Asian Development Bank - Fighting Poverty in Asia and the Pacific
What's New  |   e-Notification  |   Sitemap  |   Contact Us  |   Help

Evaluation

Home : Topics : Evaluation : About Evaluation : Portfolio Performance

About Evaluation
Attributes of Independence
Strategic Principles for Evaluations
Directions in Evaluation
Portfolio Performance
Methods and Guidelines
Perceptions of IED
Evaluation Resources
Work Program
Evaluation Capacity Development
Harmonization Work
Evaluation Chats
Linking to Results
Events
Contact Us

Portfolio Performance

Trends in Project Ratings
by Year of Approval and Source of Funding
(Combined Completion and Evaluation Results)

The figure below shows that the success rates of Asian Development Fund -funded projects approved before the 1990s tended to be considerably lower than those funded by ordinary capital resources, and average ADF ratings were much more volatile. In the 1990s, however, the OCR and ADF ratings converged, and both improved.

While the improving trend suggests that the design and/or implementation of sovereign operations have progressively improved it is important to note that there are several caveats about the trend toward better success rates: (i) rated sovereign operations approved from 1997 to 2000 comprised 59% of total processed sovereign operations during the period; the remaining 41% are still under implementation; (ii) there is a possible bias towards more positive interpretation of success in later years, since the more recent ratings rely heavily on PCRs; and (iii) sovereign operations approved in the 1990s that have experienced long delays in implementation and have not been completed are likely to have a lower than average success rating.

ADF = Asian Development Fund; OCR = ordinary capital resources
Source: Independent Evaluation Department
Note: Figures for recent years may change as more project completion reports and performance evaluation reports are completed. The figures for approval year 2000 represent only 17% of the total approved projects and programs for that year.
Project/program implementation: 4-7 years
Completion report: 1-2 years after completion
Project/program evaluation: 3 years or more after completion
Top

Project Success by Country

Performance by country varies significantly, though a common trend is evident—that results in most countries were considerably better in the 1990s than in the 1980s. Countries with strong institutional capacity performed well. Other country factors, such as economic performance, development priorities, and quality of governance also contributed to project success.

 
Number of Rated Projects
  
Proportion of Projects Rated Successful (%)
Country
1970s
1980s
1990s
Total
  
1970s
1980s
1990s
Total
Bangladesh
21
29
35
85
24
66
83
62
Bhutan
 
4
4
8
 
50
100
75
Cambodia
 
9
9
 
89
89
China, People's Rep. of
 
6
64
70
 
67
86
84
Graduate Economies
(Hong Kong, China; Republic of Korea; and Singapore)
47
10
 
57
85
90
 
86
India
 
10
17
27
 
70
65
67
Indonesia
39
53
65
157
59
60
65
62
Kazakhstan
 
4
4
 
75
75
Kyrgyz Republic
 
6
6
 
100
100
Lao People's Democratic Rep.
3
9
18
30
33
78
83
77
Malaysia
23
21
7
51
57
62
86
63
Maldives
 
4
3
7
 
75
100
86
Mongolia
 
9
9
 
78
78
Myanmar
5
3
 
8
60
67
 
63
Nepal
16
28
19
63
81
46
53
57
Pacific DMCs
20
27
25
72
55
41
56
50
Pakistan
25
52
30
107
56
60
57
58
Papua New Guinea
8
12
10
30
38
42
30
37
Philippines
33
29
34
96
52
38
53
48
Sri Lanka
12
22
24
58
42
55
67
57
Tajikistan
 
2
2
 
100
100
Thailand
24
14
22
60
88
86
100
92
Uzbekistan
 
3
3
 
67
67
Viet Nam
5
 
13
18
0
 
92
67
Total
281
333
423
1,037
  
60
58
72
64
DMC= developing member country.
Source: Independent Evaluation Department.

Top

Project Success by Country Classification

The table below demonstrates improvement from the 1970s to the 1990s across all country groupings, though patterns of progress differ. By the 1990s, the success rate of each group with access to ADF had gradually increased, and countries in Group A (with the exception of Nepal) were performing better than those in Groups B1 and B2.

Country Classification
% Successful
1970s
1980s
1990-1997
Graduated Economies
85
90
none
Group C
66
55
77
Group B2
55
59
68
Group B1
40
60
71
Group A
58
50
74
Total
60
58
71
Source: Independent Evaluation Department.
Since 1977, ADB has had a three-tier classification system that forms the basis for determining the eligibility of DMCs to borrow from ADF and for applicable limits on ADB financing of project costs. DMCs are classified into three groups based on two criteria: (i) per capita gross national product, and (ii) debt repayment capacity. Group-A DMCs are fully eligible for ADF, Group-B DMCs ("blend" economies) are eligible for limited amounts of ADF in particular circumstances, and Group-C DMCs are not eligible for ADF financing.
 
Top

Project Performance by Sector and Source of Financing

The likelihood of project success by sector is depicted in the table below. Findings indicate that both OCR- and ADF-funded projects generally perform similarly in the same sectors, with certain important exceptions. The ratings of ADF-funded projects eventually converged with those of OCR-funded projects across sectors from 1970 to 1997.

 
ADF
OCR
Total
Sector
1970s
1980s
1990-1997
Total
1970s
1980s
1990-1997
Total
1970s
1980s
1990-1997
Total
Agriculture
36
53
52
47
41
38
52
42
37
47
52
46
Energy
68
80
87
78
87
77
86
84
78
78
87
81
Government-owned DFIs
0
31
63
26
67
82
29
64
42
52
47
46
Social Infrastructure
50
31
67
55
74
63
82
73
65
48
72
63
Transport and Communications
79
73
90
82
86
76
85
83
84
74
87
83
Industry
67
100
50
67
78
100
50
74
75
100
50
72
Multisector / Others
100
64
74
71
 
 
45
45
100
64
63
64
Total
46
54
69
58
72
63
74
70
60
58
71
64
ADF = Asian Development Fund; DFI = development finance institution; OCR = ordinary capital resources.
Figures represent percentage of projects rated successful.
Source: Independent Evaluation Department.
 
Top
Next: Methods and Guidelines