What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?

For more than 20 years, the development community has claimed that monitoring and evaluation helps projects achieve their objectives. This study uses data from 1,300 World Bank projects evaluated between 2008 and 2014 to investigate this suggested...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Raimondo, Estelle
Format:	Working Paper
Language:	English en_US
Published:	World Bank, Washington, DC 2016
Subjects:	SOCIAL INCLUSION M&E SYSTEMS MONITORING & EVALUATION SUPERVISION FEEDBACK INTEREST DATA SOURCES PROJECT EVALUATION M&E CREDIBILITY PUBLIC SECTOR INDUSTRY STRATEGIES DATA COLLECTION COUNTERFACTUAL MONITORING QUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUES EVALUATION ACTIVITIES INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT EVALUATION SYSTEMS BORROWERS PROJECT PROJECTS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY SOCIAL SCIENCES IMPROVEMENTS LONG PERIOD OF TIME INSTRUMENTS AUDITS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES DATA‐COLLECTION EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN IMPACT EVALUATIONS SELF‐EVALUATION TRAINING PERFORMANCE INDICATORS INTERVENTION M&E DESIGN RELEVANCE IMPACT EVALUATION INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT CRITERIA LEARNING M&E CAPACITY INDICATORS IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH LABOR LOANS POLICY DECISIONS SERVICE DELIVERY PROPENSITY‐ SCORE MATCHING QUALITY AT ENTRY GRANTS EFFICIENCY PROBLEM PROJECTS PROJECT QUALITY STRUCTURAL POLICIES INSTITUTIONAL SETUP ACTIONS DESIGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT BASELINE DATA EQUITY PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING CONTROL GROUPS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER VALUE BANK MODEL SPECIFICATION INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS SAMPLE SIZE TREATMENT EFFECTS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS SURVEYS ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROJECT OBJECTIVES GOVERNANCE M&E ACTIVITIES ICR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION OPERATIONAL POLICY STATISTICS EVALUATION RISK MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS PROJECT CYCLE SAMPLING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION LENDING INTERVENTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE COMMUNITY M&E DEPTH CASE‐STUDIES TREATMENT GROUPS GOVERNMENTS OUTCOMES EVALUATION SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SERVICE OPERATIONS DEVELOPMENT POLICY
Online Access:	http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/06/26514566/difference-good-monitoring-evaluation-make-world-bank-project-performance http://hdl.handle.net/10986/24644

id	okr-10986-24644
recordtype	oai_dc
spelling	okr-10986-246442021-04-23T14:04:23Z What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance? Raimondo, Estelle SOCIAL INCLUSION M&E SYSTEMS MONITORING & EVALUATION SUPERVISION FEEDBACK INTEREST DATA SOURCES PROJECT EVALUATION M&E CREDIBILITY PUBLIC SECTOR INDUSTRY STRATEGIES DATA COLLECTION COUNTERFACTUAL MONITORING QUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUES EVALUATION ACTIVITIES INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT EVALUATION SYSTEMS BORROWERS PROJECT PROJECTS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY SOCIAL SCIENCES IMPROVEMENTS LONG PERIOD OF TIME INSTRUMENTS AUDITS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES DATA‐COLLECTION EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN IMPACT EVALUATIONS SELF‐EVALUATION TRAINING PERFORMANCE INDICATORS INTERVENTION M&E DESIGN RELEVANCE IMPACT EVALUATION IMPACT EVALUATIONS INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT CRITERIA PROJECT EVALUATION LEARNING M&E CAPACITY INDICATORS IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH LABOR LOANS POLICY DECISIONS SERVICE DELIVERY PROPENSITY‐ SCORE MATCHING QUALITY AT ENTRY GRANTS EFFICIENCY PROBLEM PROJECTS POLICY DECISIONS PROJECT QUALITY STRUCTURAL POLICIES INSTITUTIONAL SETUP ACTIONS DESIGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT BASELINE DATA EQUITY PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING CONTROL GROUPS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER VALUE BANK MODEL SPECIFICATION INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS SAMPLE SIZE TREATMENT EFFECTS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SURVEYS MONITORING & EVALUATION ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROJECT OBJECTIVES GOVERNANCE M&E ACTIVITIES ICR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SOCIAL INCLUSION OPERATIONAL POLICY STATISTICS EVALUATION RISK MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS PROJECT CYCLE SAMPLING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION TREATMENT EFFECTS LENDING INTERVENTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE COMMUNITY M&E DEPTH CASE‐STUDIES M&E ACTIVITIES PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING TREATMENT GROUPS GOVERNMENTS OUTCOMES EVALUATION SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SERVICE OPERATIONS DEVELOPMENT POLICY For more than 20 years, the development community has claimed that monitoring and evaluation helps projects achieve their objectives. This study uses data from 1,300 World Bank projects evaluated between 2008 and 2014 to investigate this suggested link between the quality of monitoring and evaluation and project performance. The propensity score matching results indicate that the quality of monitoring and evaluation is significantly and positively associated with project outcome as institutionally measured at the World Bank. This positive relationship holds when controlling for project manager identity, and is robust to various specification choices. Through a systematic text analysis of the narrative produced by the Independent Evaluation Group to justify its monitoring and evaluation quality rating, the study shows that there are common markers of good quality monitoring and evaluation, such as: clear institutional setup and division of labor around monitoring and evaluation activities; simple monitoring and evaluation framework that is well aligned with clients' existing monitoring and evaluation systems; good integration with operational tasks; and a system that can generate regular and timely reporting, and that is used during and after lending. 2016-07-07T21:47:43Z 2016-07-07T21:47:43Z 2016-06 Working Paper http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/06/26514566/difference-good-monitoring-evaluation-make-world-bank-project-performance http://hdl.handle.net/10986/24644 English en_US Policy Research Working Paper;No. 7726 CC BY 3.0 IGO http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/ World Bank World Bank, Washington, DC Publications & Research Publications & Research :: Policy Research Working Paper
repository_type	Digital Repository
institution_category	Foreign Institution
institution	Digital Repositories
building	World Bank Open Knowledge Repository
collection	World Bank
language	English en_US
topic	SOCIAL INCLUSION M&E SYSTEMS MONITORING & EVALUATION SUPERVISION FEEDBACK INTEREST DATA SOURCES PROJECT EVALUATION M&E CREDIBILITY PUBLIC SECTOR INDUSTRY STRATEGIES DATA COLLECTION COUNTERFACTUAL MONITORING QUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUES EVALUATION ACTIVITIES INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT EVALUATION SYSTEMS BORROWERS PROJECT PROJECTS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY SOCIAL SCIENCES IMPROVEMENTS LONG PERIOD OF TIME INSTRUMENTS AUDITS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES DATA‐COLLECTION EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN IMPACT EVALUATIONS SELF‐EVALUATION TRAINING PERFORMANCE INDICATORS INTERVENTION M&E DESIGN RELEVANCE IMPACT EVALUATION IMPACT EVALUATIONS INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT CRITERIA PROJECT EVALUATION LEARNING M&E CAPACITY INDICATORS IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH LABOR LOANS POLICY DECISIONS SERVICE DELIVERY PROPENSITY‐ SCORE MATCHING QUALITY AT ENTRY GRANTS EFFICIENCY PROBLEM PROJECTS POLICY DECISIONS PROJECT QUALITY STRUCTURAL POLICIES INSTITUTIONAL SETUP ACTIONS DESIGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT BASELINE DATA EQUITY PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING CONTROL GROUPS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER VALUE BANK MODEL SPECIFICATION INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS SAMPLE SIZE TREATMENT EFFECTS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SURVEYS MONITORING & EVALUATION ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROJECT OBJECTIVES GOVERNANCE M&E ACTIVITIES ICR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SOCIAL INCLUSION OPERATIONAL POLICY STATISTICS EVALUATION RISK MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS PROJECT CYCLE SAMPLING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION TREATMENT EFFECTS LENDING INTERVENTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE COMMUNITY M&E DEPTH CASE‐STUDIES M&E ACTIVITIES PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING TREATMENT GROUPS GOVERNMENTS OUTCOMES EVALUATION SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SERVICE OPERATIONS DEVELOPMENT POLICY
spellingShingle	SOCIAL INCLUSION M&E SYSTEMS MONITORING & EVALUATION SUPERVISION FEEDBACK INTEREST DATA SOURCES PROJECT EVALUATION M&E CREDIBILITY PUBLIC SECTOR INDUSTRY STRATEGIES DATA COLLECTION COUNTERFACTUAL MONITORING QUANTITATIVE TECHNIQUES EVALUATION ACTIVITIES INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT EVALUATION SYSTEMS BORROWERS PROJECT PROJECTS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT QUALITY SOCIAL SCIENCES IMPROVEMENTS LONG PERIOD OF TIME INSTRUMENTS AUDITS DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES DATA‐COLLECTION EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN IMPACT EVALUATIONS SELF‐EVALUATION TRAINING PERFORMANCE INDICATORS INTERVENTION M&E DESIGN RELEVANCE IMPACT EVALUATION IMPACT EVALUATIONS INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT CRITERIA PROJECT EVALUATION LEARNING M&E CAPACITY INDICATORS IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT RESEARCH LABOR LOANS POLICY DECISIONS SERVICE DELIVERY PROPENSITY‐ SCORE MATCHING QUALITY AT ENTRY GRANTS EFFICIENCY PROBLEM PROJECTS POLICY DECISIONS PROJECT QUALITY STRUCTURAL POLICIES INSTITUTIONAL SETUP ACTIONS DESIGN PROJECT MANAGEMENT BASELINE DATA EQUITY PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING CONTROL GROUPS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER VALUE BANK MODEL SPECIFICATION INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS SAMPLE SIZE TREATMENT EFFECTS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS POLICY RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SURVEYS MONITORING & EVALUATION ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROJECT OBJECTIVES GOVERNANCE M&E ACTIVITIES ICR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SOCIAL INCLUSION OPERATIONAL POLICY STATISTICS EVALUATION RISK MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS PROJECT CYCLE SAMPLING PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION TREATMENT EFFECTS LENDING INTERVENTIONS INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE COMMUNITY M&E DEPTH CASE‐STUDIES M&E ACTIVITIES PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING TREATMENT GROUPS GOVERNMENTS OUTCOMES EVALUATION SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SERVICE OPERATIONS DEVELOPMENT POLICY Raimondo, Estelle What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
relation	Policy Research Working Paper;No. 7726
description	For more than 20 years, the development community has claimed that monitoring and evaluation helps projects achieve their objectives. This study uses data from 1,300 World Bank projects evaluated between 2008 and 2014 to investigate this suggested link between the quality of monitoring and evaluation and project performance. The propensity score matching results indicate that the quality of monitoring and evaluation is significantly and positively associated with project outcome as institutionally measured at the World Bank. This positive relationship holds when controlling for project manager identity, and is robust to various specification choices. Through a systematic text analysis of the narrative produced by the Independent Evaluation Group to justify its monitoring and evaluation quality rating, the study shows that there are common markers of good quality monitoring and evaluation, such as: clear institutional setup and division of labor around monitoring and evaluation activities; simple monitoring and evaluation framework that is well aligned with clients' existing monitoring and evaluation systems; good integration with operational tasks; and a system that can generate regular and timely reporting, and that is used during and after lending.
format	Working Paper
author	Raimondo, Estelle
author_facet	Raimondo, Estelle
author_sort	Raimondo, Estelle
title	What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
title_short	What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
title_full	What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
title_fullStr	What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
title_full_unstemmed	What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?
title_sort	what difference does good monitoring and evaluation make to world bank project performance?
publisher	World Bank, Washington, DC
publishDate	2016
url	http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/06/26514566/difference-good-monitoring-evaluation-make-world-bank-project-performance http://hdl.handle.net/10986/24644
_version_	1764457259226628096

What Difference Does Good Monitoring and Evaluation Make to World Bank Project Performance?

Similar Items