Search

Displaying 1 - 5 of 5

Lesson
Guidance for completing CPRO DMFs underscored the dynamic nature of a crisis operation and the need to be prepared to strengthen, amend or add DMF indicators during implementation. The fact that this was not followed reflects a built-in lack of flexibility with DMFs (and perhaps the difficulty of making changes in accordance with existing Project Administration Instructions).

Project Number: 54178-001
Project Name: COVID-19 Rapid Response Program
Report Date:
Lesson
The design and monitoring frameworks (DMFs) of the COVID-19 Pandemic Response Option (CPRO) extracted aspects of the government’s response plan that were important to ADB and restricted the number of indicators and targets in order not to burden the government. However, this made demonstrating outcome-level achievement difficult because it relies too much on one or two indicators and targets (weak horizontal logic) and is narrowly and inadequately supported by a minimal number of outputs (weak vertical logic).

Project Number: 54178-001
Project Name: COVID-19 Rapid Response Program
Report Date:
Lesson
While cross-project collaboration are potentially powerful tools to achieve multiple objectives and reduce costs, it requires thought and planning, and the benefits are not automatic.

Project Number: 36513-032
Project Name: SchoolNet and Community Access Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Outcome statements should be more carefully worded to be consistent with the DMF and the theory of change.

Project Number: 42291-025
Project Name: Higher Education in the Pacific Investment Program – Tranche 1
Report Date:
Lesson
It was inappropriate to change the original DMF targets because the progress was inadequate (para. 20). Instead, the reasons for the slow progress could have been mentioned and draw lessons from them.

Project Number: 41171-022
Project Name: Transport Sector Development Project
Report Date: