The Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) FY15-FY20 Country Partnership Framework - Completion and Learning Review (CLR) Review

Jul 19, 2026

Independent Evaluation Group review of the World Bank Group Completion and Learning Review (CLR) for the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) covering the FY15–FY20 Country Partnership Framework period, updated in the Performance and Learning Review. Assesses development outcome ratings, WBG performance, delivery speed, lending redesign, and alignment with Regional Partnership Strategy objectives and the 2018 Systematic Regional Diagnostic. Concludes performance is fair, development outcomes moderately satisfactory, while results frameworks rely mainly on institutional outputs.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages46

Reading Time1 h 56 min

Executive Summary

Ratings and Outcomes

Program Design and Implementation

Overall Assessment and Key Findings

Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized CLR Review Independent Evaluation Group Completion and Learning Review Review The Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) FY15-FY20 Country Partnership Framework March 14, 2022 Ratings | | CLR Rating | CLRR (IEG) Rating | | --- | --- | --- | | Development Outcome: | Moderately Satisfactory | Moderately Satisfactory | | WBG Performance: | Good | Fair | I. Executive Summary i. This review of the World Bank Group’s (WBG) Completion and Learning Review (CLR) covers the period of the Regional Partnership Strategy (RPS), FY15-19, and updated in the Performance and Learning Review (PLR) dated May 1, 2018, which extended the CPF period by one year to FY20 . ii. The overall objective of the RPS was to contribute to laying the foundations for sustainable inclusive growth. The strategy was aligned with the stated government objectives as presented in the RPS, as well as with the findings of the 2018 Systematic Regional Diagnostic (SRD). The program (as modified in the PLR) was organized around eight engagement areas, which were all relevant in relation to the overall RPS objectives. At the time of the PLR there had been very slow delivery of the lending program; this required substantial project redesign, splitting multi-sector into single-sector projects, and multicountry into single-country projects. The key issue of economic performance is linked to widespread poverty (often from unemployment) . The program was thus aligned appropriately with the twin goals, although only two of the eight objectives addressed poverty issues directly. Gender was addressed primarily as part of one objective while climate change was addressed through one objective for vulnerability to natural disasters. iii. IEG rates the CPS development outcome as Moderately Satisfactory, but notes that the objectives and indicators were for institutional outputs rather than development outcomes, and thus providing little evidence of efficacy. Of the eight objectives, two are rated Achieved, three Mostly Achieved, and three Partially Achieved. Focus Area I (Fostering Conditions for Growth and Competitiveness) is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory. Institutional improvements included adoptions of medium-term debt management strategies, updated procurement guidelines, adoption by all six countries of new banking regulatory frameworks, and a number of new business climate reforms. IEG rates the outcome of WBG support under Focus Area II (Enhancing Resilience) as Moderately Satisfactory. Institutional improvements included establishing poverty-based targeting mechanisms for cash transfer programs, and national ocean policies and strategies. iv. On balance, IEG rates the WBG performance as Fair, with performance in implementation slightly better than performance in design. There were in effect two lending programs – the original RPS program focused on broadly designed operations, and a much larger post-PLR program with mostly single-country and single-sector projects. The program overall was however very large for such a group of very small countries with limited capacity, and there was little discussion of the capacity issues before the launching of the PLR program. It is not clear that the Bank had a strategy for addressing capacity constraints. However, with most approvals happening towards the end of the RPS period it is premature to determine the impact on the program of any capacity constraints. The program components were well aligned with the priorities of the OECS governments, and addressed important issues. The objectives in the results framework were however focused exclusively on institutional outputs rather than in-country outcomes; this important weakness was a factor for the rating of WBG performance. Positive aspects for Program Design were that the program redesigned at the PLR stage was implemented largely as planned, although the original RPS program was affected nega

FAQs

What period does the CLR cover for the OECS country partnership framework?

The review covers the period of the Regional Partnership Strategy (RPS), FY15–FY19, updated in the Performance and Learning Review extended through FY20.

How does IEG rate the development outcome and WBG performance?

IEG rates the CPS development outcome as Moderately Satisfactory and the overall WBG performance as Fair, with implementation performance slightly better than design.

What major changes occurred at the PLR stage affecting the lending program?

The program shifted from broadly designed multi-country and multi-sector operations to simpler single-country and single-sector projects, with substantially increased approved lending toward the end of the period.

Jul 19, 2026

Upload by Evangeline