(CPE) Methodology - Independent Evaluation Group

Country Program Evaluation (CPE)
Anis Dani
March 20, 2013
IEG Methodology for CPEs
Objective Accountability and Learning
Scope: Long-term Review (2+ CAS cycles)
Evaluation Questions identified by some CPEs to address country
specific issues and to provide lessons for similar countries
Outcome Rating:
1. Relevance and 2. Efficacy
3. Client ownership of international development priorities
4. WBG corporate advocacy priorities, such as safeguards/Replaced
with strengthening country systems
5. Institutional development impact
6. Risk to Development Outcome
CPE methodology and data sources
►Review of international literature and countrylevel analytical work and project documents
►Review and analysis of IEG data from previous
• including ISRs, ICRs, ICR Reviews, PPARs, AAA
►Interviews with key stakeholders
• Learning Week with current and former country teams
• In-country stakeholders and other development partners
►Field visits and beneficiary feedback from
project locations
Afghanistan CPE:
Evaluation Questions
► To what extent was WBG assistance in the initial years relevant and
commensurate with country’s needs to build confidence in the state?
► Relevance and effectiveness of strategic pillars over the past decade:
WBG support for building the capacity of state institutions and its accountability
to citizens?
WBG assistance in promoting growth of the rural economy and improving rural
WBG efforts to support growth of the formal private sector, including through
infrastructure development?
► How effective were efforts in harmonization and alignment among
donor organizations?
► What lessons can be derived from Afghanistan for other fragile and
conflict-affected states?
► To what extent has the WBG been effective in building institutions
likely to be sustainable and resilient to the risks facing the country?
Methodological constraints and
solutions for Afghanistan CPE
PROBLEM: Security constraints restricted mobility and
limited the size and duration of field missions
► Cluster-based Assessment of all 107 Advisory and
Analytical Activities(AAA) products
► Background paper on gender
► Case study of institutional capacity (second civil service)
► Primary data collection:
• Beneficiary survey (radio & mobile phones)
• Social media and Facebook survey
• Focus group discussions with partner organizations (NSP, public
health) and media representatives
► Comparative analysis with results from other FCS
Limitations and Challenges
►Performance assessed against strategic choices
reflected in CAS/CPS objectives but not designed
to capture “errors of omission” in strategy
►The current methodology depends heavily on
triangulation of evidence on a single country but is
not designed for comparative analysis
►The methodology is based on the country model as
the primary vehicle for delivery of Bank Group
assistance and is less effective in assessing the
relevance of regional or global issues

similar documents