Economics & Development

Ratings for the Emergency Health Service Delivery Project for Zambia were as follows: outcomes were highly satisfactory, the bank performance was satisfactory, and the monitoring and evaluation quality was high. Some lessons learned included: integrating development partners' financing into Zambia's PFM systems, which can enhance expenditure management and reduce administrative burdens. Reliance on separate, off-PFM systems has led to fragmented oversight, duplication of funding to similar activities, coordination challenges with Zambia’s health strategy, and reduced transparency in funds tracking. Channeling more external financing through the Treasury Single Account and standardizing reporting can enhance financial control, resource allocation, and the impact of health financing on strengthening Zambia’s health sector. Effective coordination at different government and health department levels was crucial for successfully implementing the project. Integrating IFMIS with health sector systems was crucial for effective expenditure tracking and accountability. Although initially planned, the integration was not implemented, leaving a gap in the intended improvements for monitoring non-salary recurrent costs and financial transparency in health sector funding. This integration would have enabled detailed tracking of expenses on supplies, maintenance, and other operational costs essential to the smooth functioning of health facilities. It will have have further provided real-time monitoring and reporting capabilities, allowing for the prompt identification and resolution of discrepancies, thus supporting financial discipline and reducing the risk of resource misallocation or misuse. Transparent financial practices also foster trust among stakeholders, including donors, government bodies, and the public, ensuring that funds are effectively used toward health sector objectives. Future engagement may need to prioritize integrating IFMIS with health sector systems to reinforce financial control, improve resource allocation, and enhance the impact of health financing on service delivery and institutional strengthening within the sector.

Ratings for the Learning Foundations Project for Liberia were as follows: outcomes were moderately satisfactory, the Bank's performance was moderately satisfactory, and the monitoring and evaluation quality was substantial. Some lessons learned included: despite the extended timeframe for preparation and the delays encountered during Project implementation, the WB and the GoL could design and implement a Project that largely achieved its development objectives. This experience demonstrated that such an outcome is more likely when certain key factors are in place, specifically, alignment of the project with government priorities and maintaining flexibility during implementation. Leveraging the WB’s long-standing engagement in the education sector and securing the full involvement of the Local Education Group is critical for implementation success in challenging operating environments. The project team made a concerted effort to ensure that the Local Education Group endorsed all activities and that there was continuous engagement with this group to collectively address Project-related challenges where necessary. The WB’s long-standing engagement with the country's education sector ensured that the project leveraged all best practices established by other development partners and was well-targeted to the areas with the highest need. Strategic planning for concurrent projects. Preparing the LLF Project while the G2B and Improving Results in Secondary Education (IRISE) project(s) were under implementation, creating competing demands on both the Bank team and the MOE. Consolidating interventions into additional financing or sequencing projects, where possible, can reduce transaction costs and improve alignment. Successfully managing these demands involves strategic planning, prioritization, and coordination to maintain both quality and timelines. This is particularly important in contexts where the MOE has limited capacity to manage multiple operations simultaneously.