Process Reviews

Abstract: The purpose of this note is to: (1) review the backlog of project completion reports (PCR); (2) present the findings of the Working Group set up under the oversight of OPEV, including representatives of the two Vice Presidencies, Operations; and (3) propose solutions with a view to reducing or eliminating the backlog of PCRs and thus achieving the target of 100% coverage of completed projects by completion reports.

Abstract: This Process Review (PR) focuses on ongoing JAS process in Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia, as well as the ongoing Ha process in Mozambique and Ethiopia. The PR may be compared to a snap-shot of what has happened so far, and the experiences, perceptions and opinions of major players. The goal is to draw lessons on how to proceed with JAS / Ha at this juncture, not to provide an evaluative judgement early on regarding this complex process, which will be fully evaluated once it has sufficiently matured.

Abstract: The Report "Toward Closing the Evaluation Gap" (Ref. ADB/BD/WP/2005/123- ADF/BD/WP/2005/143 of 29 November 2005) was prepared by OPEV and identified the gaps that need to be closed to bring about a robust and credible evaluation system organized to assess the development effectiveness of the Bank Group operations. It was submitted for discussion to the Board Committee on Operations and Development Effectiveness (CODE) in its session of 20 February 2006, seeking guidance from Board members.

Abstract: This review is the first of its kind and has four principal purposes. First, it assesses the policy, format and guidelines of CPRs undertaken during 2000–2004. Second, it assesses the process of preparation, consultation with client countries and interdepartmental cooperation within the Bank in the preparation and review process of CPRs. Third, it assesses the content of the set of CPRs and gauges the adequacy and depth of coverage of portfolio issues, their relevance and their usefulness as a portfolio performance management tool. Fourth, it identifies lessons and makes recommendations on the policy, process and content of future CPRs to make them more useful as instruments for reporting on achievements and formulating future Bank assistance strategies in the regional member countries.

Abstract: This review assesses the 2002–2004 CSPs against these six guiding principles. The effectiveness of the CSPs as managing and planning tools for the Bank is also considered. The assessment draws on lessons learned for improving the quality of the new generation of results-based CSPs. It uses a combination of desk reviews of 36 CSPs (processed and approved during the ADF-IX period) and other Bank documents, questionnaires, personal interviews with selected Bank staff and RMC officials, and five country field visits. A major finding is that the CSP guiding principles are applied but the quality of CSPs varies considerably.

Abstract: The study should be seen in the context of the present efforts by the Evaluation Cooperation Group (ECG) of the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) to develop Good Practices Standards (GPS) for Evaluation of Private Sector Investment Operations to be applied by all MDBs in order to make evaluation results comparable and to ensure that their findings are properly translated into operational standards.

Abstract: Important efforts have been made by operations departments with a view to definitively absorbing the PCR backlog. However, in July 2004, the backlog consisted of 302 projects of which 218 were approved during the 1987-1993 period. At the sectoral level, the PCR backlog was in the agriculture and transport sectors which constitute a substantial part of the Bank Group’s portfolio. Thus, other efforts should be made to limit the level of outstanding PCRs to a minimum and to attain 100% application of the Board decision and MDB good practice standards

Abstract: This report focuses on the study of the efficacy and efficiency of monitoring - evaluation systems in a sample of Bank Group financed projects/programmes. The study is in line with the strengthening of the Bank’s operational capacities so as to improve the effectiveness of its operations and contribute to the institutional development of regional member countries’ local and national monitoring-evaluation capacities.

Abstract: This process review is an attempt to examine the 1995 and 1996 Annual Portfolio Performance Reviews (APPR) in terms of the achievement of their declared objectives. The conclusion of this process review is that both APPRs are fairly excellent documents, given the circumstances under which they were produced, including the human resource constraints and the limited knowledge of the process of preparing such reports in the Bank. The declared objective of both APPRs, which is one of providing information on the state of Bank- Group portfolio, was achieved. But the data on which that information is based, and hence its quality, is questionable, if not suspect. This finding should not be seen as a critique of the APPR and its process, which in the circumstance then prevailing, was the best that there could be. Rather, the findings should be seen as OPEV's contribution to the Bank-wide efforts to improve the quality of Bank portfolio.

Abstract: The review notes that the Bank’s guidelines and provisions, with respect to the monitoring and supervision of operations, are adequate and compare favourably with those of the sister institutions, and takes note of the updating work currently underway. The study also considered that the objective of at least one annual supervision per project is appropriate. However, the frequency of the supervision should depend on the complexity of the project and the study therefore recommends that the possibility of several supervision missions should be left open. It nonetheless concludes that the Bank’s operations supervision still lacks both in frequency and quality.

Abstract: This Process Review found that the APPR process continues to improve alongside portfolio performance. But there are still areas for improvement. These are: the urgency in putting in place the much-awaited new rating format as a step towards a consistent rating methodology; the need to factor in quality-at-entry issues into the definition of Project-at-Risk; and the need to strive for 100% coverage in project supervision. As OPEV moves gradually to harmonise its ratings with other MDBs in order to ensure comparability of outcomes among these institutions, it is also desirable for the Operations Departments to harmonise their ratings with OPEV in order to ensure internal comparability of project outcomes.

Abstract: Considerable efforts have been made by the operations departments to mop up PCR arrears for good. As at 30/09/97, these arrears were on 164 projects 84 of which were approved during the period 1982-1986. Out of this total number of arrears, 35 (i.e. 21%) were being finalized in 1997, 43 (i.e.26%) were programmed for 1998, 13 projects (or 8’%) were located in countries in conflict and the loan balance of 17 projects (i.e. 10%) was cancelled. There were no PCRs on the remainder, i.e. 56 projects (34 %) for various causes of delay. Consequently, there was no reduction in the volume of these arrears, especially with regard to projects approved during the period 1982-1986. At the Sectoral level, the PCR arrears are in the agricultural and transport sectors, which constitute the bulk of Bank Group portfolio.