Highlights: World Bank
- At 72 percent moderately satisfactory or above, World Bank project outcome ratings remained stable overall. Only a few projects with very large volume drove an increase in volume-weighted outcome ratings from 81 percent in FY10-12 to 87 percent in FY13-15.
- The South Asia Region and the Social Protection Global Practice had higher outcome ratings, compared with other regions and global practices.
- At 66 percent moderately satisfactory or above, country development outcome ratings in
FY13–16 remained below the FY17 target of 70 percent. At 65 percent moderately satisfactory or above, country-level World Bank performance ratings also remained below the FY17 target of 75 percent.
- In regions other than Africa, most countries that had cycled through at least two country strategies during FY07–16 maintained a satisfactory development outcome rating, or improved from unsatisfactory to satisfactory. However, ratings remained unsatisfactory, or declined from satisfactory to unsatisfactory across country strategy cycles for a large group in Africa.
For more information, see World Bank Project Performance
- Development outcome success rates of IFC investment projects continued the broader downward trend in outcomes since the financial crisis in 2008. Financial Institutions Group performance had a slight uptick from prior years, but other industry groups saw drops in success rates.
- IFC work quality and IFC net commitments to projects are the primary drivers of development outcome ratings in the evaluated period, but limited data capture and insights on beneficiary-level results highlight a strand of weakness.
- Advisory services projects' success rate was below the corporate target for the review period,
For more information, see Trends in Outcome Ratings for IFC Investment and Advisory Projects
- On a six-year rolling average basis, excluding projects rated “no opinion possible” from the total evaluated, development outcomes of MIGA projects remained nearly steady at 61 percent.
- One consistent finding is that the underwriting methods, monitoring and supervision of the project credit risk, obligor risk profile, and overall performance reporting in self-evaluations need strengthening.
- Furthermore, IEG suggests that MIGA assess the risk to development outcome at underwriting stage and in self-evaluations explicitly.
For more information, see Trends in Outcome Ratings for MIGA Projects