Search

Displaying 1 - 8 of 8

Lesson
The design and monitoring framework (DMF) should be reviewed and updated as necessary during implementation to ensure continued alignment with other aspects of the program. The outcome and output indicators in the program DMF had been developed at appraisal for achievement over a relatively short period of 24 months. However, when program implementation was extended by 23 months to November 2019, an opportunity was missed to update the targeted dates for the indicators, which were measured about 1 year after the extended program completion date.

Project Number: 45253-002
Project Name: Third Capital Market Development Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Project targets need to be carefully determined and adjusted as necessary to ensure that they are realistic and achievable.

Project Number: 44304-013, 44304-014, 44304-015
Project Name: Microfinance Expansion Project
Report Date:
Lesson
It is important for a reform program to be supported by and anchored in a broad strategic framework that brings together both qualitative and quantitative indicators to drive, monitor, and assess the attainment of policy outcomes.

Project Number: 51059-001, 51059-002
Project Name: Improving Governance and Public Sector Efficiency Program (Subprogram 1 and Subprogram 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
The assessment of a program’s development effectiveness is difficult in the absence of a structured and aligned outcome indicators.

Project Number: 50145-001
Project Name: Countercyclical Support Facility Program
Report Date:
Lesson
A clearer link between the DMF, policy actions, and the GAP is necessary.

Project Number: 45230-001
Project Name: Women’s Entrepreneurship Support Sector Development Program
Report Date:
Lesson
For a program directly targeting women, GAP targets be integrated more into the program design and included in the DMF.

Project Number: 45230-001
Project Name: Women’s Entrepreneurship Support Sector Development Program
Report Date:
Lesson
The DMF was reasonably well-designed and the performance indicators—with the exception of the initial program impact indicators—targets, and baseline data were precise and generally easily measurable. However, the PCR assessed the program against the DMF prepared for subprogram 3, which, like subprogram 2 had no indicators to measure impact, although these were included for subprogram 1.

Project Number: 48044-001, 48044-004, 48044-005
Project Name: Improving Domestic Resource Mobilization for Inclusive Growth Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Outcome indicator should be reflective of the policy actions and outputs delivered.

Project Number: 44251-013, 44251-034
Project Name: Financial Sector Deepening Program
Report Date: