The World Bank Group has a long history of Managing for Results and has made good progress on creating a structure and process for results measurement. It has also launched reforms and several initiatives throughout the years to enhance evidence-based management and learning. IEG evidence shows progress but also indicates that strengthening the foundations of results measurement and instilling a culture of evidence-based adaptive management and learning needs a stronger, more systematic, and holistic push.


Chapter 1: Managing for Results


  • The World Bank Group has taken several important steps over more than a decade to address the principles of managing for development results; progress is notable on instituting a structure and process for measurement and less so on adaptive management and learning.
  • World Bank Group management for results is affected by weaknesses in measurement of outcomes, adaptive management based on evidence, and generally weak client systems that generate results data.
  • The World Bank Group is addressing client capacity to manage for results through various instruments and approaches; the effectiveness and results of these efforts have not yet been assessed.
  • The World Bank Group is at a good point to take stock of its progress and systematically plan for and address the now well-known constraints to strengthening both measurement and adaptive management and learning.

For more information, see Chapter 1: Managing for Results


Chapter 2: Recent Performance of World Bank Group Operations

Highlights: World Bank

  • section_2B_wb-lendiing.jpgAt 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


Highlights: IFC

  • section_2C_wb-lendiing.jpgDevelopment 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


Highlights: MIGA

  • section_2D_wb-lendiing.jpgOn 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


Chapter 3: Management Action Record


  • section_3B_mar.jpgOf the 277 IEG recommendations adopted since 2008, 34 percent had an M4R dimension that related to either capacity development or M&E.  Sixty-eight percent of these recommendations were rated as substantial, high, or completed in terms of implementation, lower than the 77 percent implementation rate for all other recommendations.
  • The most common management actions in response to M4R recommendations were improving country statistical capacity, introducing core sector indicators, strengthening World Bank Group M&E, and incorporating evidence-based knowledge work into project design. However, more attention to this area is warranted to address IEG recommendations focused on M4R, including M&E, particularly as the World Bank Group aims to better integrate results data in its decision-making processes.

For more information, see Chapter 3: Management Action Record

Best Bet Keywords
Organization Tags
Evaluation Reports Collection