| Major Finding |
Key Recommendation |
Follow-Up Action |
Time Frame for Accomplishing Action |
Primary Responsibility |
| 1. Capacity in the Bank needs to be strengthened in selected areas to meet the increasing complexity of development challenges. |
1.1. Strengthen staff capabilities for better alignment with changing needs. |
1.1.1. Based on an inventory of available skills and projected skills-mix requirements, identify areas for staff redeployment and skill supplementation. |
1 year |
BPMS |
| |
|
1.1.2. Review the adequacy of existing training in areas given priority by the Task Force, and make necessary amendments to the training program. |
1 year |
BPMS |
| |
1.2. Role of CPSO should be reoriented to accord with the changing implementation support needed by DMCs and with the Bank’s country focus. |
1.2.1. Redefine the functions of CPSO to emphasize its role as a facilitator and guide for project implementation activities. |
6 months |
Steering Committee for a Review of the Bank’s Organization |
| |
1.3. Roles of special units
(AGSD, PSSU, PRSP), OENV,
EDRC and ROs should be
reassessed and realigned to
provide stronger operational
support. |
1.3.1. Examine alternatives for
realigning the roles of these
special units and offices. |
6 months |
Steering Committee for a Review of the Bank’s Organization |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 2. Project preparation and
processing practices support
the approval culture. |
2.1. President should signal a
change in corporate culture
through a clear policy statement
reasserting the importance of
development impact rather than
loan approval. |
2.1.1. Statement by the
President. |
Immediate |
President |
| |
2.2. Focus of project processing
efforts should be shifted from
loan approval to better project
preparation. |
2.2.1. Provide increased
attention and staff input to
preparation and implementation
of PPTAs. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
|
2.2.2. Allow adequate time
during processing for satisfactory
completion of staff work and
internal consultations. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
2.3. Three-year rolling IPFs
should be considered for
adoption in place of yearly IPFs. |
2.3.1. Examine the implications
of adopting a three-year rolling
IPF, and develop milestones for
monitoring and implementation
arrangements. |
6 months |
BPMS |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 3. The status of project
administration is given less
importance than project
processing in the Bank, and
implementation efforts must be
intensified. |
3.1. President should clearly
signify the equal importance of
project administration and
project processing. |
3.1.1. Statement by the
President. |
Immediate |
President |
| |
3.2. Management and Directors
should be more actively involved
in project administration. |
3.2.1. Issue instructions that
country portfolio review missions
should be led by VP, Programs-
Projects, Director/Chief CPSO
as appropriate. |
Immediate |
Programs |
| |
3.3. Resources devoted to
project implementation activities
should be increased. |
3.3.1. Undertake at least two
weeks of field review for each
project every year. |
1 year |
Projects |
| |
|
3.3.2. A mid-term review should
be carried out for each project. |
1 year |
Projects |
| |
3.4. Introduce appropriate shifts
in the incentives/rewards
structure. |
3.4.1. Issue instructions to
recognize and reward
performance in project
administration on an equal basis
with project processing. |
Immediate |
BPMS |
| |
|
3.4.2. Re-examine the job
classification level of staff
handling project administration. |
1 year |
BPMS |
| |
3.5. Appraisal mission chief
should continue with project
administration for at least one
year after loan effectiveness. |
3.5.1. Require appraisal mission
chief to participate in project
administration for at least one
year after loan effectiveness. |
Immediate |
Projects |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 4. Capacity in DMCs needs to
be augmented to match the
requirements of designing,
implementing and evaluating
projects. |
4.1. The Bank should adopt a
comprehensive policy on
capacity building and develop
appropriate programs of
training/institutional
strengthening. |
4.1.1. Prepare a policy on
capacity building in DMCs and
proposed approaches and Bank
institutional arrangements to be
adopted in this regard. |
1 year |
DPO |
| |
|
4.1.2. Prepare and implement
effective programs to carry out
the capacity-building policy. |
2 years |
Programs |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 5. Full ownership of projects by
DMCs is often lacking. |
5.1. The Government and
beneficiaries should be fully
involved at all stages of the
project cycle beginning from
project identification. |
5.1.1. Establish guidelines for
enhanced government and
beneficiary consultations at the
PPTA and loan processing
stages. |
1 year |
AGSD |
| |
5.2. The PAM should be
prepared and fully discussed
during appraisal, with the
specific obligations and roles of
all parties being clearly
discussed and evaluated. |
5.2.1. Refine and implement a
format for the PAM. |
6 months |
CPSO |
| |
|
5.2.2. Instruct appraisal missions
to prepare a comprehensive
PAM and append the same to
the MOU. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
5.3. Project Office should be set
up and the Project Manager
appointed by the DMC prior to
loan approval. |
5.3.1. Require the needed
actions to be discussed during
appraisal and confirmed during
loan negotiations. |
Immediate |
Projects |
| |
5.4. A one-time “spring-cleaning”
of all projects under
implementation should be
carried out in partnership with
the DMCs. |
5.4.1. Prepare and implement a
one-time program of portfolio
restructuring. |
1 year |
Projects |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 6. Country focus is not fully
realized because of weak
linkage between ESW, COSS,
ERBOP, COPP and project
design. |
6.1. The Programs and Projects
Departments should be
restructured to ensure better
coordination. |
6.1.1. Examine the various
alternatives for combining
programs and projects functions
under a single unit of
responsibility. |
6 months |
Steering
Committee for
a Review of
the Bank’s
Organization |
| |
|
6.1.2. Implement the selected
alternative. |
1 year |
BPMSD |
| |
6.2. The interaction of
operational departments and
offices are special units in the
preparation of ESW, COSS,
COPP and project design should
be strengthened. |
6.2.1. Enable the special units
(AGSD, PSSU, PRSP), OENV
and EDRC to participate
increasingly in the preparation of
ESW, COSS and COPP. |
1 year |
Programs/
Projects |
| |
|
6.2.2. Estimate the resource
needs of more intensive ESW
and prepare a strategy for
mobilizing the same. |
1 year |
Programs/
Projects |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 7. Bank practices and systems
are over-centralized. |
7.1. Delegation to ROs, including
project administration matters,
should be increased. |
7.1.1. Review the ROs in terms
of the potential for delegating
authority to them, and
associated staff/other resource
requirements. |
1 year |
BPMS |
| |
|
7.1.2. Review the current and
projected project portfolio in
terms of its potential for
delegating administrative
responsibility to the ROs. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
|
7.1.3. Implement a phased
program of resource
supplementation/delegation of
responsibility to the ROs. |
2 years |
BPMS |
| |
7.2. Implementation Review
Missions should have authority
to take decisions in the field
except in the case of project
reformulation or cancellation. |
7.2.1. Develop procedures for
review missions to take
decisions in the field. |
1 year |
CPSO |
| |
7.3. Concerned
departments/offices should have
authority to allocate budgetary
resources available to them
among line items, and to recruit
staff consultants. |
7.3.1. Issue suitable staff
instructions. |
1 year |
BPMS |
| |
|
|
|
|
| 8. Feedback mechanisms are
not being fully utilized in
programming and in project
activities. |
8.1. The use of feedback inputs
in the preparation of the COSS,
COPP and project design and
during project implementation
should be ensured. |
8.1.1. Require concerned
missions to incorporate feedback
findings in their respective
reports. |
Immediate |
Programs/
Projects |
| |
8.2. Project design and
evaluation tools such as the
logical framework, which would
also contribute to more effective
BME, should be better used. |
8.2.1. Revise/introduce
appropriate guidelines and
training to ensure effective
Bankwide use of these tools. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
8.3. PCRs should be expanded
to include an initial assessment
of project performance. |
8.3.1. Prepare a revised PCR
format. |
6 months |
Projects |
| |
|
8.3.2. Introduce a phased
scheme for the preparation of
expanded PCRs. |
1 year |
Projects |
| |
8.4. The timing of PPARs should
be scheduled to enable better
assessment of the project’s
development impact. |
8.4.1. Undertake PPAR
preparation three years after
project completion. |
Immediate |
PEO |
| |
8.5. A comprehensive annual
performance evaluation program
should be prepared to bring
together the activities of different
departments/offices related to
project performance. |
8.5.1. Issue staff instructions. |
Immediate |
PEO |
Publications 
RSS Feeds
Back
Top of page