GOVERNANCE PARTNERSHIP FACILITY FINAL REPORT 2009–2015 RESULTS, LESSONS, AND LEGACY GOVERNANCE PARTNERSHIP FACILITY © 2016 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 202-473-1000 www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non- commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Photo credits: World Bank except chapter 3: Matthieu Dumeau. Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Contents Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................... vii Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................... viii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................ix Chapter 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................1 Chapter 2. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15.....................................5 Part 1: The Results Framework ...................................................................................................... 7 Part 2: GPF Performance Indicators Outside of the GPF Results Framework ............................ 28 Chapter 3. Financial Performance ...............................................................................................37 Financial Summary ....................................................................................................................... 38 Receipts and Expenditures .......................................................................................................... 39 GPF Project Portfolio and Disbursements ................................................................................... 41 The Secretariat’s Budget ............................................................................................................. 43 Chapter 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies .................................................45 Performance of GPF Programs .................................................................................................... 46 Efficiency of GPF Programs ......................................................................................................... 50 GPF Influence on Bank Operations and Donors ......................................................................... 51 GPF Support to Strengthen Partnerships with Civil Society ....................................................... 53 GPF Contribution to the Sustainability of GAC in the World Bank ............................................. 60 Chapter 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest....................................................................61 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 62 Key Lessons ................................................................................................................................. 62 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 73 Contents iii Chapter 6. The Legacy of the GPF: Planting the Seeds of Innovation.........................................75 Translating Extractives into Tangible and Sustainable Results .................................................... 76 Procurement and Open Contracting: Advancing Development Across Regions ....................... 84 Governance Boot Camp .............................................................................................................. 93 Budget Transparency, Accountability, and Participation ............................................................. 95 Right to Information—GPF Support in South Asia.................................................................... 100 Political Economy Analysis—Getting from “How” to “What” .................................................. 107 Multi-stakeholder Initiatives ...................................................................................................... 112 Annexes 1. Results Framework ................................................................................................................ 120 2. Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations ............................................................ 133 3. GPF Knowledge Products...................................................................................................... 149 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance ................................................ 161 5. List of Grants ......................................................................................................................... 171 References ................................................................................................................................177 Boxes 2.1 Systematic Country Diagnostic.......................................................................................... 15 2.2 Summary of Window 1 Review.......................................................................................... 19 2.3 The Main Uses of PEAs According to the Window 1 Review............................................ 23 4.1 What is Outcome Mapping?.............................................................................................. 55 4.2 Outcomes At A Glance...................................................................................................... 56 4.3 The Development Marketplace......................................................................................... 57 4.4 Winning Projects in the Mini Development Marketplace for Governance— The GPF in Albania............................................................................................................ 58 5.1 Governance in Cameroon ................................................................................................. 64 5.2 Youth Auditors Program in Peru ....................................................................................... 66 5.3 The Communication for Reform (C4R) Pilot in Zambia..................................................... 68 6.1 Supporting Civil Society Oversight of Public Procurement in Mongolia........................... 87 iv Contents 6.2 ieGovern Research Questions .......................................................................................... 92 6.3 Fighting Corruption in the Distribution of Free Medicine .............................................. 105 6.4 Right-to-Information Regime—Profile of Users Based on 2005–08 Comparable Data and Findings ...................................................................................... 106 6.5 Examples of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives........................................................................ 113 Figures 2.1 The GPF Results Chain......................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Scores for IDA Countries Along Three Governance Dimensions 2005–13............................................................................. 9 2.3 Selected Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Governance Indicators: Window 1 Countries Average.............................................................................................. 9 2.4 Number of GPF-Influenced Projects per Sector................................................................ 12 2.5 Number of GPF-Influenced Projects per Country............................................................. 13 2.6 Value of GPF-Influenced Projects per Sector.................................................................... 13 2.7 Mobilization of Other Resources ...................................................................................... 15 2.8 Rate the Extent to Which Your GPF Project is Promoting Innovation in Governance Activities that Influence Country Programs (e.g., Country Assistance Strategies) or Secotor Approaches.................................................................. 17 2.9 The Extent to Which GPF Projects are Achieving Results in Accountability and Transparency in Bank Operations at the Country Level............................................. 25 2.10 Number of TTLs Reporting Organizing Brown Bag Lunches ............................................ 26 2.11 Number of TTLs Reporting Organized Workshops........................................................... 26 2.12 Number of TTLs Reporting Organizing Conferences........................................................ 27 2.13 GPF Projects by Theme in 2014–15................................................................................... 28 2.14 GPF Performance: Achievement of Grant Objectives 2010–15........................................ 29 2.15 GPF Grant Activities Progress Rating................................................................................ 29 2.16 Achievement of Grant Objectives in 2014–15 .................................................................. 29 2.17 Collaboration with GPF and non-GPF Donors.................................................................. 30 2.18 Bank Performance Rating.................................................................................................. 30 2.19 Quality of Collaboration with Government Counterparts ................................................ 31 Contents v 2.20 Quality of Support Received from the GPF Secretariat.................................................... 31 2.21 Type of Follow-up Activities Undertaken by GPF Grants.................................................. 33 2.22 Overall Outcome (and its Sustainability)........................................................................... 33 2.23 Replicability........................................................................................................................ 34 2.24 Rate the Extent to which the Achievements of Your Grant Will Remain Relevant in the New Organizational Structure of the Bank............................................... 34 3.1 Exchange Rates on Contributions Received, DFID........................................................... 40 3.2 Exchange Rates on Contributions Received, Norway....................................................... 40 3.3 Number of Active Grants, Fiscal 2009-Q1 to 2015-Q4..................................................... 41 3.4 Annual Project Disbursements, Fiscal 2009–15................................................................. 42 3.5 GPF Project Expenditure as Percentage of Cumulative Spending, by Category.............. 42 3.6 GPF Project Disbursements by Region.............................................................................. 42 3.7 Secretariat Spending, Fiscal 2009–15................................................................................ 43 Tables 2.1 Overall Regional Responsiveness to Governance and Anticorruption (GAC)................... 11 2.2 Breakdown of Analytical Support and Guidance............................................................... 16 2.3 Breakdown of Direct Country Support to Systematic Country Diagnostics Preparation........................................................................................................................ 16 2.4 Summary of Window 1 Review Scores in 2011 and 2014.................................................. 19 3.1 GPF Financial Summary (as of June 30, 2015)................................................................... 38 3.2 Donor Contributions to GPF and Share of Each Donor in Unused Fund Balance............ 39 3.3 GPF Projects Activated, Fiscal 2009–15............................................................................ 41 6.1 Participating Projects—Impact Evaluation Design Workshop........................................... 90 vi Contents Acknowledgments This report is a World Bank team effort. The 126 Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) Task Team Leaders and their teams have reported their activities and results, and provided feedback though the GPF evaluation and other interviews. Many GPF Task Teams are supported by field-based managers, including country directors and management providing leadership and their foresight on governance. The impact of the GPF would not be felt in the World Bank without this support. Over the years, we have been fortunate to receive the support from Sanjay Pradhan, Randi Ryterman, Kai Kaiser, Brian Levy, Debbie Wetzel, and Linda van Gelder. At the newly formed Governance Global Practice, we would like to thank former Head of Practice Mario Marcel, as well as Directors James Brumby, Samia Msadek, Robert Hunja, and Hassan Cisse. We also would like to acknowledge the overall guidance and support of William Dorotinsky, Adviser; Robert Beschel, Lead Public Sector Specialist; as well as Marijn Verhoeven, Lead Economist and GPF Program Manager. Piet Hein Van Heesewijk led the team that prepared the Final GPF Report. The team includes Gokuldas Pai, Elena Georgiva-Andonovska, Shilpa Banerji, and Arsema Tamyalew. Laura Johnson provided design and editorial support. The results achieved by the GPF would not be possible without our donor community partners. We would like to thank our focal points, in particular: Laure-Helene Piron, Peter Owens, Julius Court, Ben Latto, Bella Bird, Mark Robinson, Stefan Kossoff, Jonathan Hargreaves, Annabel Gerry, and Tia Raappana at the UK Department for International Development (DFID); Ingjerd Haugen and Tom Erkisen at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Norway; Hege Bakke Soreime and Per Øyvind Bastoe at Norad in Norway; Hans Teunissen at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands; and Graham Teskey, Marcus Khan, Eleanor Kennon, and Sophie Temby at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) in Australia. Acknowledgments vii Abbreviations and Acronyms Bank World Bank BTI Budget Transparency Initiative C4R Communication for Reform CoST Construction Sector Transparency Initiative CPIA Country Policy and Institutional Assessment CRC Citizen Report Card CSO civil society organization DFGG demand for good governance DFID Department for International Development (United Kingdom) DPO Development Policy Operation e-GP Electronic Government Procurement E4D Extractives for Development Initiative EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative GAC governance and anticorruption GIFT Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GPF Governance Partnership Facility GRM grant reporting and monitoring ICT information and communications technology JSC Joint Services Council KPK Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission M&E monitoring and evaluation MSI multi-stakeholder initiative NGO nongovernmental organization ODI Overseas Development Institute OGP Open Government Partnership PEA political economy analysis PFM public financial management PRMPS Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network Public Sector Unit RTI right to information SCD systematic country diagnostic TAG Transparency Advisory Group TTL task team leader viii Executive Summary Abbreviations and Acronyms Executive Summary Over the past five years, the World Bank has made significant progress supporting gov- ernance as a core element in operations to end extreme poverty and boost shared pros- perity. To help its clients, the Bank strives to deepen its understanding of the environment through the design and implementation of its projects. Since the inception of the Governance and Anticorruption (GAC) Strategy in 2008, the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) has played a vital role in the success of its imple- mentation. Through the GPF, colleagues across the World Bank have been inspired in their efforts to experiment with innovative approaches to issues of governance, public management, service delivery, information and communications technology, extractives industry, among a host of thematic areas. As this Final Report will show, the GPF played an important role in helping to mainstream governance across a large number of Bank supported activities. The US$95 million that GPF donors provided has supported 127 governance projects spread across 37 countries. Bank staff surveys, as well as independent program evaluations, confirm that since 2013 various dimensions of the GPF such as analytical work, have influenced at least 163 World Bank projects with a combined value of billions of dollars. The evaluations as well as five country specific evaluations undertaken by the GPF high- lights the importance of social accountability and political economy analysis (PEA) in our projects to help Bank teams to identify and address binding constraints to development. It also showcases initiatives to help resource rich countries enjoy the benefits of their nat- ural wealth, and, with the additional contribution by Australia, GPF activities have shown how public resources can be managed more wisely and transparently for better develop- ment outcomes. The 2014 independent evaluation of the GPF noted that GPF funds allowed for flexibil- ity because governance was not institutionalized in all countries. Thus, one of the key lessons was the significance of effective leadership in service delivery and outcomes. In both Nigeria and Philippines, for example, the leadership came in the form of a country director who was a strong advocate for mainstreaming governance and changed the way business was done. Executive Summary ix GPF grants have also increased the knowledge base around the dynamics of changing public procurement practices. Political economy analytics included the examination of the political context of procurement reforms; ways to improve quality in three African countries at the central government level, and in Indonesia at the provincial and local government levels. In several countries, the consultation process identified a significant performance challenge faced by public oversight agencies: scarce human and finan- cial resources. One way to strengthen the role of oversight agencies is to facilitate their engagement with civil society and private sector organizations interested in strengthen- ing the public procurement system to jointly monitor, share information, and advocate for better procurement practices. As the GPF comes to a close, we can draw two major conclusions from the implementa- tion of activities funded by the Facility: Like other development partners, the World Bank has increasingly paid attention to augmenting the specific environment it operates in. This includes developing a better understanding of the political context as a central factor that determines the results and outcomes of our efforts. GPF has provided the tools and approaches for this type of analysis, and we have witnessed a growing number of sectors that apply PEA as an integral part of operations. Secondly, we have seen how important it is to apply citizen-centered approaches in all our programs, especially those implemented by the Governance Global Practice. Without focusing on citizens we run the danger of ignoring the essence of our development efforts. From Ghana to Cambodia, the GPF has incorporated demand side governance in to its program activities. Citizen-centered approaches were undertaken by the Budget Transparency Initiative in Nepal and Cameroon, as well as a US$1million grant to strengthen access-to-information regimes in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Case studies produced from the grant demonstrate how the Right to Information law is being used by the poor and disempowered to take on the rich—a modern David and Goliath story—with implications for good governance and transparency movements, and for the region, with some coun- tries paving the way for the others. x Executive Summary The GPF has been part of the dialogue for an increased awareness of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives (MSIs) and what they can achieve. MSIs are changing the ways civil soci- ety participates in public governance reform. CSOs in Brazil worked with the govern- ment to improve public access to information as part of their commitment to the Open Governance Partnership (OGP). A multi-stakeholder group in Liberia worked to pass a natural resource revenue transparency law as part of their commitment to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). A similar group assembled by the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST) in Guatemala successfully convinced the govern- ment to stop a large and inefficient public works contract for the reconstruction of the Belize Bridge in Guatemala City. In interviews, team leaders were unanimous about enhanced governance learnings under- stood through projects (lending and non-lending) and knowledge products through infor- mation and communications technology (ICT) tools such as SMS, online and social media, and core statistical analysis. Governance learning events must have operational relevance for many task teams to appreciate and apply the experience. The Governance Boot Camp and “New Directions in Governance” Conference were effective in promoting peer learn- ing and shared experiences. Overall, the GPF grant reports paint a positive picture of how funds were appropriately mobilized to do what the World Bank does best: provide technical support, enhance policy dialogue, and use its convening power to bring a diverse group of officials, civil society groups, and other voices to the table. The key lesson, according to one team leader, is to develop a framework that applies to the government, development partners, and—as much as possible—to contractors engaged in government service delivery. With the closing of the GPF, sustainability is a valid concern, especially in countries like Sierra Leone, where an epidemic tested the fragility of public institutions. Concern about the sustainability of other projects was overtaken by an understanding of how effective the projects were in advancing global knowledge and innovation in the development sphere. The Window 4 review reaffirms that the budget of the World Bank, like other develop- ment organizations, is squeezed and, given that environment, the GPF provided critical resources to task teams. Executive Summary xi Chapter 1 Introduction This is the final report of the GPF. It focuses on achievements of recent months but also reflects on the journey of the past six years and looks forward to what might last after the closing of the program. As often the case, the GPF was formed by circumstances at the time the program was created. In 2008, the World Bank had just initiated its Governance and Anticorruption Strategy—frequently referred to as “GAC.” The GAC Strategy demonstrated high aspi- rations to better understand governance as a binding constraint to development. The GAC implementation plan, approved by the Board of the World Bank in October 2008, supported a Bank-wide change process aimed at mainstreaming governance in World Bank operations by providing task teams in all sectors access to governance expertise and analytical capacity. The GPF was designed to respond to the GAC implementation plan. To this end, the GPF would specifically aim to boost World Bank staff capacity by funding governance specialist staff positions. The GPF also sought to provide resources to Bank staff intend- ing to integrate governance into Bank operations at the country level and into sectors. Funding preferences would be given to innovative activities that could be scaled up and replicated. The implementation arrangements of the GPF reflected these priorities. The selection of activities to be funded was achieved through a two-stage process. First, Bank staff from all areas of the organization were invited to submit brief “Expressions of Interest,” describing an initial concept for an innovative governance activity. Teams with the most compelling ideas were invited to submit full proposals, which were usually assessed by two external peer reviewers. The proposals and the reviews were submitted to a Standing Review Committee (SRC) comprised of five World Bank members and one member for each of the donor partners, which selected the activities to receive funding. This method for selecting activities to be funded proved very effective at mainstream- ing GAC and giving Bank staff outside core public sector and financial management departments an opportunity to attempt to apply approaches for overcoming governance obstacles in a wide range of sectors and country settings. The high level of competitive- ness1 lead to the selection of committed teams intent on applying innovative analysis and 1. In total, over 650 Expressions of Interest were submitted, from which 127 projects were selected for funding. In other words, only one in five initial proposals were selected. 2 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy approaches to governance constraints for operational activities. The commitment of hun- dreds of dedicated Bank staff implementing GPF-funded activities has contributed to the overall performance and success of the GPF in influencing Bank operations. The performance of the GPF has been measured and reviewed through different meth- ods. The Results Framework, included in annex 1 of this report, has been an important tool. During the initial stages of the GPF, the Results Framework went through several iter- ations, particularly with regard to discussions with DFID. As just one of the programs and sources of funding in support of the implementation of the GAC, there has been debate about how to distinguish the results and impact of the GPF, but the data and reporting demonstrates that all lifetime targets of the GPF have been met (annex 1). The positive results of the GPF have been underwritten by several evaluations that were undertaken during the course of the program, including a mid-term review by a panel of former senior World Bank managers in 2012, an independent evaluation commissioned by the donor partners in 2013–14, and a separate evaluation of GPF Window 4 projects in 2015. Chapter 4 of this report presents a summary of key findings for the three evaluations. The overall conclusion drawn from these assessments is that the GPF has performed well in achieving its immediate objective of producing innovative governance activities, and that there is significant evidence that these activities are being scaled up and expanding into other World Bank operations. This final report also looks forward. Many activities initiated by the GPF continue being implemented since their funding ended. These types of efforts have been further strength- ened by the establishment of the Governance Global Practice in July 2014, which pro- vides an institutional home for activities such as political economy analysis and promotes the inclusion of social accountability into project design and implementation. A specific example is the Governance Boot Camp, which is offered to all operational staff in the Governance Global Practice. The course includes extensive training sessions and simula- tions in the application of political economy analysis, social accountability, and systemic country diagnostics, all of which are new approaches that have been pioneered with GPF support and funding. 1. Introduction 3 Chapter 2 GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 Following the Governance Partnership Council meeting in January 2013, the revised Results Framework of the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) has been endorsed by all devel- opment partners as the method to capture the annual progress of GPF implementation. This section of the report focuses on the achievements of the GPF in fiscal 2014–15. It con- sists of two parts. The first explains the six steps of the GPF Results Framework and shows the progress made on the indicators used to measure results at each step. Following the flow of the Results Framework (see annex 1), the section begins with the higher-level results (Step 6) and ends with a description of the GPF inputs (Step 1). The revised Results Framework is aligned with the Results Chain shown in figure 2.1, which lays out the con- ceptual framework used to monitor GPF results. Figure 2.1. The GPF Results Chain Indirect Impacts • Bringing teams together • Bringing innovation into the mainstream • Contributing to better project management • Facilitating diffusion and “virtuous circle” Original GPF Design: Support to GAC Implementation Stretching GPF: Improving Institutional Quality Step 5: Country Impact and Beyond Strengthened Governance and Step 4: Public Sector Management Institutions Step 3: Step 1: Step 2: Influencing Outcomes Inputs GPF Outputs Bank Selected Operations Step 6: Practice Country Impact and Beyond Improved Country-Level Development Outcomes Production of Global Governance “Public Goods” GPF-Funded Outputs • Strengthened Engagement • Political Economy Analysis • Demand for Good Governance Direct Impacts • Governance in Sectors • Influencing selected Bank operations • Institutions of Accountability • Pioneering new and innovative approaches • Fostering a more comprehensive approach to country programming • Improving GAC in projects • Better addressing political and financial risk • Facilitating knowledge, learning, and dissemination 6 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The second half of this section presents additional results achieved through the end of fiscal 2015, which are outside of the GPF Results Framework. The information in this sec- tion is collected through the completion grant reporting and monitoring reports (GRMs) submitted by all GPF task teams as per World Bank guidelines. The GRM is the main tool used by project teams to report on their achievements. GRM reports contain a wealth of information, most of which is directly related to the GPF Results Framework. However, they also contain data not captured in the Results Framework, and provide additional insights into the performance of the GPF. They are therefore included in the results sec- tion of this report. Part 1: The Results Framework Step 6—Country Impact and Beyond: Country-Level Development Outcomes and Global Governance Public Goods Step 6 refers to the GPF’s long-term goal of improving development outcomes and the production of global governance “public goods.” Step 6 is the furthest ripple from the GPF’s impact, and even though it is the most important, it is also the result over which the GPF has the least control. For this reason, it is not measured by specific indicators. This goal will take time to achieve, and many GPF efforts have not been in place long enough to realize definitive improvements in institutional quality. It should also be noted that Step 6 of the Results Framework represents the governance and anticorruption (GAC) strategy adopted by the World Bank in 2008. With the recent changes in The World Bank Group, including the establishment of the Governance Global Practice, the initial GAC strategy has been superseded by the new structure and goals set for all Global Practices. As a result, the monitoring of GAC indicators has not been maintained, and reporting against the original indicators has been discontinued. Nevertheless, the contribution of the GPF to global public goods has been significant as described in section 6 of this report. In addition, the independent evaluation of the GPF completed in 2014 found positive reports of GPF impact in terms of development outcomes, but those reports were largely anecdotal. While interviews conducted for the evaluation produced impressionistic, self-reported evidence of GPF impact on the ground, the evaluation found it impossi- ble to systematically analyze this anecdotal evidence to determine whether development impact (or, conversely, the lack thereof) could be attributed to GPF activities. Moreover, GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 7 GPF funds are often comingled with other project funds to support a particular objec- tive, further complicating the attribution question. With those caveats, there were several self-reported examples of GPF-funded activities kick-starting larger efforts at the country level. In Uganda, for example, a GPF-financed system of parallel evaluation reportedly led to a significant drop in complaints after two years, a reduction in procurement lead time by 11 percent in the second year, and a reduction in the average cost of road treatment by 10 percent. In Cambodia, GPF-financed voice and accountability activities reportedly led to support for the government to adopt a nationwide social accountability frame- work covering local commune development, in turn enabling a somewhat rare dialogue between government and civil society. Other such examples of country-level effects can be found in GPF program documents (World Bank 2014d). Step 5—Country Impact and Beyond: Strengthened Governance and Public Sector Management Institutions Step 5 of the Results Framework refers to the Bank’s contribution to country-level impact measured by the strength of governance and public sector management institu- tions. The Bank’s contribution to this is measured by: (1) the Bank’s Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA), and (2) indicators contained in the Bank’s corporate scorecard.2 The CPIA measures general improvements in the qulality of country-level institutions.3 The CPIA rates countries against a set of 16 criteria grouped into four clusters: (1) economic management; (2) structural policies; (3) policies for social inclu- sion and equity; and (4) public sector management and institutions. Figures 2.2 and 2.3 present CPIA scores on the three governance dimensions included in the GPF Results Framework: transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector; quality of budgetary and financial management; and quality of public administration. The latest available data is from 2013. Figure 2.2 shows the trends between 2005–13 for all coun- tries borrowing from the International Development Association (IDA), and figure 2.3 shows the scores of selected GPF Window 1 countries. The data shows that there have not been many changes in the three indicators over the past three years for both sets of countries. 2. http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/pubdocs/publicdoc/2015/5/707471431716544345/WBG-WB-corporate-scorecard2015.pdf. 3. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/CPIA. 8 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.2. Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Scores for IDA Countries Along Three Governance Dimensions 2005–13 3.4 3.3 3.3 IDA CPIA transparency, accountability, 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 and corruption in the public sector rating 3.2 3.2 IDA CPIA quality of budgetary and 3.1 financial management rating 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.9 IDA CPIA quality of public administration 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 rating 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 (1 = low to 6 = high) 2.7 2.6 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Figure 2.3. Selected Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Governance Indicators: Window 1 Countries Average 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 CPIA quality of public administration rating 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 CPIA transparency, accountability, and 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.7 corruption in the public sector rating 2.5 CPIA quality of budgetary and financial 2.2 management racing 1.9 (1 = low to 6 = high) 1.6 1.3 1 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 With regard to the second measurement of Step 5, the GPF Results Framework tracks the indicator related to the strengthening of public sector management systems through Bank operations and its four dimensions. The Bank uses a three-year rolling methodology to arrive at the values of this indicator, which requires that both the 2013 baseline and 2015 actual values be updated in 2015. According to the April 2015 World Bank Corporate Scorecard, there were improvements in two out of the three measured indicators. Thirty- four countries have better civil service and public administrations compared with 29 in GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 9 fiscal 2013. Twenty-eight countries have improved their tax policies and administrations, compared with 24 in 2013. The number of countries with improved public financial man- agement systems has dropped by four and stands at 52. The April 2015 scorecard does not, however, report on the fourth dimension of the indicator, namely the number of coun- tries with strengthened public sector management systems for transparency and access to information. While it is difficult to disentangle the GPF’s direct contribution to these accomplishments, it is encouraging to note the positive influence of the Bank’s operations on the quality of governance and institutions in client countries. Step 4—Influencing Bank Practice Step 4 considers the impact of the GPF on broader Bank practices. Some of these impacts are direct, including influencing a large volume of World Bank lending operations that have pioneered GPF-funded innovative approaches; fostering a more comprehensive, politically aware approach to country programming; better addressing political and finan- cial risks, and finding ways to facilitate the dissemination of knowledge and learning. Other GPF impacts are indirect, including connecting teams with one another, bringing innovation into the mainstream, contributing to better project management, and facilitat- ing the diffusion of ideas about governance. More specifically, the contribution of the GPF to increasing the Bank’s effectiveness at addressing global, regional, and country-level impediments to development are mea- sured against 2009 baselines by an end-line study implemented as part of the overall independent evaluation of the GPF that concluded in June 2014. The review assessed the progress made toward the targets set in the GPF Results Framework with regard to the analysis and implementation of GAC-in-Bank operations since the start of the imple- mentation of the GAC strategy in 2008. The baseline review conducted in 2009 by the Bank’s Quality Assurance Group assessed and established baselines for three dimensions of GAC: (1) Governance and Political Economy; (2) GAC in Fiduciary Aspects; and (3) Demand Side of Governance (World Bank 2009a). The 2014 repeat assessment indicates that all of the set targets included in the GPF Results Framework were exceeded (World Bank 2014f). Although there are wide varia- tions, the 2014 assessment shows that, overall, 82 percent of operations are responsive to GAC (end target: 65 percent). This is an increase of 36 percent from the overall GAC 10 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Table 2.1. Overall Regional Responsiveness to Governance and Anticorruption (GAC) 2009 Baseline— 2014 Target— 2014 Results— n=180 Baseline +15 n=116 GAC Aspects (percent) (percent) (percent) Remarks Governance and Political Economy 45 60 84 Target exceeded GAC in Fiduciary Aspects 64 79 87 Target exceeded Demand Side of Governance 42 57 62 Target exceeded Overall 46 61 82 Target exceeded Source: World Bank 2014d. responsiveness of 46 percent in the 2009 baseline review, confirming the main hypothe- sis of the study: “there has been significant progress since the 2009 baseline review with respect to GAC risk assessments and mitigation measures in Bank operations.” Eighty- seven percent of Bank operations are responsive to fiduciary aspects (end target: 79 percent), and 62 percent are responsive to the demand side of governance (end target: 57 percent) (see table 2.1). However, the study found that the GPF did not have a significant influence on GAC respon- siveness. While the overall rate of GAC responsiveness in GPF-supported operations (78 percent) is slightly lower than that of non-GPF operations (85 percent), the responsiveness scores for fiduciary aspects and demand side of governance are even for both types of operations (88 and 62 percent, respectively). For governance and political economy GAC responsiveness of non-GPF operations (85 percent) is slightly higher than for GPF influ- enced operations (78 percent). Finally, the repeat assessment found that there were significant regional differences in GAC responsiveness. Overall the World Bank’s Africa Region was the most responsive region to GAC at 94 percent; the South Asia Region was the least responsive at 47 per- cent. According to the 2009 review, the South Asia region was the most responsive to the GAC agenda (World Bank 2009a). GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 11 Step 3—GPF Outcomes Step 3 demonstrates GPF outcomes with regard to their influence on selected Bank oper- ations, measured by four indicators: (1) the number of Bank projects influenced by GPF to have better quality at entry and improved accountability at in implementation; (2) the number of Bank projects influenced by GPF-supported political economy analysis (PEA) analysis; (3) whether funding for governance at the country level equals GPF financing; and (4) the number of country strategies that include governance actions. 1. Number of Bank Projects Influenced by the GPF The first indicator offers encouraging news. It indicates that the GPF is achieving out- comes far beyond the individual activities it supports. During fiscal 2014–15, the GPF had an impact on 39 additional Bank operations. The slight decrease compared to previous years can be explained by the fact that during this period, a substantial number of GPF grants had already closed. Together with the 124 projects influenced in 2013, the GPF has influenced 163 Bank projects in the past three years, well above the final target of 100 World Bank projects set in the GPF Results Framework. These projects have a value of 27 billion,4 and they encompass 16 sectors, although the majority is in the public sector and governance domain (see figure 2.4). The influenced projects are being implemented in 65 countries, but mainly in Zambia, Nigeria, and Cameroon. Figure 2.5 demonstrates the distribution per country. Figure 2.4. Number of GPF-Influenced Projects per Sector Public Sector Governance: 59 Health, Nutrition and Population: 16 Water: 12 Transport: 11 Agriculture and Rural Development: 11 Energy and Mining: 10 4. The value of the influenced projects is calculated on the basis of information provided by task team leaders in their annual GRM reports. “Influenced projects” are the Bank-funded projects that have been identified by task team leaders as having bet- ter quality at entry and improved accountability during implementation, due in part to a GPF-funded activity or output. For a detailed explanation of the definitions used in the Results Framework, please refer to annex 1. 12 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.5. Number of GPF-Influenced Projects per Country Zambia: 11 Nigeria: 9 Cameroon: 8 Burkina Faso: 7 Liberia: 7 Mongolia: 6 Tajikistan: 6 Sierra Leone: 5 Philippines: 5 Indonesia: 5 Almost 70 percent of the total value of the influenced projects is focused on four sectors: (1) education; (2) energy and mining; (3) transport; and (4) public sector governance (see figure 2.6). In each of these sectors, the GPF has influenced prominent and high-value Bank operations, such as the School Operational Assistance Knowledge Improvement for Transparency and Accountability Project in Indonesia (US$2.6 billion), the South West Roads Project in Kazakhstan (US$2.5 billion), and the Helwan South Power Project in Egypt (US$2.4 billion). The largest project influenced in 2015 is the Second Sindh Education Sector Project in Pakistan (US$2.7 billion). Figure 2.6. Value of GPF-Influenced Projects per Sector Education: 21 Energy and Mining: 19 Transport: 16 Public Sector Governance: 13 Health, Nutrition and Population: 8 69% Urban Development: 7 Water: 6 Agriculture and Rural Development: 6 Social Development: 4 GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 13 The evaluation of GPF Window 4 that was completed in June 2015 reconfirmed that the influence of the GPF on Bank operations is profound, even for the smaller grants in this window. In addition, feedback from the GPF task team leader (TTL) collected as part of the independent evaluation of the GPF confirmed the strong influence of the GPF on Bank operations. Sixty-one percent of the TTL respondents to the survey reported that their grants had either highly or moderately influenced World Bank lending or projects. The ratings were particularly high in the Latin America and Africa Regions as well as for Window 1 grants. A quote from a TTL of a Window 1 grant in the Europe and Central Asia Region illustrates the reported high level of influence: “Governance Checklist and the associated political economy, institutional, and governance analyses reshaped the way that project design reflected governance challenges and risks, and allowed the teams to modify the design accordingly. The checklist has been applied to 7 new projects in the last 3 FYs.” (World Bank 2014d) 2. Number of Bank Projects Influenced by PEA Analysis PEA has played a major role both in the overall number of GPF-influenced Bank projects. During 2014–15, 14 additional Bank operations were influenced by the GPF though PEA. The final target in the Results Framework of 39 projects for 2014 was already exceeded by 2013 when, during the peak of GPF implementation, 60 World Bank projects used GPF- funded PEA as an input. 3. World Bank Country-Level Funding of Governance During the lifetime of the GPF, the World Bank invested US$283 million in governance activities at the country level (US$46 million in 2014 and US$47 million in 2015). Therefore, the final target of US$87 million included in the GPF Results Framework has been signifi- cantly exceeded. This is corroborated by information collected through the GRM reports, in which the majority of GPF TTLs report that their grants have mobilized additional non- GPF resources during their lifetime. Forty-four percent of TTLs report that this effect was substantial, while 24 percent claim it was negligible (see figure 2.7). 4. Number of Country Strategies that Include Governance Actions Integrating governance into Bank country programs is a specific objective of the GPF’s Window 1. While the number of Window 1 countries has remained constant at 18 for the past four years, in fiscal 2014–15, the GPF supported the Governance Global Practice’s concerted effort to ensure the integration of governance concerns in the process of 14 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.7. Mobilization of Other Resources Substantial: 44.3% Modest: 24.5% Not applicable: 22.6% Negligible: 7.5% preparing systematic country diagnostics (SCDs) (see box 2.1). Thus, the final value of this indicator stands at 30. Through a grant of US$265,000 initiated in late 2014, the GPF has supported two critical dimensions of the SCD work related to (1) analytical support to the development of gen- eral and governance-specific SCD guidance; and (2) direct support to country teams for integrating governance analysis into country programing. With regard to the first dimen- sion, the resources were used either to provide input into individual SCDs, or broader Box 2.1. Systematic Country Diagnostic Since July 2014, as part of the most recent changes in the Bank, a new Country Partnership Framework defines country engagement for the World Bank Group with the goal of building on the current country-driven model and strengthening it with a more systematic, evidence-based, and selective approach to goal setting and pri- oritization. Under the new approach, World Bank Group country engagements will continue to draw on a country’s national development strategies, but they will also draw on a systematic country diagnostic (SCD), an exercise conducted by World Bank Group staff in close consultation with national authorities and other stakeholders. The SCD will identify key challenges and opportunities faced by the country in trying to acceler- ate progress toward country-level goals. It will not be limited to areas or sectors where the World Bank Group is currently active or expects government demand. The SCD is meant to be a reference point for client con- sultations about World Bank Group country engagement on priorities. It is intended to help the country, the World Bank Group, and other development partners establish a dialogue in order to focus their efforts around high-impact goals and activities that are aligned with the global goals of ending absolute poverty and boosting shared prosperity in a sustainable way. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 15 Table 2.2. Breakdown of Analytical Support and Guidance Activity Outputs Preparation of governance Background analytic work was performed for country teams working on SCDs; briefs a number of governance briefs drawing on various indicators and other assess- ments were conducted. Note on governance and Note on the impact of governance on the twin goals. the twin goals Political economy and the Guidance note on how to integrate political economy and governance analysis SCD process into the SCD process. technical guidance on the treatment of selected topics, such as political economy analy- sis, revenue mobilization, or pay and employment. Table 2.2 provides a breakdown of the main activities within this dimension and their outputs. With regard to the second dimension, GPF resources were used to support individual country teams conducting in-depth governance work in prioritized areas. The addi- tional resources were aimed at ensuring that task teams were equipped to undertake the work necessary to avoid governance being treated as a cross-cutting issue, which would Table 2.3. Breakdown of Direct Country Support to Systematic Country Diagnostics Preparation Country Activities Azerbaijan The funds were used to allow the Governance Global Practice's specialist to actively partici- pate in the Country Partnership Framework retreat in Baku in January 2015. Montenegro The funds financed mission trips to Montenegro (airfare and per diem) to prepare and con- vene stakeholder discussions on a range of governance-related topics, including political economy analysis, institutional structures, rule of law, and justice. Sierra Leone The funds financed a note on governance that included an in-depth analysis of several key governance areas. Sri Lanka The resources were utilized to hire local consultants to carry out research and produce back- ground papers, including a review of public administration, a review of the state-owned enter- prise sector, and a review of tax privilege trends. Bulgaria The resources were used to allow for the participation of Governance Global Practice special- ists in a mission to Bulgaria, following up on interest by the government to engage the Bank’s support of efforts to improve a range of governance activities. The recently elected govern- ment has reviewed the systematic country diagnostic (SCD) and agreed with the detailed governance analysis and its recommendations. Indonesia The resources were used to hire two consultants to research and draft an analytical brief on the current Indonesian political economy context as it relates to the SCD document currently being drafted by the country management unit. The brief will be used as a supplementary input to help complete the SCD. 16 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.8. Rate the Extent to Which Your GPF Project is Promoting Innovation in Governance Activities that Influence Country Programs (e.g., Country Assistance Strategies) or Secotor Approaches Highly satisfactory: 16.1% Satisfactory: 73.2% Unsatisfactory: 1.8% Not applicable: 7.1% lead to a diffuse and watered down approach to GAC objectives. The GPF supported four Regional Vice Presidencies, including three countries in Europe and Central Asia (Azerbaijan, Montenegro, and Bulgaria); one in Africa (Sierra Leone); one in South Asia (Sri Lanka), and one in East Asia and the Pacific (Indonesia) (see table 2.3). Furthermore, nine other GPF grants reported that they have influenced the preparation of SCDs and Country Partnership Frameworks. In particular, the GPF has contributed to shaping the SCDs prepared for the Democratic Republic of Congo, Russia, Lebanon, Tunisia, Cameroon, Sierra Leone, Myanmar, and Brazil. A GPF-funded analysis also fed into the Country Partnership Framework for Argentina. Therefore, it is not surprising that the vast majority of GPF TTLs (73 percent) have rated as satisfactory the extent to which the GPF promotes innovation in governance activities that influence country programs, and 16 percent (9 responses) report a highly satisfactory influence (see figure 2.8). Yet another confirmation of the strong influence of the GPF on country strategies is pro- vided by the survey of TTLs conducted as part of the independent evaluation of the GPF. When asked about the influence of the grants on country, regional, and sectoral strate- gies, 63 percent of the responding TTLs (42 out of 67) reported that their grants had either a high or moderate level of influence. The ratings were particularly high for Window 1 grants. A quote from a TTL of a Window 3 grant operating in the Latin America Region illustrates this high level of influence: GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 17 “The GPF for learning, complemented by the GPF in [a specific LAC country], was funda- mental to preparation of the governance pillar of the CPS [Country Partnership Strategy].” (World Bank 2014d) Step 2—GPF Outputs Step 2 covers GPF-funded outputs. A total of 11 indicators are tracked: 1. An assessment of governance integration in World Bank operations among GPF Window 1 countries 2. The number of PEA studies funded by the GPF 3. The number of World Bank projects that include demand for good governance (DFGG) as part of project preparation or implementation 4. The number of GPF-influenced World Bank sector projects that are sensitive to gover- nance in project preparation and implementation 5. The number of World Bank activities funded by the GPF involving institutions of accountability 6. The number of GPF-funded public sector governance Bank operations aimed at strengthening accountability for public sector functions, including public financial management 7. The number of courses offered to Bank staff funded by the GPF 8. The number of knowledge and learning products published on the GAC portal 9. The number of hits to the GAC website 10. The number of Bank staff trained in GAC subjects 11. Customer satisfaction with the GAC portal Indicator 1: An assessment of governance integration in World Bank operations among GPF Window 1 countries The first indicator measures GPF influence on the integration of governance in coun- try-level Bank programs. The baseline for this indicator was established in 2011 when the first review of Window 1 programs was conducted. An update to this review was completed in 2014 as part of the independent evaluation of the GPF. The review found that, on aver- age, Window 1 countries continued to make progress in GAC integration. Nonetheless, the target cumulative average score of 4.0 was not achieved (the overall score remained 3.8, see table 2.4). However, the authors of the analysis caution that this “fact” should be considered in light of the difficulty of comparing scores between the two reviews. 18 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Table 2.4. Summary of Window 1 Review Scores in 2011 and 2014 Program Support Change Overall GAC Assessment for GAC Management Assessment 2011 2014 2011 2014 2011 2014 2011 2014 Average score 3.2 3.8 3.7 4.1 3.4 3.6 3.4 3.8 Change (percent) 19.3 12.1 4.8 11.9 According to the 2014 review, scores in every category increased to some degree, but given the subjective nature of the scoring and the factors limiting comparability between the first- and second-round scores, this probably signals a general continuity in Window 1 countries’ forward-leaning efforts rather than a marked advancement. Change was reg- istered mainly in GAC analysis and GAC programming scores rather than in change man- agement, suggesting that, for the most part, ways of managing GAC uptake that were established at the time of the first review did not need to be strengthened to maintain or improve execution. (See box 2.2 for a summary of the repeat assessment of GPF Window 1 programs.) Box 2.2. Summary of Window 1 Review As part of the overall independent evaluation of the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF), a repeat of the 2011 study, “Implementing Country Level Governance Programs: A Review of GPF Window 1 Country Programs” was completed in July 2014. The review assessed progress in governance and anticorruption (GAC) implementa- tion in the 18 GPF Window 1 countries: Afghanistan, Albania, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Haiti, Kenya, Liberia, Mongolia, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, Uganda, and Zambia. Both reviews examined and scored three elements of GAC performance: GAC assess- ment, GAC programming, and change process and management. Both reviews also sought information on the role and impact of the GPF in promoting the GAC agenda in the Window 1 countries. Main Findings On average, Window 1 countries continue to make progress in GAC integration. Compared to the 2011 review, scores increased in every category to some degree, although given the subjective nature of the scor- ing, this probably signals a general continuity in Window 1 country efforts rather than a marked advancement. Change was registered mainly in GAC assessment and GAC programming rather than change management, suggesting that, on average, ways of managing GAC uptake established at the time of the first review did not need to be significantly changed to maintain or improve execution. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 19 Improved scores generally reflected investments in political economy analysis to inform Bank operations. Expanded programming responses also explained the significant improvement in some countries, particularly ones that received poor scores in the first review. For countries already scoring well, higher scores reflected an effort to learn from experience and revise directions accordingly, among other things. Three countries saw some slippage on previous progress, each for different reasons, as outlined in the report. GAC Assessment Almost every Window 1 country conducted a new political economy analysis since the last review, and the leaders in GAC assessment have gone beyond identifying governance problems and risks to unpacking how these conditions are perpetuated and to reflect on how Bank objectives, projects, and outreach efforts might change in response. However, this growing body of GAC analysis is not consistently evident in strategy documents, and in some cases, GAC content was less present even when additional analysis had been done. The inconsistency between GAC analysis performed by teams and what appears in strategies reinforces the finding that elements of the Bank’s institutional context and working relationships with clients lead to self-cen- sorship on thorny governance issues. While not always evident in strategy documents, political economy analysis (PEA) is increasingly promi- nent and plays important functions in Window 1 countries. PEA reportedly provided a basic political econ- omy context for Bank staff, a foundation for dialogue on GAC issues with the client, and data to support the case for greater attention to GAC issues. PEAs helped shed light on sector dynamics, entry points, and stake- holders. In some cases, they acted as catalysts for donor discussions and coordination. An important next step is to give more consideration to the implications of the diverse ways that PEAs are used and the lessons being drawn from them by the Bank. GAC Programming Since the last review, many Window 1 countries deepened their engagement with GAC issues in pro- gramming. The GAC programming scores of just over half of the countries improved as compared with 2011 Window 1 review. Also, since the last review, the scores of 10 out of 18 countries improved, six were unchanged, and two were lower. Leaders in this area expanded the breadth of their programming, increased the diversity of approaches, and better understood how to exploit opportunities for achieving specific governance objectives. The most forward-leaning countries tended to incorporate “frontier” approaches to GAC, such as inno- vative social accountability mechanisms and programs outside the Bank’s traditional areas of focus. Many countries took a step toward applying innovative DFGG approaches in their programs and widening stake- holder engagement, either as standalone activities designed to broadly promote accountability, or more com- monly as project-level transparency- and/or participation-enhancing measures. 20 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Change Management Reportedly, GAC is an increasingly common consideration for Bank operations in Window 1 countries. Bank teams in Window 1 countries reported a growing openness about discussing GAC concerns among gov- ernment counterparts, possibly due in part to the fact that the governance agenda is now broadly promoted among aid donors and at global forums attended by client countries. The Bank’s own efforts to promote a GAC agenda are also cited as an important facilitating factor. Nevertheless, the foundational Bank relationship with client governments remains, and the degree of GAC dialogue and progress is dependent on the degree to which it is thought to endanger that relationship. With respect to GAC integration within the Bank, the change management “recipe” evident in Window 1 countries continues to be leadership, staffing, and resources. The signal from country office management is still the most important factor in promoting GAC integration, but even in countries where those signals have become less encouraging because of changes in leadership, GAC practices and approaches may still be tenuously taking root. The presence of dedicated governance staff was also critical to GAC integration in many Window 1 countries. Resources beyond staffing are essential because new GAC initiatives are creating a demand for more GAC work. In some cases, teams faced challenges when an analysis called for follow-up actions, but resources were not available for implementation. GPF Contribution The GPF played a critical role in Window 1 countries by allowing for experimentation and the expansion of GAC work, in large part because of the flexibility of the funding. This flexibility provides an opportunity to do analysis and programming that would not necessarily be feasible under traditional projects or with a limited Bank budget. GPF funds are not categorically irreplaceable, however, and some country teams have found other funding options, particularly country-specific trust funds. There appears to be more flexibility than typically thought within normal Bank funds to include GAC elements in lending, although this greatly depends on contextual factors. As for the Bank budget, while recognizing an overall environment of scarcity relative to demand, the issue is one of prioritization. The GPF does appear to have contributed to the long-term sustainability of the GAC agenda at the Bank, defined in the broadest way. The experience gained through GPF-funded activities and work con- tributes to the Bank’s expertise and ability to do more of this type of work. Particularly successful or effective programs have been adopted by other sectors and sometimes by clients. But the GPF in Window 1 countries was usually praised for enabling flexible, rapid, and/or experimental programming, and it is unclear whether or not a similar vehicle will take its place. For Window 1 countries that have relied on the GPF for its unique contribution in this respect, it may prove more difficult to seize real-time opportunities for governance analysis and programming in the future. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 21 Indicator 2: The number of PEA studies funded by the GPF Regarding the second indicator, even though the number of PEA studies completed in fiscal 2014–15 is lower than that in previous years (43), the final target included in the GPF Results Framework of 100 PEAs has been surpassed. Throughout its lifetime, the GPF has funded a total of 287 PEAs. The decline experienced in 2014–15 is normal because most of the PEA studies were produced during the first years of GPF implementation and have already been accounted for in the GPF Results Framework. Notable examples of grants that produced highly influential PEAs include the Window 1 programs in Nigeria and Afghanistan. In addition, the independent evaluation of the GPF provides ample evidence of a broad uptake of the use of PEA. The repeat assessment of Window 1 concludes that while it is not always evident in strategy documents, PEA is increasingly prominent and plays important functions in Window 1 countries. PEA reportedly provided a basic political economy context for Bank staff, a foundation for dialogue on GAC issues with the client, and data to support the case for greater attention to GAC issues. PEAs helped shed light on sector dynamics, entry points, and stakeholders. In some cases, PEAs acted as catalysts for donor discussions and coordination (see box 2.3 for more details). Indicator 3: The number of World Bank projects that include demand for good governance (DFGG) as part of project preparation or implementation The third indicator in Step 2 of the GPF Results Framework is the number of World Bank projects that include DFGG as part of project preparation or implementation. In fis- cal 2014–15, the number stood at 41, slightly above the 2014 target of 40 projects. The decrease compared with 2013 can be explained by the declining number of GPF grants and the fact that the majority of Bank projects were influenced during the peak of GPF implementation. Overall, however, over its lifetime, the GPF has helped 124 World Bank projects incorporate DFGG in their design and implementation. The increase in work on the demand side of the governance agenda is supported by the GPF Evaluation findings, which confirm, “DFGG, access to information, and a host of other thematic areas that are now seen as mainstream aspects of governance in the Bank.” (World Bank 2014d). The evaluation found that the highest performing World Bank country offices: “tended to innovate with social accountability mechanisms. Many countries took a step forward in widening stakeholder engagement, either as standalone activities designed to promote accountability broadly (less common) or as transparency—and/or participation enhancing measures at the project level (more common).” (World Bank 2014d) 22 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Box 2.3. The Main Uses of PEAs According to the Window 1 Review According to Window 1 GPF task team leaders (TTLs), the main roles of political economy analyses (PEAs) are as follows: • Providing basic political economy orientation for Bank staff working in country. In Nigeria, the coun- try office has developed a political economy of policy reform paper that is given to all TTLs working in the country. Many other countries report that problem-driven or sector PEAs have played an important role in demonstrating the ways in which a governance perspective can improve outcomes in other sectors. • Providing an occasion or foundation for dialogue on GAC issues with the client. In Burkina Faso, PEA provided an analytical basis to help the Bank start discussions about an unfamiliar and sensitive justice sec- tor. In Uganda, a PEA created the occasion for explicit dialogue with the government around the sensitive issue of corruption. • Marshaling data to help undergird the case for greater attention to GAC issues, although the stron- gest data are highly detailed. Generic data points, such as the World Bank Institute Global Governance Indicators or the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index, only give a descriptive overview of the governance situation in the country. They do not generally illuminate why a situation prevails, how it might be addressed, or the costs associated with it. • Shedding light on sector dynamics and entry points. The expansion of sectoral PEAs is giving the Bank tools to illuminate blockages to reforms and critical entry points, such as in the Democratic Republic of Congo where a mining sector analysis pointed to issues in contracting as a key constraint needing to be addressed. In Sierra Leone, a study of social capital and labor conditions is expected to shape a project targeting private-sector investment aimed at diversifying economic opportunities around mining zones. • Providing stakeholder analysis. Several countries reported that PEAs made valuable contributions in iden- tifying stakeholders who were relevant to Bank objectives but who had not previously been considered typical Bank counterparts. In Mongolia, a pre-GPF PEA pointed out that legislators have great influence on policy making, so a major element of the Window 1 program was outreach to legislators on policy issues at the core of the Bank’s efforts toward stabilizing a volatile mining-based economy. A similar approach took shape in Zambia around political support coalitions. There is also an emphasis in Uganda on outreach to the parliament and other stakeholders. • Engaging development partners. In some countries, World Bank PEAs have been a catalyst for donor discussions and coordination, particularly where the Bank has already established its credibility as an actor in the governance space (e.g., in Nigeria and Sierra Leone), and other donors such as the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development are less active in governance analysis than they once were. Where the Bank’s governance profile is not yet established, it may be necessary to cultivate discussions among development partners rather than assume a Bank study will be taken seriously. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 23 TTLs surveyed for the independent evaluation also emphasized the demonstration effects that GPF-funded pilot programs have played to incorporate demand-side governance elements into new projects. A survey respondent illustrates this point: “Regarding DFGG activities, this influence has far exceeded the original objectives of the grant, which were portfolio-based and limited to collecting evidence. The influence was pri- marily on the client. The influence on Bank knowledge and learning was aligned with design and expectations.” (World Bank 2014d) Indicator 4: The number of GPF-influenced World Bank sector projects that are sensitive to governance in project preparation and implementation Integrating governance across the many sectors of Bank operations is critical to ensur- ing that World Bank lending is responsive to governance opportunities and constraints. Mainstreaming governance into operations is also a core objective of the 2012 revised GAC strategy. To that end, the GPF has influenced nine additional World Bank projects in sectors other than public sector governance in fiscal 2014–15, the fourth indicator in Step 2 of the Results Framework. A cumulative total of 335 sector projects have been influ- enced over the life the GPF, exceeding the final target of 130 projects. Figure 2.4 presents the distribution of GPF-influenced projects by sector. Indicator 5: The number of World Bank activities funded by the GPF involving institutions of accountability The next indicator in the GPF Results Framework refers to the number of World Bank activities funded by the GPF involving institutions of accountability, including parliaments, ombudsmen, information commissions, anticorruption agencies, supreme audit agen- cies, the judiciary and other institutions justice, and third-party monitoring mechanisms. During fiscal 2014–15, 24 GPF-funded projects involved institutions of accountability, a decrease compared to previous years. But the overall target of 28 GPF projects support- ing institutions of accountability has already been exceeded in 2013. The positive effect of the GPF on expanding the Bank’s work with different institutions of accountability is sup- ported by data collected from completion GRM reports, according to which 71 percent of GPF TTLs think their grants are achieving satisfactory results in terms of accountability and transparency at the country level (figure 2.9). 24 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.9. The Extent to Which GPF Projects are Achieving Results in Accountability and Transparency in Bank Operations at the Country Level Highly satisfactory: 3.6% Satisfactory: 71.4% Unsatisfactory: 1.8% Not applicable: 19.6% Indicator 6: The number of GPF-funded public sector governance Bank operations aimed at strengthening accountability for public sector functions, including public financial management The next indicator refers to the number of GPF-funded public sector governance Bank operations aimed at strengthening accountability for public sector functions, including public financial management. Its value has remained constant in the past three fiscal years. These are the 27 projects funded by Window 4 of the GPF plus projects from other win- dows still active in 2014–15. According to the independent evaluation of these projects, despite a number of hurdles related to time constraints, Bank reorganization, changes in TTLs, and other issues, most Window 4 projects delivered their expected outputs, scoring an average rating of satisfactory, while the application of outputs to outcomes on aver- age received a moderately satisfactory rating, in part due to the lack of time to apply new tools and results as intended. Further findings of the independent evaluation of the GPF’s Window 4 is available in chapter 4: “Producing Innovation and Impact: The Governance Partnership Facility, Window 4 Evaluation” (Myers and others 2015) . GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 25 Indicators 7–10: GAC Learning and Knowledge Sharing Lastly,5 the GPF has had a strong impact on learning. During fiscal 2014–15, the GPF sup- ported 84 courses for over 2,000 staff—a substantial increase from the 32 courses delivered in fiscal 2013. More than 3,700 documents—an increase of almost 1,000 since 2013—are available on the GAC portal, which has been viewed more than 17,000 times in fiscal 2014–15. In addition, GPF TTLs (n=106) report in their completion GRMs to have orga- nized approximately 93 brown bag lunches, 190 workshops, and 70 conferences during the lifetime of their grants (see figures 2.10–2.12). Figure 2.10. Number of TTLs Reporting Organizing Brown Bag Lunches 1 brown bag lunch: 14 6 brown bag lunches: 6 3 6 brown bag lunches: 1 More than 3 6 brown bag lunches: 16 Figure 2.11. Number of TTLs Reporting Organized Workshops 1 workshop: 37 2 workshops: 17 3 workshops: 8 More than 3 workshops: 24 5. The last indicator included in Step 2 of the GPF Results Framework concerns the satisfaction of users with the GAC portal. A survey of users has not been done because the GAC portal is going to migrate into the Governance Global Practice’s new website, which is expected to conduct regular satisfaction surveys. The new website under the umbrella of worldbank.org/gover- nance will house a dedicated GPF web page that will archive all knowledge products funded by the GPF. 26 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.12. Number of TTLs Reporting Organizing Conferences 1 conference: 22 2 conferences: 7 3 conferences: 2 More than 3 conferences: 3 In addition, in the survey conducted by the 2014 independent evaluation, 40 out of 58—or 69 percent—of TTL respondents answering a question regarding learning reported that their grants had either highly or moderately influenced Bank knowledge and learning. The ratings were particularly high for grants of Window 1, as illustrated by a TTL manag- ing a Window 1 program in the Africa Region: “I believe those TTLs and country team members who have been involved in the various GPF funded activities have learned from the program and its activities. A number of learn- ing/knowledge sharing events have also been organized as part of the program, to which many Bank staff have contributed and participated.” (World Bank 2014d). The evaluation also found that the learning networks financed by the GPF have been quite influential. One that stands out and is mentioned frequently is the Operations Peer Learning Network that was managed by the Operations, Policy, and Country Services department of the Bank. The GAC-in-Projects program in the Africa Region is also cited by TTLs as being particularly influential (World Bank 2014d). Step 1—Inputs Step 1 details GPF inputs. The GPF is supporting 127 grants across a range of thematic areas, including DFGG, institutions of accountability, public financial management, and various sector- and country-level activities. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 27 Figure 2.13. GPF Projects by Theme in 2014–15 Project Theme GAC learning, communities of practice (1) Core public functions, including PFM (38 projects) Institutions of Accountability (24 projects) Sectors (23 projects) DFGG (17 projects) PEA (21 projects) Country level (16 projects) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Amount (US$ million) counting project multiple times Part 2: GPF Performance Indicators Outside of the GPF Results Framework This section presents additional insights on the performance of the GPF program derived from an analysis of the completion GRM reports collected by the GPF Secretariat. The GRM reporting systems requires task teams to rate various aspects of the performance of their grants, including: (1) the overall progress of their grant with regard to achieving the grant objectives; and (2) the overall progress of their grant with regard to the implementa- tion of the funded activities. The rating system includes a self-assessment by the TTL and endorsement by management, similar to the Bank’s standard project assessment system.6 The ratings range from highly unsatisfactory to highly satisfactory. Achievement of Grant Objectives and Implementation Progress The GPF portfolio continues to receive high ratings from TTLs. Figure 2.14 shows the progression of the ratings of the degree to which grant objectives have been achieved since fiscal 2010. The percentage of projects rated satisfactory remains largely unchanged at around 60 percent, while there is a significant decrease between fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2015 in the share of projects rated as unsatisfactory (approximately 1 percent of all proj- ects). Figure 2.15 shows the progress regarding the implementation of grant activities, rated satisfactory for almost 65 percent of grants and highly satisfactory for 19 percent of grants. It should be noted that over the duration of the GPF, there has been an almost 6. The ratings presented in this section are based on an analysis of information submitted by task team leaders through the GRM system. The ratings are subjective and reflect the views of the task team leaders as well as their approving managers. 28 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.14. GPF Performance: Achievement of Grant Objectives 2010–15 80 60 61.43 Highly satisfactory Percent 40 Satisfactory Moderately satisfactory 21.43 20 15.71 Unsatisfactory 1.43 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Figure 2.15. GPF Grant Activities Progress Rating 70 60 50 64.29 Highly satisfactory 40 Percent 30 Satisfactory 20 Moderately satisfactory 18.57 20 15.71 Unsatisfactory 10 1.43 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 complete turnover of TTLs of GPF grants. The fact that the ratings on this indicator remain consistent throughout this period demonstrates that the ratings are based on widely held views of GPF grant performance. Figure 2.16 shows the performance for the period 2014–15 only, during which the quality of achieving grant objectives was evaluated as satisfactory in 61 percent of the cases and unsatisfactory in only one case, in line with the downward trend of unsatisfactory ratings observed since fiscal 2010. Figure 2.16. Achievement of Grant Objectives in 2014–15 70 60 50 Percent 40 30 20 10 0 Highly Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory satisfactory satisfactory GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 29 Donor Coordination during GPF Grants Implementation Effective donor coordination is vital to successful project implementation. In 2015, con- tinuing the positive trend reported in 2013, slightly more than half of the GPF TTLs report having successfully collaborated with GPF donor partners during the implementation of their grants. Only 30 percent of the GPF grants have had no interaction with other donors, while almost 30 percent have collaborated with non-GPF donors, such as the European Union (figure 2.17). Notable examples of such collaboration include the programs in Nigeria, Kenya, Nepal, and Mongolia. Bank Performance Completion GRMs collect the opinions of TTLs on Bank performance during GPF grant implementation, including an assessment of the support received from Bank manage- ment and the performance of their teams and consultants. Not surprisingly, 67 percent of the TTLs report that the Bank’s performance was satisfactory; 13 percent rated it highly satisfactory. There were no reports of unsatisfactory performance (figure 2.18). Figure 2.17. Collaboration with GPF and non-GPF Donors Collaboration with GPF donor partners was very good: 52.1% Collaboration with GPF donors was not so good: 2.7% Collaboration with non-GPF donor partners was very good: 28.7% There was no interaction with other donors: 30.1% Figure 2.18. Bank Performance Rating Highly satisfactory: 13.2% Moderately satisfactory: 17.0% Satisfactory: 67.0% 30 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.19. Quality of Collaboration with Government Counterparts Highly satisfactory: 26.7% Satisfactory: 55.6% Not applicable: 15.6% Collaboration with Clients The quality of the collaboration with government counterparts throughout the lifetime of grants was also rated during the last round of GRM submissions. Twenty-six percent of the TTLs (n=45) reported highly satisfactory collaborations; 55 percent rated them satis- factory (figure 2.19). Support by the GPF Secretariat Successful implementation of the GPF is also influenced by the performance of the GPF Secretariat. The Secretariat has played an important role in supporting the selection, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of all GPF grants, as well as in maintain- ing donor relations and fostering knowledge exchange. TTL’s recognize the Secretariat’s efforts at providing high-quality grant implementation support: 35 percent of those sur- veyed evaluated the support provided by the Secretariat as highly satisfactory; 57 percent rated it satisfactory (figure 2.20). Figure 2.20. Quality of Support Received from the GPF Secretariat Highly satisfactory: 35.6% Satisfactory: 57.8% Not applicable: 4.4% Not rated: 2.2% GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 31 The TTL survey completed as part of the GPF independent evaluation confirmed that the Secretariat was very helpful and accommodating. Of the 47 TTLs volunteering their thoughts on the operational aspects of the GPF, almost half expressed unreserved sat- isfaction with the way the GPF operated. Examples of these highly positive responses include the following: “Overall, the GPF has been a fairly low transaction cost grant. The GPF Secretariat has been extremely accommodating of teams—they give flexibility to TTLs and support to solve prob- lems. My recommendation would be that this modus operandi continues. No need to fix something that is not broken!” (EAP, Window 1) “The GPF Secretariat managed the overall program excellently. The initial two-step grant screening process and the once-a-year reporting were excellent and saved time. The promptness of the Secretariat in responding to queries was commendable.” (Cross-region, Window 2) Follow-up and Sustainability One of the GPF’s major goals has been to change the Bank’s practice on governance issues. Hence, the long-term sustainability of GPF initiatives will be a critical dimension of the overall success of the program. One optimal way to ensure sustainability is to guar- antee that GPF activities are embedded in broader Bank programs and procedures. This section presents a variety of indicators—all of which point to the fact that the GPF is highly likely to be sustainable and the grants it has funded will, in one way or another, be fol- lowed up on or replicated. The explicit emphasis of the GPF on funding activities linked to Bank operations can be seen in figure 2.21, which addresses the issues of follow-up and sustainability. This graph, based on GRM data, reveals that the sustainability of 50 percent of the grants will be ensured through the dissemination of new knowledge. Twenty-eight percent of the sam- ple grant completion reports submitted in 2014–15 (n=104) report that the GPF-funded activities will be followed up with Bank projects, loans, or credits. In addition, the vast majority of GPF TTLs (80 percent) rated the sustainability of the over- all outcome of their activities as likely. Only 14 percent are unsure about the suitability or prospects of their grants, and no TTLs reported that the outcomes of their grants are not likely to be sustained. 32 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Figure 2.21. Type of Follow-up Activities Undertaken by GPF Grants Follow-up Bank project/loan/credit/grant: 28% Follow-up project or grant (non-Bank funded):7% Follow-up IFC investment: 0% Policy reform/legal change: 4% Expanded capacity: 11% Dissemination of new knowledge/technology/best practice: 50% Figure 2.22. Overall Outcome (and its Sustainability) Likely: 80.2% Uncertain: 14.2% Not applicable: 5.7% Unlikely: 0% Furthermore, among the TTLs who implemented GPF activities, 74 percent are convinced that their GPF grants will be replicated; only 15 percent are uncertain. Virtually all TTLs asked expressed a strong confidence that the achievements of their GPF grants would remain relevant under the new organizational structure of the Bank (figures 2.23 and 2.24). TTLs were asked to provide evidence of the sustainability of their grants in the TTL sur- vey conducted as part of the GPF independent evaluation. The evaluators collected 57 responses, all of which supplied narrative answers suggesting some form and degree of sustainability for their projects. Collectively, the respondents adduced a wide range of evidence that activities funded by the GPF grant will be sustained, at least in part. In 22 cases (just over half of the reported total), activities continuing after the closure of the GPF grant are being financed by the Bank from its own budget or by drawing on another trust GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 33 Figure 2.23. Replicability Likely: 74.5% Uncertain: 15.1% Not applicable: 9.4% Figure 2.24. Rate the Extent to which the Achievements of Your Grant Will Remain Relevant in the New Organizational Structure of the Bank Highly satisfactory: 40.4% Satisfactory: 55.3% Unsatisfactory: 0% fund. Other donors followed up on 10 of the closed GPF grants, and local counterparts assumed the financial responsibility for five projects. The following illustrative quotes from TTLs demonstrate that most of their GPF-funded activities will continue after the closing of the grant (Task Team Leader Survey 2014): “The grant has catalyzed new funding from other donors (over US$1.3 million in total).” (ECA, Window 2) “The Extractives for Development (E4D) brand that was partially fostered under the GPF support has been widely adopted across the Bank and with external partners. Continued interest/sustainability in the E4D is a result of early outreach through the GPF grant.” (Global, Window 3) 34 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy “All outputs and outcome of the GPF were rolled into the follow-on GPF and Bank Budget activities and now expended.” (AFR, Window 1) Finally, the independent evaluation concluded that it is likely that GPF programs and proj- ects will be maintained over the intended useful life of the GPF. Chapter 4 provides more details on the GPF’s role for the sustainability of GAC, and Chapter 6 provides additional examples of how GPF-initiated innovations and activities will continue. GPF Results Framework: Accomplishments in Fiscal 2014–15 35 Chapter 3 Financial Performance As of June 30, 2015 Financial Summary Table 3.1. GPF Financial Summary (as of June 30, 2015) Since its inception in 2008, the Governance Total (US$) Partnership Facility (GPF) has received con- Total contributions 95,148,566 tributions totaling US$95 million from four Investment income 1,079,494 donor partners in four currencies. As of clo- Total receipts 96,228,060 sure on June 30, 2015, 95 percent of these Less: disbursements contributions—US$90.2 million—had been Disbursement disbursed. Due to reflows from closed Window 1 (44,987,783) grants, favorable exchange rates for contri- Window 2 (24,559,974) butions received in non-U.S. currency, and Window 3 (10,646,493) Window 4 (4,448,640) investment income earned throughout the Secretariat (4,630,261) lifetime of the GPF, the Multi Donor Trust Administrative fees (951,486) Fund has an unused balance of US$6 million. (1 percent of contribution) See table 3.1 for a financial summary of the Total disbursements (90,224,637) GPF as of June 30, 2015. Unused fund balance 6,003,423 The GPF closed with a significant unused fund balance for a number of reasons: • As explained in the following section, an exchange rate buffer was maintained throughout the lifetime of the GPF to mitigate exchange rate fluctuations in donor contributions. • Some grants did not fully use allocated funds for a variety of reasons, including exter- nal circumstances such as conflicts, the Ebola crisis and, in the case of Window 4, insufficient time for implementation. • The Netherlands disbursed its last tranche of US$1.2 million in June 2014, by which time the funds could not be allocated to new or ongoing (but soon to be closed) GPF projects. The unused fund balance will be allocated to each donor based on the pro rata share of contributions made to the GPF. The amount to be allocated to each donor as calculated by the GPF Secretariat is provided in table 3.2. The final accounting and calculation of pro rata shares to be returned to donors will be determined by the trust fund accounting department of the World Bank. 38 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Table 3.2. Donor Contributions to GPF and Share of Each Donor in Unused Fund Balance Estimated Amount to Be Total Pledge in Share of Allocated Based Contribution Total Receipts Contributions on Unused Fund Donor Currency (US$) (percent) Balance (US$) United Kingdom— £40,408,000 62,790,909 66.00 3,962,259 Department for International Development (DFID) Netherlands—Minister US$13,266,000 13,266,000 13.94 836,877 for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation Australia—Department of $A 10,850,000 10,755,605 11.30 678,387 Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) Norway—Ministry of Foreign NKr 50,000,000 8,336,052 8.76 525,900 Affairs Total donor contributions 95,148,566 6,003,423 Receipts and Expenditures The Multi Donor Trust Fund received donor contributions in four currencies. The contribu- tions were converted into U.S. dollars at the time of the contributions based on the current valid exchange rates to U.S. dollars. Contributions from United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), the Netherlands, and Norway were spread across sev- eral years. The exchange rate of the British pound experienced especially significant fluc- tuations during the first two years (figure 3.1) and, as a result, GPF budget allocations were based on conservative assumptions about donor receipts in foreign currencies. However, in subsequent years, the receipts in these currencies, particularly from DFID and Norway, were converted against more favorable rates. This was less of an issue for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia (DFAT) because its total contribution was received in a single installment. At the request of the GPF Secretariat, the Netherlands denomi- nated its contributions in U.S. dollars, thereby eliminating the exchange risk for the GPF. The tranches’ realized exchange rates for contributions from DFID and Norway are pro- vided in figures 3.1 and 3.2. 3. Financial Performance 39 Figure 3.1. Exchange Rates on Contributions Received, DFID 14 1.70 Realized exchange rates GBP/US$ Contributions Contributions in GBP (millions) 12 Exchange rate (GBP/US$) 10 1.65 8 1.60 6 4 1.55 2 0 1.50 Feb. Jan. April March Oct. March Dec. August Feb. April Dec. 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2014 2014 2014 Figure 3.2. Exchange Rates on Contributions Received, Norway Contributions Exchange rate (GBP/US$) 14 0.18 Realized exchange rates NOK/US$ Contributions in NOK (millions) 12 10 0.17 8 0.16 6 4 0.15 2 0 0.14 2008 2009 2010 2011 40 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy GPF Project Portfolio and Disbursements The GPF project portfolio consisted of 127 grants and sub-windows, which disbursed a total of US$84.6 million from the date of inception to closure on June 30, 2015. See tables 3.3 and 3.4 and figures 3.3–3.6. Table 3.3. GPF Projects Activated, Fiscal 2009–15 Number of Projects Activated FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 Total Window 1 6 8 4 2 - - 1 21 Window 2 20 23 2 - 6 1 - 52 Window 3 3 15 9 - 1 - - 28 Window 4 - - - 9 17 - - 26 Total (number) 29 46 15 11 24 1 1 127 Cumulative total number of grants at 29 75 90 101 125 126 127 the end of each fiscal year Number of active grants at the end of 29 74 86 85 81 62 - each fiscal year Annual disbursements (US$ millions) 0.7 8.4 14.1 15.6 14.5 17.2 14.1 84.6 Figure 3.3. Number of Active Grants, Fiscal 2009-Q1 to 2015-Q4 50 W1 45 W2 40 W3 Number of grants 35 W4 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FY09–Q1 FY09–Q2 FY09–Q3 FY09–Q4 FY10–Q1 FY10–Q2 FY10–Q3 FY10–Q4 FY11–Q1 FY11–Q2 FY11–Q3 FY11–Q4 FY12–Q1 FY12–Q2 FY12–Q3 FY12–Q4 FY13–Q1 FY13–Q2 FY13–Q3 FY13–Q4 FY14–Q1 FY14–Q2 FY14–Q3 FY14–Q4 FY15–Q1 FY15–Q2 FY15–Q3 FY15–Q4 3. Financial Performance 41 Figure 3.4. Annual Project Disbursements, Fiscal 2009–15 20 18 16 14 12 Window 1 US$ million 10 Window 2 8 Window 3 6 4 Window 4 2 0 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 (8 months) Figure 3.5. GPF Project Expenditure as Percentage of Cumulative Spending, by Category Sta costs and ETC: 26% Consultant fees: 50% Travel expenses: 16% Media workshop costs: 4% Contractual services: 2% Others: 3% Figure 3.6. GPF Project Disbursements by Region Africa: 44% East Asia and Pacific: 9% Europe and Central Asia: 9% South Asia: 6% Latin America and Caribbean: 5% Middle East and North Africa: 3% Global: 22% 42 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The Secretariat’s Budget The GPF Secretariat’s budget of US$5.3 million was determined by the administrative arrangements with the donors at to cover the cost of managing the Multi Donor Trust Fund from its inception to closure. The budget included a fixed component for staff costs and a variable component, which included travel, reporting, and consultants assisting with incidental tasks such as processing grant reporting and assisting with conferences. As of June 30, 2015, total disbursements from the Secretariat’s budget stands at US$4.6 million, amounting to a savings of US$684,530 compared with the maximum ceiling. The amount spent on the Secretariat budget throughout the lifetime of the GPF compared with the total contributions received is 4.9 percent of contributions. See figure 3.7. Figure 3.7. Secretariat Spending, Fiscal 2009–15 FY15 FY14 Fixed FY13 Variables FY12 FY11 FY10 FY09 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 1,000,000 3. Financial Performance 43 Chapter 4 GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies This chapter presents findings and recommendations from the major evaluation studies conducted in 2014–15. At the request of Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) donor partners, an independent evaluation of the GPF was completed in June 2014 that included: (1) an overall report on the performance of the GPF; (2) a follow up on the 2011 review of GPF Window 1 country programs; (3) a repeat of the 2009 baseline review conducted by the World Bank’s Quality Assurance Group, entitled “Governance and Anti-Corruption in Lending Operations: A Benchmarking and Learning Review”; and (4) a survey of Bank task team leaders (TTLs). The independent evaluation did not cover proj- ects under Window 4 of the GPF because they were still at an early implementation stage. Therefore, a separate independent evaluation of Window 4 projects was completed in June 2015. There were also other smaller evaluations completed over the past two years. The GPF Secretariat, for example, using its own resources, conducted an evaluation of the GPF Window 1 program in Albania. Independent consultants evaluated Window 1 pro- grams in Cameroon and Ghana. Assessments of the Albania and Cameroon programs included comprehensive reviews of the programs’ civil society components implemented through Development Marketplace competitions. Evaluations using the outcome map- ping technique were conducted on individual components of the Window 1 programs in Zambia and Mongolia. Findings and examples from these evaluations are presented in the following sections. Performance of GPF Programs The independent evaluation concluded that the performance of the GPF was satis- factory. The rating was based on sources that included a review of the GPF Secretariat’s reporting on achievements against milestones in the Results Framework; an assessment of performance against the program document and administrative agreements with donors; findings of the repeat review of the Window 1 programs; findings of the repeat review of sensitivity levels to governance considerations in the fiscal 2013 cohort of Bank-assisted projects; an extensive survey of GPF grant task team leaders; an assessment of the impact of GPF activities on integrating and mainstreaming governance and anticorruption (GAC) in Bank operations; and, to a more limited extent, their on-the-ground impact in ten part- ner countries. The overall rating was also informed by interviews with 152 Bank managers and staff. The main findings of the independent evaluation are presented in Chapter 2 46 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy and hence this section focuses on insights derived from the other evaluations (World Bank 2014d). The independent evaluation of Window 4 concluded that the Bank has productively used the resources provided by Australia. The projects funded by Window 4 were rel- evant for advancing global knowledge and innovation in public finance and governance. Teams were generally effective in meeting specific development objectives and, more importantly, in creating innovative and valuable products and lessons. The efficiency of resource use appeared appropriate and fiduciary standards of the Bank were observed. Project impacts are only now emerging for most, but could be substantial assuming a proactive dissemination and application by Bank staff. Many innovations will likely prove to be sustainable. Window 4 provided crucial and timely support to the creation of Communities of Practice within the Bank—an intervention that should not only improve management and dissemination of Window 4 innovations, but also substantially contrib- ute to enhancing a broader knowledge and learning effort being launched in the Global Governance Practice. Because, like many organizations, the World Bank faces budget constraints, spending for investments such as research are squeezed. Window 4 and the broader GPF provided critical resources for applied operational research in public finan- cial management (PFM) and governance issues so critical to client countries and the con- tinued success of the Bank and its development partners. Regarding Window 4’s impact on PFM, the evaluation concluded that the program appears to have been very successful at producing innovative knowledge in core fields of the Bank’s operations. It has extended and broadened important instruments in the Bank’s toolkit from a top-down strategic perspective and, importantly, a bottom-up prac- tical perspective (the reality of what works on the ground). Still, some innovations will clearly require refinement or more testing before they can be deemed successful. But this does not detract from the conclusion that GPF Window 4 has successfully used its limited resources in an extremely short timespan. The innovations have already begun producing expected outcomes and desired Impacts, as demonstrated by a number of projects. One of the key innovations of the Window 4 funding was supporting peer-to-peer learn- ing. That sub-window ultimately financed Communities of Practice rather than broader exchanges with external actors as originally intended. The support to Communities of 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 47 Practice has been strategic because they are based on self-selection of interested Bank staff around certain topics. For example, the Governance Global Practice focuses on gov- ernance and PFM. These demand-driven forums partly addressed the missing link in the Bank’s innovation production delivery chain because it provided forums for presenting, discussing, and adopting new knowledge and skills by those who saw a value-adding component for their own work. The chain from thought to action was thereby consider- ably reduced in many instances, providing both an interested audience but also potential implementers who could almost immediately adopt the new products. Finally, the evaluation found that the prospective impact of Window 4 projects is high. Several projects are already influencing national or subnational policies and pro- grams, and the influence of many others is likely to grow as they are either completed or as dissemination activities are conducted. If the Bank proactively communicates the results of target Window 4 innovations within the Bank and to the development community, their impact could be even greater. As a next step, an obvious priority for the Governance Global Practice is to distill and distribute lessons on what works and what does not for the projects. Window 4 has been part of the solution for the innovation delivery chain by funding important global projects, providing considerable flexibility in selection and administrative oversight, and directly strengthening the key feature of Communities of Practice in the Bank that promote impact. This peer-to-peer learning initiative is already spreading beyond the Bank and will hopefully involve development partners and clients in all of the Communities of Practice. With such invigorated dissemination of these and other innovations, their sustainability should be enhanced by more rapidly exposing them to the marketplace of development ideas and country realities (Window 4 Independent Evaluation 2015). The GPF program in Albania was also assessed by the evaluation conducted by the Secretariat as having an overall satisfactory performance. This rating coincides with the self-assessment in the completion GRM report by the grant’s TTL. The overall goal of the program was to enable the Bank to implement a more targeted, comprehensive coun- try governance and anticorruption program designed to address the main governance constraints to the effectiveness of Bank operations. Most of the 12 subgrants forming the four components of the GPF in Albania were relevant to Bank strategies for Albania as 48 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy well as the conditions in the country. The design of most projects was commensurate with set objectives, but some weaknesses in the results frameworks’ design were noted. There were minor exceptions, but most subgrants achieved their objectives, and there are solid prospects for them to be sustainable and replicable. The review of the GPF program in Cameroon found that the governance program met its development objective and affected positive change with regard to gov- ernance reform in Cameroon. Each of the program’s three components were relevant and helped inform Bank staff about Cameroonian governance dynamics; opened up dialogue between governance stakeholders, notably the government and civil society; and strengthened the enabling environment for governance stakeholders. Component 1 achieved significant political economy analyses and findings and arranged for important governance dialogues. Under Component 2, 15 smaller civil society organization (CSO) activities were financed with the potential for new and innovative ways of carrying out governance reforms. Under Component 3, program staff helped implement the over- all program, worked as an effective contact for governance stakeholders, and provided important cross-support to Bank projects related to political economy and risk analyses. The assessment of the GPF program in Ghana found that, generally, it achieved its objective and outcome indicator of “robust mainstreaming of social accountability mechanisms across the World Bank program”—these instruments now figure in more than double the targeted number. Moreover, the instruments seem well tailored to each project’s specifics, and several liaise with one another under the auspices of a permanent social accountability unit in the implementing ministry. It is more difficult to measure the causal effect that GPF resources had on these outcomes because a general uptake would require the genuine support of the TTLs. Nonetheless, the tools and expertise provided by the GPF TTL and governance specialist were reported by TTLs as having had a positive impact on achieving the mainstreaming objective in a more targeted manner than it had before. The GPF program intended that the mainstreaming of social accountability mech- anisms would be accomplished through the establishment of a mainstreaming strategy and support mechanism. Ultimately, there were no staff tasked with developing the strat- egy, and no strategy was produced. Discussions regarding the use of a governance filter to enhance or substitute for a social accountability strategy did not gain traction either. 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 49 Efficiency of GPF Programs According to the overall independent evaluation of the GPF, the program has yielded benefits commensurate with its cost. The evaluation team did not conduct a full cost-benefit analysis or calculate a rate of return on investment because doing so was beyond the resources and outside the terms of reference of the evaluation, and the team recognized that it would be extremely difficult under any circumstances. Nonetheless, the team did a simple comparison of program costs and benefits based on information provided in the 2013 GPF Annual Report and concluded that the collection of significant outcomes and impacts appears to justify the US$89.0 million in expenditures. The evaluation of the GPF’s Window 4 concluded that the projects funded by this window were carried out in line with the Bank’s fiduciary standards and oversight and with due regard to efficiency. While a cost-benefit analysis of individual projects was far beyond the scope of the evaluation, the relatively limited size of the grants, a review of the core expenditure categories as reported in the GRMs, and discussions with TTLs did not reveal any pattern of excessive spending. Only half of the teams spent more than 80 percent of the original grant amount. The competitive selection process provided an important measure of discipline for all Window 4.2 projects; the GPF Secretariat had sys- tems to track spending and appears to have taken a hands-on approach to knowing the status and character of each operation. In addition, the so-called “hassle factor” inherent in task team grant administration and monitoring, including all costs this involves, was widely characterized as being minimal compared to other trust funds. Several TTLs noted that the ability to fund experts who happened to be Bank staff—in mining, as an exam- ple—was a notable benefit of Window 4. The fact that several projects have attracted additional funding from alternative sources demonstrates the value of the projects, the perception of third parties with regard to its proper management, and the efficient cat- alytic and multiplier role of Window 4 resources. As reflected in interviews carried out and documented in the survey, the overall impression of involved stakeholders is that the limited resources made available over a brief period of time were well managed by the central unit, the GPF Secretariat, and project managers. 50 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy GPF Influence on Bank Operations and Donors The independent evaluation of the GPF concluded that its projects and activities have impacted Bank operations. The evaluation team found that the governance agenda has indeed been expanded to cover more than the public financial management issues that characterized the early phase of GAC at the Bank. Managers and staff now speak more openly and easily about topics that were once avoided. The days when any mention of political economy elicited the admonition that the Bank’s Articles of Agreement prohib- iting the Bank from engaging in “politics” are over. Article V on Operations states very clearly: “the proceeds of any financing shall be done without regards to political or other non-economic influences or considerations.” Most TTLs commenting on the influence of the GPF on Bank operations, strate- gies, lending, and knowledge and learning reported that their grants were either highly or moderately influential. The cited influence was weighted significantly toward the preparation stage of Bank-assisted projects, with particular emphasis on the GPF supporting the production and use of analytical tools, political economy analyses, and the design and demonstration effects of pilot programs to incorporate demand-side governance elements into new projects. This is also reflected in the emphasis on GPF- supported governance assessment and filter tools, political economy analyses, and ded- icated governance-focused staff support at the project design stage. In the same vein, the evaluations of the GPF programs in Cameroon and Albania found that, with relatively modest resources—US$1.8 million and US$1.2 million, respectively—the programs have influenced World Bank projects with a combined budget of US$763 million and US$592.2 million through targeted political economy analyses and other studies, in addition to other results. However, the evaluation team found that internal incentives and a culture of lending at the Bank ultimately create an environment that limits the impact of GPF- funded activities on lending processes and procedures, particularly with regard to lending decisions. According to the independent evaluation, the GPF has also influenced other donors, particularly GPF funders. The evaluation team found numerous instances of donor influence, coordination, and shared learning around specific activities and products, but only limited evidence of a greater influence on strategies, intervention approaches in 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 51 partner countries, or the operations of other donors. However, the evaluation found many instances where other donors and civil society acknowledged a close collaboration with the Bank, and that they looked to the Bank to use its convening and other comparative advantages to engage partner countries on issues of governance and anticorruption. The Bank’s increasing use of political economy analyses and demand for good governance and its long-time focus on public financial management and public sector reform and management were seen as influential. The evaluation team, conducting interviews with donor representatives from ten countries, found that GPF-funded activities influenced programs in most of them, possibly a result of the work of governance advisers funded by the GPF located in-country. Examples include GPF-funded work in Afghanistan, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Zambia, Dominican Republic, Tajikistan, Mongolia, and Nepal. With regard to GPF influence on other donors, just over half of the responses in the TTL survey indicated that the grant they managed had a high or moderate degree of influence on other donors, with the greatest proportions of high-to-moderate influ- ence scores being reported in the Bank’s Africa, East Asia and Pacific, and Latin America and Caribbean Regions. Relatively lower ratings of influence on donors were reported for grants in the Middle East and North Africa and Europe and Central Asia Regions. Of the TTLs citing high or moderate degrees of influence, nearly two-thirds cited specific instances of influence or improved coordination on GAC issues with particular donor part- ners, including the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID), Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), the European Union, the European Commission, Sweden, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Forms of GPF influence most frequently cited in the open responses included improved or expanded donor coordination at the strategic or project level; dissem- ination of and discussion/coordination with other donors around GPF-funded data, tools, and analytical products; and, to a lesser extent, influence on funding decisions of other donors. The most frequently cited reason for lower influence ratings was that the grant was at too early a stage in its implementation for its influence to be produced or assessed. TTL responses to the question about influence on country counterparts and outcomes revealed a slightly lower level of influence than appeared in responses to other survey questions. Just under half of the TTLs claimed that their grants had a great or 52 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy moderate impact on the actions of client country counterparts. The greatest proportions of high-to-moderate influence scores were reported in the Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and East Asia and Pacific Regions; for cross-region grants; and for grants under Windows 1, 2, and 4.2. GPF Support to Strengthen Partnerships with Civil Society The overall evaluation found that the GPF contributed to strengthening partnerships between the Bank, government, civil society, and development partners, particularly in Window 1 countries. While these indications are impressionistic and anecdotal, they point to the GPF providing a basis for expanding partnerships, especially with civil society. Nearly all countries include some demand for good governance component in their cur- rent strategy documents, pointing to a top-level emphasis for some form of civil society engagement. In some countries, including Ghana, Mongolia, Burkina Faso, and Zambia, GPF-funded initiatives such as e-ISR plus, a participatory monitoring exercise, strength- ened relationships with a broad range of stakeholders. In other countries, including Afghanistan, the GPF helped fund analytical work used to stimulate and lead a dialogue on governance priorities among development partners. Cameroon, Ghana, and Albania, among others, have increased their attention to the engagement of civil society in a range of forums and programs. Other cited results include better relationships and an improved reputation for the Bank among civil society; engagement with new stakeholders, espe- cially legislators; and a higher profile for the GAC issue, which has led to improved collab- oration with development partners. In some cases, this effect also resulted in leveraging resources for further programming. In the case of Zambia, the GPF provided funding for the implementation of the Accountability through Community Radio (AtCR) pilot, which sought to improve the flow of information and feedback among citizens, civil society, and duty bear- ers, with a view to improving governance and public service delivery. Civil society informants who were consulted during the independent evaluation of the GPF expressed great appreciation for the project. It was seen as innovative, pioneering, and catalytic. The project helped community radio stations run weekly interactive governance and rural development talk shows with content driven by and representative of the commu- nity’s concerns. However, according to an independent evaluation of this project that used both quantitative and qualitative methods, the final results of the activity were not as positive as expected. Radio was thought to be an effective way of addressing issues 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 53 of governance and service delivery in the two Zambian localities where the project was active. Quantitative surveys indicated an increase in the number of people who felt radio was a method by which citizens could address service delivery problems. The evaluation results demonstrated that while the show had a positive impact on service provision in parts of the Mkushi and Livingstone districts, these improvements were anecdotal. The public was still not confident about their ability to elicit change through interactions with duty bearers. Nonetheless, the Bank’s GPF team shared the findings among civil society, and this frank and open disclosure of an unsuccessful/failed experience generated an extremely positive effect. Several CSOs viewed this as the Bank/GPF acting exactly as it should: leading the way, piloting, experimenting, and sharing experiences—good or bad—so that others can replicate the successes, avoid the mistakes, and ultimately bring activities to scale. In the case of Mongolia, an independent evaluation of activities funded by the GPF and the Swiss Development Cooperation supporting civil society collected 190 out- comes using the outcome mapping technique. Outcome mapping is a participatory methodology that is useful for evaluating complex programs involving capacity building, coalition building, multiple actors, and tacit knowledge (see box 4.1). The technique was applied to three projects: 1. Social Accountability Learning-in-Action Program, a subcomponent of the Window 1 program of the GPF in Mongolia. The project’s objective was to provide training and mentoring to CSOs to strengthen their skills at working with and mon- itoring public sector organizations, and to increase the willingness of public sector organizations to work with CSOs. 2. Local Nongovernmental Organization (NGO) Capacity Building Project, funded by systematic country diagnostic. The project aimed at providing training and men- toring to improve internal governance, oversight, and financial and operational man- agement to Mongolia’s most active CSOs. 3. Supporting Civil Society Oversight over Public Procurement. The project was funded by Window 4 of the GPF with the goal of providing technical support and pilot funding to support the development of an effective, self-governing network of part- ner CSOs committed to monitoring public procurement and supporting the govern- ment in creating an effective framework for CSO participation in public procurement monitoring. 54 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Box 4.1. What is Outcome Mapping? Outcome mapping is an innovative approach to project and program planning, monitoring, and evaluation, with a strong focus on participatory learning. The major innovation is the emphasis on the behavior change of key actors over whom the program has influence rather than a focus on changes in the state that may or may not be attributable to the program. With regard to the two projects funded by the GPF in Mongolia, the evaluation iden- tified 93 outcomes for the Social Accountability Learning-in-Action Program. Against the objective of strengthening monitoring capacity of CSOs on the mining value chain and related economy outcomes, the intervention was successful at introducing or significantly enhancing social accountability knowledge and skills in several organizations. Strictly judged against the mining (or extractive industry) value chain, however, the intervention has not been fully effective because, almost without exception, it has strengthened CSO capacity at only one end of the value chain, farthest from the extractive industry. A further benefit of assessing the program two years after its conclusion is that it has been possible to interpret the extent to which the results are sustainable. After the intervention, 71 of the outcomes materialized, many of which demonstrate organizational ownership of the concepts and tools that were introduced. The Supporting Civil Society Oversight over Public Procurement Project had 28 out- comes. Against the objectives of providing support to the ministry of finance and CSOs, the intervention was successful at supporting the ministry and development of a self- governing CSO network. But it had not yet succeeded in developing monitoring tools for the network, and the extent of CSO capacity strengthening has been limited to the few participants of two pilots. The intervention was still young, and it continued for months. While some objectives remain unachieved, the outcomes indicate progress in influencing rules and guidelines and in the formal establishment of the partnership. Finally, according to the evaluation, the high number of outcomes—190—demon- strates that each intervention met or exceeded its predefined objectives (see box 4.2). This represents an impressive result for these short-term interventions, two of which were still ongoing during the assessment, leading to the conclusion that the interventions have been effective and relevant. The gathered outcomes also pointed to the sustainabil- ity potential for all three interventions, subject to the continued support and engagement 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 55 Box 4.2. Outcomes At A Glance World Bank: Social Accountability Swiss Development Cooperation: • 93 total outcomes, each relevant to or exceeding Nongovernmental Organization Capacity the Bank’s predefined objectives Building • 71 outcomes suggesting the intervention’s sus- • 69 total outcomes, each relevant to or exceed- tained influence ing the predefined objectives of the Swiss • 59 outcomes demonstrating the application of Development Cooperation social accountability knowledge gained through • 51 outcomes demonstrating the application of the intervention knowledge from the intervention • 29 outcomes demonstrate dissemination of • 7 outcomes suggesting the intervention’s sus- social accountability tained influence • 24 outcomes citing constructive engagement, • 5 outcomes citing engagement between civil demonstrating a deepening awareness of social society organizations (CSOs) and the community accountability World Bank: Public Procurement • 14 outcomes presenting successful fundraising • 28 total outcomes, each relevant to or exceeding for implementation of post-intervention social the Bank’s predefined objectives accountability activities • 25 outcomes suggesting the potential sustain- • 11 outcomes expressing demand for support in ability of the Partnership for Public Procurement using social accountability concepts and tools. • 14 outcomes at the aimag (provincial) level • 11 outcomes showing networking of practitioners • 12 outcomes at the national level • 9 outcomes directly relevant to the mining value • 11 outcomes attesting to the strengthened chain capacity of CSOs in procurement monitoring • 7 outcomes describing working with the private • 8 outcomes demonstrating influence on road sector maintenance, specifications, and planning • 7 outcomes demonstrating advocacy of social • 7 outcomes showing support for self-governing accountability CSO networks • 5 outcomes involving engagement with the • 5 outcomes revealing support for the ministry media of finance in the development of implementing rules and guidelines on CSO participation and oversight • 2 outcomes at the Ulaanbaatar level 56 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy with targeted CSOs. The evaluation concludes with lessons learned and recommenda- tions, which can be used in the design of future programs in support of civil society in Mongolia. The GPF programs in Albania and Cameroon put a strong emphasis on working with civil society to advance the Bank’s governance agenda. Both programs chose to do this through the Development Marketplace competition format, among other methods. The Development Marketplace is a competitive grant program that identifies and funds innovative early-stage development projects that are scalable and/or replicable and that have a high potential for development impact. The grant beneficiaries are usually social entrepreneurs with projects aimed at creating jobs and/or that deliver a range of social and public services to low-income groups (see box 4.3 for more information on the Development Marketplace model). Box 4.3. The Development Marketplace The Development Marketplace is a competitive grant program that identifies and funds innovative, ear- ly-stage development projects that are scalable and/or replicable, and that have high development impact potential. The grant beneficiaries are social entrepreneurs with projects aimed at creating jobs and/or deliver- ing a range of social and public services to low-income groups. Since its inception in 1998, the Development Marketplace program—housed at the World Bank and adminis- tered by the World Bank Institute—has awarded more than US$60 million in grants to more than 1,200 innova- tive projects identified through country, regional, and global competitions. Using Development Marketplace funding as a launch pad, many projects have gone on to secure additional funding support from other donors, foundations, governments, and impact and corporate social responsibility investors. Each Development Marketplace competition focuses on a specific theme or sector and draws applications from a range of social innovators and entrepreneurs. Applications go through rigorous, merit-based scrutiny by panels of development experts from inside and outside the World Bank who shortlist a group of finalists from a pool of applications. The finalists are then brought together at a face-to-face event in country locations to publicly present their ideas and participate in networking and knowledge-sharing events. Going forward, Development Marketplace competitions will focus on supporting proposals aimed at creating an intermedia- tion infrastructure in regions/countries of current interest. 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 57 Box 4.4. Winning Projects in the Mini Development Marketplace for Governance— The GPF in Albania • Reducing Informality and Tax Evasion Through Improved Governance and Transparency at the Local Government Level • Encouraging Local Government Accountability: Support to the Municipality of Vlora to Improve Public Information • Monitoring Accessibility Index of Public Institutions, Tirana • Monitoring and Evaluation of Direct Support Policies of Agricultural Development in Fieri Region • City of the Citizens–Budget of the Citizens–Wallet of the Citizens • The Involvement of Young People in Fighting Corruption Locally • Government Public Monitoring • Knowledge for Empowering Women—Promoting Employment and Income Opportunities • Budget Allocation Tracking System for Implementing the National Strategy against Corruption in Albania • Virtual Platforms for Better Interaction between the Public and Government Institutions Both competitions were assessed by the evaluators as highly successful. The objectives of the Development Marketplace competitions in both countries were similar: to support CSOs engaging in innovative activities aimed at generating and articulating a demand for better governance and accountability. The Development Marketplace in Albania, implemented in partnership with the British Council, awarded grants to 10 CSOs (see box 4.4). In Cameroon, the Development Marketplace selected Catholic Relief Services as an implementing partner and awarded 15 grants. Both competitions attracted signifi- cant interest from CSOs, and hundreds of applications were submitted. In both countries, large meetings were organized to present the results of the Development Marketplace grants and discuss ways to improve governance and the role of civil society. Bank staff interviewed for the evaluations found the Development Marketplace con- cept to be a useful approach for addressing governance challenges in Cameroon and Albania and asserted that it helped boost the Bank’s visibility. Bank staff, gov- ernment representatives, development partners, and CSOs agreed that the approach allowed for an exchange of views and ideas between government and CSOs and that it served as a platform for interaction among CSOs and between CSOs and development partners. The Development Marketplace in Albania made the Bank more popular among 58 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy civil society and local media. It was the first time most participating NGOs had worked with the Bank and the British Council. All NGOs interviewed for that evaluation confirmed that they were able to learn more about the Bank and its governance agenda through the Development Marketplace. NGOs that once looked at the Bank skeptically reported that the marketplace helped them understand the Bank better, improving its credibil- ity. Most NGOs stayed in contact with the Bank after the competition and continued to follow its activities. By supporting NGOs since the end of the small grants program, the Development Marketplace filled a significant gap. Without the GPF, the Bank would prob- ably not have been able to fund activities with civil society in Albania, as has been the case since the GPF program closed. Using the outcome mapping technique, the evaluation identified 41 concrete outputs, 24 outcomes, and four impacts in Albania, directly attributable to the Development Marketplace. The outcomes ranged from finding employment for 12 women who received training through one of the projects to reducing the number of informal businesses in the Korca prefecture by 13 percent. Other notable outcomes included a reduction in the time needed by public servants to process requests and complaints from citizens in the munici- pality of Vlora, the initiation of a debate about revising the access-to-information law, and the publication of draft laws on a public platform for discussion. Examples of output-level results are numerous publications, reports, and booklets produced by the projects and discussed at public events. While they cannot be expected to have significant long-term impacts, some of the small projects did contribute to enduring effects, such as the project implemented by the regional development agency in Korca, which resulted in the cre- ation of 900 jobs. Development Marketplace activities also helped to improve transparency, account- ability, and integrity in Cameroon. Development Marketplace activities helped bring information to activity recipients (e.g., information about citizens’ rights and rules govern- ing the use of natural resources), thereby increasing awareness and social control, which can lead to more accountability and integrity. Examples include activities in the health sector and forestry. Some activities gave participants the opportunity to report miscon- duct and corruption, which led to administrative sanctions against a number of individuals in the education and health sectors, among others. 4. GPF Performance: Insights from Evaluation Studies 59 GPF Contribution to the Sustainability of GAC in the World Bank The independent evaluation of the GPF concluded that the GPF contributes to long-term GAC uptake at the Bank. It is likely that GPF programs and projects will be maintained over the intended useful life of the GPF. Key factors are technical soundness, government commitment, sociopolitical support, financial viability, institutional effective- ness, environmental impact, and resilience to exogenous factors. Bank staff in Window 1 countries have been exposed to political economy analysis and have experience with adapting GAC approaches to various projects. To the extent that the GPF has contributed to strengthening these aspects, it has contributed to the long-term sustainability of the GAC agenda, but this can change. Factors such as the in-country authorizing environ- ment, internal processes such as continued strategic emphasis and operational support to GAC from the center, and the Governance Global Practice, will also contribute to the long-term sustainability of the overall GAC agenda. In areas where GPF activities were perceived as particularly successful or effective, they were more likely to be adopted or replicated by others within the Bank or at the country level. In Nigeria, for instance, original successes with citizen oversight/social accountability in the health and oil sectors were catalysts for several TTLs to seek addi- tional funds from DFID, leading to a major new GAC funding resource. Meanwhile, in the Philippines, certain government counterparts were sufficiently impressed with the Bank’s political economy analysis approach (to which GPF contributed) that they asked for more such analyses from the Bank and began to adopt a similar analytical approach. In Ghana, the team pointed out that a major Bank effort on social accountability led to two minis- tries establishing social accountability offices. Such examples illustrate how the effects of the GPF may be felt beyond the boundaries and project cycles of individual activities and contribute to the sustainability of the broader GAC agenda. Staff experience with the GPF has deepened Bank expertise on GAC issues. Many governance advisors, country managers, and country directors have had direct experi- ence with GPF programs and applied that experience to a variety of situations. Because staff members continue to rotate among countries, their knowledge of GAC issues will likely continue beyond the GPF. Their experiences with the GPF appear to have height- ened their sensitivity toward GAC issues and perhaps even illuminated possibilities for innovation. In cases where the GPF was the sole funder of in-country governance advisors, the lack of GPF funding could significantly impact progress on GAC issues. 60 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Chapter 5 Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest Introduction As Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) grant outcomes were reported, task teams were able to provide more holistic views of the design, structure, and implementation of their respective grants as well as to assess their effectiveness. Windows 1 and 2 supported the governance and anticorruption (GAC) strategy of the World Bank and mainstreamed gov- ernance into its Country Assistance Strategies. The GPF also provided a creative outlet for teams designing programs that might not have otherwise been able to acquire funding. Window 3 supported development-for-knowledge and learning activities that spurred the dissemination of numerous political economy studies, also funded by the GPF. The GPF helped create Communities of Practice in different sectors, incorporated citizen feedback mechanisms into program evaluations, and published books with critical reviews, such as Problem-Driven Political Economy Analysis: The World Bank’s Approach. Window 4 provided resources for applied operational research in public financial management and broader governance issues. Different regions and sectors have used grant funds to varying degrees of success, but there is no doubt that the funds have led to mainstreaming governance in Bank opera- tions as well as sustained efforts at creating new programs and activities through addi- tional channels. As new analytic approaches are developed and applied in development practice, it is therefore quite worthwhile to try to harvest the lessons learned. Key Lessons Effective Design, New Tools, and Implementation In interviews conducted, team leaders were unequivocal about enhanced governance learning understood through projects (lending and nonlending) and knowledge products through information and communications technology (ICT) tools such as SMS, online and social media, and core statistical analysis. Governance learning events must have opera- tional relevance for many task teams to appreciate and apply the experience. “One lesson is that country clients are more receptive to promoting transparency, rather than fight corruption, in the LAC region,” said Lisa Bhansali, task team leader. “Many see the fight against corruption as a losing battle but greater transparency offers concrete measures that governments are willing to take in response to citizen demands for good governance.” 62 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy In the grant for improving Indonesia’s non-tax revenue regime, the team felt it was better to involve the client in the actual diagnostic work as a way to get engagement and buy-in, even if the World Bank had to do the analytical heavy lifting. “By having budget and fiscal policy staff do the field work at the subnational level meant they felt ownership of the find- ings,” explained Yua Man-Lee, task team leader. Achieving buy-in and managing expectations from the outset was a common concern among grant activities. According to Bjorn Philipp, the task team leader (TTL) for a gov- ernment assessment in Palestine, it was important that a clear framework was developed for the Inter Local Government Cooperation to define the rules, including accountability structures and sustainability arrangements. “Good governance structures can be developed further in terms of better and clearer agree- ments between the members and more efficient cost recovery for sustainability of services.” Evolving Strategies Management oversight is needed to keep as a priority good governance in project design and implementation as part of the feedback loop between supply-side and demand- side measures, especially during project restructuring. Some of the TTLs felt there was lack of consistent staffing for their programs. With regard to the GPF program in Ghana, Katherine Bain, TTL for the Ghana GPF grant on inclusive and transparent governance recommends: “Consider placing a governance specialist with strong demand-side credentials in the coun- try office to support social accountability measures in Bank operations and facilitate dia- logue with the CSO community. Building trust with external stakeholders takes time, and ability to ‘show up’ is important.” Roberto Panzardi, task team leader, referring to Sierra Leone’s good governance initiative, notes that, “it was difficult to find governance consultants for a short period and deploy them in a post-conflict environment.” Implementation of support for the corruption strategy of the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was stalled due to vacancies in two leadership positions at the commission. While waiting for the project to commence, authorities took the initiative 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 63 Box 5.1. Governance in Cameroon Cameroon is the only Francophone country in Africa funded by the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF), and governance remains a major obstacle to its development. With a predominantly agrarian population (almost 90 percent), weak governance continues to hamper delivery and quality of services in a range of sectors, includ- ing education, health, and agriculture. Unlike neighboring countries Chad and the Central African Republic, Cameroon’s social structures are still traditional, and its sociopolitical systems revolve around tribal chiefdoms. To support the governance agenda in Cameroon, the World Bank mobilized funds through the GPF for the Banking on Change Governance Program, which became active in March 2010. The GPF-funded governance program was aimed at clarifying the de jure and de facto rules of the game and assessing their impact on ser- vice delivery. Two forums were held as part of the grant’s knowledge activities. The Governance Forum on Public Financial Management and Decentralization held January 14–15, 2015, sought to share knowledge that was based on various pilots implemented by civil society organizations (CSOs) and the government over the past five years to further involve citizens at the local council level in planning and monitoring. The forum also contributed to the ongoing policy dialogue about decentralization and public finance reform in advance of the third phase of a community-driven development project and a new public financial management project. The almost 100 participants included several CSOs, the governor of the Far North, 16 mayors, and 10 regional ministry of economy and planning delegates. Outcomes from the discussion, included the following: • Local council budget transparency. Two CSOs agreed to build partnerships for strengthen the publication of the local council budget on the pilot website—Cameroon.openspending.org—to over 140 local councils. Cameroon has recently received coverage from the 3G network, enabling a host of potential ICT services. • Technical assistance. Technical assistance to local councils would be provided on a volunteer basis regard- ing participatory budgeting, budget/tax mobilization, citizen scorecards/satisfaction surveys, and (4) pilot- ing the further use of the SMS/call center for this task. • Bridging the gap between citizens and central government. The central government is examining a pilot conducted in one district that links the local development plan with the centrally planned budget. This will also feed into the preparation of the forthcoming World Bank public financial management project. On February 24, 2015, a governance forum on multi-stakeholder engagement in mining was attended by almost 130 participants from numerous areas, including the mining regions of the East. It showcased multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), such as the Extractives Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), Open Contracting Initiative, Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, and Medicines Transparency Alliance. The thematic discussions focused on issues linked to Cameroon’s compliance with EITI (e.g., governance requirements under the EITI’s 64 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy new rules and the EITI standard); transparency in extractives and the mining sector; the multi-stakeholder social accountability web platform, with over 18,000 visitors, established under a Bank project; procurement and infrastructure investments; and access to drugs. A report published by MSI Integrity (2015) claimed that, in addition to countries such as Tanzania, Senegal, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Nigeria, Cameroon did not meet the EITI standard. In Cameroon, the challenges in meeting the standard ranged from poor content of the reports; missing voices of stakeholders from multi-stakeholder groups; critical governance provisions missing from documents; and poor collaboration among CSOs, some of whom were unaware of EITI and its process. The head of Cameroon’s EITI Secretariat, Ondigui Owona, also admitted that the EITI was facing challenges, including efforts to be more accountable and adhere to strict timelines for submitting reports. But she agreed that MSIs are important for strengthening social dialogue and social cohesion. Several activities piloted through the GPF program, such as political economy studies in the mining sector, continue to assist other Bank projects in the energy and mining sectors, which Cameroon’s former country director Gregor Binkert says is significant because GPF funds did not rely on the election cycle so the Bank could continue its work on a daily basis. With regard to potential activities that could be scaled up by the Bank, Binkert states, “We should not down- play the mining industry which is just beginning to develop.” Cameroon will need assistance in natural resource management through MSIs or other collective measures. He adds that whether it is participatory budgeting with local councils or partnering with CSOs for corruption in schools, accountability programs are significant. The potential for ICT in service delivery will also be a key factor in future activities, according to the former country director. In April, the Government of Cameroon consented to opt-in for the Bank’s Global Partnership for Social Accountability, which would make CSOs in the country eligible to participate in future calls for proposals. The potential scalability of demand side for good governance in Cameroon is eagerly anticipated. to use their own resources for one of GPF’s planned activities. As a result, the GPF bud- get allocation could not be used. Yolanda Azarcon, TTL for the Philippines GPF program remarks: “Much has been written about the importance of seizing windows of opportunity for reform, and the World Bank team has worked to meet the ambitious objectives of the government in areas of from social protection and infrastructure to more fundamental issues of access to information and openness of data.” 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 65 Political Economy Context The range of development agencies, CSOs, and think tanks interested in political econ- omy analysis continues to expand, and many interested parties have contacted the Bank’s political economy analysis team over the past three years, recognizing that there has been substantial progress in better understanding its experience. However, according to TTL Verena Fritz, “That said, continued efforts need to include political economy perspectives in development work to ensure that this becomes in fact part of regular practice, and fully develops its potential at increasing development effectiveness.” Box 5.2. Youth Auditors Program in Peru GPF financing enabled a team from the Public Integrity and Openness Directorate of the Governance Global Practice and the Latin America and Caribbean Region to perform an extensive stock-take of the diverse regional- and country-level anticorruption initiatives for youth, including a qualitative evaluation of the inno- vative Youth Auditors Program in Peru. The program was created in 2010 by the comptroller general’s office in collaboration with the ministry of education. The evaluation identified best practices for youth anticorruption programs and lessons learned, and outlined ways to effectively develop and cultivate awareness of and nega- tive affiliations toward corruption among students at the middle and high school levels. Peru’s Youth Auditors program was originally designed to address concerns about the low level of trust of pub- lic institutions, with the primary objectives of imparting ethical and civic values in youth and engaging them as agents in the fight against corruption. This approach is drastically different than other development programs in which children are commonly viewed as powerless victims of poverty, hunger, and social inequality. The program is rooted in principles of school oversight (veedurias). Students learn the regulatory norms or application decrees and budget allocations for public services. They then use that information to hold service providers accountable. Students document their observations about sanitation, school maintenance, infra- structure, and other services at their schools and in their communities. They may even present proposals to administrators to improve service delivery. Through the program, youth agents: • Learn about and practice compliance with the rules and regulations related to the quality of public services; • Promote and strengthen citizen participation; • Seek efficient and ethical performance of public officials; and • Ensure transparent management of public resources by promoting a culture that prevents corruption. 66 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The program is designed to reflect the Peruvian educational or scholastic program by incorporating principles from the national curriculum, such as civic education; personal, family, and human relations; science, technol- ogy, and the environment; communication; community service and faith; and education through art. The comp- troller’s office and education ministry created a handbook for teachers in which each of the lessons include a governance perspective (e.g., ethics, values, democracy, and citizen engagement). Other lesson plans were specifically designed to teach students how to become effective monitors/youth auditors through appropriate observation, documentation, and reporting. Program results to date are impressive, as demonstrated by several outcomes. For example, since 2010, 3,695 oversight reports have been performed, and 1,877 teachers from 838 schools in different regions of the country have trained 200,427 student participants. The qualitative report highlights the positive impact of the program, but a quantitative report is still needed to obtain data and evidence of its value, as the Bank team hopes to continue its support to Peru. Research has shown that with regard to the GPF grant addressing governance challenges in fragile and conflict-affected countries, fragility, conflict, and violence contexts highlight the value of adapting existing approaches to specific contextual realities and challenges rather than developing approaches or mechanisms from scratch. “In the area of national dialogues… much can be learned from prior experiences or applying proven modalities for supporting decentralization or local service delivery to FCV contexts,” notes Spyridon Demetriou, TTL for the global grant activity. Leadership The 2014 independent evaluation of the GPF noted that GPF funds allowed for flexibility because governance was not institutionalized in all countries. Thus, one of the key lessons was the significance of effective leadership in service delivery and outcomes. In Nigeria, for example, Country Director Marie Francoise Marie-Nelly was a strong advocate for mainstreaming governance. She explained at the GPF conference that there is enormous lending pressure in the country, so it was important to unite the country management unit under one agenda. The political economy analysis coincided with the preparation of the country partnership strategy, and as a result, the governance approach was embedded into it. “CMU [country management unit] leadership is essential to ensure that a cross-cut- ting issue like social accountability is embraced across the country team and in dialogue with stakeholders,” says Katherine Bain. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 67 Box 5.3. The Communication for Reform (C4R) Pilot in Zambia The problem. The Communication for Reform (C4R) initiative arose out of the recognition that, although the quality of the Bank’s knowledge work in Zambia is usually very high, it does not adequately stimulate broad and timely public discussions and debates in the country. As a result of this weakness, the Bank often finds that the reforms it pursues are not well supported by the majority of Zambians, nor are they sufficiently owned by the client. The aim. With this problem in mind, the GPF-funded C4R pilot pursued an innovative method of disseminat- ing Bank knowledge work that would inform public opinion on a critical development topic; actively build the debate and writing capacities of key Zambian stakeholders, especially students; and facilitate informed and inclusive discussions among a diverse set of stakeholders on a key development topic. In so doing, the initia- tive also operationalizes the Zambian country partnership strategy’s commitment to “ensure enhanced atten- tion to communication and dissemination of Bank data and analysis amongst varied stakeholders.” The method. The team created a program to encourage written discussion and live debates about the eco- nomic brief entitled “Zambia’s Jobs Challenge: Realities on the Ground” (second edition). At the time of the publication’s launch, the World Bank simultaneously launched the “Think Jobs” debate and writing competi- tion to train selected Zambian students to engage on public platforms regarding development issues, such as job creation. Finalists had the opportunity to debate on live television; have their articles published; and win prizes, including internships with the World Bank. Key to the success of the initiative is the fact that the economic brief was written as a diagnostic rather than as a prescriptive reform. A number of stakeholders have since commented that the lack of overt prescriptions allow them the necessary space to develop their own solutions to presented problems. The intervention so far. With a view toward carefully evaluating the effect of this communication strategy, the team began with a baseline survey of Zambian students, the target population, to identify current awareness and use of Bank knowledge products. Forty-seven percent of survey respondents had used World Bank infor- mation, placing the World Bank in fourth position behind the Bank of Zambia, the United Nations, and the Zambia Revenue Authority. Among the respondents, 90.3 percent felt that statistics were important for society as a basis for political decisions, research, and debate. The debate and writing competitions were launched in September 2013 alongside the launch of the brief. Over 150 people attended the event, which included a panel debate and responses from academia, the private sector, government, and youth. The event received wide coverage in the media. A Facebook page was launched in October 2013 reaching more than 1,500 people and receiving 570 “likes”—mostly from Zambia. Twenty influential young people representing the business, banking, agriculture, academic, and informal sector attended a youth forum, and some of them subsequently entered the competition and joined the Facebook page. An infographic was designed and published online 68 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy to provide a more user-friendly and accessible way to understand the data contained in the Zambia Economic Brief (ZEB). With a view toward keeping the jobs data in the public eye, sections of this infographic have since been regularly featured in a weekly “Did You Know” series that appears in one of Zambia’s most widely read newspapers. Over 80 university students from across Zambia participated in the debate and writing competition submitting entries of extremely high quality, demonstrating that they had read the ZEB and used its data in their applica- tions. The students’ academic institutions demonstrated strong support for the competition. A number of them requested that their faculty members attend the training. The possibility of an internship with the World Bank was clearly a major motivating factor for applicants. Also, four debate teams, each comprised of four people and a debate coach (coaches were selected from four different universities), were trained by a world-renowned expert in public debating skills and by the economic brief itself. A veteran journalist provided training to 20 selected students on writing about economic affairs for a public audience. Students were then given essay questions and debate topics and were given two months to prepare for the final competition. What next? Students who participated in the writing competition were required to submit their final discussion pieces in February 2014. Their submissions were judged by a panel and compiled into a single World Bank publication. Students who took part in the debate training also participated in a three-part televised debate series, culminating in the final competition during which final winners were announced. The winners of the debate and writing competitions were invited to a high-level meeting with government counterparts, hosted by the World Bank, providing an opportunity for the government to discuss job creation and unemployment issues with these informed young voices. Two of the competition winners and one of the debate winners was also offered an internship with the World Bank Zambia Country Office. Mainstreaming C4R? After completing the competition, re-running the survey, and assessing the impact of the pilot, the country office will need to identify whether this communication strategy could be beneficially mainstreamed across other Bank products in the Zambia portfolio. GPF funds were successfully utilized for the Philippines governance strategy, with an emphasis on the importance of leadership. This leadership came in many forms: a coun- try director who changed the way business was done; skilled governance advisors; task teams; and the Government of Philippines, which looked to the Bank as a partner in its efforts to introduce sustainable change. According to TTL Yolanda Azarcon, “The multi- plicity of leaders of the governance agenda demonstrates both the critical role of multiple parties in advancing the reform agenda and the need to ensure that the Bank’s under- standing of leadership reflects the complexity of the function.” 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 69 Partnerships One lesson learned by team managers was that it is important to build effective partner- ships whether for activity grants for deepening governance in a particular region or capac- ity-building efforts at strengthening public institutions. Multi-stakeholder groups can form coalitions to better understand complicated contracts and make their awarding and implementation more transparent. A GPF study on access to justice through cross-sector engagement pointed to the importance of managing relationships among stakeholders. Access to justice mechanisms often involve working with civil society partners outside of and with possible negative relationships with the government, according to TTL Deborah Isser. In Mongolia, a component of the GPF grant also engaged with members of the parliament to promote broader and more informed public accountability. “It is a potential high risk but high reward activity,” explains team leader Zahid Hasnain. Role of the Bank The convening power of the Bank was evident in supply and demand sides of governance grant activities. In Africa, countries such as Burkina Faso, Zambia, Ghana, and Cameroon brought together multiple stakeholders to discuss the role of the media and the mining industry, among other topics. In Afghanistan, the work of the GPF has led to a better understanding of the role of district and resourcing issues, which has resulted in a better understanding of where blockages remain for getting resources down to the school level and to the Bank’s health program. According to TTL Richard Hogg, “The new Ministry of Finance draft comprehensive provincial budgeting policy, which draws on the GPF work, will begin with pilots on education and health, and this will obviously impact on the work of those sectors within the Bank.” By pooling funds, the country management unit in the Philippines strengthened the mes- sage that governance is a core part of the Bank’s work. This led to local governance strat- egy efforts, the implementation of a Personal Identification Number (PIN) process, and more effective management of the grant through successful collaboration with the Open Budget Partnership and with Rappler, a budget monitoring CSO. Citizen Engagement The World Bank is particularly capable at strengthening government institutions and systems, and enabling effective citizen participation. Several lessons have emerged from the 42 projects with demand-side components. In Mongolia, for example, there 70 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy is considerable potential for demand-side initiatives due to the strength of local com- munities and a culture of openness. However, civil society organizations are technically weak, and demand-side initiatives alone cannot generate sufficient pressure to increase accountability or improve outcomes. TTL Zahid Hasnain explained: “Therefore, the approach should be to establish collaborative partnerships between reform- minded officials…. Given the grand corruption that is prevalent in Mongolia at the national level, these partnerships are more likely to be had at the local level and therefore initial impacts will be small.” The key is to demonstrate success from these local initiatives and to use the traditional and social media to disseminate these findings to broaden awareness and increase pres- sure for change. In Cambodia, “What is not possible nationally is possible locally,” according to TTL Leah April. “Even in a weak governance environment, structured social accountability processes can be undertaken effectively, produce results, and be relevant to state and non-state actors and citizens in a community.” The project’s joint action and joint capacity-build- ing efforts, in which state and non-state actors learn about the processes together, have underpinned and strengthened results. Developing skills to convene multiple stakeholders and to facilitate dialogue are extremely important to the success of social accountability approaches, especially where the political space has been historically limited. Non-state actor grants showed that it is possible to bring about significant change (responsiveness) within the mandate of the organizations engaged (e.g., schools and communes). The Ghana GPF program offers many lessons that reinforce or complement other find- ings regarding work in citizen engagement, social accountability, and demand-side gov- ernance, by embedding feedback loops between supply- and demand-side measures for good governance in project design and implementation. Social accountability instru- ments in Bank projects often get picked up by other donors midway through a project, or they receive parallel financing at the outset. Katherine Bain, TTL for the Ghana GPF grant says: “Strong collaboration is required to ensure that these two sides of the governance equa- tion continue to communicate with each other to ensure that service providers listen and respond to citizen feedback.” 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 71 Project design should identify this loop, and management oversight is needed to main- tain it as a priority, especially during project restructuring. Building social accountability in World Bank-financed projects requires client and TTL buy-in as well as careful planning at the design stage. Clients must be introduced to practical project experiences where social accountability measures have yielded tangible results. Christopher Finch, leader of the GPF program in Kenya, said, “To be effective, basic measures on transparency, community participation, and grievance redress should be embedded in the core project design, implementation arrangements, job descriptions and in project indicators and M&E frameworks.” It is important to selectively apply social accountability measures because a one-size-fits-all approach will probably be ineffective due to variations in project requirements and risks. Donor Interest GPF work has brought a degree of unified purpose to donor efforts regarding subnational governance work in Afghanistan. According to Afghanistan TTL Richard Hogg: “To some degree this is simply the product of better information and understanding of the issues; to some degree it constitutes recognition of the Bank’s dominant expertise on the issue; and to an extent it is the consequence of diplomatic effort by the Bank to create a commonality of purpose amongst donors.” The GPF project has also been successful at leveraging additional resources for subna- tional governance work—an objective of the GPF trust fund. Since early 2011, Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has contributed over US$700,000 to sup- port work on operations and maintenance, examine the linkages between village coun- cils and districts, provide funding for dissemination of findings on aid flows and district governments, and support the production of the sourcebook Afghanistan in Transition: Looking Beyond 2014 (Hogg et al. 2013). The United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) provided US$220,000 in 2010–12 from its country pro- gram resources to finance World Bank technical assistance on subnational governance. The GPF expanded that sum by half again with additional resources for related and/ or complementary work on subnational governance. The work of the GPF in Mongolia, Nepal, and Kenya have also led to further interest from donors and to the establishment of new trust funds. 72 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Conclusion Overall, the grant reports paint a positive picture of how funds were appropriately mobi- lized to do what the World Bank does best: provide technical support, enhance policy dialogue, and use its convening power to bring a diverse group of officials, civil society groups, and other voices to the table. Many of the reports stated the obvious: political climates affect grant implementation, and a lack of qualified staff in fragile settings delays project design. Another refrain from public service delivery grant activity reports was the need to create a human resources framework model to build an effective civil service and to strengthen public institutions. The key lesson, according to one team leader, is to develop a framework that applies to the government, development partners, and—as much as possible—to contractors engaged in government service delivery. With the clos- ing of the GPF, sustainability is a valid concern, especially in countries like Sierra Leone, where an epidemic tested public institutions and demonstrated how weak they really were. Concern about the sustainability of other projects was overtaken by an understand- ing of how effective the projects were in advancing global knowledge and innovation in the development sphere. The Window 4 review reaffirms that the budget of the World Bank, like other development organizations, is squeezed and, given that environment, the GPF provided critical resources to task teams. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 73 Chapter 6 The Legacy of the GPF: Planting the Seeds of Innovation When the GPF started in 2008, it was primarily used to implement and mainstream the GAC agenda of the World Bank. To this extent, projects related to mainstreaming gover- nance in countries and transparency kicked off with the notion of deepening the strategy and increasing the number of governance specialists with the help of tools like political economy analysis. Over the years, it was discovered that GAC implementation was not possible without cross-cutting sector work as well as funding key knowledge initiatives to sustain development outcomes. In this chapter, we highlight nine GPF thematic areas that have left an impact on overall development objectives, Bank operations, and most significantly, have led to emerging partnerships. Translating Extractives into Tangible and Sustainable Results The discovery of extractives in developing countries presents opportunities for growth and human development, but the experience of some developing countries in extractives wealth management offers dramatic illustrations of its inherent risks. Oil, gas, and mining exploitation often generate enormous and sudden revenue inflows that can create signif- icant challenges to developing countries with ill-equipped administrative systems. The uncertainty associated with volatile oil prices adds to the complexity and can further strain overburdened systems. The ablest of policy makers are tested by the handling of such new wealth. The inflow of funds presents prime opportunities for outright corruption. Adequate transparency and accountability are critical for ensuring that resource wealth is managed for the benefit of the entire population. A deeper understanding of the pro- cess of resource extraction, the expectation of revenue windfalls, and how they affect the governance dynamics of host countries is critically needed. A key question is: what invest- ments would best address a country’s development needs? The answer to this question could have enduring impacts on current and future generations. In over 65 percent of resource-rich countries, the World Bank promotes extractive indus- try transparency through institutional engagement (Bank Information Center and Global Witness. 2008). The Bank played an important role in convincing numerous countries to endorse the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI),7 and it has helped build capacity in anticipation of EITI implementation. Since the World Bank Group’s 2003 “Management Response to the Extractive Industries Review” (World Bank 2009a), the Bank has taken steps to enhance its support of resource-rich country clients and has put a greater emphasis on building and strengthening governance capacity in these contexts. 7. A voluntary program involving the public reporting of revenues from the extractive industries: https://eiti.org/. 76 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Prior to 2008, most extractive industry-related endeavors were primarily focused on reve- nue disclosure and EITI-related activities. During the first phase of GPF implementation, the approach to tackling extractive industry governance challenges was neither consis- tent across countries nor comprehensive. The discovery of commercial quantities of min- eral and hydrocarbon reserves in countries with limited experience with extractives and weak governance capacity in addition to the prolonged commodity price super cycle that made the exploration and production of extractives attractive, has increased the demand for a better understanding of this governance challenge. In addition, the World Bank’s reprioritization of natural resource management in Africa demanded that greater attention be paid to the needs of the client and to the develop- ment of well-structured interventions that support country priorities. The GPF, recognizing the importance of these issues, initiated a range of initiatives aimed at better understand- ing the relationship between resource dependence, institutions, and the quality of gover- nance and sustainable development in resource-rich developing countries. Beyond Supply and Demand: A Political-Economic Conceptual Approach In an attempt to unbundle extractives industry governance dynamics, the GPF funded Rents to Riches (Barma et al. 2013), an analytical study building on 13 country case stud- ies of resource-dependent developing economies in Africa, East Asia and Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean. The study seeks to make sense of suboptimal natural resource management and suggests improved policies focused on two central political economy dimensions: (1) the degree to which governments can make credible inter-tem- poral commitments to resource developers and citizens and the degree to which they can sustain durable sector policies; and (2) the degree to which governments are inclusive and inclined to turn resource rents into public goods and sustainable development outcomes. The analysis emphasizes the notion of good fit—welfare-promoting policies, institutions, and governance must be tailored to specific country contexts. An analytical framework for assessing a country’s political economy and institutional environment in relation to natural resource management is presented and, targeted, technically sound recommendations that are compatible with identified underlying incentives are offered across the natural resource value chain. Embedding the value chain into the framework offers a compre- hensive assessment of the governance and political economy parameters that affect a resource-dependent country’s ability to transform rents into wealth. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 77 Rents to Riches has been used in operational work in seven African countries. In Angola, a political economy analysis (PEA) led to an improved understanding of the downstream segment of the extraction value chain, which served as an input for the Country Assistance Strategy. In Ghana, Nigeria, and Niger, as a result of in-depth case studies, a PEA gener- ated an ongoing dialogue among country teams. In Madagascar, the country team ben- efitted from ongoing diagnostic work on natural resource management. Lessons from these analyses have helped ensure a better fit with underlying, on-the-ground social and economic dynamics. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, a PEA supported the national government with the preparation of PROMINES, a project aimed at promoting reform along the full value chain of the country’s mining sector.8 PROMINES combined early investments in government capacity for managing the mining sector with a more in-depth analysis of necessary long-term reforms and the creation of multi-stakeholder account- ability platforms that would allow government, civil society, and the private sector to dis- cuss and agree on a strategic vision for the development of the country’s mining sector. In Burkina Faso, a PEA of local governance issues was instrumental in helping the project team design the social accountability component for the Mineral Sector Development Project; it was used to further guide contributions in support of civil society activities in the sector. The GPF also funded the development of the Framework on Extractives Industries Governance.9 Developed in partnership with The Policy Practice, it was intended to sup- port improved upfront analysis on likely governance constraints within the sector at the country level and across the extractive industry value chain. This kind of analysis provides quality-at-entry for engagement in the sector, supporting the sustainability of the project over the long term. Because the political economy framework demands a high level of technical skills, the framework is designed for a nontechnical audience—mainly civil society actors in countries that are emerging producers, such as Tanzania, Ghana, Mozambique, Uganda, and Kenya—with a great interest in averting the well-known “resource curse.” The framework has stimulated an insightful conversation about accountability, capability, and inclusiveness. It has also helped donors target interventions that are more likely to generate sustainable outcomes on the ground. 8. PROMINES is a technical assistance project aimed at strengthening the capacity of key government institutions in the Democratic Republic of Congo to manage the mining sector, improve conditions for increased investments and revenues from the sector, and help increase the socioeconomic benefits from artisanal and industrial mining. 9. http://thepolicypractice.com/publications/towards-a-framework-for-extractive-industries-governance-assessment/. 78 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The World Bank has begun grappling with challenges presented by governance struc- tures and dynamics specifically pertaining to the extractives industry, identifying the con- tours and details of existing conditions and problems relevant to this work. This type of analysis forms a fundamental base for developing sound governance reform agendas. Focus on the Frontier A handful of GPF grants, including work on accounting standards in Nigeria; nontax revenue collection in Indonesia; improving mining revenues in Odisha State, India; and procurement process reform in Guinea, were mostly for technical assistance/capaci- ty-building projects focused on increasing the transparency of extractives revenues. A GPF grant funded a global pilot project aimed at embedding EITI revenue reporting into national government fiscal reporting systems as part of its efforts at creating evi- dence-based capacity-building activities. Based on initial country assessments, a number of core issues merit attention: • Institutional arrangements, procedures, and systems. Weak institutional capacity is often amplified by the fact that the responsibility for managing and receiving reve- nues from the extractives sector is fragmented among several institutions with nonin- tegrated systems. • Non-tax revenue administration. Most nontax revenues are separately collected by a government agency that manages energy- and mining-related issues. As a result, detailed information is not usually captured in financial management information sys- tems, and nontax revenues—self-assessed by companies—are not recorded prior to payment. • Timeliness of EITI reports. The process of EITI reconciliation, completion, and publi- cation can take several years. Such delays limit the relevance of EITI reports and ham- per their ability to directly feed into policy and budgeting processes. In addition, the EITI reconciliation process is completely disconnected from the public account. GPF support could potentially improve the effectiveness of fiscal reporting systems in the extractives industry, which would enhance transparency in the sector and provide an opportunity for increased revenue that would hopefully be used on behalf of the country’s entire population. In addition, increased transparency promotes democratic debate on how extractives wealth should be handled. Furthermore, improved fiscal reporting makes information available in a more timely fashion, reducing the need to allocate time and 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 79 resources to reconciliation across different reporting frameworks. It also allows the focus to be on supporting more informed policy making on revenue capture and management. Recognizing the problem of underdeveloped accountability mechanisms, some GPF grants engaged demand-side concerns, working on improving the capacity and oppor- tunities for meaningful participation in extractive industry governance processes by civil society, local communities, the media, and parliamentarians, particularly in terms of mon- itoring and overseeing extractive industry governance across the value chain. The cre- ation of opportunities for civil society and communities to participate in multi-stakeholder dialogues around extractives industry issues was an important dimension for numerous grants in Ghana, Mongolia, and Burkina Faso, among others. In Ghana, GPF grant activ- ities have led to increased capacity and knowledge of civil society organizations (CSOs) in processes and elements of transparency and accountability, particularly in the oil and gas sector. There was continuous regulatory research, policy analysis, and advocacy led by CSOs, which resulted in improved CSO engagement. The publication of the EITI annual report, the CSO review of the exploration management and production bill, and a CSO-led citizen summit on the oil and gas sector contributed to improved transparency and accountability among government actors. In Mongolia, the GPF undertook a comprehensive approach with demand-side stakeholders, targeting CSOs, the media, and parliamentarians. The grant funded the development of standards on budget transparency and openness for local governments through a multi-stakeholder consultative process. The standards were piloted at the central and local levels in rural and urban locations with a view to drawing lessons and recommendations for their potential adoption on a national scale. A website on budget information—www.iltodtusuv.word- press.com—was created for each target area. The GPF grant provided training on parliamentary research, budget oversight, extractive industries, and the legislative process. Under the grant, an independent think tank assisted the development of the Economic Research Institute. The think tank continued making progress through the funding of research grants about the socioeconomic challenges of the resource boom. It provided guidance to the civil service reform working group on pay reform and performance-based budgeting options under the cabinet secretariat. It pro- vided a series of training programs on social accountability tools, community scorecards, citizen report cards, public expenditure tracking surveys, and constructive engagement for CSOs. It funded capacity building for local media in partnership with the Press Institute 80 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy of Mongolia and its Economic Journalists Club, with a focus on improving the capacity of journalists to produce quality stories. As a result of these efforts, the grant created an effective demand for accountability by citizens and civil society in Mongolia. In Burkina Faso, a civil society extractive watch group was formed to monitor the performance of the extractive sector. Further, a Burkina Faso think tank prepared a discussion paper on local mining issues and hosted a dissemination and discussion forum chaired by the pres- ident of the chamber of mines and attended by 30 government ministry representatives in addition to parliamentarians, local mayors, a mining company, CSOs, and development partners. Focus on Knowledge and Partnership The GPF has supported platforms that are internally and externally open to disseminate knowledge products developed during its lifespan, including: (1) the creation of a nat- ural resource management website available to staff and the donor community on the governance and anticorruption portal—https://www.governanceknowledge.org/nrm/ default.aspx; (2) the delivery of regional learning exchanges among new extractive pro- ducers, bringing lessons from demand-side accountability work from oil and gas devel- opment in Ghana to other country management units in Uganda, Nigeria, and Tanzania, among other countries; and (3) the transfer of innovative project components, such as the multi-stakeholder accountability platform developed in the Democratic Republic of Congo, to a similar effort in Cameroon. The GPF supports the Extractives for Development Initiative (E4D), a global partnership of multi-stakeholders committed to helping oil, gas, and mining-endowed developing countries leverage their resources for development and poverty reduction, strengthening coordination of the World Bank’s internal and external extractives initiatives. The core team of the E4D partnership includes the World Bank Group, the International Council on Mining and Metals, the World Economic Forum, and the Natural Resource Charter. Together with its partners, the E4D initiative is exploring approaches for better syner- gizing efforts at enhancing natural resource management and delivering integrated and effective extractive industry governance programs at the country level. Within the World Bank, the E4D initiative serves as a coordinating framework for the various World Bank departments working on extractive industries. A notable achievement of the E4D initia- tive is the creation of the Extractive Industries Sourcebook (www.eisourcebook.org), which provides developing states with a technical understanding and practical options around 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 81 frontier topics in oil, gas, and mining sector development issues. The sourcebook con- tains a rich repository of data on Africa (the most extensive to date), including online interactive geo-data maps and new research on fiscal transparency, artisanal and small- scale mining, and resource corridors. There is also a link to a dynamic online Community of Practice comprising almost 2,500 practitioners from government, civil society, and the private sector (www.goxi.org). Users can share new ideas, connect to a worldwide commu- nity of experts, and engage in dialogue around emerging issues. The GPF recognizes new emerging aid donors in the extractive industry development arena, such as Brazil, India, and China, which is increasingly changing the international aid architecture. Aid used to flow in one direction: from the richest industrialized nations to the developing world. The situation is now more complex. Aid moves across the South; old definitions of developed and developing are losing their meaning. In this context, the GPF, in collaboration with the British Embassy in China, is funding a close collabora- tion and partnership between the World Bank and the Chinese government with the aim of supporting China improve its impact in overseas mining investments, including close collaboration organizing the Mining Congress. The Chinese government has expressed interest in further developing a partnership to support infrastructure and mining project preparation in Africa and other relevant regions. This type of collaboration would benefit from improved harmonization between the involvement of traditional donors and new actors in the international development scene. Beyond the GPF In anticipation of the GPF’s closure in June 2015, the Secretariat, in collaboration with the Natural Resource Governance Institute, hosted a half-day discussion about moving forward to support natural resource-rich countries in managing hydrocarbon and mineral wealth. This session was part of the New Directions in Governance conference,10 jointly organized by the GPF and the Overseas Development Institute. The meeting fostered an exchange of insights and experiences from the broader community of actors working on these issues with the goal of informing a strategic framework for engagement that would guide the future work of the World Bank. The conversations focused on how to build on the work accomplished to date, how to support emerging priorities in the field, and how to identify where the World Bank’s comparative advantage lies. This session brought together World Bank staff from headquarters and the field with key donors in the 10. http://www.odi.org/events/4007-new-directions-governance. 82 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy space, such as United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) and Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT); partners such as the EITI and Natural Resources Governance Institute; CSO networks such as Publish What You Pay; and new players such as Open Corporates, which focuses on beneficial ownership aspects. Recognition was given of progress made with regard to this agenda, but a consensus was reached that there is still more that must be done to ensure that petroleum and mineral resources translate into tangible development benefits. Progress on transparency must be matched with greater accountability. Emerging priorities identified during this event include: • Harnessing the growing flood of extractives data to better translate into accountabil- ity, including how to effectively deliver information in an accessible way that responds to stakeholder needs and that addresses information asymmetries, whether across dif- ferent parts of government, between contracting parties and civil society, or between the private sector and government counterparts. • Finding ways to support meaningful civil society participation in extractives gover- nance processes, focusing on civil society capacity and space in which nonstate actors can effectively operate. • Tackling frontier issues with highly technical elements, such as transfer pricing, con- tract renegotiations, commodity trading, and quality of host government information systems. • Prioritizing countries with recent resource discoveries to support the strengthening of governance from the outset, in recognition that early decisions have critical ongoing effects and that there is a need to manage expectations. On December 10–11, 2014, a two-day follow-up meeting was organized at Columbia University in New York. The event brought together bilateral and multilateral donors, pri- vate foundations, delivery partners, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to work on improving the governance of extractive industries, to discuss their work, and to help the World Bank and others strategize approaches with a heightened awareness of the field around them. Discussions over the two-day meeting affirmed the magnitude of the challenges confronting the field and brought to light a high degree of consensus on the nature of the key extractive industry governance challenges moving forward, such as clos- ing civic space, commodity price volatility, frontier producer concerns, the intersection of the governance of extractive industries and climate change, and the engagement of emerging market actors. The meeting underscored the need to integrate existing and 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 83 prospective lessons from past engagements into future strategies and approaches, a process that will necessarily involve more investigation and analysis to broaden global knowledge in the area. Finally, the group explored potential opportunities for pursuing collective impact around specific challenges or issue areas, including assisting new pro- ducers in East Africa leverage the extractive industry for the region’s people and promot- ing general sound economic development; creating a data source on a variety of issues to serve the policy-level goals of the governance of extractive industries; compiling publicly available system-level data about company operations; and generating and agreeing to a paradigm for how to define data sets and uses. Other issues discussed include identify- ing key challenges for data use and development of a model of data use/dissemination mechanisms; pursuing a harmonized approach among donors and continuing a dialogue among global partners such as China; and increasing the role of the private sector. The workshop led to the creation of mini-subgroups to identify some of the important discus- sions and themes emerging from the meeting. The subgroups were further separated into taskforce groups to collaborate and coordinate on key identified issues. The Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Extractives Global Practice Support, led by the World Bank, will be the securer for the GPF.11 Based on lessons learned from the GPF, it will continue to unbundle extractives governance challenges and act as a platform for organizing extractive industry governance engagement at both the global and country level, in coordination with bilat- eral and multilateral donors. Procurement and Open Contracting: Advancing Development Across Regions Public procurement, which accounts for an average of 15–22 percent of a country’s GDP, is a crucial component of democratic governance, poverty reduction, and sustainable development. From building roads and power stations to purchasing pharmaceuticals and securing trash collection services, every transaction has a substantial impact on public life. Many countries have made significant improvements to legislative and reg- ulatory structures for conducting procurement and have established officially mandated agencies authorized to oversee compliance with the new regulatory requirements, but this progress has not generated significantly better procurement outcomes. Difficulties implementing new procurement laws and resistance to changing behaviors are evident 11. The World Bank established a multi-donor trust fund for the Extractives Global Practice Support (EGPS) to support current and emerging resource-rich developing nations use their oil, gas, and mining resources sustainably and transparently for poverty alleviation and economic growth. 84 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy at all levels of government, and poor performance continues to undermine efforts at improving service delivery. Transformational Impact of Innovations in Procurement Several GPF grants have assisted countries pilot innovative approaches for implementing more effective procurement reforms. These pioneering initiatives have focused on apply- ing new technologies, such as e-Government procurement, to increase the efficiency and transparency of public procurement processes. The initiatives also seek to establish a role for civil society in monitoring public procurement contracts to improve the integrity of public service delivery and to more broadly engage in public procurement reforms. Knowledge exchange among practitioners and stakeholders has been facilitated across regions. The pilot approaches also had a wider impact on the way the Bank approaches public procurement. Modernized procurement modalities and enhanced accountability mech- anisms have been incorporated into the new Bank framework for procurement in invest- ment projects. This will change the way client countries approach procurement. New approaches such as open contracting, integrated e-government procurement, and data analytics, as well as the institutionalization of procurement as a profession, have demon- strated their transformational potential. The Bank, along with other development partners and partner countries, will continue to facilitate the diffusion of these new and promising practices toward achieving better procurement outcomes and increasing the trust among the private sector and citizens. Most notably, efforts are underway to establish a strong global partnership under a new Multi-Donor Trust Fund dedicated to public procurement in order to scale up the application of proven innovative solutions and cutting-edge tools in the context of the GPF and other reforms. Drivers of Change for Improved Procurement Performance GPF grants have increased the knowledge base around the dynamics of changing public procurement practices. Political economy analytics included the examination of the polit- ical context of procurement reforms; ways to improve quality in three African countries at the central government level and in Indonesia at the provincial and local government levels; and ways to support the collection and analysis of procurement information and the demand side of procurement, including third-party procurement monitoring. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 85 In several countries, the consultation process identified a significant performance chal- lenge faced by public oversight agencies: scarce human and financial resources. In addi- tion, the agencies have little political leverage over the government agencies responsible for implementing procurement, limiting their ability to comprehensively oversee the pro- curement processes of various sectors and agencies. One way to strengthen the role of procurement oversight agencies is to facilitate their engagement with civil society and private sector organizations interested in strengthening the public procurement system to jointly monitor, share information, and advocate for better procurement practices. This demand side of accountability can complement the role of the procurement oversight agencies. Civil Society Monitoring and Open Contracting Civil society monitoring helps ensure that technical specifications and procedures are followed and that the intended beneficiaries of public procurement receive the goods, works, and services. The GPF has been crucial in pioneering civil society monitoring of procurement; establishing the foundation for the Open Contracting Initiative, which aims at improving open and inclusive governance by promoting transparency and participation throughout the procurement process; ensuring that pubic resources are efficiently man- aged and that citizens receive quality services and goods. The transformational potential of civil society monitoring and open contracting relies on building capacity among a wide range of stakeholders to disclose and use contracting data and to collaborate and co-cre- ate solutions to help ensure that the procurement performance is as effective as it can be. GPF grants have supported the launch of multi-stakeholder coalitions and networks for procurement monitoring in four West African countries and five East and Southern African countries. These networks involve government organizations, the private sector, and civil society working together to create enabling environments that facilitate non- state actor participation in procurement monitoring and that advocate for procurement reform and improved procurement performance. In Ghana, Rwanda, and Zambia, formal procurement monitoring and feedback agreements were signed, and specific measures were implemented. Education, health, and roads are among the main sectors of interest. Organizational network analyses were conducted with coalitions in Uganda and Kenya to better understand network dynamics and key factors for success. The coalitions have established themselves as credible and well-functioning multi-stakeholder networks. 86 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The GPF collaborated with the regional Affiliated Networks for Social Accountability network to provide active support for procurement monitoring in East Asia and Pacific, including the training of CSOs. Outputs from this program have been used in CSO mon- itoring of public procurement in country programs in Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia, and Mongolia. Box 6.1 illustrates the Mongolian experience. Box 6.1. Supporting Civil Society Oversight of Public Procurement in Mongolia Opportunity. After its procurement law was revised in 2011, Mongolia placed public procurement transpar- ency and participation at the forefront of its agenda. A central procurement agency was created, local govern- ments took more substantial roles in procurement, internal controls were enhanced, and for the first time, civil society acquired a formal role in evaluating bids and monitoring contract compliance. Goal. The goal of the GPF grant was to support the ministry of finance and the efforts of Mongolian civil society to institutionalize civil society participation in the public procurement process with the aim of increasing the transparency and efficiency of the procurement process and contributing to sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. Supporting multi-stakeholder coalitions to enable procurement reform. In 2012, a GPF grant helped launch the Public Procurement Partnership, a network of about 60 civil society organizations (CSOs), to help imple- ment the new law through awareness-raising, participation, and accountability around public procurement. The GPF grant supported the secretariat of the partnership, helped redefine a five-year strategic plan, and facilitated consultations with the government. Partnership agreements were formalized and signed between the Public Procurement Partnership, the ministry of finance, and local governments to prepare implementing regulations for CSO monitoring and to pilot procurement monitoring activities at the subnational level. Outcomes. Excellent progress was made in establishing the CSO partnership and in influencing rules and guidelines. Peer-to-peer learning was facilitated in collaboration with the Affiliated Networks for Social Accountability. In partnership with government agencies, Public Procurement Partnership members started monitoring the implementation of contracts, especially in the roads and construction sector. As a result, CSOs were able to influence the procurement planning process: a road maintenance plan was revised to include roads prioritized by the monitors; roads were registered for the first time, which made planning for their main- tenance possible; technical requirements for future roads were changed to include drainage; and one Public Procurement Partnership subnetwork was invited to join a working group to develop the next road master plan. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 87 Cross-Regional Learning GPF grants helped organize a variety of regional and global events to facilitate cross-re- gional learning. For example, workshops organized in West and East Africa supported the development of country- and regional-level action plans for country teams to imple- ment with the decisive involvement and support of procurement oversight agencies in nine African countries: Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Liberia, Ghana, Uganda, Kenya, Zambia, Rwanda, and Tanzania. This collaboration strengthened the oversight roles of the pro- curement oversight agencies, motivated them to proactively support the disclosure of information on procurement, and established feedback mechanisms between civil society and government. The Procurement Innovation Challenge, a knowledge competition designed to identify best practices for improving public procurement performance through the experience of practitioners, was another innovative and prominent initiative funded by the GPF. Participants used the competition to identify common challenges, lessons learned, and solutions as they became increasingly aware of trends in public procurement innovation. The competition served to enhance both knowledge and skills because more than 60 case studies about innovative approaches to procurement reform were collected and documented. The result was a successful online and printed publication featuring the top 15 case studies, including stories from Liberia, Nigeria, South Sudan, Korea, and the Philippines. The stories in these case studies inspire both the government and nongov- ernmental organizations to work toward improved procurement performance. The events and experiences of the GPF underscore the need for fostering additional knowledge exchanges among practitioners and regions. Much of the information and developed tools are now available through the Open Contracting community. Electronic Government Procurement Experience has shown that even when a country has a procurement law in line with good international practices, and even if appropriate functional capacities have been estab- lished to effectively implement the law, procurement management in a traditional paper- based environment is fraught with challenges and vulnerabilities. The application of modern technologies, particularly Electronic Government Procurement (e-GP), promises enhanced efficiency, transparency, accountability, and fairness for all market participants, and has the potential to result in substantial savings in terms of transaction costs for both 88 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy the public and the private sector, which would stimulate private sector growth and the efficient use of scarce public resources. The GPF has supported a number initiatives aimed at achieving very tangible and con- crete results related to the application of e-GP. The CGAC program for Albania included a subcomponent aimed at increasing transparency through e-government. The exist- ing Albanian e-GP system was audited and eventually accepted as compliant with Bank guidelines, making Albania the first country in the Europe and Central Asia Region whose e-procurement system was accepted as compliant. The system was piloted and effec- tively used in the Secondary and Local Roads Project. Other activities were focused on strengthening the integrity and reliability of the e-procurement system, which is expected to improve transparency, increase bidder participation, and reduce corruption opportu- nities in public procurement. A two-day workshop in Tirana, Albania, brought together e-government practitioners from Estonia, Britain, India, and other countries. Participants included 30 government officials from multiple ministries and agencies. Overall, the GPF has provided ample opportunities for piloting innovative approaches to implementing public procurement reforms. Efforts have been informed by a deeper understanding of the drivers of performance improvement, and the GPF has substan- tially contributed to cross-regional learning and the exchange of relevant experiences and knowledge. ieGovern Initiative The GPF was instrumental in facilitating the flagship event for the ieGovern Initiative12— the January 2015 Impact Evaluation Design Workshop in Istanbul, Turkey. The event convened over 180 participants across client governments, World Bank operations, and academia, representing 28 projects from across the Governance Global Practice. It was the largest impact evaluation workshop ever hosted by the World Bank. The workshop paired each participating project team, comprising project staff and key government counterparts, with a team of researchers—leading scholars in field of the project’s operations. Teams were exposed to the methodologies and practicalities of embedding independent evaluations into operations with the goal of developing a rigor- ous design that could be built into the launch of the project. 12. http://www.worldbank.org/en/events/2015/01/05/dime-impact-evaluation-in-governance#1. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 89 The participating projects included the following sectors: civil service reform, justice, pub- lic financial management and procurement, and decentralization (see table 6.1). A subset of these projects will be chosen based on their technical rigor and policy relevance and will represent the future research agenda of the ieGovern Initiative for the next several years. Table 6.1. Participating Projects—Impact Evaluation Design Workshop Country Title Team Leader IE Question Civil Service Reform Ethiopia Public Sector Capacity Berhanu Legesse Ayane — Building Program Guinea Public Sector Governance and Shiho Nagaki How can newly recruited HR Directors in line- Accountability Project MDAs be more effective at doing their jobs? Jamaica Strategic Public Sector Marcelo David Buitron What behavioral interventions can improve pro- Transformation cessing of payments? Liberia LR-Land Administration Hardwick Tchale How does different types of contracting of survey- ers affect formal registration and recognition of land rights? Nigeria State Employment and Atul B. Deshpande Can vocational training coupled with jobs, Expenditure enhance productivity, skills creation, and employ- ment sustainability? Pakistan PK Sindh Public Sector Zubair Khurshid Bhatti/ Can ICT-based monitoring tools improve quality of Management Reform Umar Nadeem public infrastructure projects? Justice Azerbaijan Judicial Services and Smart Amitabha Mukherjee What is the most efficient form of providing legal Infrastructure Project aid: stationary or mobile? Jamaica Citizen Security and Justice Bhavna Sharma and How do job placement programs reduce the risk Programme (DFID) Sarah Barnett factors for crime and violence? Jordan Impact of Legal Aid on Poor Paul Prettitore How can demand be improved quality and Women efficiency of the judicial system? Which type of training works? Kazakhstan Justice Sector Institutional Amitabha Mukherjee Can training of judges improve quality and Strengthening efficiency of the judicial system? Which type of training works? Kenya Judicial Peformance Nicholas Menzies What is the most effective way of reducing case Improvement backlog and improving case clearance rates? Kyrgyz Judicial Development Project Klaus Decker/Georgia How do improvements in court infrastructure Republic Harley impact access and perceived efficiency of justice for (M)SMEs? Pakistan KP/FATA Governance Reforms Sher Shah Khan What are the key barriers to citizen utilization of state-supported judicial system? Pakistan Peacebuilding Support to the Jonathn Patrick — Post-Crisis Needs Assessment (DFID) (continued) 90 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Country Title Team Leader IE Question Public Financial Management and Procurement Bangladesh Public Procurement Reform Zarful Islam and Ishtiaq What changes in procurement performance are Project II Siddique achieved by the implementation of E-GP? By capacity development program? Brazil BR Amazonas DPL Laura De Castro Zoratto How does the use of e-procurement improve effi- ciency, speed, and transparency in procurement processes? Colombia Colombia Compra Eficente Jorge Luis Silva Mendez How does purchasing school meals through and Cristina Gutierrez framework agreements help deliver the food in the school feeding program (price, quality, timeliness) Ethiopia Ethiopia PFM Project Parminder P. S. Brar How does rollout of IFMIS impact efficiency, accountability, and transparency of finance sys- tem? Which type of support to operators is most effective? Guatemala Revenue Administration Svetlana I. Proskurovska What is the value of adding third-party information Modernization and Karina Ramirez (e.g., custom information) to integral tax audits? Arras India Orissa Modernising Bhuvana Anand What is the impact of automation and citizen Economy Governance and engagement on reducing leakage in public food Administration (DFID) distribution system? Lesotho Public Sector Modernization Shiho Nagaki — Project Palestine Enhancing the Capacity Nazaneen Ismail Ali How do training programs for SMEs increase/facil- and of SMEs to Enter Into itate their participation in public procurement? Lebanon Government Contracts Swaziland Public Sector Modernization Raymond Muhula What is the effect of training and auditing on val- Project ue-for-money in health sector procurement? Decentralization/Subnational Public Sector Managment Colombia CO Subnational Institutional Pedro Arizti What are the effects of the subnational strength- Strengthening ening program on SNG’s management capacities and on public service delivery? Congo, Tuungane: Community Driven Helen Poulsen How does including a community scorecard Dem. Rep. Reconstruction Program and line ministry improvment program improve (DFID) accountability in local service provision? Mexico Protection Project Laura Chioda What type of oversight is more effective in prompting quality service in the National Crime and Violence Prevention Program: top-down or bottom-up? Somalia Community Driven Ivanoe Fugali What is the impact of adding additional safety Develoment Project (DFID) components, gender quotas, and unconditional grants on the effectiveness of community develop- ment interventions? Tanzania Urban Local Government Andre Bald What is the impact of reminders that empha- Strengthening Program size different motivations on improving revenue collection? 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 91 Impact Evaluations The GPF funded the design and initial implementation of several individual impact evalua- tions that now form the foundation of the ieGovern Initiative’s research portfolio. Six inde- pendent evaluation concept notes were produced and approved, and 10 initial research designs were developed in collaboration with the ieGovern project coordinator. An out- line of the research questions being explored by the projects is presented in box 6.2. Box 6.2. ieGovern Research Questions Country: Kenya Title: Judicial Performance Improvement Project Sector: Justice Research questions: • Does a change in the institutional conditions judiciary staff work under lead to faster case processing and better service offered to court users? • Is the slow case processing caused by a lack of motivation/effort from the relevant frontline providers? • Is the main explanation for the slow case processing the context in which court staff works? Country: Tanzania Title: Impact Evaluation of the Urban Local Government Strengthening Program in Tanzania Sector: Taxation and Decentralization Research questions: • What is the impact of behavioral interventions at the tax collector level on the efficacy of decentralized tax collection efforts? Country: Colombia Title: Does Centrally Coordinated Buying Get Better Meals to More Students? Sector: Procurement Research questions: • What is the impact of purchasing school meals through a framework agreement on equity of food supply, measures of value-for-money, and students’ learning and health outcomes? Country: Jordan Title: Assessing the Impact of Legal Aid Services in Jordan Sector: Justice 92 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Research questions: • Does increasing public awareness of the law improve individuals’ ability to access justice and resolve disputes? • Does access to legal counseling improve individuals’ justice outcomes and socioeconomic welfare? • Does access to free legal representation improve individuals’ justice outcomes and socioeconomic welfare? Country: South Sudan Title: Impact Evaluation Design for Training and Empowering Establishment Officers Sector: Civil Service Reform Research questions: • Which modes of training delivery—classroom, on-the-job, or combined—have the greatest impact on inter- mediate outcomes of civil servants’ knowledge and skills and on the final outcomes of on-the-job perfor- mance and behavior? Country: Colombia Title: Colombia Mobile Victims Unit Impact Evaluation Sector: Justice Research questions: • What are the direct impacts of delivering legal services through the mobile units at the procedural level? • Does the number of claims in-taken/registered increase? • Does the number of claims processed improve? • Does the number of payments made increase? Governance Boot Camp Fifty staff from Washington, DC, and 20 country offices representing a broad spectrum of expertise within the Governance Global Practice participated in the inaugural Governance Boot Camp in Annapolis, Maryland, from April 26–May 1, 2015. The training, funded by the GPF, was an intense and challenging week aimed at creating a shared governance identity and through a series of hands-on learning activities, developing new approaches to cross-practice collaboration, and providing value to internal and external clients. It was an opportunity to bring people with a wide range of skills together to improve countries, institutions, and governance environments. The training featured several prominent guest speakers, including Hart Schafer, Vice President Operations Policy and 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 93 Country Services, who opened with his Governance Global Practice Top 10 list. “Gov Talks” from Global Solution Leads were sprinkled throughout the week, inspired by the award-winning storytellers Anne Thomas and Kristin Pedemonti. Participants received real-time feedback on their proposed governance programs from Director Robert Hunja and former Country Directors Nick Krafft and Peter Harrold. By week’s end, participants and a panel of Governance Global Practice Directors reflected on ways to strengthen col- laboration. Mario Marcel, Governance Global Practice Senior Director, concluded with an inspiring personal story of his days as an activist during the years of Pinochet in Chile as well as his vision for the practice moving forward. Another speaker, Joel Hellman, former Chief Institutional Economist of the Governance Global Practice said the new Global Practice is based on the idea of building synergies across all aspects of governance work at the Bank. “This is the first opportunity to really test the muscles of this new practice and really think together about how we’re going to take advantage of all the skills we have in a different way. My hope is that by building on all of our expertise and by putting it together in different ways, we are able to come up with new answers to difficult problems.” Senior Operations Officer Ronnie Hammad, another speaker, expressed that the Governance Boot Camp was designed to foster a shared governance identity, and through a series of interactive plenary sessions and hands-on simulations, enable staff to better articulate the value proposition of the practice to the Bank’s internal and external clients, to work as one integrated governance team, and to be exposed to new ways of making projects and programs more effective. Hellman, Hammad, and Governance Advisor Yongmei Zhou of the Knowledge Learning and Global Partnerships of the Governance Global Practice shared personal stories on governance. Hammad had been faced with a gun-toting militia in Lebanon that forced him to think about oppression under civil conflict. Zhou recalled her days of student activ- ism in Tian’anmen Square, which directly conflicted with the views of her parents. “My brother had died as an infant when my parents were under arrest for political activism during the Cultural Revolution. My father said 1977–89 was the longest period of stabil- ity… and the students should not interrupt it. He had lost a son already, and he would do anything to protect his daughters.” 94 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The week’s agenda included learning activities on citizen-centered development, diag- nostic tools such as the systematic country diagnostics and country partnership frame- works, and insights from Problem-Driven Iterative-Adaptation and the Rapid Results Approach to pitch projects and programs to clients and country directors. Despite the rigorous schedule, participants such as Senior Economist Mediha Agar stated: “[the week ] was the most engaging, inspiring and out-of-the-box training event. We had excellent knowledge sharing sessions and case studies which forced us to think about our country-specific governance narratives and helped us understand that the richness of our staff’s diverse skills is one of the key features for our GP.” Nicola Smithers, Public Financial Management and Global Solutions Lead, agreed: “It was one of the best learning events I’ve attended. Key benefits included connecting with colleagues from across the GP, from the field, and headquarters and working through real operational exercises together. These were invaluable for team building, sharing expe- riences, perspectives, and know how. The positive energy among the group and the quality of design and delivery were outstanding.” Because of the pilot’s success, the Governance Boot Camp will be rolled out to a target of 400 staff over the coming year. Investing in staff development is a strategic priority, and the Governance Boot Camp will continue to play a key role in the quest to create a unified governance identity, developing new and innovative approaches to cross-practice collaboration, strengthening diagnostic tools, and designing high-impact projects so that the Governance Global Practice can provide increasingly valuable services to clients and stakeholders. Budget Transparency, Accountability, and Participation In many developing countries, the quality of public service delivery is low, evidenced by the high absence rates among teachers and healthcare providers and by leakages of pub- lic funds intended for schools, health clinics, and other social benefits. The plan for an inclusive budget process that integrates transparency, accountability, and participation is driven by the need to overcome these obstacles. An inclusive budget process involves close relationships between service providers, citizens using the services, and policy mak- ers. Citizens are able to access information about government allocations and provide 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 95 feedback to the government regarding revenues, grants, and expenditures. Policy mak- ers and citizens can hold governments accountable, influence budget allocations, and facilitate democratic legislation when they are allowed input during the budgeting pro- cess. Therefore, budget transparency, accountability, and participation are critical for strengthening governance and enhancing public service quality. In this context, the GPF has supported activities aimed at improving accountability and government performance through increasing transparency and participation. Initiatives allowed stakeholders to communicate ideas and information to the public and encouraged collaborative part- nerships between governments and citizens in public policy decision making and imple- mentation. The aim was to improve the transparency and accountability of government and increase public discourse regarding government expenditures by encouraging the demand side of governance. The publishing of budget information is expected to have a significantly positive impact on public policy and budget allocations. Discourse around such issues will ultimately increase demand for better public services and help develop the capacity of CSOs. In Cameroon, a GPF grant funded the implementation of the Budget Transparency Initiative (BTI), a pilot program in two regions of Cameroon—Northwest and Adamawa. The BTI took a new approach with dual goals: (1) to simplify, analyze, and disclose bud- gets at the national, district, health center, and school levels; and (2) to build awareness among government officials and citizens in a way that promotes a dialogue about public expenditures through social accountability. BTI activities targeted health clinic patients and staff, parents, teachers, students, local communities, mayors, local CSOs, and the media from more than 230 institutions (151 schools, 58 health centers, and 28 municipal- ities). In addition, a transparency index was developed to assess the budget openness and performance of local councils. The analyzed results of the first round of Adamawa’s budget transparency index were discussed at a public meeting called by the governor that included the media. The index was examined for a second time in the Northwest and Adamawa regions. These assessments were accompanied by concerted efforts to create awareness and engage citizens through innovative radio programs, theater, arts competitions, and newly established student budget clubs. A Facebook page for the Northwest region was created under this initiative, which allowed interested citizens to exchange views about budget transparency and facilitated the announcement of budget dissemination meetings. It also enabled the project team to remotely supervise activities during the pilot program. The Cameroon Budget Inquirer—a website that uses appealing graphics to represent national public investments, local council budgets, and the results 96 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy of the transparency index—was developed during the reporting period to increase bud- get transparency at all levels.13 The short-term tangible influences of the BTI include: • Increasing tax revenues. In at least one local council (Ngaoundéré III), tax revenues increased after a budget dissemination session because the council managed to raise US$1,527 in cattle taxes for the first time. The mayor attributes the change to activities under the BTI. • Empowering parent-teacher associations (PTAs). After the school’s budget was dis- closed at one school, parents reduced their contributions to the parent-teacher asso- ciations by 50 percent (from US$4 to US$2) because they determined that the school’s official funds were sufficient. • Increasing trust between citizens and officials. The disclosure of budget information and direct engagement with citizens increased trust of government officials, improv- ing relations among them. For instance, during a BTI radio program, the mayor of the council of Ngaoundéré was able to answer a caller’s question about a bridge he had promised to build. • Influencing priorities. Secondary-school students used dissemination meetings to express their concerns, and in some cases, were able to influence school priorities and decisions on resource allocation. • Reducing corruption. A school principal was forced to return approximately US$20,000 of misappropriated funds after students and parents revealed that he had levied fees on items already covered by the lump sum registration fees. In another case, a CSO galvanized by BTI exposed a corrupt health official. The GPF funded a collaboration in Nepal between the World Bank and Policy Research and Development, a local NGO, to implement the BTI pilot program, which promotes budget transparency and better governance at schools in Kaski, Dolakha, and Nawalparasi districts. Activities included gathering information on budgets and schools; creating sim- plified templates; training facilitators and concerned officials to accurately fill out tem- plates; and disseminating the collected information through brochures, public meetings, and media coverage. At the national level, a handbook on budget literacy was devel- oped, and workshops were conducted for constituent assembly members. At the sub- national level, budgetary allocations were disclosed, simplified, and disseminated to key stakeholders, including village development councils, district development councils, and 13. For more details, please see http://cameroon.openspending.org/en/. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 97 CSOs. In addition, a study analyzed how and when funds were released for education programs and how the allocations could better align with district priorities. The analysis revealed several gaps between policy and practice in subnational budget formulation and execution, with a mostly top-down process, a lack of cost-benefit analyses in budget allocation decisions, and delays in the communication of budget ceilings and release of allocated funds. In addition, the grant team worked with the local NGO Community School National Network to conduct social audit-related activities, including a gap analysis of the social auditing process in schools; training of social audit facilitators and the development of training material; the creation of social audit resource centers; and capacity-building for social audit committees in select schools. Results of the pilot have been disseminated through media, including posters, radio, television, and brochures. The social audit and good governance tools and techniques were circulated in schools in all 75 districts of Nepal. Moreover, a series of capacity-building interventions were conducted for assembly members and district-level officials to address the demand for budget-process training. At the community level, a gap analysis was conducted in 60 schools to identify dispar- ities between the guidelines of the mandated social audits and their implementation. Gaps in implementation were mainly due to poor capacity and insufficient information for enabling a full understanding of the responsibilities of various stakeholders. The BTI included a training program for master trainers and social audit facilitators. The facilitators, in turn, strengthened the capacity of the social audit committees and col- lected school-level data. A series of other tools and information materials were developed to support training efforts and the dissemination of information to school stakeholders, including My School At-a-Glance, a simplified template that outlines school-level demo- graphics and resources; School Governance Assessment Tool, a template combining information on the social audit process with information on the management of school finances and the conduct of the school management committee; and two Frequently Asked Questions publications to inform school stakeholders about the principles of good school governance and social audits. The tangible results of the BTI initiative include: • Creation of a cadre of social audit facilitators. A three-day program trained 30 social audit facilitators, strengthening the capacity of social audit committees in 60 schools. 98 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy • Improvements in school social auditing practices. A post-capacity-building assess- ment in 20 schools in one district found that a single iteration of social audit trainings significantly improved community-level capacity to monitor and improve over 50 per- cent of the indicators in the social audit guidelines. • Increased demand for budget transparency. Discussions with stakeholders at all levels revealed a high demand for budget simplification and disclosure. Stakeholders agree that these activities help prevent misuse of funds, enhance transparency, and increase community participation. The latest discussions with partner NGOs and gov- ernment officials confirm the ongoing enthusiasm for the initiative and positive feed- back from local communities. In Mongolia, the grant team provided technical assistance to subnational governments on budgets. Specifically, the team developed and disseminated open budget standards and budget simplification for provinces and districts. The grant helped establish a dynamic website for Mongolia’s ministry of finance by providing design assistance and developing skills and capacity of ministry staff to create, update, and upload content. In addition, the grant supported the development of a monitoring system to help the ministry track all budget-funded procurement and display the information on its website. The tangible influence of this specific initiative includes an improved Open Budget Index ranking. A reduced perception of corruption within the country led to an improvement in Mongolia’s Open Budget Index ranking from 18 in 2006 to 60 in 2010, prior to its 2012 decline to 51. In the Philippines, a GPF grant helped augment demand for consultative budget planning activities. Public engagement activities were organized in collaboration with the Open Budget Partnership, including a nationwide televised forum about budget priorities in 2013. The forum was an opportunity for the government to present the gist of its 2013 budget, which was to allocate more resources to community-identified needs in a process known as bottom-up budgeting. While this bottom-up budgeting was a popular initiative, CSOs continued to press government for more pro-poor spending and greater budget transparency. A particularly interesting innovation was a project with Rappler, a Manila- based organization of journalists with a keen interest in public issues. Prominent journal- ists offered capacity building in writing, communications, and the use of social media and the Internet to aid CSO advocacy toward budget reform. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 99 In Ghana, GPF-funded activities raised awareness and secured a government commit- ment to an action plan for joining the Open Government Partnership (OGP). As a result of GPF-supported broad-based consultations, an action plan was established in January 2013. Since that time, there has been progress in a number of OGP components. A num- ber of analyses and associated workshops in areas such as promoting fiscal responsi- bility, improving independent budget monitoring, and the use of cost-benefit analysis have encouraged sounder investment expenditures and provided a useful framework for discussions. The roundtables and workshops were helpful in building the networks and capacity necessary to undertake better-informed advocacy, despite having no direct or immediate results with regard to government transparency and responsiveness. In summary, these activities have created awareness and opened an arena for citizens to be engaged and participate in the budget process. Simplifying and increasing public access to government budgets will lead to better policies and more efficient resource allocations, which will ultimately result in higher-quality public services. In addition, the GPF-funded activities in various countries have created an environment that is conducive to promoting budget transparency, accountability, and participation. Moreover, the afore- mentioned projects are linked to existing World Bank operations, which ensures long- term sustainability even after the GPF closes. Right to Information—GPF Support in South Asia Much of South Asia suffers from a tradition of powerful bureaucracies and opaque proce- dures, resulting in poor service delivery, massive rent seeking, and weak citizen empower- ment. In recent years, access to information has emerged as a key element for the broader push toward greater accountability and transparency across the region. Today, all of the countries in the South Asia region have right-to-information (RTI) legisla- tion in place or are on the verge of enacting it. India adopted a path-breaking RTI law in 2005, marked by extensive suo-motu (routine) disclosure provisions, especially in devel- opment projects; the imposition of penalties on officers for noncompliance; an indepen- dent appeals process vested in central and state information commissions; and carefully circumscribed exceptions. 100 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Nepal enacted a RTI law in July 2007, partly in response to media pressure. It is ranked among the better laws in the world. Key priorities for implementing RTI in Nepal revolve around promoting greater usage of the law through public campaigns, training public officials in the administration of the law, and strengthening the information commission. Bangladesh also passed a law in support of RTI in 2009. Looking ahead, areas of potential assistance to the government include records management, suo-motu disclosure provi- sions, the establishment of an information commission, and institutional architecture to facilitate disclosure. In Sri Lanka, a coalition of journalists, lawyers, and civil society advocates have sought to push for the adoption of an RTI law by the government, but these efforts have been blocked by the deteriorating security situation. Nevertheless, the groundwork that could advance RTI as conditions improve does exist, including a draft RTI law that has won wide- spread informal approval from key actors. Pakistan is clearly moving toward a more democratic phase, with a declining role for the military and the reactivation of competitive politics. Pakistan enacted an ordinance to promote greater freedom of information in 2002, but its provisions were weak and inef- fective. A chance now exists for Pakistan to showcase RTI as a key element of its unfold- ing democratization process. The Pakistan People’s Party appears receptive to the idea of pushing RTI as part of its political reform proposals. An international seminar on RTI arranged by the World Bank in Islamabad was well attended and received by government and civil society. Thus, an opening exists across the region to assist a number of countries in the prepa- ration of RTI legislation (e.g., Sri Lanka and Pakistan), help others implement RTI legisla- tion more effectively (e.g., India and its states, Nepal, and Bangladesh); and advance a more transparent information-sharing regime, even in the absence of approved legisla- tion (e.g., Pakistan and Sri Lanka). Greater openness in disclosing information, financial or other, will also reassure domestic and foreign investors as they seek to participate in the region’s growth. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 101 Grant Objectives The main development objective of the US$1million grant was to boost accountabil- ity and transparency, as well as to curb opportunities for rent seeking by strengthening access-to-information regimes in the region, particularly in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Results • In Nepal, a paper titled “Towards Open Government in Nepal: Experiences with the Right to Information” was published by the Freedom Forum (Freedom Forum 2011); the country’s first RTI request tracking survey was conducted by Concerned Citizens for the Right to Information, and the team completed the final draft of a volume detail- ing the use of the RTI law in Nepal through case studies. RTI has also been included in the interim strategy note for Nepal. • In Bangladesh, the World Bank has made RTI a key focus of its Country Assistance Strategy. A baseline survey on the workings of RTI and the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee project has been completed, which promoted the use of RTI at the grassroots level through the creation of community infomediaries. • In India, an analysis of 20,000 RTI applications is underway, with preliminary findings to be shared at a technical advisory group (TAG) meeting in Bangkok. TAG seeks to pro- mote learning about transparency, provide advice on how to implement RTI regimes, and serve as a voice for RTI across South Asia and beyond. This analysis is seminal because it will help extract patterns from RTI requests, which could pinpoint areas requiring special attention by the government to improve proactive disclosure or sys- temic reform in processes of delivery. The work on RTI has also supported the World Bank’s work on e-governance in India. • In Pakistan, the GPF has provided support to the governments of Punjab, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provinces to frame their own draft RTI laws. This would provide a strong legal underpinning for transparency work in the Program for Results in Punjab. A two-day workshop was held in Dhaka on February 18–19, 2015, which brought together information commissioners, civil society activists, government officials, and legisla- tive members to assess the state of the RTI across all eight countries in South Asia and in Myanmar. The meeting was held in collaboration with TAG and Research Initiatives Bangladesh with support from the World Bank. 102 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The workshop was inaugurated by the Bangladesh’s cabinet secretary, who noted the important strides made by the country in implementing the RTI law. Key steps taken up in recent months to strengthen the country’s RTI regime included the creation of an RTI working group headed by an entire division of the secretary to drive RTI implementation within the government, the issuance of guidelines for more effective proactive disclo- sure, and the formation of district advisory committees to promote RTI across the coun- try. The cabinet secretary also released a two-volume set entitled Empowerment through Information (Bari et al. 2015), which provides the first detailed examination of the evolu- tion of RTI regimes across South Asia. Together, the two volumes provide a unique per- spective on the workings of RTI across all eight countries in South Asia. The first volume examines the processes that led to the adoption of RTI regimes in the first place, followed by an analysis of the current status of the regimes in the different countries in South Asia. It concludes with a set of case studies on how ordinary people have used RTI to effect change in their lives. The second volume presents two empirical studies: the first com- prises a comprehensive baseline survey on the implementation of RTI in Bangladesh; the second focuses on an analysis of how RTI has been used in India based on a sample of nearly 4,000 requests filed by individuals. Subsequent sessions reviewed the status of RTI across the region, which has greatly improved over the last six years. In 2009, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh were the only countries that had RTI laws in place (Pakistan had an ordinance). Since then, RTI has made further progress, particularly in Pakistan, Bhutan, Afghanistan, and the Maldives. Two major provinces in Pakistan—Punjab, and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa— enacted progressive laws in 2013 to promote access to information. The president of Afghanistan signed an access-to-information law toward the end of 2014. Bhutan has also framed a draft RTI law that was passed by the National Assembly (the lower house) in early 2014, but it was later withdrawn from the National Council (the upper house) due to a procedural issue. In 2014, the Maldives adopted an RTI law that has been ranked among the best ten such laws globally. In Sri Lanka, the newly elected president has committed to passing an RTI law within the first 100 days of government following his victory. Break-out sessions discussed the backward and forward linkages needed to sustain an effective RTI regime (records management is a backward linkage; using documents obtained through RTI in anticorruption proceeding is a forward linkage); extending RTI to private actors discharging state functions or funded by the state; improving the use of RTI 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 103 by women (there is a troubling gender gap in the use of RTI); and strengthening transpar- ency within political parties, particularly with regard to campaign finance. Key Findings and Lessons Learned Regional networks for RTI are essential. The grant supported the formation of a TAG and its work program. It met in New Delhi in 2010, Kathmandu in 2011, Patna in 2012, and Bhutan and Bangkok in 2013. The TAG comprises information commissioners, civil society figures, parliamentarians, and high-level officials from all of the countries in South Asia. It has emerged as a major source for ideas on RTI, which have fed into RTI processes in Pakistan, India, Bhutan, Nepal, and Bangladesh. A nodal agency is needed to implement RTI within the government. The GPF team sought to help create mechanisms within the government to operationalize RTI, resulting in the creation of an RTI cell in the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers in Nepal as well as the formation of an RTI committee within the cabinet secretariat of Bangladesh to oversee RTI implementation. It is important to provide high-quality technical inputs into draft RTI legislation. The grant supported the provision of technical advice in the framing of new RTI legis- lation, particularly in Pakistan and Bhutan. In Pakistan, it played a role in the framing of the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab laws as well as the new freedom-of-information law recently enacted by the national assembly. In Bhutan, high-level work relating to interna- tional experience with RTI were organized at the request of the Ministry of Information and Communications, and advice was provided on the draft RTI bill. Innovations to promote RTI should be fostered. The grant, working closely with civil society groups in Bangladesh and Nepal, developed innovative ways of promoting RTI, including work with the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee to design and create a group of community infomediaries to promote the sharing of information related to gov- ernment programs and services at the local level. A study conducted in Nepal involved filing RTI test requests to better understand problems encountered by RTI applicants and the public authorities responding to them. The stock of analytical work on RTI should be increased. A key problem in the region has been a lack of serious analytical work on RTI, which in turn hampers cross-state 104 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Box 6.3. Fighting Corruption in the Distribution of Free Medicine Background and Problem Aleya Begum, a resident of Saidpur, northern Bangladesh, wished to help a poor neighbor obtain free medical services from the local hospital, which she knew were available for the indigent. She took the neighbor to the hospital, but the staff refused to provide free medications and they treated her and the neighbor rudely and disrespectfully. Eventually, she was forced to pay for the medi- cines. When Begum described her experience at her Participatory Action Research (PAR) group’s weekly meeting, the group recommended that she file an application under the right-to-informa- tion (RTI) law asking the hospital authorities for information—specifically, if the government had provided the hospital with free medicine for distribution to indigent patients, the names of those medicines, and how much medicine had been provided by the government for free distribution in the last month. Application for Information: Applicant and Authority On September 28, 2011, with the help of an RTI mediator affiliated with her group, Begum filed an application with the designated officer of the hospital, asking for information under the RTI law. Description of the Case Within a few days of the submission of the application, Begum received a phone call from the hospital, asking her to come to see a designated officer. The officer praised her for her initiative to help a poor patient and promised to provide her with the requested information, which he then did. Result Aleya Begum shared her experience at the PAR group’s weekly meeting. She informed the group about all the medicines they were entitled to get for free from the government hospital. The group decided to publicize the list of free medicines to the local population. This experience significantly increased interest and confidence of the RTI law among the local population. Conclusion The empowerment paradigm—from knowledge to action—is a continuum. Mobilization and joint efforts provide good results. In this case, information about entitlements reaffirmed a sense of hope. The PAR groups have taken the initiative to inform others so that the public is made increas- ingly aware of their entitlements, allowing them to demand their rights. Source: Bari 2015. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 105 learning and the institutionalization of lessons. In order to address this gap, a series of studies was conducted on the evolution of RTI and its current status in various South Asian countries. The study also documented the use of RTI in key South Asian countries, includ- ing Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh. In addition, a random sample survey was conducted with 5,000 applications in India to understand how RTI is used in practice— mostly for grievance redress. In addition, the first baseline survey on the state of RTI in Bangladesh was conducted. Two books have been published as a set under the auspices of TAG: Empowerment Through Information: The Evolution of Transparency Regimes in South Asia (Bari et al. 2015) and Towards Open Government in Nepal (Freedom Forum 2011). RTI should be mainstreamed into Bank projects. RTI has been successfully embedded into Bank projects. The VAT Improvement Project in Bangladesh, for example, includes an important component relating to transparency in tax administration. Bolstering RTI has also been a key component of governance projects in Assam and Mizoram in India as well as of the Pakistan Punjab Program-for-Results. Box 6.4. Right-to-Information Regime—Profile of Users Based on 2005–08 Comparable Data and Findings • Approximately 200,000 right-to-information applications were filed from Indian villages in 2007–08. • During the same period, approximately 800,000 applications were filed from urban areas in India for an estimated total of 1 million. • Applicants were 95 percent male and 5 percent female. • The proportion of scheduled caste or tribe applicants was in line with their relative populations in India. • Thirty percent of rural applicants and 15 percent of urban applicants lived below the poverty line or came from antyodaya (Government of India definition for “poorest of poor” families). The number of applications increased fourfold over the last few years. The proportion of female to male applicants has only improved slightly. It remains abysmally low. Source: Bari et al. 2015. 106 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Conclusion As illustrated in the rich two-volume set, case studies from South Asia demonstrate how the RTI law is being used by the poor and disempowered to take on the rich—a modern David and Goliath story—with implications for good governance and transparency move- ments, and for the region, with some countries paving the way for the others. Challenges remain: there is a need to broaden the dominant narrative (how, when, and who should use RTI), and it remains to be seen if political establishments will continue to support the law over changing election cycles. But by activating core constituencies in favor of RTI among civil society, the media, and the information commissions of individual countries, the grant has created significant traction for a growing focus on RTI in the design of coun- try strategies and in promoting openness and transparency. Political Economy Analysis—Getting from “How” to “What” It is generally agreed that institutional change is fundamental to development. What is not as clear is which institutional challenges can be effectively tackled, how or when in a country’s development they should be, and who should do so (Booth 2014). The phrase “thinking and working politically” is increasingly heard in international development agencies, but evidence of the effectiveness of this approach remains scant. However, a recent Overseas Development Institute (ODI) paper presents seven cases of aid-funded interventions that demonstrate donors facilitating developmental change despite the odds. According to the paper, the call for politically smart, locally led approaches highlights the changes that needed in the thinking and practices of donors if they are to be effective facilitators of development change. Donors must be politically informed and make good choices regarding what issues to work on and which partners to work with. They also need to allow local actors to take the lead in finding solutions to problems that matter to them (Booth and Unsworth 2014). Since the mid-2000s, a growing number of teams across the Bank have undertaken polit- ical economy analyses (PEAs). This is consistent with the Bank’s overall effort to find solu- tions that provide not only a good technical fit, but that are also likely to be more feasible, given various stakeholder interests and incentives. PEA takes into account limited insti- tutional capacities, risks of elite capture, and the frequent failure of expected collective action. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 107 Political economy is explicitly mentioned in the Bank’s six institutional priorities identified by the World Bank sanctions process, and thanks to GPF funding and support, more anal- ysis is being conducted today than at any other time. PEA is increasingly seen as part of good development practice and has influenced mainstream practices in some sectors. The Bank’s work on leadership and coalition building demonstrate attempts to work polit- ically, albeit within its mandate. GPF Support to PEA PEA has gained momentum in the Bank since the adoption of the first governance and anticorruption strategy in 2008. Since then over 224 political economy studies have been conducted, culminating in the seminal volume, Problem-Driven Political Economy Analysis: The World Bank’s Experience (Fritz, Levy, and Ort 2014), which reflects on lessons learned and presents practical examples of how PEA has been applied. According to the Results Framework, 43 PEA studies were conducted in fiscal 2014–15. Notable examples of grants producing highly influential PEA include the Window 1 pro- grams in Nigeria and Afghanistan. In their completion grant reporting and monitoring reports (GRMs), 60 percent of the GPF task team leaders evaluated as satisfactory the extent to which their projects have helped identify political economy constraints in Bank projects. Within the Bank, a PEA Community of Practice was established that has helped to connect task teams grappling country-, sector-, and project-level issues. The number of develop- ment agencies, NGOs, and think tanks interested in utilizing PEA continues to grow, and in recognition of the substantial progress made, many of the agencies have contacted the Bank’s PEA team over the past three years to better understand its experience. Analysis of the mining sector has supported policy dialogue and engagement with citizens on the extractives industries in Mongolia, Tajikistan, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone. The paper “Natural Resources, Weak States and Civil War: Can Rents Stabilize Coup-Prone Regimes?” examines Botswana, Nigeria, and Sudan (Bodea 2012). Several analytical papers have been produced on energy subsidy reform in Syria, Jordan, Yemen, and Morocco. 108 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy GPF grants published key publications on decentralization, including a seminal book on the heels of the new Kenyan constitution, Devolution without Disruption: Pathways to a Successful New Kenya (Volumes 1 and 2), (World Bank 2012) which informs devel- oping agencies on local and decentralized government. Another book, Afghanistan in Transition: Looking Beyond 2014 (Hogg et al. 2013) has been a valuable source of infor- mation for donors and officials about a fragile state in transition. In addition, a paper on decentralization was produced for the grant activity in Liberia. Analytical reviews of citizen voice and accountability were also conducted under the aegis of the GPF, including a civil society paper in Burkina Faso; citizen options paper in Ghana; gender studies in Nigeria; as well as a study of local basic service delivery in Cambodia. Opening the Black Box: Contextual Drivers of Social Accountability was peer reviewed, published and disseminated in 2015 (Grandvoinnet et al. 2015). Activities carried out under Window 4 grants include a PEA workshop and papers on public financial management, such as “Pay Flexibility and Government Performance: A Multi-Country Study” (World Bank 2014f). PEA Knowledge Forums Several key dissemination activities and knowledge events were organized with the sup- port of the GPF, including a peer-learning workshop in April 2012. Following the publica- tion of Rents to Riches, a book launch event was held in Washington, DC, in January 2014. It was followed by two dissemination events in London in June 2014, and a follow-up presentation at a GPF conference in London in the Fall of 2014. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) expressed an interest in hosting an event thereafter to discuss key insights of the publication. Findings from the volume were also presented at International Food Policy Research Institute in February 2015. Peer learning workshop. A workshop was held in April 23–24, 2012, in Washington, DC, and highlighted high-quality PEA from across regions and sectors. It had a tangible impact on Bank operations. The event brought together World Bank staff and managers who had commissioned, produced, and used PEA in recent years in addition to others inter- ested in learning more about its potential and value. The workshop focused on PEA work being produced and used around the Bank, ranging from just-in-time notes for directly informing operations, background notes for Country Assistance Strategies and Interim 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 109 Strategy Notes; chapters for Public Expenditure Reviews, Country Economic Memoranda, and other Economic and Sector Work; and self-standing reports. Speakers addressed the issue of how to calibrate PEA in a forward-looking way to better inform development engagement. Sectors and countries represented at the workshop included electricity and telecom in Zambia; natural resource management in Madagascar; subsidy reforms in Morocco; collective action electricity challenges in the Dominican Republic; local roads in Sierra Leone; and decentralization in Papua New Guinea, Tajikistan, and Ghana. A volume of eight good practice cases was completed (seven of which were presented at the conference in 2012) to ensure that clear quality examples of PEA are easily accessible within the Bank and among the wider development community. The cases demonstrate how PEA can be applied to specific development challenges and opportunities from dif- ferent sectors, highlight the range of empirical evidence that can be used, and explore the resulting recommendations and follow-up actions. The GPF conference. The PEA panel at the 2014 GPF conference was preceded by a sem- inar held at ODI. Both sessions highlighted four key challenges around PEA: bureaucratic barriers, policy environments, corporate incentives, and programming requirements. Participants discussed how to improve the work of donor organizations on the politics of development, which must be treated as a broad issue that includes human resources processes, procurement, and organizational management, as examples. The panel noted how essential it is to work with and support those trying to document and change internal ways of working and also seek other robust PEA tools that could be better deployed to understand what drives or prevents political change. PEA and Theories of Change14 are best used through ongoing dialogue and adaptation rather than as a one- off application of a tool. Monitoring politics, identifying and adapting to opportunities, and working across sectors require the time of knowledgeable and empowered staff. In conclusion, the panelists pointed out two problems: (1) donors need to spend large amounts of money on projects with measurable outcomes; and (2) more money must be spent on staff with expertise in specific country contexts. Staff members require addi- tional time and space to apply PEA to their work, but it can be difficult to allocate larger proportions of a budget to staff. 14. See http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/jsrp/2014/08/18/six-key-findings-on-the-use-of-theories-of-change-in-international-development. 110 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Doing Development Differently.15 The GPF conference brought together like-minded individuals from the ODI, academia, and elsewhere, who believe that development approaches and processes could be dynamic and significantly impact results and service delivery. The conference served as a catalyst for a workshop held at Harvard University in October 2014. Several GPF task team members participated in the event. Inspired by 13 case studies16 showcasing problem solving through local agents as well as on-the-ground lessons learned, participants agreed to form a Community of Practice and develop a man- ifesto for building a foundation and for expanding membership. The DDD Manifesto17 was developed in November 2014, with over 400 signatories from 60 countries from bilateral organizations, multilaterals, governments, academia, CSOs, and independent practitioners. The workshop at Harvard University was followed by an event in Manila, Philippines, in April 2015. The event, organized in collaboration with ODI and the Asia Foundation, was attended by approximately 50 practitioners from across the region, including represen- tatives from a number of donor agencies.18 Twenty-three articles and blogs were cited as background reading as well as 13 presentations and an ODI video on land rights reforms in the Philippines. ODI’s David Booth noted that the DDD Manifesto was too broad, and in the spirit of “letting 1,000 flowers bloom,” customized versions of the manifesto should be allowed. Moving Forward All aid has the potential to create winners and losers—to reinforce or challenge the polit- ical elite, the bureaucracy, or society as a whole.19 It is critical to understand these effects and be sensitive to opportunities and risks. PEA deploys a range of tools to explore the underlying political drivers, constraints, and opportunities for change. DFID has supported several programs that work through local actors to overcome political obstacles in sectors such as hydropower in Nepal, rice mar- keting in Myanmar, and budget and social sector reforms in Nigeria—with encouraging results. 15. See http://doingdevelopmentdifferently.com. 16. See http://doingdevelopmentdifferently.com/videos. 17. See http://doingdevelopmentdifferently.com/the-ddd-manifesto. 18. For more details on the event, see http://www.odi.org/events/4198-doing-development-differently-manila. 19. See “Busting 5 Myths about PEA,” by Stefan Kossoff: http://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/node/1056. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 111 However, with institutional incentives to lend and the project model and cycle being largely unchanged, forging an alliance between a politically sophisticated dialogue and operational engagements remains a work in progress at the Bank (Akmeemana 2015). Finding the right staff to mainstream PEA also remains a challenge. Country managers and directors who want to mainstream governance—as in the case of Nigeria—are the rare exception—not the rule. Nevertheless, continued effort is needed to include a politi- cal economy perspective in development work, to ensure that it become a part of regular practice, and to fully develop its potential for increasing development effectiveness. Multi-stakeholder Initiatives Over the past decade, there has been a rise of multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs)—ini- tiatives that seek to bring together a diverse set of actors into collective actions. These actors—or stakeholders—can be individuals or entities from the public or private sec- tor, academia, or civil society seeking to address pressing governance challenges for better and sustainable development outcomes. Using various means, MSIs seek to pro- mote improved government transparency, responsiveness, and accountability. They also address a broad range of sector-specific issues, including ensuring fair labor standards, access to medicine, and equal distribution of oil revenues. The GPF has been part of the dialogue for an increased awareness of MSIs, what they can achieve, and their overall effectiveness (see box 6.5). Examples of some MSIs include the EITI, the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST), OGP, and the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT). MSIs are changing the ways civil society participates in public governance reform. CSOs in Brazil worked with the government to improve public access to information as part of their commitment to the OGP. A multi-stakeholder group in Liberia worked to pass a natural resource revenue transparency law as part of their commitment to the EITI. A similar group assembled by the CoST in Guatemala successfully convinced the government to stop a large and inefficient public works contract for the reconstruction of the Belize Bridge in Guatemala City. A synthesis review undertaken by GIFT examined how South Korea, Brazil, and the Philippines have made extensive efforts to create new institutions and policies that encourage the participation of citizens and CSOs in complex policy processes. 112 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Box 6.5. Examples of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) promotes the open and accountable management of natural resources. EITI seeks to enhance government and company systems, and in each implementing country, it is supported by a coalition of government, private sector, and civil society. Countries maintain the EITI Standard—a fully transparent mechanism for oil and mining company payments to governments. Collective action through this MSI is encouraged through the formation of multi-stakeholder groups in every country that contributes to the EITI reporting and validation process. The Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST) was launched in 2012 to promote trans- parency and accountability in publicly financed construction. In each country, CoST is directed by a multi-stakeholder group working together to improve transparency. It is comprised of government representatives, private sector consultants and contractors, and civil society groups. By bringing together key stakeholder groups in a neutral setting, CoST improves the effectiveness and value- for-money of construction projects, and increases demands for greater transparency. The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a global effort to secure commitments from govern- ments to promote transparency and accountability and to harness new technologies for strength- ening governance. OGP was launched in 2011 when the founding eight governments of Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, United Kingdom, and United States formally adopted the “Open Government Declaration” and announced their national action plans. Since then, the partnership has grown to 64 countries. GIFT, The Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency, works to advance global norms around fiscal transparency, to increase and improve peer learning and technical assistance, to align incentives, and to harness new technologies/open data to engage with the public. GIFT works with various stakeholders across sectors and regions who have become stewards of the initiative, including the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the International Budget Partnership—the key civil society organization where GIFT’s offices are located. Although this growth demonstrates the popularity of MSIs, as well as ways to deal with complex governance challenges that have proven difficult to address otherwise, the question as to whether or not MSIs are the best approach to collective action still remains. Since each MSI has its own theory of change, can different stakeholders have the same level of input? Because MSIs have been active for only a few years, is there any evidence of their effectiveness? And what are the political and legal environments that enable MSIs 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 113 to function effectively? The GPF was part of several forums in 2014 that addressed these and other questions as well as the goals and the nature of MSIs. Knowledge Forums A conference entitled “Increasing the Effectiveness of MSIs Through Active Collaboration” was held April 28–30, 2014, in Wilton Park, United Kingdom. Organized by the GPF in partnership with the Reos Partners, the Transparency and Accountability Initiative, and the Hewlett Foundation, the conference. brought together 40 stakeholders from civil society, business, and government, from 16 countries for an open and participatory dialogue. By the end of the conference, participants agreed that shared learning, experience, and collaboration were essential to improving the effectiveness of MSIs. According to the con- ference report, highlights include: • MSIs arose because existing models were insufficient. They may help identify solutions for large-scale, complex problems, but leadership, entrepreneurship, and adaptability are critical to ensure their success. • Since there is no common ground to facilitate all MSIs (and funders) to share lessons learned, common elements of success and failure, or areas of research and service impact, MSIs could benefit from a Community of Practice or joint platform to share insights. • In the midst of power dynamics and/or internal conflicts, effective facilitation of MSIs is essential to achieving their success. Capturing and identifying facilitation methods and tools for MSIs would be useful to enhance the process. If MSIs are to be meaningful contributors to change, MSI approaches and processes must be analyzed, particularly under broader governance ecosystems. Systematic, politically informed analyses would promote a better understanding of the role of MSIs, how they could be leveraged most effectively, and what additional approaches might be necessary to ensure their sustainable impact. Participants also committed to leverage MSIs more effectively by developing a starter kit, strengthening local facilitation capacity in select countries, and sharing knowledge and learning activities such as webinars about how to measure impact. They agreed to recon- vene to further the conversation. 114 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy The dialogue was enhanced at “New Directions in Governance,” a GPF conference orga- nized in London. A deep dive session entitled “Governance in Extractives” indicated the emerging priorities in this field, including harnessing extractives datasets and finding ways to support meaningful civil society participation. There was strong interest from the World Bank Group and its partners to continue the discussion. The exchange resumed at a one-day forum entitled “Governance of Extractive Industries: New Opportunities and Strategies,” held at Colombia University in New York on December 10–11, 2014. Donor agencies and key civil society actors, including the Natural Resource Governance Institute, came together to help identify opportunities for collective impact in resource-rich countries. Participants, who included Robert Hunja, Governance Global Practice’s Director for Open Governance and Partnerships; Jonathan Atkinson, United Kingdom’s Department for International Development; and other key civil society actors from EITI, Open Oil, and Publish What You Pay, were focused on finding answers to ques- tions such as: “How can we build a shared understanding of priorities for advancing the governance of extractive industries over the next five years?” and “How can we identify what works and what does not?” Emerging priorities in the extractives field include harnessing the growing flood of extractives data arising from transparency initiatives and other sources to better translate it into better governance; finding ways to support meaningful civil society participation in the extractives governance processes; and tackling frontier issues with highly technical elements, such as transfer pricing, contract renegotiations, commodity trading, and the quality of the host government’s information systems. Finally, at a workshop organized by the Transparency and Accountability Initiative, held in Washington, DC, on February 11–12, 2015, participants discussed the topic: “What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here? Considering the Evidence Base and Sharing Knowledge on MSI Effectiveness and Impact in the Governance Sector.” The workshop brought together 60 participants from donor agencies, MSI boards and secre- tariats, as well as MSI practitioners from the government, civil society, and the private sec- tor. It focused on key questions, sharing insights and experiences, and jointly identifying emerging lessons to improve practice. To date, there has been no systematic investigation of the evidence for MSI effectiveness from which to understand what might be working and under what conditions. In order to 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 115 address this gap, the Transparency and Accountability Initiative commissioned a study20 to consolidate and synthesize existing evidence for MSIs addressing public governance challenges. Some of the key findings were: • Sources of evidence for effectiveness and impact remain scant. They include sin- gle-country case studies, collected but not reviewed; MSI strategy documents; multi-country studies; large quantitative studies; and cross-initiative studies. • One half of reviewed documents focus on EITI. They vary in scope and content. • EITI alone has been operating long enough to generate serious reviews of its medium- and long-term effectiveness. • CoST’s secretariat host organization (East Asia and Pacific) is currently being reviewed • OGP’s first independent evaluation will be completed in 2016. • Stakeholders report that, at the moment, “success” is still a fluid, negotiated concept. Politics (and funding) matter. Lessons Learned According to Open Society, most multi-stakeholder efforts “replicate existing power relationships and thus establish standards through processes that are far from genuinely democratic.” Other challenges include the following: • Relevance and connection of multi-stakeholder initiative goals and outcomes. Theories of Change reflect a specific understanding of the challenge MSIs seek to address. It is not surprising that a technical framing of governance problems leads to a technocratic approach to a solution. • Multi-stakeholder initiatives and civil society. Space is closed for civil society engagement and their actual representatives to influence MSI processes. Do MSIs increase CSO leverage with government actors and influence the decision-making process? The effort to figure out how initiatives can drive national-level reforms in spe- cific country contexts is a challenge in closing the loop. • Credibility issues. Issues with credibility could be related to a lack of political will or an inability to demonstrate results. The proliferation of actors and standards can over- whelm the capacity of governments and civil society groups and limit their ability to participate effectively. 20. See http://www.transparency-initiative.org/news/a-workshop-on-multi-stakeholder-initiatives-and-governance-what-did-we- learn-and-where-to-go-from-here. 116 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy • Political and legal environment. Because international initiatives intentionally set low bars for entry, the process might be blocked or co-opted by entrenched interests, and used to bolster the legitimacy of closed and less-than-democratic regimes (i.e., open washing.) For example, what if governments pass access-to-information laws— on paper—but release only enough budget data to meet the OGP eligibility criteria? • Power imbalance. Although MSIs increase access and standing for constituencies not represented in traditional interstate forums, most MSIs were created by traditionally powerful actors and may reproduce structural imbalances that favor them. Based on a request for research by Publish What You Pay International, in February 2015, MSI Integrity published the study, “Protecting the Cornerstone: Assessing the Governance of EITI Multi-Stakeholder Groups.” Over 40 EITI implementing countries were included in the study, which included an in-depth look at Azerbaijan, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, the Philippines, and Tanzania. While several countries have adopted innovative governance practices, most countries are still experiencing several shortcom- ings with regard to multi-stakeholder governance. In fact, none of the assessed countries met all requirements in EITI’s new rules—the EITI Standard. The report cited Tanzania, where CSOs were selected through a closed process; Nigeria, where multi-stake- holder group meetings provided limited access to information; and Cameroon, where critical governance provisions are missing from the multi-stakeholder group decree. According to MSI Integrity, MSIs must recognize that they need to set up monitoring and grievance mechanisms for when there are gross violations (MSI Integrity 2015). The les- sons from the EITI report show that MSIs involve power and balance between the actors coming together. Medicines Transparency Alliance, an MSI working to improve access, availability, and affordability of medicines for the poor and vulnerable in seven countries, acknowledges that working with the government is a balancing act, especially with regard to issues like corruption in the pharmaceutical industry. It is difficult to set up a structure, but MSIs can be a vehicle for change. Besides the EITI review, other MSIs are undergoing navel gazing efforts. The Transparency and Accountability Initiative will be collaborating with Global Integrity to carry out an in-depth review of OGP across several contexts. According to OGP’s research proposal, the findings will help them strengthen their existing structures and in understanding OGP’s impact over the short and long term. 5. Lessons Learned: From Seed to Harvest 117 Conclusion There is a need to clearly articulate and broaden knowledge about how MSIs work, espe- cially in global and national contexts, and with regard to how they contribute toward a more accountable and transparent government. While collaboration between MSIs is essential, thinking about new ways to unpack MSI theories of change, including whether or not they should even have one at all, is also necessary. For the World Bank and its donor partners, financing, incubating, and supporting country programs, as well as finding out what works and what does not, is critical to MSIs moving to the next stage of development. The Bank-led Global Partnership for Social Accountability has been a successful example of CSOs applying for social accountability project grants that seek to solve specific governance challenges in a country. In total, 42 countries have opted into the partnership—16 of them from Africa. Similarly, the newly formed Leadership, Leadership and Innovation lab seeks to bring together different experts for knowledge solutions with an emphasis on emerging technologies. After the success of Open Data Initiative and Mapping for Results, Leadership, Leadership and Innovation now seeks to “marry the know-how with the do-how” with multi-year, multi-stakeholder, and systems approaches to solving complex problems. These initiatives may not be sufficiently large, rigorous, or well governed to affect change, but MSIs can help create dialogues where there is a preexisting willingness to change— that is, if the MSI approach is demanding in terms of its selection process (multi-stake- holder groups), the legitimate and independent voices in the room (critical stakeholders), and outputs (reports). The goal is to urge more critical thinking among pro-reform actors about the contributing role of MSIs to good governance. Thinking about change in a more informed and systematic way will improve understanding about the role of MSIs, how they can best be leveraged, and what we can be done to measure their sustainable impact. 118 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy ANNEXES Annex 1: Results Framework Consolidated Results Chain (based on figure 2.1) 1 Met or Exceeded Target Step 3: Step 4: Steps 5 and 6: Step 2: GPF Outcomes Influencing Country Impact 2 Moderate Progress GPF Outputs (Selected Operations) Bank Practice and Beyond 3 Target Not Met Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 Goal: (Step 6) Improved country-level devel- opment outcomes Production of global gover- nance “public goods” Country-Level Impact (Step 5) Strengthened governance Indicators: CPIA The latest available data on CPIA ratings and public sector manage- Average CPIA scores for scores is from 2013 (published in 2014 at http:// ment (PSM) institutions International Development not yet data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/CPIA). Association countries: available The CPIA scores for the three public Data Sources, M&E Tools: 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 sector management dimensions have CPIA scores Transparency, Accountabil- remained unchanged since 2012. ity, and Corruption in the Identified Risks: Public Sector Long results chain influenced 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.2 by countries and other donors Quality of budgetary and Financial Management Quality of Public Admin- istration 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.9 2.9 Baseline: 0 Target: None Strengthened governance Indicators: No data No data A. 61 A. 72 A. n.a. A. n.a. The April 2015 corporate scorecard does and Public Sector Manage- Number of countries available available not report on the number of countries B. 57 B. 57 B. 72 B. 52 ment institutions through with strengthened PFM with strengthened public sector man- Bank operations systems in: C. 28 C. 28 C. 39 C. 34 agement systems in transparency and D. 27 D. 27 D. 34 D. 28 access to information. The Bank uses a Data Sources, M&E Tools: Transparency and Access A.  three-year rolling methodology to arrive World Bank Corporate Score to Information at the values of these indicators. As a Cards B. PFM result, both the 2013 baseline and the Identified Risks: 2015 actual values are updated in 2015. Civil Service and Public C.  Governance reforms are stalled According to the scorecard, there are Administration at country level improvements in two out of the three Tax Policy and Adminis- D.  World Bank operations in measured indicators: 34 countries have tration governance and public sector better civil service and public adminis- management (PSM) under- Baseline: NA tration compared with 29 in fiscal 2013. perform Twenty-eight countries improved tax Target: None policies and administrations compared with 24 in fiscal 2013. The number of countries with improved PFM systems has dropped by four. (Source: World Bank corporate score- cards, April 2015: http://pubdocs. worldbank.org/pubdocs/public doc/2015/5/707471431716544345/ WBG-WB-corporate-scorecard2015 .pdf.) (continued) Bank-Level Impact: Influencing Broader Bank Practice (Step 4) 120 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 1. The World Bank is more 1. Indicator: Overall Overall An endline QAG-type review was con- 1 effective in addressing global, Percentage of Bank oper- Assessment: Assess- ducted in 2014 as part of the indepen- regional, and country-level ations and Country Assis- 76/180 (46 ment: 82 dent evaluation of the GPF. It assessed governance impediments to tance Strategies are more percent) percent the progress made toward set targets in development sensitive to governance the analysis and implementation of GAC Governance Gover- in Bank operations since the implemen- Data Sources, M&E Tools: Baseline (2008): and PEA: nance and tation of the GAC strategy in 2008. The Analysis of governance sensi- 46 percent GAC respon- 81/180 PEA: 84 2009 review assessed and established tivity of World Bank operations siveness in operations as (45 percent) percent baselines for three dimensions of GAC: by independent repeat of QAG described in Quality Assur- GAC in GAC in governance and political economy, GAC type survey to measure prog- ance Group (QAG) report of Fiduciary Fiduciary in fiduciary aspects, and demand side of ress against 2014 target 2008 sample of World Bank Aspects: Aspects: governance. portfolio of projects Identified Risks: 116/180 2014 87 The repeat assessment in 2014 indicates GAC implementation stalls Target (2014): (64 percent) percent that all the GAC targets were exceeded. Overall GAC responsiveness Demand Demand Overall, 82 percent of operations were scores at least 65 percent in Side of Side of responsive to GAC (target 65 percent), sample of World Bank fiscal Governance: Gover- up by 36 percent from the overall GAC 2013 projects 76/180 nance: responsiveness of 46 percent in the 2009 Average 15 percent point (42 percent) 2014 baseline review, although there were improvement across 3 main target: 62 wide variations. Eighty-seven percent governance sensitivity percent of Bank operations were found to be indicators in the 2009 QAG responsive to fiduciary aspects (target survey 79 percent) and 62 percent were found Overall Assessment: •  to be responsive to demand side of 2014 target: 65 percent governance (target 57 percent). Governance and PEA: •  (Source: World Bank 2014f) 2014 target: 60 percent GAC in Fiduciary •  Aspects: 2014 target: 79 percent Demand Side of Gover- •  nance: 2014 target: 57 percent GPF Outcomes on Selected Operations (Step 3) 2. GPF accelerates Indicator: No GPF 108 139 97 124 39 2.1: GPF activities are very effective 1 World Bank sensitivity 2.1 Number of World projects projects projects projects projects at influencing World Bank projects at to governance Bank projects influenced operational preparation and implementation stages. by GPF activities to have During fiscal 2014–15, the GPF had an Data Sources, M&E Tools: better quality at entry and impact on 39 additional Bank operations. GRM by GPF-funded projects improved accountability at Together with the 124 projects influenced Analysis of data in World Bank implementation in 2013, the GPF has had an influence accounting system. on 163 Bank projects in the past three Baseline 2009: Interviews and surveys of Bank years—well above the final target of No GPF projects managers and staff and exter- 100 set in the GPF Results Framework. Targets: The value of projects influenced by GPF nal partners 2010: 50 projects continues to be in the billions. Statistics on training provided 2011: 60 projects by Human Resource Leadership 2012: 70 projects (Source: GRM reports.) and Human Development Team 2013: 80 projects Identified Risks: 2014: 100 projects GAC implementation halted Overall Bank Budget declines Donor contributions to GPF are reduced Conditions of client/recipient countries change (continued) Annex 1: Results Framework 121 Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 2.2 Indicator: No GPF PEA 9 11 37 60 2.2: The overall number of World Bank 1 Number of World Bank projects projects projects projects projects projects influenced by the GPF has projects influenced annually operational been much larger than expected (see by PEA funded through Outcome indicator 2.1). PEA has played a the GPF major role in this. As a result, this indica- tor now exceeds the target for a second Baseline (2009): No PEA year in a row and has almost doubled as funded through the GPF compared with FY12. included in World Bank operations (Source: GRM question 1 and 2) Targets: 2010: 10 projects 2011: 15 projects 2012: 30 projects 2013: 35 projects 2014: 39 World Bank projects influenced by PEA funded through the GPF 2.3 Indicator: No projects US$51 US$47 US$47 US$45 US$93 2.3: In the countries in which the GPF 1 Funding of governance operational million million million million million is active, actual Bank-budget funding activities at country level exceeds the amount disbursed by GPF. In equals GPF financing 2014, US$46 were dedicated to funding of governance activities at the country Baseline (2009): level and US$47 in 2015. US$10 million 2010: US$15 million (Source: SAP Software and Business 2011: US$20 million Warehouse.) 2012: US$30 million 2013: US$40 million Target (2014): US$87 million 2.4 Indicator: No GPF 12 18 18 18 30 2.4: The number of Window 1 countries 1 Number of country projects countries countries countries countries countries has remained constant throughout the strategies that include operational past four years. governance actions. However, in FY2014-15, the GPF sup- ported the Governance Global Practice’s Baseline (2008): 6 Coun- concerted efforts to ensure the inte- tries gration of governance concerns in the Targets: process of preparing systematic country 2010: 10 countries diagnostics and country partnership 2011: 15 countries frameworks. 2012: 18 countries 2013: 24 countries 2014: 30 country strategies (Country Assistance Strategy or Interim Strategy Note include governance actions. (continued) 122 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 GPF Outputs (Step 2) 1. Strengthened engagement 1.1 Indicator: Scored N/A N/A 3.4 3.8 Window 3.8 An update to the 2011 GPF Window 1 1 in governance by the World assessment of integration of 1 review review was conducted in 2014 as part of Bank in selected countries governance in World Bank will be the independent evaluation of the GPF. operations in GPF Window com- It found that, on average, Window 1 Data Sources, M&E Tools: 1 countries pleted in countries continued to make progress in 1. Independent report based 2014 GAC integration. The target cumulative on surveys and interviews Baseline (2011): 3.4 points average score of 4.0 was not achieved, 2. GRMs (from Window 1 review) however, it is difficult to compare the 3. Reports from Regional VP 2011: 3.0 scores of the two reviews. Scores for Development Effectiveness 2012: 3.6 every category increased somewhat, but Units 2013: 3.8 given the subjective nature of the scoring Identified Risks: and the factors limiting comparability Target (2014): 1. Changes in management at between the first- and second-round Over 4.0 points country and regional levels scores, this probably signals a general 2. Changes in client countries continuity in Window 1 countries’ for- restrict World Bank engage- ward-leaning efforts rather than a marked ment advancement. Change was mainly registered in GAC analysis and GAC programming scores rather than change management, suggesting that, on average, ways of managing GAC uptake established at the time of the first review did not need to be strengthened in order to maintain or improve execution. (Source: An Update to the 2011 Gover- nance Partnership Facility (GPF) Window 1 Review). 2. Increased number of World 2.1 Indicator: No GPF 43 42 85 74 43 2.1: T The number of PEA studies 1 Bank operations informed by projects studies studies studies studies studies completed in fiscal 2014-2015 is lower Number of PEA studies political economy analysis operational than that in previous years (43) but the funded by GPF completed final target included in the GPF Results Data Source, M&E Tools: and reports published Framework of 100 PEAs has been 1. GRMs 2010: 20 studies surpassed: throughout its lifetime, the 2. Reports of the PEA Commu- 2011: 40 studies GPF has funded a total of 287 PEAs. The nity of Practice 2012: 60 studies decline experienced in 2014-15 is normal Identified Risks: 2013: 80 studies because most of the PEA studies were 1. Restrictions on use of PEA produced during the first years of GPF Target (2014): 100 PEA due to World Bank mandate implementation and have already been studies funded by GPF 2. Restrictions on use and accounted for in the GPF Results Frame- completed and reports dissemination of PEA due to work. Notable examples of grants that published sensitivities of World Bank produced highly influential PEAs include client countries or Board the Window 1 programs in Nigeria and members Afghanistan. (Source: GRMs) (continued) Annex 1: Results Framework 123 Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 3. Increased use of DFGG and 3.1 Indicator: No GPF 14 42 57 83 41 In fiscal 2014–15, there are 41 additional 1 social accountability in World Number of World Bank proj- projects projects projects projects projects projects Bank projects that include DFGG, which Bank operations ects that include DFGG as operational is slightly above the 2014 target of 40 part of project preparation projects. The decrease compared with Data Source, M&E Tools: or implementation 2013 can be explained by the declining 1. GRM number of GPF grants and the fact 2. Reports by the DFGG Com- Baseline (2009): No DFGG that the majority of Bank projects were munity of Practice in World Bank operations influenced during the peak of GPF 3. Reports from Regional VP funded by GPF implementation. Overall, however, over Development Effectiveness 2010: 10 projects its lifetime, the GPF has helped 124 Units 2011: 20 projects World Bank projects incorporate DFGG Identified Risks: 2012: 30 projects in their design and implementation. The Restrictions on use of multis- 2013: 40 projects increase in work on the demand side of takeholder approaches due to the governance agenda is supported by Target (2014): 40 World World Bank mandate or Board the GPF Evaluation findings which con- Bank projects include DFGG instructions firm that “DFGG, access to information, as part of project prepara- tion or implementation and a host of other thematic areas that are now seen as mainstream aspects of governance in the Bank.” (Sources: GRM reports; World Bank 2014d.) 4. Increased sensitivity to 4.1 Indicator: No GPF 58 122 54 92 9 4.1: Nine additional World Bank projects 1 governance in sector oper- projects projects projects projects projects projects in sectors other than public sector gover- Number of World Bank ations operational nance were influenced in fiscal 2014–15; sector projects influenced 39 total projects were influenced. Cumu- Data Sources, M&E Tools: by GPF that are sensitive latively, a total of 335 sector projects have to governance in project 1. GRM been influenced over the life the GPF, preparation and implemen- 2. Reports from SDN GAC focal thus exceeding the final (cumulative) tation points target of 130 projects. Baseline (2009): No proj- 3. Survey by GAC in Operations ects funded by GPF (Source: GRM Question 2.) Community of Practice 2010: 10 projects 4. Interviews of sector directors 2011: 20 projects Identified Risks: 2012: 30 projects 2013: 35 projects 1. Perceived lack of relevance for governance in sector Target (2014): 35 World operations Bank sector projects are sensitive to governance in project preparation and implementation 5. Increased engagement by 5.1 Indicator: Number No GPF 21 30 26 33 24 5.1: During fiscal 2014–15, a total of 24 1 World Bank with Institutions of World Bank activities projects projects projects projects projects projects projects funded by the GPF involved of Accountability funded by GPF involving operational institutions of accountability Institutions of accountability Data Sources, M&E Tools: (Source: GRM reports.) Baseline: 1. GRMs 2010: 10 projects 2. Monthly reports of Parlia- 2011: 20 projects mentary Network 2012: 25 projects 3. Interviews with World Bank 2013: 28 projects Institute, OPCFM, LEG, INT, Target (2014): 28 World and PREM Bank activities funded by Identified Risks: GPF involve institutions of accountability Resistance from client countries to World Bank engagement with institutions of account- ability (continued) 124 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 6. Increased attention to 6.1 Indicator: Number of No W4 No W4 No W4 No Win- 27 38 These include the 27 W4 projects plus 1 accountability for core public GPF-funded Public Sector dow 4 projects projects projects from other windows which were sector functions Governance Bank opera- projects opera- aimed at strengthening accountability for tions aimed at strengthen- opera- tional public sector functions, including public Data Sources, M&E Tools: ing accountability for public tional financial management. 1. GRMs sector functions, including 2. PEFA indicators public financial manage- 3. AGI data ment Identified Risks: 2013: 12 operations Innovation in support to core Target (2014): 36 World public functions is resisted in Bank Public Sector Gover- client countries nance operations funded by GPF strengthen account- ability for public sector functions, including public financial management 7. Increase in the offer of 7.1 Number of courses 84 courses 53 73 51 32 84 7.1: There was an increase in the number 2 courses for GAC learning and funded by GPF offered to courses courses courses courses courses of GAC-related courses delivered in fiscal public goods Bank staff 2014–15, but the target of 110 courses was not achieved. Data Sources, M&E Tools: Baseline (2008): 1. Review of World Bank Learn- 52 courses offered (Source: LMS database.) ing Catalogue and PREM Week 2009: 60 courses programs 2010: 70 courses 2011: 80 courses 2. Review of GAC Portal 2012: 90 courses (uploads and hits, internal and 2013: 100 courses external) 2014: 110 courses Identified Risks: 1. Changes in HR policy con- strain impact of knowledge and learning activities 2. Reduction in knowledge and learning budget of the World Bank 7.2 Number of knowledge No GAC 500 doc- +2,500 +2,500 +2,896 +3,729 7.2: In fiscal 2014–15, 833 additional 1 and learning products pub- Portal uments docu- docu- docu- docu- documents were uploaded to the GAC lished on GAC Portal ments ments ments ments portal. The target of 3,000 documents was exceeded. Baseline (2008): 1. No GAC Portal available (Source: GAC Portal Administrator.) 2. No online products offered 2010: 500 documents 2011: 2,000 documents 2012: 2,500 documents 2013: 3,000 documents 7.3 Number of hits to the No GAC 36,090 178,551 128,804 16,390 17,399 7.3: The decline in the value of the 1 site Portal hits hits hits views views indicator can be explained by a change in the Bank’s website tracking system, Baseline (2008): which provides only the number of views. No GAC Portal available On average, one view equals between 2010: 20,000 hits 10–15 hits. Using that estimation, the 2011: 50,000 hits number of hits is approximately 173,990. 2012: 75,000 hits In addition, most of the content of the 2013: 90,000 hits GAC portal has been absorbed by other Target 2014: 100,000 hits public websites, such as the Bank’s Public Governance Global Practice Website. (Source: Omniture software.) (continued) Annex 1: Results Framework 125 Achievements 1 Baselines, Targets, and Summary Assessment of Progress 2 GPF Results Chaina Indicatorsb 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014/15 Against Targets (Annual/Overall) 3 7.4 Number of Bank staff No data 4,280 4,576 4,575 1,832 2,036 7.4: The number of people trained has 2 trained in GAC subjects staff staff staff staff staff declined due to the Bank’s restructur- ing. However, in fiscal 2015, with GPF Baseline: 2,000 staff (2010) support, the Governance Global Practice Target: 5,000 staff (2014) rolled out “Governance Bootcamp”—a comprehensive GAC training for all Governance Global Practice staff. (Source: LMS database.) 7.5 Customer satisfaction No data No data No data No data No data No data A survey on user satisfaction is expected with GAC Portal to be completed in fiscal 2014. Baseline (2008): No GAC Portal available Target 2014: 80 percent of users are satisfied with the portal. GPF Inputs: (Step 1) 16 GPF projects strengthen Baseline: 0 US$13.10 US$29.10 US$35.20 US$46.14 US$50.20 US$29.6 Target has been exceeded by US$14.2M engagement in governance at Target: US$36.0M million million million million million million in 2013, the decrease in 2014-2015 is due country level to the closing of many projects 21 GPF projects undertaking Baseline: 0 US$5.22 US$8.20 US$8.95 US$12.62 US$16.70 US$10.3 Target has been exceeded by US$11.7 PEA Target: US$5.0 million million million million million million million million in 2013, the decrease in 2014–15 is due to the closing of many projects 17 GPF projects undertaking Baseline: 0 US$6.97 US$8.95 US$10.71 US$10.71 US$16.29 US$7.3 Target has been exceeded by US$9.29M DFGG activities Target: US$7.0 million million million million million million million back in 2013, the decrease in 2014–15 is due to the closing of many projects 23 GPF projects undertaken Baseline: 0 US$3.0 US$9.43 US$11.86 US$13.25 US$15.11 US$8.7 Target has been exceeded by US$5.76 in sectors Target: US$9.25 million million million million million million million million in 2013, the decrease in 2014–15 is due to the closing of many projects 24 GPF projects engage with Baseline: 0 US$3.96 US$6.13 US$6.18 US$13.25 US$13.46 US$8.7 Target exceeded by US$1.94 million. institutions of accountability Target: US$8.0 million million million million million million million 38 GPF projects support core Baseline: 0 US$1.86 US$4.54 US$4.74 US$7.84 US$ 11.8 Target exceeded by US$3.89 million in public functions, including Target: US$9.25 million million million million million US$13.14 million 2013. The decrease in 2014–15 is due to public financial management million the closing of many projects. 1 GPF projects create oppor- Baseline: 0 US$3.17 US$5.30 US$5.87 US$6.90 US$8.41 US$550 Target has been exceeded by US$2.41 tunities for GAC learning and Target: US$6.0 million million million million million million million million in 2013. Only one project in this public goods category was active during fiscal 2014–15. a. The steps included in the GPF Results Chain portion of the Results Framework provide guidance on what steps in the Results Chain diagram align with what expected results in the Results Framework. b. Definitions of the indicators and how they will be monitored are included at the bottom of the Results Framework. CPIA = Country Policy and Institutional Assessment; DFGG = demand for good governance; GAC = governance and anticorruption; GRM = grant reporting and monitoring; M&E = monitoring and evaluation; PEA = political economy analysis; PFM = public financial management. 126 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Definitions and Legends of the Results Framework The GPF Results Framework is organized into four levels—Goal, Impact, Outcomes, and Outputs—that capture each main stage through which the 100 GPF projects’ inputs and activities are transformed into results (annex 1). The logic of the Results Framework and the connections between the GPF and country-level governance results are outlined in the GPF Results Chain (figure 2.1). Each level of the Results Framework corresponds to a step in the chain. These are noted in the Results Framework. Baselines, targets, and indicators. Each level of results is monitored against relevant baseline data and progress against established targets using agreed indicators. The indi- cators are used to translate objectives into performance indicators and sets targets by collecting data on the indicators and then comparing actual results with targets. The tar- gets have been set for each level of the GPF Results Framework for the period 2012–14. Each target provides quantifiable levels of the indicators and defines what the GPF wants to achieve annually and cumulatively through 2014. The baseline provides the starting point from which progress is assessed. The baseline year for the GPF is 2008 even though projects only became operational in 2010 after the selection rounds were completed. The indicators allow the GPF to assess the degree of annual progress achieved against estab- lished targets. Data sources and monitoring and evaluation tools. Data to monitor the results and progress against targets is largely drawn from the grant reporting and monitoring reports (GRMs), which are submitted annually following a standard corporate format approved by the GPF. Financial data is drawn from World Bank accounting systems. To supplement the GRMs and provide a check on the reports, additional data sources are also used for mon- itoring including surveys, interviews, focus groups, and commissioned research feeding into the annual reporting cycle. The GPF Monitoring and Evaluation Framework defines what data sources are used for what level of results. Identified risks. Risks to the achievement of each of the levels of results have been iden- tified, including those within the scope of the GPF, the Bank, and the GPF partners that would have an effect on GPF implementation. Annex 1: Results Framework 127 Annual progress achieved; examples of annual progress against targets. This section of the Results Framework reports on achievements against targets at all four levels—Goal, Impact, Outcomes, and Outputs. Examples and evidence of progress (or lack thereof) are included and referenced to the relevant sections of this report. Summary assessment of progress. This section provides a brief assessment of the annual and cumulative progress (or lack thereof) against the targets for each level of the GPF Results Framework. The red, orange, and green labeling indicate whether there has been progress, a delay, or an underachievement. Indicator definitions. These describe the indicators used to monitor and assess annual and overall progress against expected results and targets of the GPF as outlined in the GPF Results Framework and provide guidance on how the levels of results align with the Results Chain diagram. The Results Framework, however, is the primary monitoring and assessment framework for the GPF. Goal (Step 6): Improved country-level development outcomes and production of global gover- nance “public goods. At this level, key indicators of governance are monitored in coun- tries where the World Bank is active. These results cannot be solely attributed to the World Bank or the GPF. Tier I development results indicators from the corporate scorecard for institutions and governance will be used to inform the overall impact of on-the-ground GPF activities in client countries. Global governance public goods refer to such items as the Extractives Industry Transparency Initiative and the Open Government Partnership. Impact (Step 5): Strengthened governance and public sector management institutions through Bank operations will be measured by the number of countries with strengthened public finan- cial management systems in: (1) transparency and access to information; (2) public financial management; (3) civil service and public administration and; (4) tax policy and administra- tion. These figures are drawn from the World Bank corporate scorecard. Outcomes (Step 3): At this level, Outcome 1 results that can be attributed to the World Bank level of engage- ment on governance are monitored. The indicator for this is whether or not Bank opera- tions and Country Assistance Strategies are more sensitive to governance. Sensitivity to 128 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy governance is defined as the extent to which Bank task teams address political economy, demand-side elements, and fiduciary and anticorruption issues affecting development effectiveness in the design and implementation of new Bank operations. Results that are specific to the GPF program and for which the Bank is accountable to GPF partners are limited to Outcome 2. These are monitored to assess whether GPF activities are effectively influencing Bank project preparation and improving accountability in Bank operations. Effective influence is defined as GPF-funded activities/outputs that affect the design and implementation of Bank operations in an effort to improve accountability. Examples of this include integration of beneficiary verification mechanisms, third-party monitoring, and political economy analysis. Outputs (Step 2): At this level, the results of GPF projects are monitored for their contribution to the various GPF program objectives as outlined in the GPF program document. These results are monitored according to the indicators described below. 1.1. Assessments of GPF Window 1 influence on integration of governance in coun- try-level Bank operations. The assessment of the influence of governance on integration in country-level Bank programs uses the same framework as the Window 1 review. These criteria determine the overall assessment of a country program on a 4-point scale, with 4.0 being the highest and 1.0 the lowest. There are three broad categories: governance and anticorruption (GAC) assessment, program support for GAC, and change management. • Little attention to GAC. • Limited analytic and diagnostic work that was not sufficiently related to the program. Program is aware of GAC issues but has not developed a useful approach to GAC other than possibly retreating from difficult issues. Divisions between elements of the country team and with Bank management. • Adequate analytics. Program addresses GAC constructively but without significant innovation or much change. No special focus or innovative approach in GAC-related teambuilding, although minor efforts made as part of the GPF Window 1 program. • Strong analytics, use of political economy analysis, and analytics relevant to program. Program introduces a new conceptualization of GAC and significant change, such as, for example, moving from a supply-side emphasis to one that substantially includes demand-side elements. Efforts at teambuilding, such as a focus groups or recruitment. Annex 1: Results Framework 129 • Development of highly innovative diagnostic tools linked to the program and used in novel ways. Program makes a major change in the way GAC is conceptualized and specific and innovative approaches are embedded. Similar innovative and substantive approach for teambuilding, including skills, filters, and systems to include sectors. 2.1. Number of World Bank projects influenced by political economy analysis (PEA) measured by the number of projects identified by the task team leaders (TTLs) in the GRMs and through a survey by the PEA Community of Practice. The projects influenced need to be substantively supported by project codes that are verified by the GPF Secretariat. The number of PEA studies completed and reports published will be measured by the number of PEA studies reported in the GRMs and through the annual survey of TTLs via the PEA Community of Practice. 2.3. Funding of governance activities at the country level equals GPF financing measured in accordance with the recommendations of the “Note on Monitoring and Reporting of Bank Budget Funding of GPF Related Governance Activities produced by the GPF Secretariat.” In particular, according to Method A, the recommended method for monitoring the Bank budget in countries with GPF activities, “the aggregate amount of Bank Budget used for governance activities in the countries receiving GPF funds under Window 1 [should be considered] as the relevant Bank counterpart funding to the GPF funds under the AAs.” 3.1. Number of World Bank projects that include demand for good governance (DFGG) as part of their project preparation or implementation is measured by the number of DFGG actions reported in the GRMs by TTLs, is supported by project numbers, and is verified by the GPF Secretariat. The DFGG Community of Practice in the Social Development Network of the World Bank also plays a role in assessing these actions. DFGG refers to the ability of citizens, civil society organizations, and other nonstate actors to hold the state accountable and make it responsive to their needs. DFGG encompasses initiatives that focus on citizens as the ultimate stakeholders. It includes activities relating to information disclosure, demystification, and dissemination; beneficiary/user participa- tion and consultation; complaints handling; and independent and/or participatory mon- itoring. DFGG aims to strengthen the capacity of nongovernmental organizations, the media, local communities, and the private sector in order to hold authorities accountable 130 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy for better development results. DFGG mechanisms can be initiated and supported by the state, by citizens, or by both, but they are usually demand-driven, operating from the bottom up. Social accountability is an approach for increasing government’s responsiveness in a way that relies on civic engagement where ordinary citizens and/or civil society organizations directly or indirectly participate in achieving accountability. 4.1. Number of World Bank sector projects that apply governance to project prepa- ration and implementation are measured by the number of sector projects reported by TTLs in the GRMs and through GAC in Operations Community of Practice monitoring and GAC focal points in the sectors (e.g., health, education, water, energy, transport, and extractives). The GPF Secretariat verifies the information against the project numbers pro- vided by TTLs. 5.1. Number of World Bank activities involving institutions of accountability is mea- sured by the number of projects reported in the GRMs by TTLs and verified by the GPF Secretariat against provided project numbers. Institutions of accountability include par- liaments, ombudsmen, information commissions, anticorruption agencies, supreme audit agencies, the judiciary, other justice institutions, and third-party monitoring mechanisms. 6.1. Number of World Bank public sector governance operations that strengthen accountability for public sector functions, including public financial management. The GPF Secretariat verifies the information against project numbers provided by TTLs in the GRMs in cooperation with the public financial management cluster leader in the Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network Public Sector Unit (PRMPS). 7.1. Number of learning events offered is monitored by the GPF Secretariat in cooper- ation with the PRMPS/GAC Secretariat as part of its regular reporting on knowledge and learning activities to Poverty Reduction and Economic Management and the World Bank Knowledge and Learning Board. 7.2. Number of knowledge and learning products published on the GAC portal is monitored by the GPF Secretariat in cooperation with the PRMPS/GAC Secretariat as part of its regular reporting on knowledge and learning activities to Poverty Reduction and Annex 1: Results Framework 131 Economic Management and the World Bank Knowledge and Learning Board. Reports from GAC focal points and products identified by the TTLS in the GRMs are used to sup- plement these reports. 7.3. Number of hits/duration of visits to the site is monitored by the GPF Secretariat in cooperation with the PRMPS/GAC Secretariat as part of its regular reporting on knowl- edge and learning activities to Poverty Reduction and Economic Management and the World Bank Knowledge and Learning Board. OMNITURE software and user-specific iden- tification enhances the accuracy of the monitoring and reports. 7.4. Number of Bank staff trained in GAC subjects is monitored by the GPF Secretariat in cooperation with the PRMPS/GAC Secretariat as part of its regular reporting on knowl- edge and learning activities to Poverty Reduction and Economic Management and the World Bank Knowledge and Learning Board. Data sources include the Bank’s “My Learning” portal, which tracks courses completed by all World Bank staff members as well as event participation lists. INPUTS (Step 1): Inputs are the value of GPF program resources allocated to each of the thematic areas within the GPF outputs. Because a project can address multiple thematic areas, the total value can be larger than the value of GPF program resources. 132 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF012237 The grant activities are being complemented by three ongoing Bank P119825 Mongolia Multi-Sec- Mongolia Public Sector 12.00 projects: toral Technical Assis- Governance tance Project (1) Mongolia Multi-Sectoral Technical Assistance Project (P119825). This TF012237 project is providing technical assistance to the government procurement P098426 Mongolia Governance Mongolia Public Sector 14.00 agency in Mongolia to make procurement data publicly available on the Assistance Project Governance Internet. TF012237 (2) Mongolia Governance Assistance Project (P098426). This project is P096439 Mongolia Sustainable Mongolia Public Sector 49.40 providing technical assistance to the ministry of finance to help develop Livelihoods Project Governance implementing regulations on procurement, including those relating to civil society organization (CSO) participation. (3) Mongolia Sustainable Livelihoods Project (P096439). This project is providing procurement monitoring training to citizens and CSOs. TF012433 This project is closely linked with the EGTACB project, reinforcing and P125890 Economic Governance, Guinea Economic 10.00 complementing its capacity building support of experts to prepare, Technical Assistance, Policy appraise, and monitor public investment projects in the Department of and Capacity Project Analysis, Monitoring, and Evaluation in the Directorate of the National (EGTAB) Public Investments of the Ministry of Economy and Finance and the Direc- torate of Public Investment Programming in the Ministry of Planning. TF012560 There are no current Bank operations in Indonesia in the extractive indus- P106050 Extractive Industries Indonesia Extractive 1.05 tries, but the Bank does provide technical assistance to EITI Indonesia Transparency industries (P106050). This project’s activities—particularly Component 2’s diagnostic TF012560 P129048 Natural resources, Indonesia Extractive 0.11 study—strongly complements the Bank’s technical assistance on EITI governance and industries because it provides an understanding of the system that helps improve the development—Man- design of EITI in Indonesia. For example, for the first EITI reconciler report, aging risks, maximizing the project’s diagnostic work helped the reconciler understand where in opportunities the system to look to resolve discrepancies. On the second EITI report, the diagnostic work of the project identified additional government insti- tutions that should report on extractive industries revenues. The project also forms a solid foundation for a broader technical assistance project on natural resources and governance (P129048), which could look at other governance issues along the natural resources management value chain that were brought to light during the non-tax revenue work. TF012779 The Croatia Revenue Administration Modernization Project (P102778) and P102778 Croatia Revenue Croatia Financial man- 126.10 the Colombian MUISCA Project have benefited from IAMTAX assess- Administration Mod- agement ments. An IAMTAX assessment in Croatia helped the ongoing Revenue ernization Project Administration Modernization Project (P102778) (to be extended) identify TF012779 P106628 National Public Man- Colombia Financial man- 25.00 new areas and activities for inclusion and funding during the extension. agement Information agement Project teams were provided with an extremely detailed analysis on the Systems Project core business areas. Also, The IAMTAX assessment in Colombia relating to information technology and management information systems helped the MUISCA project, which is focused on information technology support. It is a component of the Consolidation of National Public Management Information Systems Project (P106628), the third component of which deals with the expansion of the Colombian tax administration’s integrated Tax and Customs Administration Model. (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 133 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF012924 The GPF grant has allowed the team to enter into an educated dialogue P144934 Capacity Development India Energy and 0.06 with broader stakeholders in India, including the ministry of mines at the for the Indian Bureau Mining national level. In turn, this led to a request from the ministry to support of Mines reforms within the Indian Bureau of Mines, the overarching regulatory authority for all mining activities in Indian states, including Odisha. The project has been tremendously valuable, both in and of itself, as well as by influencing states like Odisha to improve their performance with regard to reforms. The project focuses on implementing institutional change in the Indian Bureau of Mines, taking preventative actions aimed at the estab- lishment of a national cadaster and sustainable mining practices that are in line with the United Nations Framework Classification for Fossil Energy and Mineral Reserves and Resources (UNFC) framework. TF080836 Three of the six studies produced by the grant have explicit links to other P130495 Results Based Financ- Zambia Health, 0.12 Bank projects. The Zambia survey serves as a baseline for an evaluation ing program in Zambia Nutrition, and assessing the impact of the Results Based Financing Program in Zambia Population and different audit arrangements for measuring quality (P130495). The TF080836 P121315 Measuring Governance Ukraine Public Sector 0.24 process of developing indicators for the India study directly informed the in Health and Educa- Governance process of a similar study measuring governance in health and education tion Sectors in Ukraine in Ukraine (P121315). And a hospital study was integrated into the Bank’s TF080836 policy dialogue with the in the Government of the Philippines and into P119069 Universal Health Care Philippines Health, 300.00 the lending operation—Philippines Universal Health Care Project, which is Project Nutrition and currently in the pipeline (P119069). Population TF080907 The GPF has been instrumental in diagnosing, assessing, and informing P121186 Water Resources and Albania Water 45.00 new projects. Almost all projects in the Albania have been affected in a Irrigation Project way or another by the GPF W1, one project—Water Sector Investment TF080907 P102733 Water Sector Invest- Albania Transport 86.00 Project (P102733) (to be approved by the Board this year), was specifically ment Project informed by it. With a value of US$86 million, the projects builds on two main finding from the report: (1) the necessity of water investment in Durres, a crucial development area; and (2) decentralization. In addition, The irrigation piece of the Water Resource and Irrigation Project (P121186), with a value of US$40 million, was partly informed by the GPF W1. TF080908 Bangladesh Open Government Project (under preparation) (P129770). P129770 Bangladesh Open Gov- Bangladesh Public Sector 80.00 Inputs on implementation design and implementation issues provided to ernment Project (under Governance project team. preparation) TF080908 Yemen Transparency Support Project. Advise country team on project P144483 Yemen Accountability Yemen Transport 5.00 design. (Proposal to be submitted to MNA Transition Fund.) and Transparency Enhancement Project TF080955 Projects influenced by the GPF: P098426 Governance Assistance Mongolia Public Sector - Project Governance (1) Governance Assistance Project (P098426). The GPF has complemented TF080955 the project’s activities by providing support to the anticorruption agency P119825 Multi-Sectoral Techni- Mongolia Public Sector - (IAAC) on asset and income declarations and corruption monitoring. For cal Assistance Project Governance example, the project helped the IAAC develop the Mongolia Corruption TF080955 Index, while the GPF is helping to further refine and improve it. P130891 Support for Account- Mongolia Public Sector 20.00 able, Responsible, Governance (2) Multi-Sectoral Technical Assistance Project (P119825). The GPF has and Transparent complemented the project’s technical assistance to the ministry of finance Government with regard to implementing the procurement law and developing a new sovereign wealth fund law. (3) SMART Government Project (P130891). The initiatives on open govern- ment and the use of information and communications technology (ICT) tools for citizen engagement will be further developed under the SMART project, which is under preparation. (continued) 134 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF081119 The grant was specifically designed to assist teams in the design, P130222 Lao PDR: Scaling up Lao PDR Agriculture 39.39 implementation, and supervision of World Bank operations. The work was Participatory Sustain- and Rural primarily focused on creating tools and methodologies for improving the able Forest Manage- Development impact of project-level governance work rather than specific project work. ment Project Some work was initiated during reporting period that involved applying tools to individual projects, including: (1) a political risk framework was uti- lized on a pilot basis to assist with the planning of SUFORD II Project; and (2) thematic fiduciary supervision pilots produced analyses on supervision approaches utilized by different country teams. The political risk framework was used in the development of the Lao PDR project—Scaling-up Participatory Sustainable Forest Management Project. The project represented a significant expansion of the Bank’s support for sustainable forestry in Laos. The task and country team were concerned that the increase in the geographic footprint would expose the project to an increased risk of political interference from local and national forces, and they were keen to receive analytical support in the selection of project areas. The political risk analysis provided a richer map of the politics around the granting of logging and mining concessions, enabling the team to take a more informed approach to risk assessment and management. TF081149 Nine portfolio projects (P071407, P10548, P12325, P120872, P070962, P071407 Support for Economic Zambia Economic 28.15 P12723, P070063, P082452, and P102459) were directly influenced by the Expansion and Diversi- policy stocktaking report that was produced under this GPF, which looked at fication (SEED) the strengths and weaknesses of the existing demand-side mechanisms TF081149 P110458 Water Sector Perfor- Zambia Water 11.00 in each of the projects and made recommendations for improvement. A mance Improvement number of others were directly affected by virtue of their inclusion in the Project: environmental e-ISR plus program, which proved to be extremely useful in providing and social manage- Bank staff with a credible source of non-state actor feedback on various ment framework Bank projects. In some cases, this data has been used to improve some TF081149 of the projects and has had a particular bearing on the development of P121325 Additional financing Zambia Energy and 22.00 subsequent demand-side mechanisms for the Zambia country office. for Zambia increased Mining Projects whose preparation and implementation have been most affected access to electricity by the GPF work include the new Irrigation Development Support Project, services project the Roads Rehabilitation and Maintenance Project Phase II, and to a lesser TF081149 P120872 Malaria booster project Zambia Health, 30.00 extent the Peri-Urban Sanitation Improvement Project (P132003). Both the additional financing Nutrition, and Irrigation Development Support Project and the Peri-Urban Sanitation Population Improvement Project are piloting the new ICT-enabled beneficiary feed- TF081149 back mechanism, which is being funded under the GPF in collaboration P070962 Zambia Copperbelt Zambia Environment 41.77 with the World Bank Institute. The Roads Rehabilitation and Maintenance Environment Project Project Phase II has directly benefitted from the governance and anticor- (CEP) ruption (GAC) input that it received from GPF staff during its additional TF081149 P120723 Road rehabilitation and Zambia Transport 15.00 financing as well as the ongoing work under the Governance in Roads maintenance second grant. This grant is helping the Roads Rehabilitation and Maintenance additional financing Project achieve the commitments made in the Project Appraisal Document TF081149 regarding citizen engagement, transparency, and particularly, third-party P070063 Agricultural Develop- Zambia Agriculture 39.96 monitoring. ment Support Program and Rural Development TF081149 P082452 Public Sector Manage- Zambia Public Sector 17.50 ment Program Support Governance Project TF081149 P102459 Irrigation Development Zambia Agriculture 201.02 and Support Project and Rural Development TF081149 P132003 Peri-Urban Sanitation Zambia Urban Devel- 0.30 Improvement Project opment (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 135 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF081264 Mining Technical Assistance (P122153). The Political economy analysis P128534 Social Safety Nets Cameroon Social protec- 50.00 undertaken and the follow-up policy dialogues impacted the preparation tion and initial implementation of the Mining Technical Assistance by: (1) TF081264 P108368 Telecom Cameroon Telecommuni- 26.73 deciding against directly tackling Artisanal Mining in the Technical Assis- cations tance due to the strong opposition to change and the plan to work on the TF081264 resource corridor because of challenging high bureaucratic fragmentation P116437 EFA-Fast Track Cameroon Education 24.80 and poor coordination; (2) strengthening components related to access to Initiative information and multi-stakeholder dialogues; (3) strengthening relation- TF081264 P133338 Equity and Quality for Cameroon Education 55.80 ships with demand-side actors in the private sector, CSOs, and members Improved Learning of parliament. Project Social Safety Nets (P128534). The GPF-funded qualitative analytical work TF081264 completed the quantitative work undertaken during project preparation. P073629 PNDP 2 Community Cameroon Social Devel- 82.82 The workshop and the analytical work significantly informed the design of Development Program opment the project by the team (e.g., high governance risks and the need to let Support Project the Government of Cameroon pilot first) and the way to lead the policy dialogue (de-link universal subsidy reform and project financing, build trust on implementation arrangements and evidence on impact, and develop a strong communication strategy). The World Bank Board approved the project in February 2013. Telecom (P108368). At an early stage in the project’s implementation, the confidential report accurately informed the team about probable resistance to some aspects of the project, including the state-owned telecom enterprise’s modernization, open-access feature, and increased competition in the mobile market). The task team leader was able to iden- tify and understand the points of contention early on in the process and to be responsive and pro-active in dealing with them as much as possible, translating into a significant time savings in making decisions about project supervision and policy dialogue. Education (EFA—Fast Track Initiative and P133338 in preparation). The Ministry of Basic Education (MINEDUB) implemented scoreboards to improve public sector management with support from the sector team as a follow-up to the national- and regional-level governance dialogues organized by the Bank during the previous GRM period. The dialogues included discussions of governance issues identified by the GPF-funded qualitative analysis of governance in schools and the 2010 PETS in Educa- tion. For the project in preparation, the team is following up on the score- board tools to inform decision-making with regard to teacher and budget allocations to schools based on need and to monitor school performance. PNDP 2 (P073629): The GPF influenced the implementation of the second phase of the community driven development project. Informed by this experience, the Budget Transparency Initiative and the workshop held with a budget monitoring civil society organization, the GPF-funded gover- nance specialist highlighted citizen participation gaps in local governance, As a result, in 2012, the PNDP PIU expressed an interest in piloting the participatory budgeting approach in one local council to increase account- ability and citizen monitoring at the local level. (continued) 136 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF081435 The GPF grant is improving project preparation most significantly through P118196 Second Dushanbe Tajikistan Water 102.81 Component 2 (Governance Checklist) and Component 3 (Transparency Water Supply Project and Accountability in Sectors). The Governance Checklist was applied to TF081435 P130091 Private Sector Compet- Tajikistan Financial and 10.00 the design/preparation stage of the following projects: itiveness private sector • P118196: The Second Dushanbe Water Supply Project development P130091: Private Sector Competitiveness (notably its large mining •  TF081435 component) P126130 Tajikistan Health Tajikistan Health, 23.00 • P126130: Health Sector: Results Based Financing Services Improvement Nutrition and • P127807: Tax Administration Reform Project Population P127805: Second Public Employment for Sustainable Agriculture and •  TF081435 P127807 Tax Administration Tajikistan Public Sector 18.00 Water Resources Management Project Governance P131246: Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihoods •  TF081435 Project P127805 Second Public Employ- Tajikistan Water - ment for Sustainable Agriculture and Water Resources Manage- ment Project (project was dropped) TF081435 P131246 Environmental Land Tajikistan Agriculture 9.45 Management and Rural and Rural Livelihoods Project Development TF081474 The preparation of the Sierra Leone Pay and Performance Project P128208 Sierra Leone Pay and Sierra Leone Public sector 17.00 (P128208) was informed by the findings of the GPF grant Performance Project governance TF081962 The grant funded the development of an ICT-based redress and feedback P096572 Third National FAD- Nigeria Agriculture 425.00 mechanism to enhance third-party verification of health service delivery AMA Development and Rural through the Nigeria State Health Program Investment Credit (NSHPIC) and Project (FADAMA III) Development Fadama III beneficiaries. TF081962 P090644 Community and Social Nigeria Social Devel- 380.00 Activities have also enhanced CSO engagement in four government and Development Project opment World Bank-supported projects, namely NSHIP, FADAMA III, SEEFOR, TF081962 EDO-DPO, CSDP, RAMP II, NEWMAP, and Urban Water. P072644 Rural Access and Nigeria Transport 72.00 Mobility Project (RAMP) TF081962 P124905 Nigeria Erosion Nigeria Water 650.00 and Watershed Management Project (NEWMAP) TF081962 P115565 Additional Financing Nigeria Water 80.00 for National Urban Water Sector Reform Project TF093740 The GPF has influenced the following projects: Promines, PMDE, the P106982 DRC: Growth with Gov- DRC Extractive 90.00 Agriculture Project, the Urban Development Project, and the Multi-Modal ernance in the Mineral industries Transport Project. The preparation of the Public Administration Reform and Sector (Promines) Rejuvenation Project is based on the conclusions of GPF-funded studies. TF093740 P092724 DRC: Agriculture Reha- DRC Agriculture 130.00 bilitation and Recovery and Rural Support Development TF093740 P092537 Multi-Modal Transport DRC Transport 631.00 Project TF093740 P120666 Projet de Develope- DRC Energy and - ment du Marche Mining d’Electricite pour la Consommation et a l’Exportation (PMEDE) TF093740 P129713 DRC Urban Develop- DRC Transport 100.00 ment Project FY13 TF093740 P122229 Public Service Reform DRC Public Sector 77.00 and Rejuvenation Governance Project (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 137 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF093906 Results of the Voice and Accountability activities during this reporting P101156 Demand for Good Cambodia Public Sector 25.06 period have been significant. The VCD2 analytical work, in particular, has Governance Project for Governance led to support for the Royal Government of Cambodia to design and Cambodia adopt an innovative nationwide social accountability framework that covers TF093906 P102284 Cambodia Second Cambodia Health, 110.00 local commune development (rural development funds/local block grants Health Sector Support Nutrition and mostly for rural roads), primary health care, and schools. It is anticipated Program Population that this framework—part of a programmatic set of reforms supported TF093906 by numerous donors—will also be supported by a forthcoming Bank P096505 Local Governance and Cambodia Public Sector 40.00 decentralization operation (LGDP) (pending confirmation in the Interim Development Program Governance Strategy Note). The initiative promotes social accountability efforts in the Bank Health operation (HSSP2) and introduces systematic opportunities for citizen monitoring of primary schools. Most importantly, it has enabled unprecedented dialogues between CSOs and the government about stra- tegic changes in social accountability activity in Cambodia. The framework includes (1) new levels of transparency and access to information within communes, around health and education; (2) open budgets in communes, districts, health centers, and schools; and (3) annual multi-sector citizen monitoring with joint accountability action plans. An implementation plan is currently being developed with Bank budget and project funds, and if it is implemented even partially, it has the potential to be transformational. TF093918 The grant refocused efforts to better serve public financial management P121455 State Expenditure Nigeria Public Sector 200.00 (PFM) activities in the Niger Delta. All grant activities complement core Effectiveness for Governance activities under the SEEFOR and EDO-DPO projects and are comple- Results Project mented by additional DFGG activities under these projects. The grant (SEEFOR) increases the visibility of DFGG and improves project outcomes. It has led to increased demand for DFGG inputs in projects across the portfolio. The grant supports the strengthening of the capacity of CSOs to engage in project preparation and implementation for SEEFOR and EDO-DPO. Two projects have been influenced by the grant: • P121455: State Expenditure Effectiveness for Results Project (SEEFOR) • P123353: Nigeria Edo State First Development Policy Operation TF093918 The grant was originally conceived as a tool for mainstreaming DFGG in P123353 Nigeria Edo State First Nigeria Economic 75.00 Bank operations. In order to achieve this, the grant has been refocused Development Policy policy on PFM to better serve the Bank’s priorities in the Niger Delta, namely Operation PFM. All activities implemented in the grant complement core activities under the SEEFOR and EDO-DPO projects, complemented by additional DFGG activities carried out under these projects. The grant has also served as a mechanism for increasing the visibility of DFGG and its use in improving project outcomes has lead to an increased demand for DFGG inputs in projects across the portfolio. Finally, the grant has supported the strengthening of the capacity of CSOs to engage in project preparation and implementation of SEEFOR and EDO-DPO. TF094038 Grant activities in the water and sanitation sectors complement Honduras P103881 Honduras Water and Honduras Water 35.00 Water and Sanitation Program (P103881). The GPF financed activities to Sanitation Sector Mod- foster and create space for improving the demand-side governance within ernization Project the sector. Grant financing innovative approaches included a contest TF094038 P110050 Improving Public Sec- Honduras Public Sector 18.20 among water service providers rewarding best practices in transparency tor Performance Governance and accountability. Expectations. Enhanced capacity of CSOs and journalists (GPF Compo- nents 2 and 4) will contribute to and create new demands for government information and transparency, which will complement activities under com- ponent 4, Improving Public Sector Performance Project (P110050) related to M&E and Transparency Portal of Government (SISGEP). TF094290 The grant-supported analytical work on the political economy of the agri- P112575 Agriculture Investment Ukraine Agriculture 0.13 culture sector (an input into the Agriculture Investment Note P112575). Note and Rural Development TF094320 The GPF grant was implemented in close collaboration with Maputo P115217 Maputo Municipal Mozambique Urban 105.00 Municipal Development Program II (MMDP II) (P115217). The project’s Development Program Development development objective was to improve the delivery and sustainability of II (MMDP II) priority municipal services in Maputo Municipality. The grant is directly relevant to the implementation of the first project component of devising mechanisms that address governance constraints to responsive and accountable municipality. (continued) 138 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF094467 The GPF grant facilitated the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Com- P115725 Education Trust Fund Indonesia Education 8.50 mission (KPK) to support the Ministry of Education and Culture develop a Support Program complaints-handling mechanism for Bank-funded education projects and BOS-KITA BOS-KITA, among others. TF094468 GPF activities improved the Ministry of Education’s BOS program by P107661 Indonesia—BOS Indonesia Education 2,621.50 providing an online complaints-handling mechanism. The project—Indo- Knowledge Improve- nesia: BOS Knowledge Improvement for Transparency and Accountability ment for Transparency (P107661) is now closed, but the BOS program continues under the and Accountability government. TF094544 Citizen oversight activities and the GPF grant’s DFGG approach were P095563 PE- (APL2) Health Peru Health, 162.40 key to the design of social monitoring mechanisms for the new school Reform Program Nutrition, and program, Qali Warma. The Social Inclusion Technical Assistance Loan Population (P131029) and the Social Inclusion development policy loan (DPL) series TF094544 P131029 Poltical Economy Peru Social 14.30 support the Government of Peru through its extensive and profound social Social Inclusion Techni- protection sector reform process. In on key reform,the Government of Peru made the cal Assistance Loan trail blazing decision of closing the national food assistance program PRO- NAA (Programa Nacional de Asistencia Alimentaria) because of deficien- cies in transparency and anticorruption identified in previous evaluations, among other reasons. Qali Warma is a new program in both design and implementation, based on a decentralized management model, strong community participation, and a focus on governance and accountability. TF094606 The project has been directly instrumental in securing Bank funding for P132997 Sub-National Finances Afghanistan Financial man- 0.14 further analytical work on service delivery under the Sub-National Finances and Service Delivery agement and Service Delivery Project (P132997). TF094691 Grant activities have helped improve country procurement systems and P118491 Thailand Public Thailand Public Sector 0.42 fiscal information. In this regard, its impact is system-wide. The GPF has Finance Management Governance contributed to the increase in global knowledge about what does and Review does not work with regard to issues such as access to information. The TF094691 P132563 Country Develop- Thailand Public Sector 0.21 GPF has informed the Bank’s analytical operations, and the grant informed ment Partnership on Governance the Country Development Partnership on Governance and Public Sector Governance and Public Reform (P132563) as well as the findings of the Public Finance Manage- Sector Reform ment Review (P118491). The findings of this review informed government policies to improve public procurement and refine local accountability systems. TF094693 In Cameroon, GPF-funded activities are identified and linked to the Trans- P084160 Transparency and Cameroon Public Sector 15.00 parency and Accountability Capacity Building Project or the Community Accountability Capacity Governance Development Program Support Project. Commune-level pilot activities Building Project were suggested by the Community Development Program Support Project TF094693 P073629 Community Develop- Cameroon Health, 82.82 (PNDP) project team; they should be integrated into the project and scaled ment Program Support Nutrition and up after its successful completion. GPF-funded activities were also lever- Project Population aged to mobilize funds from the ICT for Social Accountability Trust Fund, TF094693 used to visualize data collected under the Budget Transparency Initiative, P074448 Madagascar—Gover- Madagascar Public Sector 58.00 building on it directly. nance and Institutional Governance In Nepal, a multi-donor trust-funded initiative for PFM executed through Development Project PRAN is expected to scale up the activities under the Budget Transparency Initiative after Phase 1. Information on the Budget Transparency Initiative has generated interest among various country units. The developed approach has been replicated in stand-alone projects or integrated into other Bank operations. For example, work of a similar nature was undertaken in Mongolia that was directly supported by the team through technical assistance as well as some financial support from the current initiative. The work concluded in the reporting period and final reports have been disseminated. With regard to integration into Bank operations, local level budget transparency components informed by the Budget Transparency Initiative will be integrated into the Madagascar Institutional Governance Reform Project. To that end, on a study trip to one of the project regions, a delega- tion from Madagascar joined the last mission in Cameroon to learn how to replicate the activities. (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 139 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF094694 The GPF grant enabled the GovID taskforce to support project teams P119662 Burkina Faso—Bagre Burkina Faso Financial and 133.70 integrating governance into projects during project preparation through Growth Pole Project private sector the application of a GovID filter. development TF094694 Projects: P129688 Third Phase Com- Burkina Faso Agriculture 86.00 • Bagre Growth Pole Project (P119662) munity Based Rural and Rural • Local Government Support Project (P120517) Development Project Development • Community-Based Rural Development Project Phase 3 (P129688) TF094694 • Mining Sector Support Project (P124648) P124648 Mineral Development Burkina Faso Extractive 33.00 Reproductive Health Project (P119117) and Growth and Competitive- •  Support Project industries TF094694 ness Development Policy Lending Series (P126207). P119117 Azerbaijan: Presidential Azerbaijan Economic 0.15 It is too early to judge the impact of GPF measures, but the GPF grant Forum policy TF094694 has gained traction with regard to enhancing accountability in the project P126207 BF- First Growth and Burkina Faso Economic 90.00 implementation of existing projects through an EISR+third-party moni- Competitiveness Credit policy toring initiative, and the GovID taskforce initiated the development of a (GCC-1) country office complaints-handling mechanism (P128964). TF094694 P128964 BF PFM Pub Sector Burkina Faso Financial man- 0.13 Control Institutions agement TF094694 P120517 Local Government Burkina Faso Public Sector 66.00 Support Project Governance TF094821 The citizen portal is improving the visibility of citizen demands and/or P144489 Quito Metro Line One Uruguay Urban Devel- 1,684.16 reports on corruption—within the Quito Metro Line One project (P144489). opment This is an over a billion dollar project and is under consideration in the TF094821 P131515 Electricity Distribution Dominican Energy and - Uruguay P4R (early stages of discussion), and most likely into an upcoming Rehabilitation Project, Republic Mining water operation in Peru (P number not yet assigned). This platform was additional financing integrated into a US$3 million component of Additional Financing for elec- tricity in the Dominican Republic (AF for P131515), but the overall project was put on hold. Nonetheless, client demand is high since the training, and it has been internally agreed that this type of platform will be a key component of the next electricity project. TF094847 The local government project under preparation in South Sudan seeks to P130589 Local Government South Sudan Public Sector 0.10 use multi-stakeholder social accountability to be implemented at the state Support Governance level. The project may also extend the concept to the county level. The foundational work by this project will facilitate the application of DFGG approaches in the local government support project implemented in fiscal 2014. TF095281 An in-depth PEA that was undertaken with GPF support enriched the P127741 National Community Cameroon Public Sector 1,170.10 quality of discussions and informed decision making regarding the viability Driven Development Governance of proposed reforms. Such inputs make their way to the Operational Risk Project (will go to Assessment Frameworks (ORAFs) and shape plans for supervising the Board in early FY14) projects once they are approved by the Board. Four projects were added TF095281 P118904 Learning, Equity and Philippines Education 300.00 in 2013. Accountability Program Support Project (will go to Board in early FY14) TF095281 PO82144 Social Welfare and Philippines Social Devel- 512.60 Development Reform opment Program TF095281 PO79935 The Second National Philippines Transport 576.02 Roads Improvement and Management Project (NRIMP II) TF095320 Provides task teams with training sessions, knowledge products, eLearning P121052 Sierra Leone Youth Sierra Leone Social Devel- 20.00 course, and Communities of Practice. The Sierra Leone Youth Employment Employment Support opment Support (P121052) was supported to map project locations for increased TF095320 P143164 Comoros GAC Techni- Comoros Public Sector 0.13 transparency and accountability. The Madagascar Mainstreaming Gover- cal Assistance Governance nance Technical Assistance (P145445) and Comoros GAC Technical Assis- TF095320 tance (P143164) received direct GAC-in-Operations support to mainstream P143445 Madagascar Main- Madagascar Public Sector - GAC in sectors within the respective countries. streaming Governance Governance (continued) 140 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF095574 Through the governance specialist, the grant participated in the prepa- P109195 Senior Executive Liberia Public Sector 2.30 ration and provision of implementation support to three budget support Service Project Governance operations and in more than seven projects including: TF095574 P124643 Additional Financing Liberia Economic 7.00 • Emergency Senior Executive Service Project for Economic Gover- policy Additional Financing for Economic Governance and Institutional •  nance and Institutional Reform Project Reform Project • Reengagement and Reform Support Program III TF095574 • Integrated Public Financial Management Reform Project P123196 Re-Engagement Liberia Public Sector 5.00 • Basic Education Project (Trust Fund) and Reform Support Governance • Civil Service Reforms Project (LICUS Trust Fund) Program III TF095574 • Public Sector Modernization Project—Team Lead (P143604) P127319 Integrated Public Liberia Financial man- 28.55 Financial Management agement Reform Project TF095574 P117662 Basic Education Project Liberia Education 40.00 (Trust Fund) TF095574 P128823 Civil Service Reforms Liberia Public Sector 3.50 Project (LICUS Trust Governance Fund) TF095574 P143604 Public Sector Modern- Liberia Public Sector 0.04 ization Project Governance TF096312 GPF-funded studies enabled projects under preparation to have deeper P092837 Transport Sector devel- Uganda Transport 198.00 insights on political economy and governance challenges and proposed opment project remedial measures to address accountability and transparency challenges TF096312 P115563 Uganda health sector Uganda Health, 144.00 at the country and sector levels, including projects in the Agriculture, support Nutrition and Transport, and Health sectors. Population The Transport Sector Development Project—benefitted from a broad TF096312 governance and PEA at the preparation stage, and there is a reduction in P109224 Agriculture technical Uganda Agriculture 639.00 number of complaints about procurement in the agency due to the inde- Advisory Service and Rural pendent parallel bid evaluation process recommended by the studies. Development TF096312 The Uganda Health Sector Support Project benefitted from governance P123204 Water management Uganda Water 135.00 and political economy studies, which informed the project’s governance project action plan. Part of the plan involved putting mechanisms in place to engage with citizens about service delivery monitoring. The Agriculture Technical Advisory Service Project benefitted from GAC and the political economy assessment under the GPF. A government anticorruption action plan was implemented as part of the project, and local-level transparency was enhanced. The water management project benefitted greatly from the just concluded environment and natural resources study, and the government agreed to develop a government anticorruption action plan based on the findings. TF096676 A loan was approved in fiscal 2014 to strengthen subnational government P123879 Sub-national Institu- Colombia Public Sector 70.00 capacity in support of the implementation of Citizen Visible Audits in tional Strengthening Governance Colombia. The Project Appraisal Document recognizes that Citizen Visable Audits raise awareness about the need to promote and support participa- tory mechanisms in project design. TF096730 A GPF grant supported the preparation of the Kenya Health Sector P128663 Health Sector Support Kenya Health, 56.80 (P128663), focused on decentralization of funding and strengthening of Additional Financing Nutrition and supervision, auditing capacity, and social accountability mechanisms. The Population grant supported the Cambodia Health Sector Programmatic AAA Engage- TF096730 P074091 Health Sector Support Kenya Health, 100.00 ment, which focused on the process of social audits. It also supported Nutrition and implementation of error and fraud control systems in the modernization of Population social assistance in Romania (social protection). TF096862 The grant supported the preparation of Senega PFM Technical Assistance P122476 Public Financial Man- Senegal Financial man- 15.00 (US$15 million) (P122476). agement Strength- agement ening Technical Assistance Project (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 141 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF096898 The grant supported the dissemination of experiences of TF093905 P106703 Sao Paulo Water Brazil Water 107.49 Recovery Project— P106703: Brazil: Sao Paulo Water Recovery Project (REAGUA) REAGUA P112516: Botswana (Morupule B Generation and Transmission Project TF096898 P112516 Morupule B Genera- Botswana Energy and 1,662.00 P115486: tion and Transmission Mining Uzbekistan/Tajikistan (Bukhara and Samarkand Water Supply Project), Project Kazakhstan/Armenia (South West Roads Project/ Lifeline Road Improve- TF096898 P115486 Lifeline roads improve- Armenia Transport 30.40 ment Project ment project Brazil (Eletrobras Distribution Rehabilitation Project, Honduras (Power TF096898 P099270 South West Roads Kazakhstan Transport 2,500.00 Sector Efficiency Enhancement Project Project TF096898 P114204 Eletrobrás Distribution Brazil Energy and 709.30 Rehabilitation Project Mining TF096898 P104034 Power Sector Honduras Energy and 42.30 Efficiency Enhance- Mining ment Project TF096898 P049621 Bukhara and Uzbekistan/ Water 62.33 Samarkand Water Tajikistan Supply Project TF096909 The grant informed the following nine operations P127955 Morocco Solid Waste Morocco Water 130.00 Management DPL 3 • Morocco Solid Waste Management DPL 3 TF096909 • Iraq Consultative Service Delivery II, P129645 Iraq Consultative Iraq Health, 5.00 Service Delivery II Nutrition and • Yemen Government CSO Partnership Project Population • Egypt Helwan South Power Project TF096909 P117407 Egypt Helwan South Egypt Energy and 2,404.40 • Jordan Badia Ecosystems and Livelihoods Project Power Project Mining TF096909 • West Bank and Gaza Municipal Development Program II P144665 Yemen Government Yemen Social Devel- 1.50 • West Bank and Gaza Palestinian NGO IV Project, additional financing CSO Partnership opment Project • Morocco Urban Transport DPL 2 TF096909 P127861 Jordan Badia Ecosys- Jordan Environment 14.68 • Tunisia Urban Development and Local Governance Project tems and Livelihoods In Morocco, the pilot Citizen Report Card (CRC) exercise in the Municipal Project Solid Waste Sector has been fully adopted by the ministry and will be TF096909 P111741 West Bank and Gaza West Bank Public Sector 10.00 progressively rolled out to the larger municipalities in the sector. The first Municipal Develop- and Gaza Governance year of the roll-out—2013—is followed by five municipalities running CRCs, ment Program II three of which are supported by the Bank, and two by government funds TF096909 directly. The CRC approach was so well received in the solid waste sector P117444 West Bank and Gaza West Bank Social Devel- 8.00 that the transport ministry agreed to have a pilot CRC launched in its Palestinian NGO IV and Gaza opment sector with the intention of adopting the approach across the eight largest Additional Financing municipalities in the country. The Morocco Solid Waste Management Project DPL3 was recognized in the Bank’s Middle East and North Africa Region as TF096909 innovative A complete guidance toolkit on rolling out the CRC approach in P115659 Morocco Urban Trans- Morocco Transport 136.70 Morocco and a draft terms of reference, sample questionnaires in French port DPL 2 TF096909 and Arabic, guidance on sampling methodology, and other information P130637 Tunisia Urban Devel- Tunisia Urban Devel- 100.00 can be found at the mining, water and environment ministry website: opment and Local opment http://ecdm.secserver.org Governance project Login: ecdmuser Password: ecdmuser2012 The CRC exercise resulted in two subsequent exercises in the Morocco transport sector, which informed the Morocco Urban Transport DPL2 and the urban development sector in Tunisia, which then informed the Tunisia Urban Development and Local Governance Project. (continued) 142 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF096984 The grant activities directly influenced three Bank operations: (1) Greater P119063 Greater Accra Metro- Ghana Water 150.00 Accra Metropolitan Area Sanitation and Water Project (GAMA); (2) Ghana politan Area Sanitation Youth Employment and Entrepreneurial Development (GYEEDA); and and Water project (3) Ghana Health Systems Strengthening Project (IHSSP), each of which TF096984 P132248 Ghana Youth Employ- Ghana Social Devel- 60.00 includes a subcomponent on or proposes to include governance and ment and Entrepre- opment social accountability activities in the project. Therefore, the preparation neurial Development phase of these projects benefited from guidance from governance experts TF096984 about identifying governance challenges and developing appropriate P132950 Ghana Health Systems Ghana Health, 105.00 instruments to address project challenges. The Ghana e-Transform Project Strengthening Project Nutrition and (P144140), approved by the Board in October 2013, incorporates feedback Population tracking mechanisms tested under the GPF. TF096984 P144140 GH eTransform Ghana Ghana Telecommuni- 97.00 cations TF097505 The governance and public sector team is involved in the preparation P128208 Pay and Performance Sierra Leone Public Sector - of the Public Performance and Pay Project. The analytical work—Rapid Project Governance Assesment of the Dynamic of PSR—has influenced the preparation of the project. TF097688 The GPF grant contributed to the design of the Nigeria State Health P120798 Nigeria States Health Nigeria Health, 150.00 Investment Project (P120798). Investment Project Nutrition and Population TF097927 GPF-funded work has helped make existing data on governance more P131028 DPL social inclusion Peru Social protec- 45.00 easily accessible to operational and sectorial colleagues, helping them project tion understand how to integrate this information into their work. Actionable TF097927 P144483 Accountability and MENA Public Sector 5.00 governance indicators team members are often asked to be part of a proj- Transparency Enhance- Governance ect team and to give advice about the best governance indicators to use ment Project under the for a particular project. This close interaction with operational and sector MNA Trust Fund colleagues has helped the actionable governance indicator team increase awareness about the actionable governance indicator portal and the public accountability mechanisms work and to concretely demonstrate the potential uses and applications of actionable governance indicators and the new public accountability mechanisms database for Bank operations. Peru P131028: DPL (development policy loan) social inclusion project (VPU Award 2012). Program-for-Results for Transport Sector in Uruguay. Proposed Accountability and Transparency Enhancement Project under the MNA Trust Fund—P144483. TF098579 The GPF grant improves accountability in project preparation and imple- P074106 Western Kenya Com- Kenya Agriculture 100.00 mentation in World Bank operations, assisting the WKCDD FM Project munity-Driven Devel- and Rural (P074106) implementation unit in Kenya and district staff in the mapping opment and Flood Development of subprojects and the ongoing implementation of social accountability Mitigation Project measures. The mapping initiative is part of a larger effort by the govern- ment and the World Bank Kenya country team to enhance governance in Kenya projects that involve decentralized expenditures in communities and service facilities. TF094850 The analysis is already feeding into World Bank operations. The World P113757 Decentralized Service Sierra Leone Public Sector 20 Bank’s International Development Association, the United Kingdom’s Delivery Project Governance Department for International Development (DFID), and the European TF094850 P078613 Institutional Reform Sierra Leone Public Sector 28.2 Commission had already invested approximately US$50.0 million in and Capacity Building Governance decentralization through the Institutional Reform and Capacity Building Project Project. The support to the subnational level will increase during the current Country Assistance Strategy period through the first (ongoing) and second phases of the Decentralized Service Delivery Project, which will invest over US$50.0 million in local governments and in service delivery with support from the other donors,. The Rural Community and Health Project also works through local governments. The new government policy about feeder roads in Sierra Leone devolves the maintenance of feeder roads to local councils, allowing the Bank to invest in feeder roads through subnational governments. There is also the possibility of investing in micro- and mini-power distribution and generation through local councils and community-based organizations that could, in addition to the potential benefits noted earlier, improve access. Enabling reforms were approved by the cabinet in December 2010, although they have not been implemented. (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 143 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF095206 The Institutional Development Fund, signed in 2011 with the Central P124975 Strengthening SICA’s Central Public Sector 0.4 America regional body, Sistema de Integracion Centroamericana (Central (Sistema de Integracion America Governance American Integration System, or SICA) (P124975, l now includes a coordi- Centroamericana) nation mechanism as one of its three components to ensure engagement Capacity Democratic with civil society and the private sector in the design and implementation Security Unit (unit in of a regional strategy for citizen security, and to ensure accountability and charge of developing transparency in new policies and programs being implemented. the Central America Citizen security strategy) TF095206 The Honduras Safer Municipalities Project (P130819—under preparation) P130819 Honduras Safer Munic- Honduras Public Sector 17 will also include support for the active participation of CSOs, the private ipalities Governance sector, and community-based organizations around the country’s violence prevention strategy and flagship program—Municipios Mas Seguros. TF094745 The Local Level Political Economy Analysis (LLPEA) framework has been P125505 Capacity Building for Philippines Public Sector 0.18 adopted and used in project preparation in Indonesia PNPM (P125505) and the Philippines’ Pub- Governance Cambodia Local Governance (P125405). Qualiative studies using elements lic-Private Partnership of LLPE methodology have been prepared as part of project preparation Center (e.g., local institutions study in Indonesia and voice, choice and decision TF094745 P125405 National Community Indonesia Health, 500 making study in Cambodia). Empowerment Pro- Nutrition and gram In Urban Areas Population For 2012–2015 TF094377 The GPF is directly influencing the integration of demand-side governance P120517 Local Government Burkina Faso Public Sector 66 activities, particularly in Bank operations, by making operational knowl- Support Project Governance edge products ready for task team use. By offering high-quality capacity TF094377 P121714 Burkina Faso: Com- Burkina Faso Public Sector 1.48 building courses for staff, it increases staff skills and knowledge on how munity Monitoring for Governance to more effectively integrate DFGG at both the project and country level. Service Delivery The DFGG team offers task teams numerous online documents and brings TF094377 speakers for peer-to-peer exchanges. It also promotes knowledge-sharing P071144 Democratic Republic Democratic Health, 124 among different Country Assistance Strategy and project teams through of Congo Private Republic of Nutrition and the DFGG Community of Practice. The team also provides direct opera- Sector Development Congo Population tional support to project teams about demand-side elements and links and Competitiveness them to supply-side governance activities. Projects include: Project TF094377 P120517: the Decentralized Development Project in Burkina Faso. This P108069 Integrated Public Sierra Leone Public Sector 20.9 multi-sectoral project covering the health, education, and water sectors Financial Management Governance has a six million dollar component about transparency and accountability Reform at the municipal level. It rewards good transparency initiatives and prac- tices among local governments, strengthens local council and community oversight of local government perforwmance in implementing local development plans. The Social Development team provided cross-support to the Participa- tory Monitoring in Health and Education Services Project in Burkina Faso (P121714), funded by the Japan Social Development Fund. This pilot project seeks to implement community scorecards and other participatory monitoring and accountability approaches to evaluate the quality of health and education services. The team has helped the Democratic Republic of Congo’s Private Sector Development and Competitiveness Project (P071144) design a third-party monitoring system for beneficiaries to monitor health and education bene- fits that they receive from the main state mining company. The team is providing cross-support to budget transparency and develop- ing the capacity of civil society actors for PFM analysis and advocacy. This is also a project component under the Integrated PFM Reform Program (IPFMRP) in Sierra Leone (P108069). In addition, the team has been working with the County Management Unit to incorporate DFGG into the Sierra Leone Country Assistance Strategy progress report. TF094325 The GPF grant has been very instrumental in finalizing the Knowledge P110537 Quality of Local Gov- Russia Public Sector 0.5 Platform on Local governance in Russia (P110537) and showcasing best ernance Governance practices for social accountability and ICT approaches in Russia. The country management unit and the World Bank Institute have approached ECSS4 to develop specific knowledge-sharing activities in Russia in fiscal 2013, to present this project, and to share lessons. The project was included as a deliverable of the new Russia Country Part- nership strategy prepared in 2011 as a pillar of governance activities. (continued) 144 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF094117 The grant served mainly as a means to support technical assistance, which P106735 Provincial Public Health Argentina Health, 400 was essential to achieving a number of governance and stewardship-re- Insurance Develop- Nutrition and lated objectives. It allowed the Bank to hire consultants to coordinate ment Project Population with high-level officials in the health ministry’s preparation and design of the national health observatory. The observatory’s proposed institutional arrangements are available due to the grant. The health ministry agreed that all of the observatory’s implementation activities would be financed by the new health sector operation (P106735) and would therefore included in its procurement plan. TF093990 Bank-financed justice reform operations in the Europe and Central Asia P076826 Russia Judicial Reform Russia Public Sector 120 Region that are under implementation (e.g., Croatia Justice Sector Support Project Governance Support Project, Russia Judicial Reform Support Project, FYROM Judicial TF093990 P104749 Croatia Justice Sector Croatia Public Sector 39 Reform Project, and Romania Judicial Reform Project) are tied into the Support Project Governance JUSTPAL network and activities. Good practice examples shared through TF093990 JUSTPAL are facilitating results orientation and measurements (e.g., IT-en- P089859 Legal and Judicial Macedonia, Public Sector 14.8 abled applications developed in Russia and Turkey are being studied and Implementation and FYR Governance adapted by countries such as Serbia and Azerbaijan). Information on the Institutional Support results of the Croatia project is being periodically published by the ministry Project of justice. Knowledge gained through JUSTPAL is also being applied in TF093990 P090309 Romania Judicial Romania Public Sector 130 economic and sector work and technical assistance activities in Croatia Reform Project Governance through the Justice Sector Public Expenditure and Insttutional Review in and Serbia through the Multi Donor Trust Fund for Justice Sector Support, as examples. Demand for new Bank-financed support has come in from the Kyrgyz Republic, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, among others. The department is considering what activity (economic and sector work, tech- nical assistance, or investment operation) can provide the most meaningful support for each country. TF094907 Electricity Distribution Rehabilitation Project (P089866), or more specif- P089866 Electricity Distribution Dominican Energy and 152 ically, the design of the additional financing for this Project, including a Rehabilitation Project Republic Mining dedicated social accountability component. The political economy analysis pointed to the clientelism pervading the electricity sector—even at the micro level (e.g., who was required to pay bills, who was not, and the diver- sion of resources to campaigns), and to the regulator failing to comply with good practices on public consultation, which led to a regulator with little focus on consumers. This helped to reinforce the need to continue and expand the focus on social compacts in the electricity sector between con- sumers and the utility in the additional financing. (The additional financing was put on hold, but it will be integrated into any new projects. This social compact approach is now being replicated in Turkey as a way to improve the two-way accountability between utilities and consumers. In addition, the political economy analysis in this sector helped to inform a GPF-sup- ported initiative that allowed for public and georeferenced feedback from consumers, moderated by civil society. This brings a new level of transpar- ency and accountability to the sector (Vozelectrica). This latter initiative is spurring the regulator to shift focus more toward consumers. TF094822 The grant informed the preparation of the governance component of the P130749 AF Infrastructure and Haiti Public Sector 35 additional financing for Infrastructure and Institutions Emergency Recovery Institutions Emergency Governance Project (P130749). Recovery TF094692 A two-day seminar was organized for judges and high government officials P132803 Governance Djibouti Public Sector 0.1 at the ministry of justice in June 2012. After the workshop financed by Governance the GPF, the ministries of justice and finance requested further technical assistance from the World Bank’s in fiscal 2013 and 2014. TF094692 P132803 (Bank budget US$56,000) in fiscal 2013 and P146635 (Bank budget P146635 Support to Governance Djibouti Public Sector 0.1 US$150,000). Reforms Technical Governance Assistance Total number of individual P-codes 124 22,599.66 (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 145 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions 2014/2015 TF012236 Recommendations for context-appropriate PFM reforms are reflected in P149886 Solomon Islands Solomon Energy and 5 Bank Development Policy Operation in the region, which typically include Recovery Financing Islands Mining some PFM components. Examples of Development Policy Operations Development Policy supporting problem-driven PFM reforms include: P149886, P149888, Operation P144602, and P144377. TF012236 P149888 Second Economic Kiribati Public Sector 3 Reform Development Governance Policy Operation TF012236 P144602 Kiribati Economic Kiribati Public Sector 5.2 Reform Operation Governance TF012236 P144377 Samoa Development Samoa Public Sector 15 Policy Operation Governance TF015503 The GPF contributed to the Multi-Governance Practice Programmatic P143505 Programmatic Peru Public Sector 0.1 Knowledge Service on Local Governance and Mining (P143505) in Peru. Knowledge Service on Governance Local Governance and Mining TF012384 The grant influenced the following operations: P133071 State Employment and Nigeria Education 100 EDO-DPL and State Employment and Expenditure for Results Project •  Expenditure for Results (SEEFOR) Project Nigeria Edo State Fiscal Improvement and Service Delivery Operation •  TF012384 P151480 Nigeria Edo State Nigeria Public Sector 75 (P151480) Fiscal Improvement Governance and Service Delivery Operation TF014517 The client government in Jamaica agreed to establish a unified public P146170 Jamaica PFM Enhance- Jamaica Public Sector 0.3 investment management for public private partnerships system with the ment Governance Bank’s consultation under Public Financial Management Enhancement (DFID P146170) TF096675 The results dashboard has been replicated in terms of reference for several P100304 Uttar Pradesh Health India Health, 152 projects in the India portfolio, such as UP Health, UP Roads, and Pancha- Systems Strengthening Nutrition and yati Raj in West Bengal. Project Population TF096675 As of June 2014, the BVS dashboard was replicated in the UP Roads P105990 Panchayati Raj in West India Public Sector 235 Project. Construction of the dashboard was underway with an anticipated Bengal Governance completion date of August 2015. The team provided the conceptual framework for monitoring the entire health program for UP, which has now been included in the RFP (request for proposal) for the health management information system. The RFP has been delayed due to the recent elections in India—the team reflected this concern in the latest Aide Memoire: “The mission is extremely alarmed at the very slow pace of hiring the system integrator. The role of the system integrator in the project is a critical one and will entail the conceptualization, design, development, and roll out of the Health Management Information System in the entire state. There has been no progress in the last six months! The PSU had initiated the procurement process and published the REOI in March 2014, the pro- cess was concluded on 16th April, 2014. The PSU received 26 EOI#s from prospective bidders, however the PSU is still in a process of evaluating the same. During the mission, it was agreed that in order to be pragmatic and realistic there would be a need to reduce the scope of work for system integrator as It would be difficult to design, develop, and roll out the appli- cation in entire state in remaining period of the project. It was decided that framework of HMIS will be designed in such a way that it can take a load of entire state but roll out of application will be in around 40 district hospitals only (25 percent of total hospitals).” (continued) 146 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF094945 The government of Rio Grande do Norte has worked through its State P126452 Rio Grande do Norte Brazil Public Sector 400 Secretariat of Planning and Finance (SEPLAN), which coordinates the RN Regional Develop- Governance Sustentavel Project (P126452), as well as other co-executing \s, inter alia: ment and Governance the State Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (SAPE) and the Project State Secretariat of Economic Development (SEDEC). the local apiculture productive arrangement (LPA) pilot study was carried out, discussed with the state government, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders, including project beneficiaries, during the latest visit to the state by the consultant in February 2015. Based on the results and lessons learned, studies and strategic plans will be developed for other local apiculture productive arrangements, already selected and funded by the RN Sustentavel Project. TF015352 The team designed the model of a platform aimed at lowering the costs P123879 Colombia Subnational Colombia Public Sector 70 of participation for citizens and governments. The platform was designed Institutional Strength- Governance to reduce transactional costs for participation by introducing a solely ening Loan web-based model. It increases the inclusiveness of the participatory process because citizens do not need to invest large amounts of time or resources to participate in the process. The platform also provides a virtual government mechanism to undertake Citizen Visable Audits that require considerably less personnel than the old, in-person system. The first module of the platform is currently fully operational (in trial mode). Government and citizen users gave it positive ratings during test labs. By investing in the development of this tool, the government could effectively multiply the impact of their support of local public investment management, turning it from a centrally managed in-person model into an unconstrained community-driven one supported by centrally provided tools. The government has expressed an interest in pursuing the devel- opment of the Citizen Visable Audit platform by connecting it to the two current systems for managing public investment works, regardless of the source of financing. Counterparts also expressed an interest in exploring the possibilities for inserting the development of the Citizen Visable Audit platform into the current portfolio with the Bank, such as the Colombia Subnational Institutional Strengthening Loan (P123879). TF081474 The work of Component 2 (Operational Guidance for (Re) Building the P128208 Capability of the Public Services in Post Conflict Countries) has helped inform the preparation of Sierra Leone Pay and Performance Project, a public service reform project, and provided cross-support to the Somalia country team. Findings from Component 2 were presented in Nairobi in December 2013, at a United Nations–World Bank Meeting in New York in Feb 2014, and at the Fragility, Conflict, and Violence Forum in Washington, DC in February 2015. A summary of findings was also shared with partici- pants at the GPF workshop in London in 2014. Experts are reviewing draft chapters and case studies on the subject, and after the decision meeting in mid-June, a synthesis report will be disseminated to stakeholders and experts, sharing the findings of the study more broadly and furthering dialogue on rebuilding public services in post-conflict countries. TF015189 A pilot problem-driven diagnostic for developing results-oriented P149176 Burundi Strengthening Burundi Public Sector 27.2 solutions to clients’ public sector problems was undertaken in Burundi. Institutional Capacity Governance The diagnostic identified constraints to local revenue mobilization and for Service Delivery suggested policy interventions to improve the collection of local revenues. Project It informed the design of the tax component of the Burundi Strengthening TF015189 Urban Local Govern- Tanzania Public Sector 255 Institutional Capacity for Service Delivery Project (P149176). Possible policy ment Strengthening Governance interventions include changes in the applicable tax mix, adjustments to tax Program in Tanzania computations, capacity-building measures, and investments in common TF015189 goods. The final diagnostic report has been completed and peer reviewed. P143975 Institutional Reform South Sudan Public Sector 40 The grant also delivered the design and early implementation for several and Capacity Building Governance impact evaluations that formed the foundation for the research portfolio of Project TF015189 the ieGovern Initiative. Six concept notes were produced and approved, P144700 Judicial Services and Azerbaijan Public Sector 200 and ten research designs were developed in collaboration with the ieGov- Smart Infrastructure Governance ern project coordinator, funded by the grant. Project TF017941 The assessment provided needed data to the Bank on the Joint Service P148896 Councils and their governance structure during preparation for the Local Governance Services Improvement Program (LGSIP). (continued) Annex 2: Grants that Have Benefited World Bank Operations 147 Project No. of the GPF Trust How Has the GPF Grant Been Used for the Benefit of World Bank Amount in Fund No. World Bank Operations? Operation Project Title Country Sector Millions TF093891 This project has produced several key documents related to building P125952 M&E capacity in fragile and conflict-affected states. The deliverables and conducted activities supported and will continue to support governance efforts in other countries. The project produced useful notes and examples that can help policy makers, Bank staff, nongovernmental organizations, and civil society advance M&E capacity in their countries. The work sup- ported the Pakistan Education Sector Project (P125952) to support its M&E capabilities, Rwanda’s M&E efforts, among other benefits. TF093905 Most of the activities under this grant have supported enhanced account- P106703 BR Sao Paulo Water Brazil Water 107 ability within specific projects in the infrastructure sector during prepara- Recovery Project— tion and implementation. REAGUA TF093905 (1) Brazil—Sao Paulo Water Recovery Project—REAGUA (P106703). Devel- P112516 Botswana—Morupule Botswana Energy and 1,066 opment of results-based disbursement systems to improve accountability B Generation and Mining and performance of water utilities in the state of Sao Paolo. Transmission Project TF093905 (2) Botswana—Morupule B Generation and Transmission Project (P112516). P049621 Bukhara and Samar- Uzbekistan Water 62.3 Development of an ICT tool to effect greater accountability of an energy kand Water Supply project during implementation, enabling monitoring of progress and Project submission of complaints by civil society. TF093905 P099270 South West Roads Kazakhstan Transport 2,500 (3) Uzbekistan/Tajikistan—Bukhara and Samarkand Water Supply Project Project (P049621). The project improved customer satisfaction with and the TF093905 responsiveness of municipal service providers in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. P115486 Lifeline Road Improve- Armenia Transport 30.4 ment Project (4) Kazakhstan—South West Roads Project (P099270) and Armenia—Life- TF093905 line Road Improvement Project (P115486). The projects introduced and P114204 Eletrobrás Distribution Brazil Energy and 709 field-tested an innovative governance filter to increase transparency and Rehabilitation Project Mining accountability in the roads sector of Kazakhstan and Armenia. (5) Brazil—Eletrobrás Distribution Rehabilitation Project (P114204). The project supports the introduction of advanced metering infrastructure to enable better monitoring of transmission versus commercial losses in the energy sector. (6) Honduras—Power Sector Efficiency Enhancement Project (P104034). Similar to the case of Brazil, technical and operational guidance was provided to authorities in Honduras to implement an automated metering system in the energy sector, making monitoring of technical losses easier. TF097146 Grant-funded activities have reinforced an understanding of effective P143645 TZ First Power and Gas Tanzania Energy and 100 Bank approaches and innovative options for promoting good governance Sector DPO Mining in natural resources management, namely transparency, accountability, and efficiency. This increased understanding was achieved through the generation of new knowledge products and innovative platforms and has facilitated and enhanced relationships with operations. As a result, input on the governance dimensions of operational projects is often sought from the World Bank Institute and the E4D team. DFGG = Demand for Good Governance; DPL = development policy loan; DPO = Development Policy Operation; ICT = information and communications technology; PFM = public financial management. 148 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products Project/Country Knowledge Product Governance of State- • S  tate-owned enterprises handbook/toolkit Owned Enterprises • Three country case studies informed in Africa  (SOE)—Global •  Contribution to finalization of six country case studies in Latin America •  Currently informing on state-owned enterprise country diagnostic in Maldives • Two power point presentations (English and French)  •  Training for Africa Governance Staff, 2012 • Training for Bank teams performing state-owned enterprise country diagnostics, 2013 and 2014  CGAC Program for  overnance Diagnostics: “Governance Review and Study on Micro-Foundations of • G Albania Governance” (HD sectors) Policy notes: “Public Expenditure and Institutional Review (PEIR) for the Irrigation and •  Drainage Sector,” “Governance in the Protection of Immovable Property Rights in Albania,” “Decentralization and Service Delivery in Albania: Governance in the Water Sector, Improving the Quality and Planning of Road Maintenance and Construction Works, and Keeping Account of Education Governance” Mongolia  ase study on Mongolian mining sector, Sovereign Wealth Fund Secretariat/Heritage Fund, and • C collaboration with FPD Two Mongolia economic updates: “An Outcomes Evaluation of World Bank’s Governance •  Partnership Facility” and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation’s “CSO/NGO Capacity Building Interventions in Mongolia” Support to think tank that produced a series of papers •  Regulations on contract monitoring (in progress). •  EAP: Strengthening •  ase study: “Assessing Political Risk in Projects” (Laos, Forestry and Rural Development) C Governance at the • Draft report on political risk in the World Bank  Project Level •  Draft report on political risk in private sector •  Draft of two pilot cases and pilot application Zambia  iagnostic study on public investment management • D Political economy of mining sector •  Political economy of decentralization and assessment of readiness of local governments to •  implement the Development Impact Plan Report on political economy in 2012, used in CPS EITI 2008 and 2009 reconciliation reports •  “Review of Demand for Good Governance Mechanisms for Lending Projects in Zambia” •  Political economy studies: “Are They Actionable? Some Lessons from Zambia,” “Can ICT- •  Enabled Feedback Improve Service Delivery? A Case Study of the Accountability through Community Radio Pilot in Zambia,” and “Supporting the Development of Watchdog Media: A Case Study of World Bank Journalism Trainings in Zambia” Cameroon •  olitical economy draft report (forest) P •  Government Diagnosis Health final report • Two governance dialogues—health and social  • Llarge-scale mining forum  • Seven completed Rapid Results Initiative  Strengthening  conomic and Sector Work report • E Governance of Policy brief •  Fisheries Synthesis paper: “Community Sciences for Coastal and Inshore Marine Resources in Liberia” •  Deepening GAC in  Review of Demand for Good Governance Mechanisms for Lending Projects in Zambia” • “ Africa “Dealing with Governance and Anti-Corruption (GAC) issues in Fragile and Conflict-Affected •  States: Ten Things Team Leaders Should Know” Compilation of political economy studies produced in conjunction with PRMPS in Kenya, the •  Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, and Uganda (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 149 Project/Country Knowledge Product Identifying • I n-depth country case studies: Lao PDR, Timor-Leste, the Gambia Good Practice in •  “Institutions Taking Root: Building State Capacity in Challenging Contexts” Strengthening the •  “A Cross-Country Analysis of Public Service Reform in Post-Conflict Countries in Africa” Public Institutions in •  “Identifying ‘Best Fit’ Solutions for Public Service Reform in Post-Conflict Countries: A Way Fragile and Conflict- Forward,”presented to the Global Center for Conflict, Security and Development. Affected Situations Nigeria •  onflict analysis on Niger Delta C • Nine political economy notes  • Gender and livelihoods note  •  Gender in Fadama study • Governance filter  • Macro-level PEA  •  Three “Politics of Policy” analyses • Governance portfolio review  Kenya  A Guidebook for Governors” • “ “Handbook for County Governments” •  PFM training modules and curriculum for counties on budgeting, accounting, reporting and •  procurement The Empirics of Component 1 Governance “Devolution without Disruption: Pathways to a Successful New Kenya,” volumes 1 and 2 (winner •  of Vice Presidential Unit award) County fact sheets (also supported by other sources) •  Inputs for Kenya’s new public financial management policy framework •  Review of global experience with embedding transparency and participation provisions in public •  financial management acts and regulations Review and synthesis of findings/lessons from 19 civil society organization initiatives •  Review of Kenya’s draft freedom-of-information bill status •  Six case studies on citizen participation in previous decentralized funds •  Component 2 Kenya open data initiative •  Western Kenya geo-mapping initiative •  Kenya Health Sector Support Initiative social accountability pilot •  Kenya open data incubator and Code4Kenya fellows program •  Democratic Republic of Political economy studies in natural resources. •  Congo Domestic Three country studies: Rwanda, Vietnam, and Yemen •  Accountability in Synthesis report comparing them to a fourth country (Mexico) •  Fragile Settings: A Gradual Approach to Strengthening PRS Monitoring Infrastructure •  Road asset governance filter Advisory Service— • Case study of Kazakhstan and Armenia  Mainstreaming GAC •  Case study of Santa Rosa, Honduras in Infrastructure • “World Bank—Civil Society Engagement in the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector”  Operations •  “Road Works Management and Execution in Kosovo: A Quality Assessment Report” • “Emerging Good Practice Notes: Benin, Brazil, India, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Kenya,  and Ukraine” •  “Decentralization of Water and Sanitation Services: A Public Expenditure Review” •  “Guide for Technical Audit of Road Works” • “Enhancing Institutional Governance for Implementing Energy Efficiency Policies, Laws, and  Regulations in Developing Countries” • Customer Relationship Management manual for Uzbekistan, volumes 1–5 (continued) 150 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project/Country Knowledge Product Cambodia  FGG Learning Notes 1–12 • D “Voice, Choice, and Decision 2: A Study of Local Basic Service Delivery in Cambodia” •  Pay reform and options paper •  Honduras  eport on media-monitoring pilot • R Study of public archives of Honduras •  Nepal • “  PFM Reform: Challenges and Opportunities” •  Social accountability toolkits • “Governance and Peace Action Plans”  •  “Agriculture, Food Security Report” •  Grievance redress mechanism for the roads department •  Bridges Improvements and Maintenance Program •  Public disclosure and outreach strategy Implementing Right to • “  Towards Open Government in Nepal: Experiences with the Right to Information” Information in South •  Analysis of 20,000 right-to-information cases in India Asia • Report of case studies  •  Right-to-information survey in Bangladesh • Paper on right-to-information status in Pakistan  • Transparent Governance in South Asia  •  Empowerment Through Information Transparency and  rochures • B Accountability in the Materials disseminated to the media and parliament •  Kyrgyz Republic Mozambique:  iagnostics of participatory governance for Maputo Municipality, Mozambique • D Improving Voice and Participatory budgeting for Maputo—proposed methodology and recommendations for •  Accountability operations manual Operations manual for participatory budgeting in Maputo (three versions) •  “Voice and Accountability,” Social Accountability Good Practice Note •  “Participatory Urban Service Monitoring for Maputo Municipality, Mozambique,” Scoping •  Report Supporting the • nternal operations manual for anticorruption commission I Indonesian Corruption •  KPK presentation on anticorruption Eradication •  Mapping of procedures and controls of public services Commission’s (KPK) • Reports delivering recommendation for improving control mechanisms through citizen reporting  Corruption Prevention •  KPK team attended tailor-made training program for Malaysian anticorruption agency to Strategy improve KPK’s model and review approach Operation of complaints handling for Best of Services project •  Facilitated outreach activities on mechanism guidelines—sessions were delivered by KPK team, •  a Bank individual expert, and ministry staff Customer satisfaction measurement system (seven-button) for public offices in Bandung •  Peru  olicy reports • P Technical assistance documents •  (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 151 Project/Country Knowledge Product Afghanistan  Exploring Afghanistan’s Sub-National Fiscal Architecture: Considering the Fiscal Linkages • “ between Villages, Districts, Provinces and the Center” • Afghanistan in Transition: Looking Beyond 2014, a sourcebook for donors, operational services, and others. “Research and Assessment of Provincial Operations and Maintenance in Afghanistan, 2010 •  “Operations and Maintenance expenditures in Herat and Samangan” •  “Strengthening District Level Accountability and Service Delivery in Afghanistan: Volume 1— •  Mapping of Fund Flows in Three Pilot Districts,” 2011 “Strengthening District Level Accountability and Service Delivery in Afghanistan: Volume 2— •  District Level Accountability,” 2011 “Strengthening District Level Accountability and Service Delivery in Afghanistan: Volume 3— •  Land Registration Processes in Three Districts,” 2011 “Strengthening District Level Accountability and Service Delivery in Afghanistan: Overview •  Paper,” 2011 “Strengthening District Level Accountability and Service Delivery in Afghanistan: Looking at the •  Fundamentals,” Power Point Presentation, 2011 “Public Expenditure Tracking Survey in the Education Sector,” 2011 •  “Assessing Operations and Maintenance of Key Assets in Afghan Provinces,” 2011 •  “District Governance in Afghanistan: DDAs and ASOPs-Policy Issues and Challenges,” •  discussion paper, 2011 Thailand  eport and implementation of Official Information Act knowledge exchange from India: • R ipaidabribe.com Public Expenditure  Increasing Accountability through Budget Transparency at the Sub-national Level in • “ Reform Through Cameroon,” four learning notes Budget Reform “Global Stocktaking on Budget Transparency,” peer-reviewed •  and other SoAc Mechanisms Burkina Faso  olitical economy study on civil society • P Political economy study on mining sector •  GovID bulletins •  Developing Institutions “In the Shadow of Violence: Politics, Economics, and the Problems of Development” •  in Limited Access Orders: Country Case Studies Regional Learning  Public Investment Management in Sierra Leone” • “ Program for “Political Economy of Extractives Governance in Sierra Leone” •  Operationalizing GAC “Open Development: ICT for Governance in Africa,” case study •  in Africa Strengthening “Political Economy of Agriculture, Land, and Infrastructure” •  Governance, Transparency, and Accountability in Kenya Haiti  Logistics and Training Services for Twinning Arrangements between Financial Inspectorates of • “ Haiti and France” Political economy study Sudan  he anticorruption strategy formulated by SSACC was published and disseminated under the • T project; subsequently, the government achieved its endorsement at the national level Pakistan Political economy reports and materials •  Brazil Study of governance for the State of Pernambuco report •  Paraguay  System of Public media,” feasibility study • “ Creation of a public television station, Tele Publica •  (continued) 152 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project/Country Knowledge Product Philippines • U sed as background papers for the preparation of the Philippine Development Report for 2012: –“  Promoting Fairness and Inclusive Growth in Outsourcing Arrangements” – “Ensuring Just and Speedy Settlement of Labor Disputes” – “The Political Feasibility of Labor Reform in the Philippines Philippines roads sector: background paper •  Six studies to be completed: climate change, open data, land administration, urban transport in •  Metro Manila, education and budgeting, and planning in agriculture The GPF supported the production and airing of two panel discussions on budget issues on the •  local cable news channel. They were very well received A third panel discussion was broadcast online via live feed from the online media platform •  Rappler, which also hosts the microsite, Budgetwatch, an innovative platform for disseminating and popularizing the findings of the CSO-led research on national expenditure issues. Launched in March 2013, BudgetWatch had 15,255 visitors over the course of five months—an average of 3,000 visitors per month. GAC-in-Projects Peer How-to notes: Learning “Bank Guidance: Use of Different Types of Audits in Investment Project Financing” •  “Interactive Community Mapping: Improving Service Delivery and Empowering Communities” •  “Using ICT to Improve Transparency in Bank-Financed Projects” •  “Value Chain Analysis” •  “Political Economy Assessments” •  “Good GAC Practices for FMS” •  “Electronic Government Procurement” •  “Grievance Redress Mechanisms—Theory” •  “Grievance Redress Mechanisms—Practice” •  “Citizen Charters” •  “Citizen Report Cards: Monitoring Citizen Perspectives to Improve Service Delivery” •  “Citizen Service Centers” •  “Community Scorecards” •  “Participatory and Third Party Monitoring in World Bank-Financed Projects: What Can Non- •  State Actors Do?” “How, When, and Why to Use Demand-Side Governance Approaches in Projects” •  “Using Demand-Side Governance in Projects to Identify and Manage Risk in Projects” •  “Supporting Passage and Implementation of Right to Information Laws” •  “GAC in Fragile and Conflict Situations: 10 Things to Know” •  Case studies: “KDP Program in Indonesia” •  “Andrhra Pradesh Rural Poverty Reduction Project” •  “Productive Safety Net Program in Ethiopia” •  “RECURSO/REACT in Peru” •  “Malawi Social Action Fund” •  “Protection of Basic Services (PBS) in Ethiopia” •  Grievance Redress Mechanism in Philippines 4Ps project eLearning course: MODULE 1: Introduction •  MODULE 2: The Project in Context—GAC at the Country, Sector and Project Level •  MODULE 3: Assessing Risks—Emerging Good Practices •  MODULE 4: Risk Mitigation—Smart Project Design and Beyond •  MODULE 5: Project Supervision and Implementation Support •  MODULE 6: Demand Side Governance •  MODULE 7: Engaging with Clients •  Project Examples: Philippines School Textbook Delivery, Madagascar Community Scorecard in •  Health, Ethiopia Financial Accountability (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 153 Project/Country Knowledge Product Web presence: Searchable online database with more than 100 good practices projects •  Over 800 Community of Practice members, monthly knowledge exchange meetings organized •  with GAC Focal Points across the Bank (ongoing since 2010), monthly newsletters featuring good practices and learning events with members of the Community of Practice. Online portal since 2008, complemented by a social media platform since 2011. Both platforms •  are updated frequently. Content includes good practices database, resource database, videos, and Community of Practice profiles. Political Economy  Assessing public opinion in the political economy of reform: The Case of Energy Subsidy • “ of Subsidy Reform Reform in Morocco” and Social Protection “The Political Economy of Energy Subsidies in Syria” •  Strategies: “The Political Economy of Subsidies in Jordan” •  Understanding and “The Political Economy of Energy Subsidies in Yemen” •  managing political risks “Pricing for Prosperity: Consumer Price Subsidies in MENA and the Prospects for Reform” •  in MENA countries Liberia Political economy on decentralization •  Uganda  olitical economy studies • P Three annual reports on tracking corruption •  W3–Governance and  Natural Resources, Weak States and Civil War: Can Rents Stabilize Coup-Prone Regimes?” • “ Political Economy for Policy Research Working Paper Growth Analysis “Botswana, Nigeria, and Sudan: Case Studies of GPE Analysis on the Linkages Between Natural •  Resource Extraction and Conflict” Colombia  Can Bottom-Up Institutional Reform Improve Service Delivery? Evidence from the Citizen • “ Visible Audit Program in Colombia” “Impact Evaluation of the Citizen Visible Audit Program—A Community Monitoring Program •  in Colombia,” a strategy paper aimed at organizing and presenting the rationale for analytical pieces of work required to strengthen Citizen Visable Audit institutional design, operation, and impact Monitoring framework •  Report on citizen participation mechanisms in Colombia •  Report on participatory planning in Colombia, Annex 10: “Strengths and Weaknesses of •  Participatory Mechanisms” Report Citizen Visable Audits and the public investment cycle •  Proposal to integrate citizens’ participatory mechanisms •  Dominican Republic  Empowering the Poor with Information: Evidence from the Dominican Republic” • “ “Expanding Access to Information to the Poor and Vulnerable Communities in the Dominican •  Republic: Findings from the Impact Evaluation Baseline Quantitative Survey” “Access to Information in the Dominican Republic: What a Mixed-Methods Survey Tells Us •  About Attitudes and Expectations,” report and PREM notes Mainstreaming GAC in  ase Studies: Kenya • C Human Development HDNCE Portal: Guidance notes, toolkit, case studies (The outputs are available on the “access •  (HD): Supporting Task to information” tab on the HDNCE Sharepoint: http://intwork.worldbank.org/units/HDN/ce/ Teams Pages/Human-Rights-in-HD.aspx and on the Overseas Development Institute website. Guidance notes on PETS, absence surveys, social audits and BOOST •  Book on social accountability with four related seminars •  Three case studies on audits in health in Kenya, private health provider entry in Kenya and •  Ghana, and community score cards in the Democratic Republic of Congo Study of medicine pricing in Argentina •  Toolkit and three case studieson access to information in Kenya, Ukraine, and Macedonia •  Five GAC-related training sessions during a human development forum and learning week in •  2011 and six during Human Development Week 2013, two of which were cross-sectoral Workshop on measurement of governance indicators discussing the work of 18 teams •  (continued) 154 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project/Country Knowledge Product Bridging the Change •  Boosting Budget Execution for Development Impact in the WAEMU countries” “ Gap—Support to •  Governance and political economy study on Benin and Burkina Faso with other partners the implementation • WAEMU PFM practitioners and Internet website started in December 2010  of WAEMU PFM • Two workshops held in Burkina Faso  Directives Implementing GAC  ccess to information in the Middle East and North Africa Region—Jordan/Morocco/Tunisia— • A in Projects—Demand quick win applications that informed policy makers for Good Governance “Morocco: Findings from a Citizens Report Card Survey on Household Solid Waste •  Approaches to Management” Strengthen the MNA “State-NGO Relations: International Good Practice and Implications for West Bank and Gaza,” •  Portfolio World Bank report “Social Accountability in Middle East and North Africa: Lessons Learned From Past Political and •  Economic Transitions,” World Bank report) “Social Accountability in the Middle East and North Africa—Country Profiles and Diagnostics,” •  separate notes for each country “Social Accountability in Palestinian Local Governance and Service Provision Issues and •  Opportunities,” World Bank report “Transparency and Accountability in the Egyptian Power Sector,” diagnostic study •  A New Methodology  ynthesis report (three states in India) • S for Governance Roads sector assessment in India (under implementation, no knowledge output) and •  Analysis in Sectors Vietnam Sierra Leone PEA analysis of natural resource management •  Nigeria: Strengthening  hree PEAs of the Governance, Conflict and Gender Filter, which World Bank teams are using • T Sector Governance and in intervention design Promoting Partnership Political economy analysis of the education sector •  in Service Delivery Political economy analysis of irrigation sector •  • “Result-based Monitoring and Evaluation of Public Finance in Key Social Sectors,” manual Generic manual for community-based targeting •  Registering of vulnerable households to improve effectiveness of service delivery •  Open government portal in Edo state: www.data.edostate.gov.ng •  PFM Community of Practice (PEMNET) •  Citizen Feedback mechanism: www.myvoicenigeria.com •  “Making Mobile Feedback Programs Work: Lessons from Designing an ICT Tool with •  Local Communities” Strengthening reform •  nalytical work on drivers of procurement reforms in Indonesia and Mongolia A and improving •  Framework agreements in Africa public procurement • “Open Contracting: A Guide for Practitioners by Practitioners”  performance in Africa • Social Reporting Apprenticeship Program, product specifics  and East Asia and •  “Procurement Innovation Challenge,” case study compilation done from this challenge Pacific Political Economy  Does Political Economy Analysis Influence Country Strategies?” paper • “ Global Knowledge “Applied political economy analysis: Five practical issues,” paper by Harris and Booth •  Platform and Problem-Driven Governance and Political Economy Analysis: The World Bank’s Experience: •  Community of Practice https://www.governanceknowledge.org/pe/Pages/political%20economy%20resource% 20library.aspx Political Economy of Policy Reform Framework •  How To Note: Political Economy Assessments at Sector and Project Levels •  “Problem-Driven Governance and Political Economy Analysis Framework,” paper •  (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 155 Project/Country Knowledge Product Ghana  Supporting Good Governance for Growth—Lessons from World Bank Engagement in Ghana’s • “ Emerging Oil and Gas Sector,” case study • “The Pursuit of Benefit Maximization in Ghana’s Oil and Gas Sector—Policy, Legal, and Institutional Considerations,” produced by the Oil and Gas Platform and its members organizations • “Citizen Options Paper” about the right to information in Ghana Bill prepared by the Right-to-Information Coalition of CSOs for the Ghanaian Parliament •  Governance in HDN  itizens and Service Delivery—Assessing the Use of Social Accountability Approaches in Human • C Events Development, book Governance in LAC  atin America and Caribbean approach paper • L Colombia and Paraguay results stories •  Study on youth and corruption •  Developing a  Planning Public Financial Management Reforms in Pacific Island Countries,” guidance note • “ Framework for Design “Pay Flexibility and Government Performance: A Multi-Country Study” •  of PFM Systems in Endemically Capacity- Constrained Contexts Climate Change “Climate Change Expenditure Review Sourcebook” •  Expenditure Review Sourcebook Indonesia “Improving Natural Resources Non-Tax Revenue Administration,” interim draft report •  Governance Impact  iterature review on hospital governance • L on Service Delivery in Background note on the governance/legal framework of hospitals and public agencies/public •  Primary Education— enterprises in Senegal Africa (India) Orissa State:  eport on Odisha mining avenues (internal) • R Building Public Odisha Mining Corporation, scoping report and investment plan •  Financial Management Systems for Mineral Based Inclusive Growth Bottom-up Costing  omparative report on international practices for determining medium-term resource needs for • C for Medium- spending agencies Term Expenditure Diagnostic reports (in progress) •  Frameworks (MTEF) in Costing procedures and descriptive case studies (in progress) •  Brazil and Indonesia Capital project  aper on analysis of effective methodologies on capital project appraisal • P appraisal methodology Two guidance notes on “best fit” methodologies based on country context •  in MICs and LICs Measurement  Can the Poor Access Generic Drugs? A Mystery Client Experiment in Argentina” report • “ of Indicators of “Measuring Governance in the Health Sector: Assessing Public Sector-Management Functions •  Governance in Health in Government Health Agencies—A Case Study on Capturing Knowledge from Process Service Delivery Documentation in India” “Healthcare Governance Indicators in Yemen,” pilot study •  “Measuring Governance in the Health Sector: Assessing Public Sector Management Functions •  in Government Health Agencies—Results from Gujarat and Tamil Nadu,” report “Measuring Governance in India’s Health Sector: A Toolkit” •  “Health System Performance Assessment—Case Study for Turkey” •  “Philippines Health Sector Overview” •  “Healthcare Governance Indicators in Zambia,”case study •  • “How is it working? A New Approach to Measure Governance in the Health System in Ukraine,” report (continued) 156 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project/Country Knowledge Product Good Governance •  The World Bank’s Evolving Role in Promoting Good Governance in the Extractives Industries” “ and Accountability in •  “World Bank Engagement in Resource-Rich Economies” Extractive Industries •  “Towards a Framework for Extractive Industries” •  Governance Assessment (Framework on Extractive Industries Governance)” • “Synthesis of EITI++ Comprehensive Approach to Extractive Industries Interviews”  •  “Innovative Approaches for Multi-Stakeholder Engagement in the Extractive Industries” •  “Lessons from World Bank Engagement in Mongolia’s Emerging Mining Sector” •  GOXI Innovation Series • “Extractives for Development: Leveraging Natural Resource Wealth for Diversified and Inclusive  Growth” “Extractives for Development: Leveraging Natural Resource Wealth for Diversified and Inclusive •  Growth” Diagnosing the Micro •  Right-sizing in the Indonesian Civil Service: Opportunities and Constraints,” report “ Political Economy of •  “Indonesian Civil Service: Key Issues and Options for Reform,” report Civil Service Reform in •  Meta study on performance-related pay in the public sector, policy research working paper East Asia •  Case studies on pay flexibility on Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Chile, Brazil, Russia, South Korea, and Philippines Synthesis report •  Accountability reforms: Three papers on accountability in political parties, submitted for publication •  What do we know about what works? Sister Trust Fund grant:  our draft papers, one of which is based on lab experiments and what works in public sector • F The Development reform Effects of Public Sector Management Reform Extractive Industries  eoData, resource corridors, PFM, and transparency have been disseminated at five E4D • G Task Group Natural workshops in Jakarta, Tunis, Washington, Brazil, and Manila. All products have been published Resource-led in the EI Source Book, the online global knowledge compendium being used by the E4D Development Regional initiative. Monthly statistics of online use of the EI Source Book are collected and reported. Workshops “Rents to Riches? The Political Economy of Natural Resource-led Development” •  Security Sector Under implementation •  Expenditure Review Sourcebook Tajikistan • “  Mainstreaming Governance in Practice (and in Projects)” •  “Introduction of the Governance Checklist for Tajikistan” • “Meeting on Governance: Rollout of Governance Checklist”  • “Guidance Note for Operations Officers”  •  “Tajikistan Second Dushanbe Water Supply Project” • “Governance Review: Dushanbe Water Supply and Sewerage Agency (DVK),” final report, June  30, 2011 •  “Political Economy of the Extractive Sector in Tajikistan,” March 22, 2012 • “Political Economy Analysis of Rural Health Stakeholders in Tajikistan,” February 2013  •  “Energy Audit at Talco Aluminum Company in Tajikistan” • “Transparency and Accountability in Agriculture”  •  Report for the study of public awareness on the Strategy of Public Administration Reform, March, 2011 Public Investment •  Better Business Program Overview” “ Management •  Better Business Cases •  “Investing for Change: The Application of BBC in New Zealand” •  Public investment management launch event: videos, PowerPoint presentations, and papers • Strengthening the Management of Public Investment: Korean and International Experiences, a  workshop in Seoul “Appraisal of Public Investment in Practice– Methodological Approaches and Decision Rules in •  Advanced Systems” (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 157 Project/Country Knowledge Product TF015150 “Aggregated Biodiversity Offsets: A Roadmap for Liberia’s Mining Sector” •  Public Finance Peer to •  harters and activity plans for seven Communities of Practice C Peer Learning •  Launch of Public Finance Community of Practice Insider Newsletter and one result story •  Soft-launch of Community of Practice web platform • Five events by the new Communities of Practice  Good Governance  ood Governance Framework based on development best practices with 6 thematic areas and • G for Sustainable Joint 19 subcriteria. Spreadsheet list of all Joint Services Councils (JSCs) in West Bank and Gaza with Service Provision in all JSCs with up to 14 different types of information, including 92 JSCs; 82 in the West Bank and Palestine: West Bank 10 in Gaza. Of the 92 JSCs, 55 are active, 14 temporary and 23 inactive. and Gaza Joint Services Based on the Good Governance Framework for Joint Service Provision an assessment system •  Council Governance with 19 indicators within the six thematic areas above was developed for further ranking of JSCs. Assessment After 42 active JSCs in the West Bank and 5 active JSCs in Gaza responded to a questionnaire, the third output, a ranking of active JSCs was prepared. “Joint Services Council Assessment in the West Bank and Gaza,” March 2015 draft report and •  assessment completed Two-volume report with eight field assessments and four bylaws •  Social Inclusion and •  North Caucasus Meeting—Building Resilience” “ Resilience in the North • Survey questionnaire and an inception report  Caucasus • Research paper (English and Russian)  • PowerPoint presentation (English and Russian), summarizing the findings of the mapping  exercise and highlighting their relevance to the World Bank. Identifying Good  (Re)building Public Services in Post-conflict Countries—Preliminary Findings from a • “ Practices in Comparative Study of Public Service Reform Trajectories in Five Post-Conflict Countries” Strengthening Public “What works for strengthening public service training?” Case study •  Institutions in Fragile “Civil Service College Uganda,” case study •  and Conflict-Affected “ Public Services Rwanda,” draft case study •  Situations Sierra Leone case study •  South Sudan case study •  • “Preventing Harm in Fragile Contexts: Managing Incentives in Parallel Structures, Understanding the Afghanistan Experience of Regulating the Parallel Civil Service” “What Works for Strengthening Public Service Training?” synthesis report •  Cameroon • S  ynthesis report •  Political economy studies on forest and mining sectors • “Development Marketplace: Lessons Learned”  • “GPF Evaluation Report”  • Twenty-three knowledge dissemination events, including five governance forums, a multi-  stakeholder engagement forum, and a decentralization forum Income and Asset  evelopment of a library of laws and regulations on disclosure of financial and business interests • D Disclosure that apply to members of the executive for 176 economies, with a particular focus on heads of state, heads of government, and members of the cabinet “Public office, private interests: Accountability through Income and Asset Disclosure” •  “Income and Asset Disclosure: Case Study Illustrations” Conference: “Declaraciones Juradas de •  funcionarios públicos en América Latina: Aprendizajes y desafíos” on June 8–9 in Santiago de Chile. Conference: “Financial Disclosure by Public Officials: Practices, Challenges, and Lessons •  Learned in Asia,” March 28–29, 2012, Bangkok, Thailand Conference: “Increasing the Effectiveness of Disclosure Systems though Innovation,” May •  13–14, 2013, Istanbul, Turkey Facilitating the establishment of a global network of asset disclosure practitioners •  Development of training modules for Bank staff and practitioners and an enabling business •  model to support country team engagement in income and asset disclosure issues in Nigeria and Sierra Leone “Opening the Black Box: Contextual Drivers of Social Accountability” •  (continued) 158 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Project/Country Knowledge Product Sovereign Wealth Fund  Trinidad and Tobago’s Heritage and Stabilization Fund,” case study • “ Secretariat “ World Bank’s Engagement with Mongolia,” case study •  Q&A briefs with Shuilin Wang, Advisor for Africa Regional Integration and Partnership at the •  Vice Presidency for Africa Region, World Bank, and formerly Managing Director at the China Investment Corporation; Darius Lilaoonwala, Head of IFC Global Infrastructure Fund; and Viktor Kats, Deputy Head of IFC Global Infrastructure Fund Public Finance Peer-to- •  ublic finance Communities of Practice: P Peer Learning - Charters and activity plans for seven Communities of Practice - Launch of Public Finance Community of Practice Insider Newsletter and one result story - Soft-launch of Community of Practice web platform • Five events by the new Communities of Practice PFM in Resource Rich  hree volumes of extractives industries sector primers for economists and public finance • T Settings professionals Three advanced drafts completed •  Rapid Response To  workshop to share experiences has been organized • A Help Guinea Establish The decree on the functioning of the Special Investment Fund was signed December 23, 2013. •  a Special Investment A procedures manual was developed in September 2013 •  Fund to Responsibly and Transparently Manage Mining Revenues Strengthening  etailed PowerPoint presentation on the legal and regulatory framework of the coal non-tax- • D Governance, revenue administration system Improving Incentives Diagnostic study to track the flow of non-tax revenues in the coal and timber sectors and •  and Reducing Non development of “good fit” recommendations with detailed PowerPoint presentations on the Collection and current system—processes and institutional roles and preliminary recommendations Leakages in Indonesia’s Excel model, note, and PowerPoint presentation on the potential of coal royalties. •  Non-tax Revenue Final report to the ministry of finance •  Regime Field Testing and  echnical guidance notes on the application of the IAMTAX model • T Development of Web application that includes reporting results for each core strategic dimension of the •  the Integrated reference system: www.iamtax.org Assessment Model The tool has been implemented nine times in seven countries. Version 2 of IAMTAX was •  for Tax Administration implemented this year in Guatemala, and results have been satisfactory. (IAMTAX) Governance Impact  ethodological framework • M on Service Delivery— Country-level studies for Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, and Benin •  SOE Governance Framework and Public Hospitals PFM Reform Indicators • P  FM core sector indicators used in projects • PFM CSIs • Review of evidence and indicators  • Draft general guides and menu of operational indicators on fiscal transparency and public  investment management Research on the performance of PFM systems •  Greater Effectiveness  hree provinces in the Democratic Republic of Congo have institutional structures and the • T of the Use of Public capacity to carry out district-level participatory budgeting annual exercises Resources Through Websites were created with spaces for three project centers to facilitate interactions and •  the ICT Enhanced generate knowledge linked to the World Bank’s Open Government Partnership program Participatory Budgeting Four modules of training courses for participatory budgeting certification developed in French •  in the Democratic Stocktaking on evaluation of participatory budgeting •  Republic of Congo Legal database •  Provinces (continued) Annex 3. GPF Knowledge Products 159 Project/Country Knowledge Product Ma’arefah Community  even webinars held between December 2013 and May 2014 • S of Practice Arabic platform launched •  Citizens Visible Audits  echnical document on the new participatory methodology • T II: Expansion to all Evaluation of Citizen Visable Audit •  Stages of the Public Investment Cycle Public Expenditure • O  nline public expenditure review registry Review Stocktaking and • Stocktake of 36 public expenditure reviews done to date  Guidance •  Analytic tools and techniques • Draft guidance notes on expenditure analysis tools and techniques and treatment of macro-  fiscal considerations in public expenditure reviews Review of the treatment of institutional and systems aspects in public expenditure reviews, •  looking at 30 examples Guidance on the current practice, lessons, and menu of approaches (in progress). •  Survey underway about how authorities institutionalize the public expenditure review in their •  processes and decision-making, and how the Bank utilizes them. Capacity Building  tudy on a comprehensive assessment integrating input from all key stakeholders to specify a • S for Parliament and menu of activities from which the TGNA leadership can cooperate with the World Bank Parliamentary Budget Capacity building included two international seminars at which the experience and knowledge •  Office in the new PFM of Turkey in terms of implementing PFM reforms and enhancing the oversight role of the Framework parliament was shared with participants from Middle East and North African countries Two study visits to the United Kingdom and Sweden •  Development of the plan and budget committee website •  Evaluation report providing an assessment of overall project activities •  Public Expenditure • B  udgets were disseminated in 230 institutions in Cameroon and 63 in Nepal. Management Reform •  Two national-level and nine district/regional-level workshops Through Budget • Training for journalists  Publication and other • Two workshops for parliamentarians  Social Accountability •  290 schools, health centers and local councils were covered. Mechanisms •  Four learning notes and global stocktaking report on budget transparency published • Several templates prepared and distributed  Developing Institutions In the Shadow of Violence, comprising nine case studies, published by Cambridge Press, 2013 •  in Limited Access Orders: Country Case Studies ICT = information and communications technology; PFM = public financial management. 160 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Annex 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance September 17–19, 2014 The Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) was launched in December 2008 to support the World Bank in the implementation of its Governance and Anticorruption (GAC) strat- egy. As the program will be closing in June 2015, the GPF Secretariat organized a confer- ence to highlight the results and achievements of the program. The event was held from September 17–19, 2014, at the Royal Society in London.21 The conference, held in collaboration with the Overseas Development Institute, was well attended by donor representatives, civil society, and academia. In all, there were more than 180 participants in attendance over two and a half days, including over 85 represen- tatives from civil society organizations. The meeting focused on: (1) sharing lessons learned and GPF outputs; (2) introducing the Governance Global Practice as part of the World Bank’s new organizational structure; (3) finding ways to integrate innovation and governance analysis in country programs; (4) defining the issues and developing a shared vision for key thematic areas of governance; and (5) developing collective thinking, partnerships, and synergies for post-2015 gover- nance in development. There were rich exchanges among participants on all of the conference topics, as dele- gates updated one another on their respective country’s development and thematic areas of work. This raised awareness about the Bank’s Governance Global Practice structure and enhanced the recognition of projects by country program coordinators. The following summaries follow the order of the agenda. 21. A detailed agenda is available at http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/events-documents/5110.pdf. Annex 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance 161 Opening Remarks In his opening remarks, Mario Marcel, Governance Global Practice Senior Director, said that we are all interested in hearing about “concrete, tangible improvements from the field that have the prospect of being scaled up and replicated.” He noted that building partnerships is important when shaping the governance agenda, and acknowledged the contribution of the GPF in helping to mainstream governance into Bank operations.22 Jonathan Hargreaves asserted that the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) was proud to be part of the GPF and that the conference was a great opportunity to discuss and shape the new agenda. “Aid and non-aid approaches go hand-in-hand,” he said, and he further emphasized the need to accelerate and sup- port the Bank’s work on fragile and conflict states and extractive industries, as well as innovations in social accountability. He added that using the right political economy anal- ysis (PEA) tools and cross-sectoral staff is critical to developmental success. GPF Evaluation and Lessons Learned Graham Teskey of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia picked up from the previous session by saying that the GPF instigated “a transactional change rather than a transformational” one. Although the GPF expanded the legitimate space of governance discourse in the Bank, he was unsure about the intellectual leadership of the governance agenda. The GPF received a satisfactory rating from a recently concluded independent evalua- tion. Richard Cambridge from DAI Consulting presented the overall findings and high- lighted the strong influence that GPF funds have on Bank-wide operations and on other donors, with Africa, East Asia and Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean regions being the most influenced. Sahr Kpundeh, World Bank Africa Region Governance and Anti-Corruption Adviser, provided an overview of GAC in Projects and highlighted some of the innovative measures taken in the Africa Region under the US$1 million GPF grant, including the external implementation status report (EISR+) and contract watch initiative. Among the various topics in the emerging agenda is support to regions in mainstreaming citizen engagement tools across relevant projects. 22. See Mario Marcel’s blog, “New Directions in Governance” at http://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/governance/ new-directions-governance. 162 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy New Directions in the World Bank Senior Director Marcel’s presentation highlighted current reforms at the Bank and laid out a vision for the Governance Global Practice. The Governance Global Practice would also be proactive and reach out to other Global Practices, he said, and identify shared initia- tives in areas such as extractives, identification registries on social protection and health sectors, taxation, decentralization, and service delivery. “GAC and GPF were precursors of a change like this and it has the ability to be catalytic.” Robert Hunja, the Director for Public Integrity and Openness in the World Bank’s Governance Global Practice said the Bank’s presence on the anticorruption agenda is not as robust as it should be, and he identified four emerging areas: (1) fortifying Bank oper- ations against the risk of fraud and corruption risk; (2) rethinking and supporting coun- tries on anticorruption more broadly by being innovative and by “moving the dial up” on social mobilization; (3) being more strategic about using the Bank’s voice and presence through forums like the Open Government Partnership; and (4) promoting cutting-edge research and knowledge. This led to Chief Institutional Economist Joel Hellman’s talk on how to best craft a stron- ger discipline on governance. After conducting a knowledge audit, he said he discovered a lack of intellectual coherence in the field. He said that little is known about how to create institutions and drivers of change, especially in fragile and conflict-affected states, and governance was seen as more of donor-driven concept rather than a clear topic of study. It is crucial to determine the role the Bank can play in shaping outcomes. Hellman also discussed a governance training program—an important part of the management’s deliv- erables to train over 700 staff to engage with the rest of the governance team.23 Integrating Governance in Country Programming The panelists offered interesting perspectives during the session on integrating gover- nance in country programming. Liz Hart with DAI Consulting, said the evaluation had reinforced the case for incentives. GPF funds allowed for flexibility, which was valuable since governance was not institutionalized in every country. Nigeria is one of the few 23. See blog by Joel Hellman, “Nigeria: Can Governance be Filtered?” http://searchassist.verizon.com/main?Intercept- Source=0&ClientLocation=us&ParticipantID=euekiz39ksg8nwp7iqj2fp5wzfwi5q76&FailureMode=1&SearchQuery=&- FailedURI=http%3A%2F%2Fglobalpractices.worldbank.org%2Fgovernance%2FManagementBlog%2FLists%2FPosts%2FPost. aspx%3FList%3D2643b85b-950a-487f-ae2f-425012baf535%26ID%3D11&AddInType=4&Version=2.1.8-1.90base&Referer=&Im- plementation=0&method=GET (internal link). Annex 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance 163 exceptions. The Nigerian country director Marie Francoise Marie-Nelly is a strong advo- cate of mainstreaming governance.24 She explained that there was enormous lending pressure in Nigeria, so it was important to unite the country management unit under one agenda. The PEA coincided with the preparation of the Country Partnership Strategy and as a result, the governance approach was embedded into it. Kenya’s GPF program was represented by Task Team Leader Chris Finch, who empha- sized the importance of donor coordination because the country was undergoing political upheaval. He said that the Bank’s comparative advantage is institutional and that there is potential for the Governance Global Practice to look at social accountability from the sup- ply side. Finally, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia’s Kirsten Bishop said her agency was also undergoing internal changes and that it was keen to access an improved, shared pool of information. She described the agency staff as generalists rather than technicians. Three breakout groups on Governance in Extractives, Political Economy, and Social Accountability discussed the practicalities of mainstreaming governance through ana- lytical tools, structures, and indicators. The main conclusions drawn from the sessions included: • Tools like the systematic country diagnostics are important to develop country programs. • Structures around staff incentives and sharing information with donor partners, as well as understanding/anticipating citizens’ perceptions and needs better is important. • The use of indicators and feedback to monitor “smarter” projects during implementa- tion is also necessary through tools like Strength of Public Management Systems and Actionable Governance Indicators. Key Thematic Sessions Governance in Extractives This session brought together World Bank staff from headquarters and the field with key donors such as DFID and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia; partners such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Natural Resources Governance Institute; civil society organization networks such as Publish What You Pay; and new players such 24. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knm6uKWEP_g. 164 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy as Open Corporates, which focuses on beneficial ownership aspects. The progress made in this agenda was recognized, but there was also a consensus that further actions are needed to ensure that petroleum and mineral resources translate into tangible develop- ment benefits. With emerging priorities in this field, including harnessing data and finding ways to support meaningful civil society participation, there was strong interest in con- tinuing the discussion from the World Bank Group and its partners. The World Bank Group could add additional value through comprehensive engagement in new producer countries to help manage expectations, explore the consequences of revenues from extractives being used in new models of financing for development, and convene the necessary global dialogue on ensuring interoperability of extractives datasets.25 A planned follow-up meeting with DFID, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia, and the Natural Resource Governance has been confirmed for early December Institute to further clarify where different organizations can best contribute. GPF financ- ing has been secured to support the meeting, which could serve as a focal point for Governance Global Practice conversations about clarifying integrated offers on gover- nance of extractives, and working with energy and extractives, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and other key players—internal and external. Political Economy There are four key challenges around PEA: the bureaucratic barriers, the policy environ- ment, corporate incentives, and programming requirements. Dealing with institutions, not just during design, but during implementation, and engaging with sectoral colleagues to deal with service delivery and infrastructure, were important elements to the component. DFID and the World Bank are taking different approaches to promoting PEA and giv- ing more consideration to the political constraints and opportunities within their orga- nizations. DFID is looking at its organizational structure and culture and how it might be reformed to empower staff to use their own professional judgment, take responsibility for the programs they design, and create extra space in order to work more flexibly. The 25. See blog by Michael Jarvis, “Governance of Extractives Industries: Old Metal, New Polish,” at http://blogs.worldbank.org/ governance/governance-extractive-industries-old-metal-new-polish. Annex 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance 165 World Bank is attempting to use the results from working with PEA to argue for its more broad use across the organization and to promote it within the organization. There are questions about the cost of working more politically. There are two problems among some donors: they must spend large amounts of money on projects with mea- surable outcomes and they must spend more money on staff with expertise in a specific country’s context in addition to staff with expertise in PEA. Staff members need more time and space to use and apply PEA to their work, but there are difficulties in allocating a larger portion of the budget to staffing. Improving the work of donor organizations around the politics of development must be treated as a broad issue that includes the human resources processes, procurement, and organizational management. Knowledge and expertise in these areas must be included in the way donors try to adopt ways of working that are more politically aware. It is essential to work with and support those trying to document and change internal ways of working, while at the same time finding other robust PEA tools that could be deployed to better understand what drives or prevents political change. Political economy anal- ysis (and Theories of Change26) is best used through ongoing dialogue and adaptation rather than as a one-off application of a tool. Monitoring politics, identifying and adapt- ing to opportunities, and working across sectors require the time of knowledgeable and empowered staff.27 Public Financial Management Generally, public financial management (PFM) reforms seem to have worked, and PFM has always enjoyed a pride of place at the Bank. But going forward, the Governance Global Practice work should focus on linking the practice and expertise on PFM with tangible results for citizens that can lead them to eventually increase their trust in government. Although there are a number of indicators already developed (e.g., public expenditure 26. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/jsrp/2014/08/18/six-key-findings-on-the-use-of-theories-of-change-in-international-development/. 27. See “Radically Thinking Governance: A Manifesto” (blog) by Marta Foresti and Leni Wild at http://www.odi.org/com- ment/8835-governance-new-manifesto; “Deep Structure: Tensions in the Emerging Governance Agenda?” (blog) by Hamish Nixon at http://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/deep-structure-tensions-emerging-governance-agenda; Pablo Yanguas from the Effective States and Inclusive Development Research Center on how organizations need to change internally to work in more politically smart ways (video) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQD6DX9xfDc; Sue Unsworth, Principal of the Policy Practice, on what politically smart, locally led approaches look like in practice (video) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N- wfuigAqJpY; and Wilf Mwamba, Governance Advisor for DFID Nigeria, on what politically informed programming looks like in practice (video) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufsIpQulmqc. 166 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy and financial accountability), there is still a lack of clear understanding, and PFM systems are not the only precondition for good service delivery. Nonetheless, the importance of PFM instruments such as Integrated Financial Management Information Systems, payroll management, and procurement processes, was noted for playing an important role in keeping the government from overspending and going bankrupt. There may be biases in the way the PFM discipline applies itself that could blunt its ability to neatly connect with the service delivery agenda: the desire to simplistically compare systems across countries rather than considering local complexities, the need to have perfect systems and data rather than settling for good enough functional results; and the regular attempts at implementing projects that are donor rather than government priorities.28 Social Accountability An introduction to the Bank’s social accountability flagship report as well as DFID activ- ities supporting social accountability programs in countries such as Nigeria led to a rich discussion on what has been learned from citizen feedback mechanisms and how effec- tive new tools are for citizen engagement, including information and communications technology. A major takeaway was that social accountability is the social component of PFM, and context can be changed when societies are dynamic. Three civil society orga- nization panelists spelled out the importance of citizen-state interface through commu- nity scorecards, how impact evaluations work in social accountability, and on-the-ground experiences from Mozambique. Two key goals emerged from the role of information and communications technology in social accountability: (1) a mechanism that can address some barriers to accountability and data (e.g., lowering costs of collection, comparison, dissemination, and adaptation of data); and (2) a fundamental game changer that can open up new spaces and catalyze change where it would not otherwise occur. Overall, there were mixed views on the role and effectiveness of citizen noise alone. Some considered it to be effective, but others emphasized the potential for officials to act with impunity in certain systems, regardless citizen action. 28. See Matt Andrews, Associate Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, speaking on whether PFM makes a difference to service delivery at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpN1_hiU8ok. Annex 4. GPF Conference in London: New Directions in Governance 167 Regarding the accountability profiles of selected sectors, the discussion revolved around a service characteristics framework that could support politically informed technical solu- tions. This is not the same as a value-chain analysis; it is about analyzing performance. Characteristics are not immutable: the framework raises the possibility that organizational responses can be tailored to address any negative effects of characteristics. But how can this framework be operationalized in practice? This would have implications for pro- gram design. A simplified framework along the lines of the World Development Report Accountability Framework could prove more beneficial. To move forward, case studies and anecdotal stories may be needed.29 Does Governance Have a Place in the Post-2015 Framework? This question was debated on the final day of the event with the timeline for final negoti- ations due to end in January 2015 and new goals to be agreed upon by September 2015. The question as to whether or not there should be goals at all was debated. Should states instead have a menu of indicators in place, such as registrations of birth, road deaths, and freedom of movement across borders? Would this improve ownership? A study conducted by the Overseas Development Institute found that people care about governance. The basic delivery of services and corruption are of primary concern; political freedoms and voice are secondary. Members of the military are most trusting in govern- ment—across all countries, irrespective of income. Governance must be a cross-cut- ting goal. It was also pointed out that, beyond an impact on aid and development, the post-2015 framework seems limited. A case must be made for more than just a gover- nance-related goal. The narrative should be about making transparency and accountabil- ity center-stage. Development goals do, however, build on indicators and targets. Indicators can unleash conversations among stakeholders. Goals are not discussed by government experts: this is a political process. The process has advanced enough to recognize that governance is inclusive and the governance agenda has evolved in the development community.30 29. See Jeff Thindwa, Manager of the World Bank’s Social Accountability Practice, speaking about what has been learned about social accountability (video) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8mAM8I and Joseph Wales questioning where we are going with social accountability (video) at http://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/enthusiasm-confusion-and-bit-clarity- where-are-we-going-social-accountability. 30. See Gina Bergh, Marta Foresti, Alina Rocha Menocal, and Leni Wild (2012). “Building Governance into a Post-2015 Frame- work: Exploring Transparency and Accountability as an Entry Point” at http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/pub- lications-opinion-files/7875.pdf. 168 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Next Steps Participant feedback has been very positive and has led to fruitful follow-up discussions on thematic areas such as extractive industries, public financial management, and social accountability. Even though the GPF closed in February 2015, there are ample opportu- nities for new partnerships and knowledge exchanges to take place. So far, the event has led to plans for the following: • Holding a “Doing Development Differently” workshop at Harvard University in collab- oration with the Overseas Development Institute. • Development of a governance training program curriculum for World Bank Governance Global Practice staff, in collaboration with DFID and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia, and accessible by other development agencies. • Organization of a follow-up meeting on the governance of extractives by the World Bank, Natural Resource Governance Institute, and the DFID in December 2015. There was a high level of interest in this conference. • Continuation of the discussions about a new partnership between the Governance Global Practice and DFID. This partnership would be primarily based on sharing ideas and knowledge and help to deepening the relationship in a systemic way. A DFID delegation will visit Washington, DC, in the near future to discuss modalities. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Australia expressed an interest in joining this emerging partnership. Resources and Links • www.governanceknowledge.org (internal) • GPF page under construction: www.worldbank.org/governance (external) • GPF 2013 Annual Report: http://blogs.worldbank.org/governance/holding-mirror-governance-partnership- facility-gpf-89-million-multi-donor-trust-fund-releases-annual • GPF Grant Activity Report: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/ Resources/285741-1343934891414/GPFGrantActivities_9_12-final_link.pdf GPF Lessons Learned Series Annex 1: Results Framework 169 • Mainstreaming Governance in Country Programs: Insights from the GPF in Zambia: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/ Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_GPFLearningSeries_Zambia_Web.pdf • Insights from the GPF in Tajikistan: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/ Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_GPFLearningSeries_Tajikistan_Web.pdf • Insights from the GPF in Nigeria: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ PublicSectorandGovernance/Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_ GPFLearningSeries_Nigeria_Web.pdf • Insights from the GPF in Mongolia: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ PublicSectorandGovernance/Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_ GPFLearningSeries_Mongolia_Web.pdf • Accountable Devolution Program: Insights from the GPF in Kenya: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/Resources/ 285741-1343934891414/9059_GPFLearningSeries_Kenya_Web.pdf • Impact Evaluation of the Citizen’s Visible Audits: A Community Evaluation Program in Colombia: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/ Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_GPFLearningSeries_Colombia_Web.pdf • Global Review of the GPF Program in Cameroon: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PublicSectorandGovernance/ Resources/285741-1343934891414/9059_GPFLearningSeries_Cameroon_Web.pdf 170 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Annex 5. List of Grants Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) Window 1 W1 CAGAC Program for Albania 1,500,500.60 1,217,944.79 282,555.81 81 W1 Mongolia—Strengthening Governance Across the Mining 2,030,000.00 1,985,422.34 44,577.66 98 Value Chain by Promoting Broader and More Informed Public Accountability W1 Governance Partnership Facility Zambia 2,000,000.00 1,955,637.61 44,362.39 98 W1 Banking on Change: Tackling Sector and Demand-Side 1,933,768.97 1,862,309.28 71,459.69 96 Governance Issues in Cameroon W1 Mainstreaming Governance in Tajikistan Country Program 3,800,000.00 3,729,850.93 70,149.07 98 W1 Improving Economic Governance in Nigeria 12,106,500.00 12,025,973.95 80,526.05 99 W1 Kenya—Supporting Accountable Devolution 5,118,091.44 5,076,879.46 41,211.98 99 W1 Democratic Republic of Congo: Country Governance and 3,000,000.00 2,890,310.83 109,689.17 96 Anti Corruption Program Implementation W1 Cambodia GPF 1,500,000.00 1,455,510.94 44,489.06 97 W1 Nepal CGAC 2,000,000.00 1,668,675.08 331,324.92 83 W1 Afghanistan Governance and Accountability Program 1,504,090.20 1,504,090.20 - 100 W1 Mainstreaming of Governance and Institutional 1,100,000.00 990,840.31 109,159.69 90 Development W1 Enhancing Political Leadership to Improve Governance 500,000.00 442,883.59 57,116.41 89 and Public Sector Performance in Haiti W1 Philippines Governance Strategy 1,500,000.00 1,445,602.95 54,397.05 96 W1 Rebuilding State Capacity in Liberia 400,000.00 379,359.77 20,640.23 95 W1 Uganda CAS Implementation: repositioning the Bank’s 1,600,000.00 1,310,726.05 289,273.95 82 role on Governance W1 Social Accountability for Inclusive and Transparent 2,000,000.00 1,991,374.78 8,625.22 100 Governance in Ghana W1 Sierra Leone Good Governance Initiative—Integrating 1,400,000.00 1,395,542.96 4,457.04 100 Governance Principles into New Joint Country Assistance Strategy (JAS) for FY10–13 W1 Nigeria: Strengthening Sector Governance and Promoting 797,540.23 797,540.23 - 100 Partnership in Service Delivery W1 Implementation Support 200,000.00 155,891.85 44,108.15 78 W1 The Empirics of Governance 566,317.56 566,317.56 - 100 W1 Review of Implementing Governance in Country-Level 81,128.14 81,128.14 - 100 Bank programs W1 Governance Work in Systematic Countrgnostic 265,000.00 57,969.50 207,030.50 22 W1 Total 46,902,937.14 44,987,783.10 1,915,154.04 96 (continued) Annex 5. List of Grants 171 Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) Window 2 W2 xxxxxx Measurement of Indicators of Governance in 500,000.00 430,296.04 69,703.96 86 Health Service Delivery W2 Strengthened Governance and Political Economy Analysis 583,000.00 578,604.95 4,395.05 99 for Engagement in Resource Rich Settings W2 Strengthening Governance at the Project Level 1,000,000.00 842,551.71 157,448.29 84 W2 Strengthening Governance of Fisheries 600,000.00 597,875.27 2,124.73 100 W2 Deepening GAC in the Africa Region 1,000,000.00 999,274.44 725.56 100 W2 Strategic Approaches for Strengthening Governance in 930,000.00 905,123.62 24,876.38 97 Extractive Industries W2 Domestic Accountability in Fragile Settings: A Gradual 232,000.00 216,736.90 15,263.10 93 Approach to Strengthening PRS Monitoring W2 Infrastructure Advisory Service—Mainstreaming GAC in 1,000,000.00 996,191.37 3,808.63 100 Infrastructure Operations W2 Promoting Good Governance in Nigeria’s Niger Delta 750,000.00 745,701.91 4,298.09 99 W2 Governance Partnership Facility 175,000.00 173,349.45 1,650.55 99 W2 Governance Partnership Facility 225,000.00 223,998.34 1,001.66 100 W2 Stretching the Frontiers of Governance Work in Honduras 350,000.00 315,277.27 34,722.73 90 W2 Implementing Right to Information (RTI) in South Asia 1,000,000.00 962,014.41 37,985.59 96 W2 Strengthening Governance in Argentina’s Health Sector 350,000.00 349,366.31 633.69 100 W2 Information Matters—Transparency and Accountability in 793,000.00 789,332.94 3,667.06 100 the Kyrgyz Republic W2 Political Economy and Governance (PEG) in ECA Region 400,000.00 381,814.92 18,185.08 95 W2 Political Economy Analysis for Papua New Guinea 200,000.00 199,907.73 92.27 100 W2 Mozambique: Improving Voice and Accountability 270,000.00 263,731.47 6,268.53 98 W2 Institutions of Accountability: Office of the Ombudsman 750,000.00 746,622.65 3,377.35 100 for Transparent and Accountable Local Governance and Human Rights Protection at the Local Level W2 Actionable Governance Indicators for Human 500,000.00 499,912.50 87.50 100 Development: Measuring Service Delivery in Education W2 Supporting the Indonesian Corruption Eradication 150,000.00 95,653.59 54,346.41 64 Commission’s Corruption Prevention Strategy W2 Capacity Building for the Parliament and Parliamentary 575,000.00 496,178.81 78,821.19 86 Budget Office in the New Public Financial Management Framework W2 GPF Trust Fund Grant for Improving Prevention, 350,000.00 342,377.18 7,622.82 98 Oversight and Accountability to Increase Transparency and Curb Corruption in Peru W2 Strengthening the External Accountability Framework in 500,000.00 480,981.56 19,018.44 96 Thailand W2 Strengthening the Governance and Anti-Corruption 220,000.00 212,693.87 7,306.13 97 Agenda in Djibouti W2 Public Expenditure Management Reform Through Budget 754,000.00 750,077.39 3,922.61 99 Publication and Other Social Accountability W2 Improving Governance in Social Services Delivery in 750,000.00 713,092.46 36,907.54 95 Morocco: A Program of Randomized Impact (continued) 172 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) W2 Governance in the New Uganda CAS: Capturing 215,000.00 206,701.33 8,298.67 96 Opportunities and Mitigating Risks W2 Strengthening Governance, Transparency, and 350,000.00 330,687.27 19,312.73 94 Accountability in Kenya W2 Political Economy Analyses of Three Sectors in Angola 172,500.00 149,409.52 23,090.48 87 W2 Governance and Political Economy Analysis in Critical 329,250.00 329,227.72 22.28 100 Sectors in Emerging Post-Conflict Sierra Leone W2 Building Demand-Side Capacities for Increasing Budget 380,000.00 337,780.94 42,219.06 89 Transparency and Performance W2 Strengthening Governance for State Economic 500,000.00 430,737.05 69,262.95 86 Development in Northeast and North Brazil W2 Building an Accountability Coalition to Address Systemic 500,000.00 246,298.18 253,701.82 49 Corruption in Paraguay W2 Local Public Private Partnerships for Crime and Violence 258,000.00 257,363.14 636.86 100 Prevention W2 Political Economy of Subsidy Reform and Social 750,000.00 642,060.67 107,939.33 86 Protection Strategies: Understanding and Managing Political Risks in MENA Countries W2 Improving Prevention, Oversight and Accountability to 100,000.00 98,916.13 1,083.87 99 Increase Transparency and Curb Corruption in Peru (Bank TA) W2 Innovative Use of Technology to Improve Governance and 500,000.00 499,109.48 890.52 100 Accountability W2 Citizen’s Visible Audits to Improve Public Investment 700,000.00 697,168.09 2,831.91 100 Transparency and Accountability W2 Political Economy of the Water Supply and Sanitation 495,000.00 487,490.22 7,509.78 98 Sector: Bringing Together Approaches from PRMPS, SDV, ComGap to Develop Water Sector Programs W2 Mainstreaming GAC in Human Development (HD): 446,171.21 443,989.22 2,181.99 100 Supporting Task Teams W2 Overcoming Governance and Fiduciary Constraints to 325,000.00 324,184.50 815.50 100 Service Delivery in Argentina W2 Bridging the Change Gap—Support to the implementa- 890,000.00 824,733.90 65,266.10 93 tion of WAEMU PFM Directives W2 Implementing GAC in Projects—Demand for Good 600,000.00 599,748.75 251.25 100 Governance Approaches to Strengthen the MNA Portfolio W2 Strengthening Reform and Improving Public Procurement 780,000.00 761,095.84 18,904.16 98 performance in AFR and EAP W2 Sector Governance and Land Governance—Africa 200,000.00 106,936.21 93,063.79 53 Regional W2 Citizen Voices: Global Conference on Citizen Engagement 100,000.00 97,943.36 2,056.64 98 for Enhance Development Impact W2 Piloting Innovations for Results (PIfR) in Public Sector 500,000.00 490,279.64 9,720.36 98 Management Reform W2 ODTA-ICT4Gov Monitoring and Evaluation 500,000.00 492,198.68 7,801.32 98 W2 Governance and Decentralization of Public Service 300,000.00 191,513.94 108,486.06 64 Provision (continued) Annex 5. List of Grants 173 Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) W2 Addressing Governance Challenges in Fragile and 200,000.00 162,048.77 37,951.23 81 Conflict-Affected Countries W2 Strengthening Citizen Engagement in Service Delivery 50,000.00 47,416.00 2,584.00 95 Sectors in FCV Countries (FCV Governance Facility) (sub- grant of TF016273) W2 Good Governance for Sustainable Joint Service 50,000.00 48,814.90 1,185.10 98 Provision in Palestine: Joint Services Council Governance Assessment (Sub-Grant of TF016273) W2 Institutional Sources of Resilience in the North Caucasus 50,000.00 38,983.84 11,016.16 78 (subgrant of TF016273) W2 Strengthening Access to Justice Through Cross-Sector 50,000.00 49,968.67 31.33 100 Engagements (subgrant of TF016273) W2 Strengthening Public Services in the Context of Fragility 100,000.00 81,154.85 18,845.15 81 (subgrant of TF016273) W2 Supporting the Indonesian Corruption Eradication 600,000.00 254,583.25 345,416.75 42 Commission’s Corruption Prevention Strategy W2 GAC Initiatives for Development Effectiveness Project 500,000.00 499,674.13 325.87 100 W2 GAC Initiatives for Development Effectiveness (TF094847) 50,000.00 23,016.73 26,983.27 46 W2 Total 26,447,921.21 24,559,973.98 1,887,947.23 93 Window 3 W3 Knowledge Development on Access to Information 290,000.00 288,684.35 1,315.65 100 Reforms W3 Identifying Good Practice in Strengthening the Public 524,950.00 506,366.00 18,584.00 96 Institutions in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations W3 Governance at Country Level Knowledge and Learning 500,000.00 477,139.71 22,860.29 95 Events W3 Joint COPs–GAC Learning Events 260,636.90 257,745.69 2,891.21 99 W3 Sharing Global Knowledge and Practice on Governance 2,254,169.02 2,254,169.02 - 100 W3 Knowledge Platform 200,000.00 186,163.98 13,836.02 93 W3 Strengthening Learning and Knowledge Networks in 300,000.00 299,887.51 112.49 100 Support of Demand-Side Governance W3 Political Economy Global Knowledge Platform (KP) and 250,000.00 248,899.97 1,100.03 100 Community of Practice (CoP) W3 Developing Institutions in Limited Access Orders: Country 203,500.00 191,540.95 11,959.05 94 Case Studies W3 Using Political Analysis to Enhance Community 300,000.00 299,605.69 394.31 100 Development Outcomes W3 Assessing Social Participation in Infrastructure Regulation 140,000.00 132,347.56 7,652.44 95 and Utilities—Outcomes W3 Governance and Civic Engagement: A Field Experiment 225,000.00 225,000.00 - 100 W3 GAC in Projects Peer Learning 300,000.00 259,049.45 40,950.55 86 W3 Governance and Political Economy for Growth Analysis 165,000.00 111,014.32 53,985.68 67 W33 GAC Knowledge and Learning Portal 780,000.00 744,322.22 35,677.78 95 W3 Impact Evaluation of Governance and Accountability- 350,000.00 348,302.87 1,697.13 100 Enhancing Interventions in Poor Areas in the Dominican Republic (continued) 174 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) W3 Understanding and Improving Governance of Health 50,000.00 48,519.63 1,480.37 97 Services in Alexandria and Menoufia—An Integrated Strategy for Better Service Delivery and Higher Utilization Rates W3 Window One Workshop 400,000.00 364,734.25 35,265.75 91 W3 Governance and Anti-Corruption in Infrastructure 200,000.00 196,067.08 3,932.92 98 Advisory Program-Knowledge Management W3 Good Governance and Accountability in Extractive 285,000.00 283,749.72 1,250.28 100 Industries W3 A New Methodology for Governance Analysis in Sectors 200,000.00 192,802.65 7,197.35 96 W3 Actionable Governance Indicators Improvements and 350,000.00 349,813.97 186.03 100 Enhancements W3 Diagnosing the Micro Political Economy of Civil Service 350,000.00 346,347.49 3,652.51 99 Reform in East Asia W3 Accountability Reforms: What Do We Know About What 250,000.00 248,680.47 1,319.53 99 Works? W3 Development Effects of Public Sector Management 350,000.00 349,984.21 15.79 100 Reform W3 Knowledge Development and Sharing on Asset 343,944.89 343,944.89 - 100 Disclosure Systems W3 Sovereign Wealth Fund Secretariat 220,000.00 200,849.89 19,150.11 91 W3 Evaluation of the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) 890,759.16 890,759.16 - 100 W3 Total 10,932,959.97 10,646,492.70 286,467.27 97 Window 4 W4.1 Climate Change Expenditure Review Sourcebook 260,350.00 260,080.20 269.80 100 W4.1 Security Sector Expenditure Review Sourcebook 268,700.00 121,013.47 147,686.53 45 W4.1 Public Financial Management in Resource Rich Settings 360,350.00 358,662.10 1,687.90 100 W4.1 Field Testing and Development of the Integrated 247,250.00 244,296.22 2,953.78 99 Assessment Model for Tax Administration (IAMTAX) W4.1 Political Economy Aspects of PFM Reforms 210,000.00 77,664.82 132,335.18 37 W4.1 Governance of State-Owned Enterprises (SOE)—Global 200,000.00 126,768.18 73,231.82 63 W4.1 GFR 12160—Public Investment Management Tools for 200,000.00 181,670.34 18,329.66 91 PPPs W4.1 PFM Reform Indicators 220,000.00 148,743.00 71,257.00 68 W4.1 Public Expenditure Review Stocktaking and Guidance 250,000.00 173,641.94 76,358.06 69 W4.2 Developing a Framework for Design of PFM Systems in 70,000.00 52,980.09 17,019.91 76 Endemically Capacity-Constrained Contexts W4.2 Mongolia: Supporting Civil Society Oversight over Public 170,000.00 167,791.31 2,208.69 99 Procurement W4.2 Rapid Response to Help Guinea Establish a Special 170,000.00 91,480.49 78,519.51 54 Investment Fund to Responsibly and Transparently Manage Mining Revenues W4.2 Strengthening Governance, Improving Incentives and 197,500.00 193,933.79 3,566.21 98 Reducing Non Collection and Leakages in Indonesia’s Non-tax Revenue Regime (continued) Annex 5. List of Grants 175 Unused Disbursement Grant Name Grant Amount Disbursements Balance (percent) W4.2 Governance Impact on Service Delivery in Primary 250,000.00 170,294.69 79,705.31 68 Education—Africa Regional W4.2 Orissa State: Building Public Financial Management 200,000.00 199,205.13 794.87 100 Systems for Mineral Based Inclusive Growth W4.2 Bottom up Costing for Medium Term Expenditure 200,000.00 161,832.93 38,167.07 81 Frameworks (MTEF) in Brazil and Indonesia W4.2 Capital Project Appraisal Methodology in MICs and LICs 187,700.00 65,937.16 121,762.84 35 W4.2 Enhancing Accountability in Public Procurement and 193,000.00 182,701.62 10,298.38 95 Capturing Results W4.2 Enhancing Demand-Side Use of Open Budget Data in 200,000.00 160,012.36 39,987.64 80 Kenya, Tunisia, and Tanzania W4.2 Greater Effectiveness of the Use of Public Resources 175,000.00 147,624.82 27,375.18 84 Through the ICT Enhanced W4.2 PFM Maarefah Community of Practice (W4.2) 613,753.00 547,461.33 66,291.67 89 W4.2 Citizens Visible Audits II: Expansion to all Stages of the 200,000.00 144,435.54 55,564.46 72 Public Investment Cycle W4.2 Developing Road Map to Strengthen CLLD in Khyber 120,000.00 118,471.65 1,528.35 99 Pakhtunkhwa W4.3 Public Finance Peer to Peer Learning 340,000.00 312,165.56 27,834.44 92 W4.3 Deepening Knowledge Base of Public Spending for 30,000.00 22,440.62 7,559.38 75 Enhanced Understanding of Determinants, Causal Relations and Impact of Fiscal Openness on Downstream Use W4.3 Accounting, Treasury and Financial Reporting Community 30,000.00 17,330.43 12,669.57 58 of Practice Comparative Study W4 Total 5,563,603.00 4,448,639.79 1,114,963.21 80 176 Governance Partnership Facility FInal Report 2009–15: Results, Lessons, and Legacy References References Akmeemana, Sakuntala. 2015. “Aid is Politics.” Governance for Development (blog), February 24. http://blogs. worldbank.org/governance/node/1045 Bank Information Center and Global Witness. 2008. “Assessment of International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group Extractive Industries Transparency Implementation,” Bank Information Center and Global Witness. http://www.bankinformationcenter.org/en/Document.11479.pdf Bari, S., V. Chand, and S. Singh Munirka, eds. 2015. Empowerment Through Information, The Evolution of Transparency Regimes in South Asia. (Volumes 1 and 2). Transparency Advisory Group (TAG) and Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB). http://transparencyadvisorygroup.org/uploads/Empowerment_ through_Information_-_Volume_-_I.pdf and http://www.transparencyadvisorygroup.org/uploads/ Empowerment_through_Information_-_Volume_II.pdf. Barma, Naazneen H., Kai Kaiser, Tuan Minh Le, and Lorena Viñuela. 2013. Rents to Riches? The Political Economy of Natural Resource Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bit- stream/handle/10986/2381/659570PUB0EPI10737B0Rents0to0Riches.pdf?sequence=1. Bodea, Cristina. 2012. “Natural Resources, Weak States and Civil War: Can Rents Stabilize Coup-Prone Regimes?” Policy Research Working Paper 6071, World Bank, Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ bitstream/handle/10986/9350/WPS6071.pdf?sequence=1. Booth, David. 2014. “Aiding Institutional Reform in Developing Countries: Lessons from the Philippines on What Works, What Doesn’t and Why.” Working Politically in Practice Series Case Study No. 1, The Asia Foundation and Overseas Development Institute. http://www.businessenvironment.org/dyn/be/docs/287/ ODI_WorkingPoliticallyPhilippinesCaseStudy.pdf. Booth, David, and Sue Unsworth. 2014. “Politically Smart, Locally Led Development.” Overseas Development Institute. http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9158.pdf. Chand, Vikram K. 2015. “Editorial Note.” In Empowerment Through Information, The Evolution of Transparency Regimes in South Asia (Volume 1):, edited by S. Bari, V. Chand, and S. Singh, Munirka, Transparency Advisory Group (TAG) and Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB). http://transparencyadvisorygroup.org/uploads/ Empowerment_through_Information_-_Volume_-_I.pdf. Freedom Forum. 2011. “Towards Open Government in Nepal: Experiences with the Right to Information.” http://www. right2info.org/resources/publications/publications/nepal_towards-open-government_freedom-forum_2013 Fritz, Verena, Brian Levy, and Rachel Ort. 2014. Problem-Driven Political Economy Analysis: The World Bank’s Experience. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/16389 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. Grandvoinnet, Helene, Ghazia Aslam, and Shomikho Raha. 2015. Opening the Black Box: The Contextual Drivers of Social Accountability. Washington, DC: World Bank. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/exter- nal/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/04/17/000333037_20150417113346/Rendered/ PDF/958090PUB0seri0PUBLIC09781464804816.pdf. Hogg, Richard, Claudia Nassif, Camilo Gomez Osorio, William Byrd, and Andrew Beath. 2013. Afghanistan in Transition: Looking Beyond 2014. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bit- stream/handle/10986/13107/758480PUB0EPI0001300PUBDATE02028013.pdf?sequence=1. MSI Integrity. 2015. “Protecting the Cornerstone: Assessing the Governance of EITI Multi-Stakeholder Groups.” MSI Integrity. http://www.msi-integrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/MSI-Integrity-Protecting-The-Corner stone-Report.pdf. References 177 Myers, Ronald, Arne Disch, and Laura Plattner. 2015. “Producing Innovation and Impact: The Governance Partnership Facility, Window 4 Evaluation,” World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank. 2009a. “Governance and Anticorruption in Lending Operations: A Benchmarking and Learning Review.” Quality Assurance Group (QAG), World Bank, Washington, DC. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/GAC_ review_2009.pdf. World Bank. 2009b. “Management Response to the Extractive Industries Review,” World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2011. “Implementing Country-Level Governance Programs: A Review of GPF Window 1 Country Programs.” World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2012. “Devolution without Disruption: Pathways to a Successful New Kenya.” Volumes 1 and 2, World Bank, Washington, DC. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/ 11/15/000333037_20121115230524/Rendered/PDF/NonAsciiFileName0.pdfand http://documents.worldbank. org/curated/en/2012/11/16964608/devolution-without-disruption-pathways-successful-new-kenya-vol-2-2- main-report. ———. 2014a. “Governance of Extractive Industries: New Opportunities and Strategies,” Summary Report, December 10–11, Colombia University, New York. ———. 2014b. “Implementing Country-Level Governance Programs: An Update to the 2011 Governance Partnership Facility (GPF) Window 1 Review Component 2 Final Report,” Quality Assurance Group, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2014c. “Increasing the Effectiveness of MSIs through Active Collaboration,” Summary Report, April 28–30, 2014, Wilton Park, United Kingdom. ———. 2014d. “Independent Evaluation of the Governance Partnership Facility (GPF): Survey of Task Team Leaders,” DAI Consulting, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2014e. “New Directions in Governance,” Summary Report, September 17–19, London. ———. 2014f. Repeat of the 2009 Quality Assurance Group (QAG) Baseline Review Component 3 Final Report, DAI Consulting, World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2014g. “Pay Flexibility and Government Performance: A Multi-Country Study.” World Bank, Washington, DC. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2014/06/06/000470435_20 140606091629/Rendered/PDF/884860WP0PayFl00Box385241B00PUBLIC0.pdf. ———2015a. Independent Evaluation of Window 4. ———. 2015b. “What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here? Considering the Evidence Base and Sharing Knowledge on MSI Effectiveness and Impact in the Governance Sector,” February 11–12, Summary Report, Transparency and Accountability Initiative, Washington, DC. 178 References