Improving Effectiveness and Outcomes for the Poor in Health, Nutrition, and Population : An Evaluation of World Bank Group Support since 1997
This evaluation aims to inform the implementation of the most recent the World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC) health, nutrition, and population (HNP) strategies to enhance the effectiveness of future support. It covers the period...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Publication |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Washington, DC: World Bank
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?menuPK=64187510&pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&entityID=000334955_20090623035255 http://hdl.handle.net/10986/2645 |
| Summary: | This evaluation aims to inform the
implementation of the most recent the World Bank and
International Finance Corporation (IFC) health, nutrition,
and population (HNP) strategies to enhance the effectiveness
of future support. It covers the period since fiscal year
1997 and is based on desk reviews of the portfolio,
background studies, and field visits. The evaluation of the
HNP support of the World Bank focuses on the effectiveness
of policy dialogue, analytic work, and lending at the
country level, while that of IFC focuses on the performance
of health investments and advisory services before and after
its 2002 health strategy. The themes it covers are drawn
from the two strategies and the approaches adopted by
international donors in the past decade. Independent
Evaluation Group (IEG) has previously evaluated several
aspects of the Bank's HNP support. IFC's support
for the health sector has never been fully evaluated. Many
lessons have been learned over the past decade about the
successes and pitfalls of support for health reform: First,
the failure to assess fully the political economy of reform
and to prepare a proactive plan to address it can
considerably diminish prospects for success. Political
risks, the interests of key stakeholders, and the risk of
complexity- issues the evaluation case studies found to be
critical are often neglected in risk analysis in project
appraisal documents for health reform projects. Second,
reforms based on careful prior analytic work hold a greater
chance of success, but analytic work does not ensure
success. Third, the sequencing of reforms can improve
political feasibility, reduce complexity, ensure that
adequate capacity is in place, and facilitate learning. When
implementation is flagging, the Bank can help preserve
reform momentum with complementary programmatic lending
through the Ministry of Finance, as it did in Peru and the
Kyrgyz Republic. Finally, monitoring and evaluation are
critical in health reform projects-to demonstrate the impact
of pilot reforms to garner political support, but also
because many reforms cannot work without a well-functioning
management information system. |
|---|