Search

Displaying 1 - 10 of 10

CSV
Lesson
Monitoring and continuous technical support is needed for effective continuation of reform because program impacts will be felt over the long term. The government has agreed to a postprogram engagement framework whose broad purpose is to ensure that policy reforms are not reversed and that Joint-Stock Company Georgian State Electrosystem stays on the path towards financial sustainability.

Project Number: 49006-003
Project Name: Electricity Transmission Sector Reforms Program
Report Date:
Lesson
A thorough screening and assessment of project selection upfront is crucial to enhancing the effectiveness of MFF modality, especially its suitability and readiness for a specific type of investment. In a case where an MFF modality is designed to finance a typical stand-alone investment, the intended benefits and envisaged results of the financing instrument are less likely to be achieved.

Project Number: 41122-013, 41122-043
Project Name: Road Corridor Investment Program (Tranche 3 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
Extensive delays in implementing a project that is not ready for implementation reflect foregone economic benefits and result in a net loss to the economy. Assessment of project readiness is an integral part of the project preparation process, particularly from a safeguards perspective where delays often originate.

Project Number: 41122-023
Project Name: Road Corridor Investment Program (Tranche 1)
Report Date:
Lesson
Specifically for implementing agencies and governments with weak institutional capacities, adequate skills set can improve the execution of subsequent project activities and management of implementation risks.

Project Number: 41122-013, 41122-043
Project Name: Road Corridor Investment Program (Tranche 3 and Multitranche Financing Facility)
Report Date:
Lesson
Weaknesses in the initial design and monitoring framework (DMF) led to difficulties in measuring project achievements. The initial DMF for the facility had to be revised. Some outcome targets were not updated even though there were changes in the associated investments under the different tranches. The DMF included output Indicators for activities not directly financed under the MFF.

Project Number: 42414-013, 42414-045
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 5 and MFF
Report Date:
Lesson
Actions that demonstrate the achievement of program policy matrix milestones should indicate what has been achieved, rather than the process of their accomplishment. For example, Cabinet approval is an inadequate indicator to demonstrate a successful policy reform in Tonga.

Project Number: 48361-001, 48361-002, 48361-003
Project Name: Building Macroeconomic Resilience Program
Report Date:
Lesson
The design and monitoring framework (DMF) needs to be carefully formulated to adequately measure project achievements. The DMF contained indicators that were not entirely attributable to the project. The assumptions and data source behind the quantitative baselines and targets for several indicators were also not clearly explained. These weaknesses need to be addressed in future projects.

Project Number: 42414-043
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 3
Report Date:
Lesson
A project specific DMF is key to reliably assessing the implementation progress and overall performance of each tranche project. The DMF for this project contained indicators that pertained to investments under other tranches of the multitranche financing facility (MFF). This made monitoring and evaluation of project progress and performance difficult, with results that hid the real picture and so prevented corrective measures from being undertaken during implementation.

Project Number: 42414-023
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 1
Report Date:
Lesson
Weaknesses in the design and monitoring framework (DMF) can lead to an inaccurate assessment of project achievements. The project DMF contained indicators that measured benefits that were not entirely attributable to the project, such as the number of tourist nights in Georgia rather than in the Batumi area. Some dimensions of the project’s outcome were omitted, such as the increased protection of coastal infrastructure assets. The reduction of storm-related damage should have been considered as part of project’s outcome performance indicators.

Project Number: 42414-044
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 4
Report Date:
Lesson
Project scope changes provide opportunities for correcting the weaknesses in the design and monitoring framework (DMF) that can result in an unreliable assessment of the project achievements. The outcome and outputs of the DMF were logical, and the stated risks and assumptions were relevant. However, there were weaknesses in the indicators used to measure the project’s achievements. Some of them were addressed through the DMF updates accompanying the changes in scope.

Project Number: 42414-033
Project Name: Sustainable Urban Transport Investment Program - Tranche 2
Report Date:
CSV