Search

Displaying 1 - 15 of 50

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
The potential for success of any innovation cannot be established without taking risks.Taking the risk of an innovative program design that piloted the use of the policy-based lending (PBL) modality for contingent disaster financing (CDF)—for only the second time in ADB (following the Cook Islands’ Disaster Resilience Program) and the first time at the regional level—has led to significant success. It contributed to policy change and product innovation at ADB.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Partnerships and cofinancing possibilities need to be further explored, considering that traditional and emerging bilateral and multilateral partners have a strong presence in the Pacific which could provide opportunities for greater collaboration.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
A more systematic tracking of performance across countries, which could build on new assessment frameworks developed under the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) program in some areas of DRM, could enhance the innovations introduced by this program, particularly phasing of interventions and a differentiated approach that addresses the challenges of implementing planning, policy, and legal frameworks in fragile and conflict-affected situations (FCAS) and small island developing states (SIDS).

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Increasing disaster risk financing (DRF) in participating DMCs is critical to reduce negative impacts on lives, livelihoods, and economic and fiscal outcomes. The program contributed to significantly higher pre-disaster financing, helping to partially fill gaps following a disaster event. Three aspects could be further explored. First, CDF was created for medium-scale disaster events that occur about every 3–10 years, whereas, in practice, qualifying events in the Pacific have occurred with greater frequency and led to higher levels of damages in certain countries.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Addressing specific risks and impacts affecting women in disaster situations can make a tangible difference for women and vulnerable groups in and beyond the disaster context. Among the approaches shown viable are enabling the participation of women and other vulnerable groups in planning and decision-making, ensuring that resilience efforts benefit them, and making disaster responses more responsive to their needs.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Sustained commitment, coordination, and collaboration are critical foundations for the continued effectiveness of the CDF modality, as capacity limitations and competing political priorities pose challenges in many small Pacific DMCs.DMCs have remained committed to reforms during and after the first two phases. The program improved in coordination and collaboration between borrower entities responsible for finance and DRM.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Staffing and consultant resources for country engagement as well as technical assistance (TA) appear still limited relative to the number of countries and the program scope. ADB’s role in coordinating and systematically addressing DRM has been strengthened through the program. The attached TA has been playing a growing role in boosting ADB capacity (including for knowledge building and sharing), and the overlap and continuity of the new TA attached to the program’s fourth phase approved in 2023 is positive.

Project Number: 50028-001, 50028-002
Project Name: Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)
Report Date:
Lesson
Single-tranche and stand-alone policy-based programs can be an appropriate instrument to support reforms in fragile states provided that (i) these take place in the context of an ongoing, long-term development partnership; and (ii) there is a demonstrated government commitment to pursue substantial reforms over an extended time frame. Moreover, such programs need to be supported by ongoing capacity development in key agencies. In fragile states, the risks to implementing and sustaining reforms are amplified by external shocks and natural disasters.

Project Number: 52074-001
Project Name: Improved Fiscal Sustainability Reform Program
Report Date:
Lesson
The formal government and development partner coordination mechanisms offer the opportunity to reduce transaction costs for all parties and increase the likelihood of a good quality program design and implementation. In the case of Solomon Islands, it utilized a wellestablished coordination mechanism to undertake policy dialogue, to design a program that is responsive to the country’s needs, and to jointly oversee program implementation.

Project Number: 52074-001
Project Name: Improved Fiscal Sustainability Reform Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Continued monitoring of the non-tranche policy actions of reform programs is critical to ensuring that these actions are completed on time.

Project Number: 52074-001
Project Name: Improved Fiscal Sustainability Reform Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Timing is essential in the successful implementation of reforms.

Project Number: 52074-001
Project Name: Improved Fiscal Sustainability Reform Program
Report Date:
Lesson
Replication: Within ADB, the SDCD cost center has been established to develop GCF project proposals. Scaling up: It would require additional project preparation facilities, trust fund resources, and climate TA projects alongside ADB projects. Skills within SDCD have been developed but continue to rely on TA consultant support for implementation. The TCR, thus, recommended for a way forward.

Project Number: 47286-001
Project Name: Enhancing Readiness of ADB Developing Member Countries for Scaled Up Climate Finance
Report Date:
Lesson
Based on the TCR narrative, the TA prepared some technical documents and accessed new mechanisms for climate finance. The approved GCF proposals were examples. While the TA made some efforts to increase awareness and disseminate knowledge via the in-country consultations, there was no clear evidence or assessment that the target audience was more aware of the technical materials presented, and had adopted the same, thereby, building institutional capacity. Adopting national or sectoral policies or legal standards, or any academic literature was not mentioned in the TCR.

Project Number: 47286-001
Project Name: Enhancing Readiness of ADB Developing Member Countries for Scaled Up Climate Finance
Report Date: