Country Assistance Program Evaluation for Kyrgyz Republic | Asian Development Bank

Country Assistance Program Evaluation for Kyrgyz Republic

Evaluation Document | 15 August 2012

This country assistance program evaluation assesses ADB's country strategies and programs to support the Kyrgyz Republic from 1994 until 2010. ADB support was rated satisfactory, although major constraints and risks remain.

The Kyrgyz Republic has made considerable headway in its transition from independence in 1991 to a market-oriented system, achieving moderately high economic growth and an improving although still fragile political situation. Progress, however, has been highly mixed in achieving non-income Millennium Development Goals, and the country faces enormous risks from natural disasters.

This country assistance program evaluation assesses the strategies and assistance programs of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for the Kyrgyz Republic from 1994, when it became an ADB developing member country, until 2010, when the current country strategy ended. ADB's support in the review period included 49 project and program/policy-based loans and grants totaling $1.0 billion, and 52 advisory technical assistance operations totaling $28.2 million.

ADB support was rated satisfactory, although major constraints and risks remain. Among them are infrastructure constraints (including an unreliable power supply), insufficient fiscal and institutional capacity resulting in an inadequate delivery of basic services, and the need to improve governance standards. The Kyrgyz Republic grapples yearly with earthquakes, floods and landslides. The evaluation notes that while ADB responded quickly to damage caused by natural disasters with emergency support, it provided only one disaster risk mitigation project over the review period.

The study recommends that ADB's next Country Partnership Strategy for the Kyrgyz Republic focus on sectors and subsectors in which the government has shown strong commitment to ownership and where ADB has performed well. At the same time, ADB should work closely with other development partners to concentrate on other sectors to increase synergies and complementarities.

Efforts to boost ADB's private sector operations should be continued to attract more foreign direct investment, improve corporate governance standards, and facilitate sustainable economic growth. The study recommends that climate change adaption be addressed in the next Country Partnership Strategy.


  • Acknowledgements
  • Preface
  • Executive Summary
  • Chapter 1. Introduction
  • Chapter 2. Country Context, Government Strategies, and ADB Support
  • Chapter 3. Methodology
  • Chapter 4. Performance of ADB Support in Achieving the Country Strategy Objectives
  • Chapter 5. Performance of ADB Support under the Six Evaluation Criteria
  • Chapter 6. Overall Findings
  • Chapter 7. Lessons and Recommendations
  • Appendixes

Note on IED's Country Evaluations and Validations

Using its 2015 Guidelines for the Preparation of Country Assistance Program Evaluations and Country Partnership Strategy Final Review Validations, the Independent Evaluation Department (IED) intends to provide an objective and informed judgement of the performance and results of country partnership strategies (CPSs), particularly in terms of their relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and development impacts.

In ascertaining relevance, IED considers not only the alignment of the program with country needs and government objectives, but also cross-sector CPS objectives, appropriateness of modalities and sector program designs, and sufficiency of donor coordination.

The effectiveness of a country program in delivering results is also an important aspect of an IED evaluation. Primary focus is on the achievement of the outcomes and outputs of ADB interventions (and the likelihood of achievement if the program is still ongoing), as worded in CPSs and their results frameworks. These include knowledge products and institutional development efforts.

Performance and results are likewise judged from an efficiency perspective, that is, whether the program was delivered in a cost-effective and timely manner, and generated value for money. It also considers the capacity of executing agencies that may contribute to start up and implementation delays, and cost overruns.

Another critical element of IED's evaluation is the likely sustainability of results over the medium term, technically, financially, environmentally, socially, politically, and institutionally. Further, IED looks at how results led to development impacts. Specifically, whether ADB contributed to achieving the CPS objectives, directly through its sector programs and implementing cross-cutting agenda(s) across various modalities in different sectors and by various development partners.

IED gives special importance to cross-cutting objectives by considering how the cross-sectoral and thematic objectives of the CPS are articulated in the results framework and provided with appropriate indicators and targets; and how the program achieved the cross-sector thematic results. Equal weights are given to the achievement of sector and cross-cutting objectives in the relevance and development impact assessments, in both country assistance program evaluations (CAPEs) and CPS final review validations (CPSFRVs). This aligns with ADB's increasing emphasis on achieving corporate strategic priorities.

In preparing its country evaluations and validations, IED conducts document reviews, consults with concerned departments, staff, governments and other stakeholders, and undertakes evaluation missions. IED has put in place a quality assurance system to ensure consistent application of its 2015 guidelines. In CPSFRVs, IED's primary focus is to validate the evidence presented in the CPS Final Review.