World Bank (n.d.al), World Bank (IBRD/IDA) Results Highlights (internal note), World Bank Group, Washington, DC

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 203

ANNEX C : R E S U LTS O F TH E M O PA N E XTE R N A L
PART NER S U R VE Y
Key Partner Survey Information
Sample Countries

Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Burundi, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Lao PDR,
Nigeria, Pakistan, Taijikistan, Türkiye, Yemen

Effective Sample Size

1475 respondents

Survey Responses (Response Rate)

280 (19%)

Survey Timeframe

June-September 2022

RESPONDENT PROFILE

28

Board member

60

Donor

13
66

Borrower country

8

Operational partner

7
7

Non-Gov donor to trust fund

19

29

Peer organisation

15

9

Civil society organisation

5

Private sector

6
6

Knowledge partner

0

20

2
40

60

Global

Country

80

100

204 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

SURVEY RESULTS
Strategic management
MO strategies and policies demonstrate clarity of vision and good understanding of comparative advantage.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

agreeof the
Agree
Somewhat
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Don’t know / No opinion
TheStrongly
strategies
World Bank
demonstrate
good understanding
of their comparative
advantage.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree
Strongly agree

Agree
Agree

Somewhat agree
Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree
Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree
Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion
Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 205

The World Bank organises and runs itself in a way that fully supports its vision.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s financial framework supports the effective implementation of the mandate and strategy.
Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s strategic allocation of resources is transparent and aligned with agreed strategic priorities.
Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank applies principles of results-based budgeting and reports its expenditures according to results.
Board member
Donor
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree
Strongly agree

Agree
Agree

Somewhat agree
Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree
Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree
Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion
Don’t know / No opinion

206 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank adequately addresses issues and concerns raised by internal control mechanisms (including
operational and financial risk management, internal audit, social and environmental safeguards).
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank manages a range of trust funds and other concessional resources that can be applied flexibly and
efficiently to address emergencies, conflict, knowledge work and global public goods in different countries.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 207

The World Bank manages trust funds efficiently, including through pooled and umbrella funds
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank has a COVID strategy that is clear and reflects its comparative advantage.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

208 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Staffing
The World Bank has a sufficient number of staff, either in or accessible to countries where it operates to deliver
intended results.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s staff have the relevant experience and skills to work successfully in their technical/sectoral context.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 209

The World Bank’s staff are present in country for a long enough time to build the necessary relationships to deliver.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank makes critical strategic or programming decisions affecting country in an agile and responsive way.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

210 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Cross-cutting issues
The World Bank promotes gender equality through its operations and strategies.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank promotes environmental sustainability and addresses climate change through its operations and
strategies.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 211

The World Bank considers and addresses risks of fragility, conflict and violence in its interventions and strategies.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

The World Bank promotes the protection of vulnerable people in its operations.

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

212 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Interventions
The World Bank’s work responds to the needs of beneficiaries, including the most vulnerable populations.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

The World Bank adapts its work as necessary when the context changes.

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 213

The World Bank’s work is aligned with the development needs and priorities of the countries in which it works.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s strategies and interventions are informed by an analysis of situations and needs, including those in
the local context as relevant.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

214 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank’s work with partners is based on a clear understanding of why it is best placed to target specific
sectoral and/or thematic areas.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s work takes into account national/regional capacity, including of government, civil society, private
sector and other actors.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 215

In country, the World Bank’s operations and strategies target long-term development outcomes and changes in
capacity.
Donor

Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s work in country is selective, targeting sectors where it can contribute to long-term impacts.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

216 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank provides an appropriate mix of technical advice, financing and knowledge to address key development
challenges in country.
Donor

Borrower country
Peer organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank designs and implements its work in country in such a way that its effects and impact are likely to be
sustained over time.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 217

The World Bank appropriately manages risk within the context of its work in country.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank has been able to adapt its operating model in country in response to COVID-19 to ensure operational
continuity.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

218 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

Financial Resources Management
The World Bank openly communicates the criteria for approving operations and allocating financial resources.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank provides reliable information on when financial allocations and disbursement will happen, and the
respective amounts.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 219

The World Bank co-ordinates its activities with partners to ensure coherence and avoid fragmentation/duplication
at country level.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank has been able to adapt its programming and financing to respond to COVID-19 in an agile and
responsive way.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

220 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank actively seeks co-financing with development partners and opportunities to mobilise finance from
the private sector.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Managing Relationships
The World Bank’s knowledge products are useful for my work.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 221

The World Bank’s knowledge products are provided in a format that makes them easy to use.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s knowledge products are timely.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

222 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank provides high-quality inputs to global policy dialogue.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank allocates sufficient resources to support strategic knowledge work.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 223

The World Bank convenes development partners to promote a coherent response to development challenges.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank shares key information (analysis, budgeting, management, results) with partners in line with IATI
requirements.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

224 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank helps develop institutional capacity of borrowing partners through its strategies and interventions.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank’s management processes (e.g. hiring, procuring, disbursing) do not cause unnecessary delays for
partners in implementing operations.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Private sector
Operational partner

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 225

The World Bank seizes opportunities to support countries in furthering their development partnerships through
South-South Cooperation and triangular relationships (e.g. support to regional organisations and initiatives).
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank is actively engaged in co-ordination mechanisms for planning, implementation, monitoring alongside
the host country and other development partners in country.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society
Knowledge partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank jointly monitors progress on shared goals in country with local and regional partners.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree
Strongly agree

Agree
Agree

Somewhat agree
Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree
Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree
Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree
Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion
Don’t know / No opinion

226 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank increases the impact of interventions through the provision of technical guidance and project
preparation support.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank identifies and manages the potential environmental and social impacts of its projects in country.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner

0%
Strongly agree

Strongly agree

Agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

30%

Somewhat disagree

Somewhat disagree

40%

Disagree

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 227

The World Bank engages civil society and Project Affected People (PAPs) in country and addresses any grievances
raised.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Knowledge partner
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank requires its partners to apply clear standards for preventing and responding to sexual misconduct in
relation to host populations.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Operational partner

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

228 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank has provided relevant knowledge and thought leadership in the context of the COVID-19 response.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation
Private sector
Knowledge partner
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

Performance management

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank prioritises a results-based approach – for example when engaging in policy dialogue, or planning and
implementing interventions.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX C – RESULTS OF THE MOPAN EXTERNAL PARTNER SURVEY . 229

The World Bank consults with stakeholders on the setting of results targets at country level.
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Operational partner

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank supports implementation through regular supervision of projects.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Non-government donor trust fund

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank consistently identifies which interventions are under-performing.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

230 . MOPAN ASSESSMENT REPORT . WORLD BANK (IDA and IBRD)

The World Bank addresses any areas of intervention under-performance, for example, through technical support or
changing funding patterns if appropriate.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank participates in joint / inter-agency efforts to prevent, investigate and report on any sexual misconduct
by personnel in relation to the host population (SEA).
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Civil society organisation

0%
Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

10%

20%

Somewhat disagree

30%

40%

Disagree

50%

60%

70%

Strongly disagree

80%

90%

100%

Don’t know / No opinion

The World Bank learns lessons from previous projects and applies them to new interventions.
Board member
Donor
Borrower country
Peer organisation
Knowledge partner
Non-government donor trust fund

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

Strongly agree

Agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don’t know / No opinion

ANNEX A – PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS . 231