Evaluation Team
This report was prepared by Mr. P-A. ROCHON, Principal Evaluation Officer, OPEV, and Mr. John Kofi BAFFOE, Consultant, following their mission to Ghana in May 2005.
Objective
The objective of the CAE is to assess the development effectiveness of the Bank's intervention by evaluating the contribution of the Bank's assistance towards meeting the expected outcomes in the Government's Strategic Document, the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy, and eventually in meeting the Millennium Development Goals. The CAE also draws relevant lessons learned from experience over the period in order to strengthen future Bank policies and procedures and improve the quality of Bank operations. The CAE will be used to develop the Annual Review of Development Effectiveness (ARDE).
Main Lessons
- Relevance, though a necessary condition for satisfactory Bank performance, is notsufficient on its own. Changes in the sectoral allocation of resources suggest that CSPs may have not have been utilized as planned to guide the Bank intervention during program implementation in Ghana. By not implementing the CSPs key outcomes in the social sector were not realized which in turn impacts on MDGs.
- The Ghana programme appears at times to have been demand-driven rather than CSPdriven. Lack of reference to strategy during CSP implementation is a key factor that has likely inhibited the Bank's ability to achieve full development effectiveness in Ghana. Poor efficiency in Bank products delivery is another critical factor.
- Bank ongoing (or active) portfolio in Ghana is performing below Bank average and is deserving of closer monitoring and supervision and portfolio improvement measures. This is important considering it is likely inefficiencies prevented the Bank from achieving greater development outcomes over the last three CSPs, and that unless inefficiencies are addressed this tendency will likely continue in the next CSP.
- The last PCR for a project in Ghana was in 2001. As PCRs are not carried out in time or systematically, it is increasingly difficult to retain lessons learned from past experience. This is largely due to the incentive structures and resources provided for doing this kind of exercise etc. in the Bank. The WBG has developed a number of incentives and measures to ensure resources are available for PCRs. They could be emulated by the Bank, as it is important to carry out PCRs without delay so that lessons learned may be used elsewhere on a timely basis.
- As M&E is not carried out in time or systematically, it is increasingly difficult to retain lessons learned from past experience. This can be remedied by carrying out M&E activities without delay so that lessons learned may be used elsewhere on a timely basis
Main Recommendations
Recommendation(s) to the Bank:
- Bank should seek to leverage funding and augment its own resources devoted to ESW (i.e. surveys, studies, programme design, etc.) and for sector interventions, as well as for policy-based loans in support of balance of payments and budget support. Effective ESW cooperation with other donors can minimize costs, maximize impact and increase the likelihood that action will be taken
- With regards to PBLs the Bank should better partner with BWI in setting the tone of programme design and preparation. Special attention should be paid to policy issues linked to ongoing and/or planned sectoral interventions in the CSP.
- The Bank should move to joining SWAPs in the Social Sector with other donors based on sound ESW.
- The Bank should pursue its Multi-donor Budget Support (MDBS) while ensuring its intellectual contribution to this type of intervention is well founded in ESW.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
Ghana - Country Assistance Evaluation 1998-2003.PDF | 521.5 KB |