Search

This evaluation of the country program with Paraguay for the period 2014-2018 has been prepared as part of the work program of the Inter-American Development Bank’s Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) for 2018 as an input for preparation of the IDB Group’s future country strategy.This is OVE’s fourth independent evaluation of the Bank’s program with Paraguay.

In 2010 the IDB’s Board of Governors approved the 9th General Capital Increase (IDB-9), adding $70 billion in paid-in and callable capital to IDB’s existing $100 billion capital base. Governors tied the capital increase to a series of Bank reforms, further detailed in the “Report on the Ninth General Increase in the Resources of the Inter-American Development Bank” (“IDB-9 Agreement”). This evaluation reviews IDB’s implementation of the IDB-9 mandates and results to date. It follows the themes of OVE’s 2013 midterm evaluation (also mandated under IDB-9) and focuses more centrally on “the big picture” – to what extent IDB-9 mandates have been implemented, what has been achieved, and what challenges remain going forward.

As part of its work program for 2018, the Inter-American Development Bank’s Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) is evaluating the IDB Group’s Country Program with Honduras 2015-2018. This is OVE’s fifth independent Country Program Evaluation (CPE) of the IDB Group’s program in Honduras. This document defines the scope and methodology of the CPE 2015-2018. The evaluation will continue to build on the lines of OVE’s early work, looking more closely at relevant financial and nonfinancial areas in “value added” and in learning processes related to the IDB’s effectiveness and efficiency. The CPE 2015-2018 will be the first independent evaluation of the program with Honduras that covers the work of both the IDB and IDB Invest in the country.

This will be the fourth time that OVE provides an independent look at the Bank’s program with Paraguay. This approach paper spells out the scope and content proposed for the program evaluation for the 2014-2018 period. This evaluation will continue to provide the accountability typical of previous OVE evaluations, but will focus more heavily on how the relationship between the Bank and Paraguay has evolved over time.

This executive summary sums up OVE´s evaluation "IDB’s Ninth General Capital Increase: Implementation and Results". This evaluation reviews IDB’s implementation of the IDB-9 mandates and results to date. It follows the themes of OVE’s 2013 midterm evaluation (also mandated under IDB-9) and focuses more centrally on “the big picture” – to what extent IDB-9 mandates have been implemented, what has been achieved, and what challenges remain going forward.

As part of its 2015-2016 annual work plan, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) prepared the Bank's country program evaluation (CPE) with Argentina for the 2009-2015 period. This CPE is OVE's third independent evaluation of the IDB's country program with Argentina. The first (document RE-299) covered the 1990-2002 period and focused on analyzing Bank support prior to and during the 2001-2002 crisis. The second OVE evaluation (document RE-361) covered support during the Argentine economy's strong recovery in the post-crisis period (2003-2008). The 2009-2015 CPE evaluates the Bank's program with the country over the period subsequent to the 2009 international crisis, which was guided by the 2012-2015 strategy (document GN-2687) and updates to the 2004-2008 strategy (document GN-2328) over the 2009-2011 period. This CPE seeks to analyze the Bank's relationship with the country, taking an independent view and assessing, in particular, the program's relevance and effectiveness, including both financial and nonfinancial products offered by the Bank during the period under analysis. This evaluation is intended as an input for the new country strategy document that the Bank is preparing.

As part of its 2016 annual work plan, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) is preparing the evaluation of the Inter-American Development Bank country program with Guyana for the period July 2012-November 2016. This paper sets out the proposed approach and methodology for the planned Country Program Evaluation, OVE's fourth for Guyana.

The Board of Executive Directors is interested in exploring ways for the IDB to continue to reduce costs and increase efficiency. As part of OVE's work program and budget discussion for 2016-17, the Board requested that OVE include in its 2016 program a review of the Bank's administrative spending, with a goal of helping the Board and management identify opportunities for cost reductions. This exercise is not meant to be an evaluation per se, but rather an activity that fits more broadly under OVE's oversight mandate. OVE's goal is to shed light on cost patterns and trends to help the Board and management in their decision-making and governance roles.

This document defines the scope and methodology of the evaluation of the IDB Country Program with the Government of Argentina for the 2009-2015 period. This evaluation will seek to analyze the Bank's relationship with the country from an independent and comprehensive perspective, with particular reference to the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of the program, including both the financial and nonfinancial products offered by the Bank during the period under review. As established under the protocol, this exercise is performed as one of the inputs for the process of preparing the new Country Strategy with Argentina for 2016-2019.

This first Annual Report reviews the past two years of OVE's work, 2013-2014. It is designed in two parts. Part I reports on OVE's recent evaluation activities and findings, on developments in the Bank's evaluation "architecture" (including management self-evaluations and OVE validations) during the year, and on management's progress in implementing agreed-upon recommendations from previous OVE evaluations. Part II highlights a special topic, seeking to put OVE's work in a broader perspective by bringing new analysis and linking OVE's evaluation work to major themes of importance to development effectiveness. This year's themes are the Bank's core objectives of growth and poverty reduction, as specified in the Agreement for IDB¿s 9th General Capital Increase in 2010. These themes continue to be relevant for the next IDB institutional strategy, which is currently under preparation.

This Country Program Evaluation (CPE) is the third independent evaluation of the country program of the Inter-American Development Bank (the Bank) with Panama. Past evaluations covered the periods 1991-2003 (RE-305), when the country was transitioning to full control of its prime economic asset, the Panama Canal, and the Canal Zone territory and infrastructure, and 2005-2009 (RE-359), a period characterized by extraordinarily good macroeconomic performance and significant fiscal reform. This CPE spans January 2010 to December 2014, years marked by an ambitious public investment program and a strong reduction in unemployment and poverty, although accompanied by income inequality.According to the Bank's Protocol for Country Program Evaluations (RE-348-3), the main goal of a CPE is to provide information on Bank performance at the country level that is credible and useful, and that enables the incorporation of lessons and recommendations that can be used to improve the development effectiveness of the Bank's overall strategy and program of country assistance. Like other CPEs, this evaluation seeks to examine the Bank's relationship with the country from an independent perspective, strengthening accountability and facilitating learning to serve as an input to the new Country Strategy under preparation for 2015-2019. To prepare this document, OVE interviewed the Bank's main counterparts among Panama's authorities, project execution units, civil society and the private sector, multilateral agencies with presence in Panama, and Bank staff in Panama and at Headquarters. OVE also visited Bank-supported projects to assess implementation progress and challenges. The evaluation portfolio includes all operations approved over the review period, together with those approved previously but implemented during the review period. Chapter 1 examines Panamas economic and social development over 2010-2014 and considers the countrys medium-term prospects. Chapter 2 analyzes the strategic

The Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) has committed to produce its second annual report as part of its 2015 Board-approved work plan (RE-479-1). This approach paper sets out the proposed approach, drawing on lessons from the first exercise in 2014 and on suggestions made by the Board of Executive Directors at a recent review meeting. The goals of the annual report are to enhance knowledge, strengthen feedback loops, and increase the use and influence of OVE's evaluation products, in line with the recommendations of the 2011 Independent Review Panel and the OECD-DAC. The annual report will draw on OVE's recent evaluation findings and, where appropriate, complement them with additional analysis. Because the report is not a full evaluation itself, it will not offer new recommendations. As in 2014, it will consist of two parts. Part 1 will summarize key findings and recommendations from OVE's 2015 evaluations, as well as the results of OVE's validations of management's DEM, PCR, and XSR ratings. It will also provide a status report on management's implementation of Board-endorsed recommendations from prior OVE evaluations, including a review of main points from Board discussions, and it will report on the uses of OVE's 2015 budget.

As part of its 2014 annual work plan, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) is preparing the evaluation of the country program with Jamaica for the period 2009-2014. This paper sets out the proposed approach to and methodology for the planned Country Program Evaluation (CPE), which represents the third occasion on which OVE evaluates the Bank's program with Jamaica. Past evaluations covered the periods 1990-2002 (RE-310, October 2005) and 2003-2008 (RE-365, June 2010).

The Board of Directors of the Inter-American Development Bank has requested that the Office of Evaluation and Oversight undertake an evaluation of Special Programs (SP) as part of its 2014 work program. The evaluation seeks to shed light on whether the current practice and arrangements for allocating US$100 million from Ordinary Capital (OC) net income to 19 SPs are an effective way to finance Technical Cooperations (TCs) to address priority social and economic development needs in the Bank's borrowing member countries. The evaluation covers the functioning of OC funded SPs from 2005 through mid-2014 and covers the SP TC portfolio from 2005 to 2013.

As part of its 2014 annual work plan, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight(OVE) is preparing the Country Program Evaluation (CPE) with Honduras for the period 2011-2014. This approach paper defines the evaluation's scope. This CPE therefore aims to analyze the Bank's relationship with the country, taking an independent and comprehensive view, particularly the program's relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability, including both financial and nonfinancial products offered by the Bank during the period under analysis. This evaluation is intended as an input to the new country strategy document being prepared by the Bank. This CPE is the fourth OVE evaluation of the Bank's program with Honduras. Past evaluations covered the periods 1990-2000 (document RE-263), 2001-2006 (document RE-328), and 2007-2010 (document RE-390). This CPE covers the Bank's program for the period 2011-2014.

The Realignment defined four key goals to respond to a perceived loss of Bank relevance and presence in LAC: sharpening sector focus and expertise, sharpening country focus, strengthening risk- and results-based management, and enhancing institutional efficiency. To achieve these goals, it proposed adjustments to the Bank's structure, processes, and human resources and incentives which included, among other things, the introduction of a new matrix organization, the delegation of additional responsibilities to country offices and project team leaders, the updating of operational and corporate processes, and changes in staffing and HR policies. This evaluation concludes that the Realignment's underlying direction toward a matrix structure and greater decentralization were appropriate, but it has not yet achieved all of its objectives. There are several noteworthy trends on the positive side. The technical skills of Bank staff have improved, the capacity to generate and disseminate knowledge has increased, and more authority has been delegated to country representatives and team leaders, bringing IDB closer to the client. The collaboration between staff in the same sector in country offices and headquarters has increased, as has the continuity of project team membership over the project cycle. However, the matrix is not yet functioning well. VPC has limited authority and few mechanisms to coordinate Bank inputs at the country level to ensure delivery of a coherent and efficient program. VPS and VPP have limited opportunity or incentive to bring their knowledge and influence to bear in country strategy and programming. Sector silos are tall and the pressures to lend and disburse greater than ever. As a result, the Bank and its borrowing countries are not reaping the full potential gains from cross-matrix coordination and collaboration in country strategy and program formulation, project design and implementation, and knowledge sharing. Moreover, the evaluation did not f

This Country Program Evaluation (CPE) with Honduras covers the period between January 2011 and April 2014 and is the fourth occasion on which the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) has evaluated the Bank's program with the country. Previous evaluations covered the periods 1990-2000 (document RE-263), 2001-2006 (document RE-328), and 2007-2010 (document RE-390). Under the Protocol for Country Program Evaluation (document RE-348-3), the main goal of a CPE is to "provide information on Bank performance at the country level that is credible and useful, and that enables the incorporation of lessons and recommendations that can be used to improve the development effectiveness of the Bank's overall strategy and program of country assistance."The current country strategy (document GN-2645) was approved in November 2011 and does not coincide with the country's political cycle. President Porfirio Lobo's administration was in office from January 2010 to January 2014. IDB Management expects to submit a new country strategy to the Board of Executive Directors in December 2014. The evaluation is structured into four chapters, plus an annex. Chapter I analyzes the general context of the country. Chapter II provides a general analysis of the Bank's program between January 2011 and April 2014, with particular attention devoted to the relevance of the country strategy and an analysis of the program actually implemented. Chapter III provides a sector-based analysis of the implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability of operations and of progress made toward the Bank's proposed strategic objectives. Chapter IV presents conclusions and recommendations.

This paper describes OVE's approach to the preparation of its 2014 AnnualReport. As discussed in OVE's Proposed 2014-2015 Work Program and Budget (RE-462), OVE's annual reports will describe routine OVE activities, summarize keyevaluation findings and recommendations in the context of development issues of special interest for the Bank and the region, and report on the system for tracking Management's implementation of OVE recommendations. OVE will summarize 2013 and 2014 evaluations in the context of IDB's two institutional mandates: to help reduce poverty and inequality and to promote sustainable growth in the region.

As part of its annual work plan, the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) will evaluate the Bank's country program with Panama for the period 2010-2014. This paper defines the approach and methodology for the planned Country Program Evaluation (CPE). This is the third independent evaluation of the Bank's Country Program with Panama. Past evaluations covered the periods 1991-2003 (RE-305), and 2005-2009 (RE-359). For the purpose of this evaluation, OVE will review all Sovereign Guaranteed (SG) and Non-Sovereign Guaranteed (NSG) loan and TC operations (excluding IIC and MIF) that were either active or approved between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014.

This approach paper defines the scope and objectives of, and tools for, the Costa Rica Country Program Evaluation (CPE) for the 2011-2014 period. This evaluation covers the 2011-2014 period, during which the debate over the country's growth model sharpened. This evaluation will be governed by OVE's current Protocol for Country Program Evaluation (document RE-348-3), pursuant to which the past program will be evaluated to determine the extent to which its goals were achieved and to draw lessons.

The evaluation seeks to shed light on whether the current practice and arrangements for allocating $100 million from Ordinary Capital (OC) net income to 19 Special Programs (SPs) is an effective way to support technical cooperation to help address priority social and economic development needs in the Bank's borrowing member countries. The evaluation will cover the functioning of OC funded SPs from 2005 through mid-2014, with attention to the implementation of the reforms proposed since 2008 and their effects on SP performance.

The realignment was proposed to remedy the loss of relevance and presence of the Bank in Latin America and the Caribbean because it had been unable to adapt to: (i) greater access by the countries to alternative sources of financing, (ii) the appearance of new actors, such as subnational governments, responsible for investment decisions, (iii) the heterogeneous nature of the countries of the region, and (iv) pressures to obtain results more quickly. In this context, the Bank was perceived as slow and bureaucratic, with complicated and undifferentiated processes, products that were not very innovative or flexible, and technical capacity and know-how that were lagging behind. The Bank's loss of presence and relevance in the region had a negative impact on its capacity to influence the economic and social development of the region. The reforms associated with the realignment were aimed at sharpening the Bank's country and sector focuses and improving its organizational efficiency and effectiveness. According to the realignment documents, the achievement of those intermediate objectives translates into the attainment of the targets identified. In turn, this greater country and sector focus and organizational efficiency and effectiveness was expected to lead to a greater presence and relevance of the Bank in the region.

This approach paper defines the scope and content of the Paraguay country program evaluation (CPE) for the period 2009-2013. This is the third time the Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) has provided an independent look at the Bank¿s program with Paraguay. The current evaluation covers the 2009-2013 period, which saw an intensification of the agricultural export model and showed early signs of new opportunities, challenges, and vulnerabilities.

During 2008 and 2009, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB, or Bank) assessed and documented shortcomings and constraints in its information technology (IT) capabilities, and in 2008 it created the IT Roadmap project (later Program Optima) to address these issues. As part of the IDB-9 Report, the Bank committed to the implementation of Program Optima to improve its efficiency in delivering services through IT. The program evolved over time, with its focus changing from information systems to business process reengineering. Also during 2010, the scope of the program was expanded to include areas that were originally left out of the program. Consequently, the budget assigned to the program increased from the original US$37 million to US$55.5 million. Program Optima suffered two major setbacks and changes in direction, the first in early 2009, when irregularities in the contracting of the consulting firm stopped the project for eight months; and the second in late 2010, when concerns were raised by senior Bank Management about the direction of the program. The team was moved to the Office of Strategic Planning and Development Effectiveness and a new Manager was hired, a process that again delayed the work for about eight months. Since the end of 2011 a new Optima team has been in charge of the program. The Bank has not yet implemented the necessary changes on its internal processes and IT systems to fulfill the requirements set out in the IDB-9 Report. However, the new Optima team has put in place the necessary mechanisms to make this program work, and it is now moving forward at a steady pace.

The 2008-2012 Country Program Evaluation for Guyana concludes that the Bank's strategy was aligned with the development objectives and economic priorities of the government. Nevertheless, its program has produced mixed results. In infrastructure, progress was achieved by consolidating the primary road network and extending the electrical grid to unserved areas; however, efforts to reduce losses in the electricity sector did not meet their target. In competitiveness, the financial and judicial sectors benefitted from institutional and structural reforms, and the business environment was strengthened through the adoption of streamlined procedures. However, key initiatives to deepen the financial market and increase access to credit have met with less success. Gains have also been made towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals; however, the absence of updated data in the social sectors hinders the evaluation of results. The average age of the loan portfolio is 4.56 years, the oldest in the Bank. With the launch of the Low Carbon Development Strategy, Guyana has an opportunity to benefit from global commitments for rainforest conservation and climate change. The Bank should continue to support new initiatives that lie within the LCDS, and should work closely with Guyana to enhance its national capacity to monitor and report the results. Although Guyana has shown the greatest improvement among D-2 countries in terms of its Country Institutional and Policy Evaluation score, FSO resources available to the country under the current program were 32% less than the allocation under the previous program. The sustainability of the Bank¿s work and its relevance in Guyana could be affected by a further reduction in future FSO allocations. The CS emphasized the strengthening and use of national systems by Bank projects. Several operations use the Integrated Financial Management System for accounting, and the intention is to use this for all new Bank-funded operati

The 2008-2012 Country Program Evaluation (CPE) concludes that the Bank's program was programmatically aligned with Government's National Plan for Human Development and addressed five areas essential for growth and poverty reduction. The one significant omission in the Bank's program from a development perspective was the lack of attention to governance an area identified as a priority for future strategies by the previous CPE. The Bank played a central role in financing the country's fiscal gap over the CPE period, reflecting increased country demand in the context of the global financial crisis. Nevertheless, time constraints limited the Bank's analytical efforts to identify important policy reforms in the first series of three programmatic policy-based loans, resulting in relatively weak policy content in those loans. Even with significant increases in the level of concessional resources allocated to Nicaragua and greater complexity in programming, the efficiency of program execution improved. In terms of developmental effectiveness, project-level results have generally been poorly documented. Furthermore, the Bank has at times overlooked the issue of recurrent cost financing for services initiated under investment loans, leading to the untimely suspension of programs and undermining the effectiveness of the initial investment. In light of CPE findings, OVE recommends that the Bank: (i) undertake further diagnostic and analytic work to delineate the Bank¿s potential role and value-added; (ii) continue to support improvements in the efficiency of public expenditure, including in the electricity sector; (iii) strengthen the measurement and reporting of results at the project level; (iv) identify potential sources of financing for the continued provision of services beyond project completion; and (v) consider allowing D-2 countries access to emergency lending facilities to meet fiscal needs in times of crisis.

This evaluation examines the IDB's Country Program with Peru for the 2007-2011 period. Policy reforms accounted for most of the approvals in this period. These involved programmatic loans associated with non-reimbursable technical cooperation operations as financial instruments. The main outcomes identified highlight the IDB's technical contributions to the solutions designed and to promoting the implementation of policy reform agendas in various sectors. The outputs associated with the legitimation of institutional arrangements among the various executing agencies and the approval of new organizational, legal, and regulatory frameworks were the main tangible results of the strategy. For the impact of the IDB's programmatic exercise with Peru to be enhanced, OVE proposes the following recommendations: (i) include knowledge and technical cooperation as program products; (ii) accelerate the change in the public-private makeup of the portfolio to elevate the importance and catalytic effect of the non-sovereign portfolio; (iii) seek greater balance in the sovereign portfolio between investment and policy reform financing modalities; (iv) foster progress in the country execution capacities and systems in line with the transformations in the IDB's monitoring and evaluation systems; and (v) concentrate the program's scope on fewer issues, focusing on sustainable growth and inequality reduction, which are the IDB's areas of excellence.

This Evaluation (RE-266) covers the period from 1989 to 2001. The IDB has played an important role in meeting Guyana's financial needs, especially since 1995. The instruments chosen were mainly project and sector loans, technical assistance and debt relief. Non-financial products were scarce as the need for financial support increased. The programming exercise has been closely coordinated with other multilateral organizations. The larger issue is whether the fulfillment of financial requirements has been accompanied by progress in Guyana's ability to regain the path to economic development. Hence, this report explores that issue in analyzing the implementation and effectiveness of the Bank's program.