[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-112136-en":3,"doc-seo-112136-105":29,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":91},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"doc_content":15,"file_id":16,"file_url":17,"file_type":18,"file_size":19,"view_count":20,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":20,"is_downloadable":20,"audit_status":20,"page_count":21,"language":22,"language_code":23,"site_id":24,"html_lang":23,"table_of_contents":25,"faqs":26,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":27,"read_time":28},112136,549758146520,"Patrick","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/80002397d8c0411e94?_k=1775819394049821470",8,"Research & Report","Madagascar - Completion and Learning Review (CLR) - FY17-FY22 Country Partnership Framework","Independent evaluation summarizes the World Bank Group Completion and Learning Review of Madagascar’s FY17–FY22 Country Partnership Framework. The review compares the original CPF (FY17–21) and the revised Performance and Learning Review extending the program to FY22, and assesses development outcome and WBG performance. Findings cover progress across eight objectives and two focus areas, highlighting achievements in health, nutrition, social protection, partial education gains, limited resilience in fishing, and mixed results on governance, business environment, agricultural value chains, and electricity and infrastructure efficiency.","Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized  \nCLR Review  \nIndependent Evaluation Group  \nCompletion and Learning Review Review Madagascar  \nFY17-FY22 Country Partnership Framework  \nNovember 8, 2022  \nRatings  \n\n|  | CLR Rating | CLRR (IEG) Rating |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Development Outcome: | Moderately Satisfactory | Moderately Unsatisfactory |\n| WBG Performance: | Good | Good |\n\nI. Executive Summary  \ni. This review of the World Bank Group’s (WBG) Completion and Learning Review (CLR) covers the period of the Country Partnership Framework (CPF) FY17-FY22 . The review is based on the original CPF (FY17-21) dated May 30, 2017, and the Performance and Learning Review (PLR) dated July 30, 2021. The PLR revised the CPF’s Results Framework and extended the program’s period by one year to FY22.  \nii. The CPF program was well aligned with the government program and the challenges the country faced to address poverty and enhanced shared prosperity. The 2015-2019 National Development Plan aimed at addressing the causes of fragility and improving service delivery, strengthening governance, creating a conducive environment to promote private sector development, and transforming agriculture, where the majority of the poor live and work. The priorities identified in the Systematic Country Diagnosis (FY16) confirmed the relevance of the government agenda and framed the CPF FY17-FY21, which was organized around two Focus Areas (“Increase Resilience and Reduce Fragility and “Promote Inclusive Growth”) and eight objectives. The CPF design was informed by the lessons from the 2011 WDR on Conflict, Security and Development. These alignments provided the CPF with sound strategic relevance, which was captured in the detailed agenda. No objective or indicator focused on the poor directly. However, given the concentration of the poor in rural, peri-urban areas and the Southern part of the country, the program was highly sensitive to poverty and inclusion. The focus on gender increased during the CPF, but lack of information made it difficult to track progress on gender.  \n\n| CLR Reviewed by | Peer Reviewed by | CLR Review Coordinator |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n\niii. IEG rates the CPF development outcome as Moderately Unsatisfactory. Of the eight objectives, three were Mostly Achieved, and five Partially Achieved.  \niv. In Focus Area I: Increase Resilience and Reduce Fragility, under Objective 1, children gained in in terms of health, nutrition, and targeted social protection. The gains in education were limited. Under Objective 2, the resilience of rural livelihoods benefited from the provision of inputs, seeds, and basic infrastructure repairs, and in urban areas from better availability of water and sanitation services. In both rural and urban areas, productive safety nets provided complementary support. Progress in enhancing resilience in fishing was limited. On Objective  \n3, efforts to enhance and increase the effectiveness of decentralization showed limited progress on resource mobilization at the local level and partial progress on strengthening local governments. As to Objective 4, progress towards a more transparent and accountable government has seen backsliding on budget transparency and some progress on accountability, for example, substantial gains in the number of timely audits. These gains have proven fragile, though.  \nv. Focus Area II: Promote Inclusive Growth, under Objective 5, national resource mobilization remained stable at a modest level and did not open additional space for social expenditure and infrastructure. On Objective 6, efforts to improve the business environment posted some gains in facilitating firm registration and resolving commercial disputes; efforts to increase access to finance contributed to substantial gains, with gender balance in access to credit. As to Objective 7, agricultural exports from value chains supported by the WBG increased but gains to improve the certainty of property rights in rura","cbCaiben8qZqSxu0","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiben8qZqSxu0","pdf",1400979,1,38,"English","en",105,"# Executive Summary\n## Review scope and framework changes\n## Alignment with government priorities and focus areas\n## Objective-level results across Focus Area I and II\n## Overall ratings and performance assessment","[{\"question\":\"What period and documents does the Madagascar CLR cover?\",\"answer\":\"The review covers the FY17–FY22 Country Partnership Framework period, based on the original CPF (FY17–21) and the Performance and Learning Review (PLR) that revised the Results Framework and extended the program to FY22.\"},{\"question\":\"How are development outcome and WBG performance rated in the CLR?\",\"answer\":\"The CLR rates the CPF development outcome as Moderately Unsatisfactory, while World Bank Group performance is rated as Good.\"},{\"question\":\"What outcomes are reported under Focus Area I and Focus Area II?\",\"answer\":\"Focus Area I includes gains in health, nutrition, and targeted social protection with limited education progress, and mixed results for resilience and decentralization. Focus Area II reports stable but modest national resource mobilization, some progress in the business environment and access to finance, partial gains for property rights and linking smallholders to value chains, and improvements in reducing electricity losses with limited progress on governance and roads.\"}]",1784493369,96,{"code":4,"msg":30,"data":31},"ok",{"site_id":24,"language":23,"slug":32,"title":13,"keywords":33,"description":14,"schema_data":34,"social_meta":86,"head_meta":88,"extra_data":90,"updated_unix":27},"madagascar-completion-and-learning-review-clr-fy17-fy22-country-partnership-framework","",{"@graph":35,"@context":85},[36,53,68],{"@type":37,"itemListElement":38},"BreadcrumbList",[39,43,47,50],{"item":40,"name":41,"@type":42,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":44,"name":45,"@type":42,"position":46},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":48,"name":12,"@type":42,"position":49},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":51,"name":13,"@type":42,"position":52},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/madagascar-completion-and-learning-review-clr-fy17-fy22-country-partnership-framework/112136/",4,{"url":51,"name":13,"@type":54,"author":55,"headline":13,"publisher":57,"fileFormat":60,"inLanguage":23,"description":14,"dateModified":61,"datePublished":62,"encodingFormat":60,"isAccessibleForFree":63,"interactionStatistic":64},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":56},"Person",{"url":40,"name":58,"@type":59},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-07-20","2026-07-19",true,{"@type":65,"interactionType":66,"userInteractionCount":20},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":67},"ViewAction",{"@type":69,"mainEntity":70},"FAQPage",[71,77,81],{"name":72,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":74},"What period and documents does the Madagascar CLR cover?","Question",{"text":75,"@type":76},"The review covers the FY17–FY22 Country Partnership Framework period, based on the original CPF (FY17–21) and the Performance and Learning Review (PLR) that revised the Results Framework and extended the program to FY22.","Answer",{"name":78,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":79},"How are development outcome and WBG performance rated in the CLR?",{"text":80,"@type":76},"The CLR rates the CPF development outcome as Moderately Unsatisfactory, while World Bank Group performance is rated as Good.",{"name":82,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":83},"What outcomes are reported under Focus Area I and Focus Area II?",{"text":84,"@type":76},"Focus Area I includes gains in health, nutrition, and targeted social protection with limited education progress, and mixed results for resilience and decentralization. Focus Area II reports stable but modest national resource mobilization, some progress in the business environment and access to finance, partial gains for property rights and linking smallholders to value chains, and improvements in reducing electricity losses with limited progress on governance and roads.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":51,"og:type":87,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":58,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":89,"canonical":51},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":24},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":92},[93,97,101,105,110,115,120,123,128,131,135],{"id":20,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":94,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":96},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},30,"research-report",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":126,"slug":127},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":126,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":126,"slug":130},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":132,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":133,"show_sort_weight":132,"slug":134},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":136,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":45,"category_name":137,"show_sort_weight":106,"slug":138},19,"General","general"]