[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-109725-en":3,"doc-seo-109725-105":31,"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":21,"is_downloadable":21,"audit_status":21,"page_count":22,"language":23,"language_code":24,"site_id":25,"html_lang":24,"table_of_contents":26,"faqs":27,"seo_title":28,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":29,"read_time":30},109725,1099514067415,"Rowan","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/100002539d78ffe74a7?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1779092875211072502",8,"Research & Report","World Bank Group Outcome Orientation at the Country Level - Report to the Board from the Committee on Development Effectiveness - Meeting of October 28, 2020","This report summarizes the Committee on Development Effectiveness’ discussion of the World Bank Group’s outcome orientation at the country level and the draft management response. It reviews the current results measurement approach, acknowledging that the overall model is sound and has supported a results culture. It also identifies gaps in how the country-level results system captures CPF objectives, links contributions to outcomes, enables adaptive management, and reinforces accountability incentives.","Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized  \nWorld Bank Group Outcome Orientation at the Country Level  \nand Draft Management Response  \nReport to the Board from the  \nCommittee on Development Effectiveness ∗  \nMeeting of October 28, 2020  \nThe Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) met to consider the report entitled The World Bank Group Outcome Orientation at the Country Level (CODE2020 0054) and Draft Management Response (CODE2020-0055) .  \nThe Committee welcomed the Report’s findings and recommendations on improving the outcome orientation of country programs and commend Management and IEG for their collaborative and constructive engagement and for having reached agreement on the way forward to improve the current system for measuring country outcomes. Members were pleased to learn that the model of how the WBG aims for outcomes in its client countries is sound; that for the most part teams practice it well; and, that it has played an important role in establishing a culture of results measurements in WBG’s operational teams and clients it supports. Nonetheless, they agreed with IEG and Management that there was room for improvement, noting that the WBG country-level results system did not effectively capture CPF’s objectives; WBG’s contribution to changes in country outcomes; enable teams to respond to changing circumstances; nor drove incentives or behaviors to uphold accountability for results at the level of the country program. They were encouraged to learn that Management agreed with the need to better evaluate the pathways to country outcomes in CPFs, including better integrate IFC’s and MIGA’s contributions, explore ways to capture how the Bank Group contributes to higher development outcomes through institutional change and capacity building, , and move away from the false dichotomy of attribution vs contribution.  \nIn calling for these reforms, they recognized the value of a results measurement system that accurately captures country outcomes while allowing for adaptive management and agreed with the country results system needed to be adjusted in order to find a better balance between contribution and attribution, strengthening and capturing linkages with higher level objectives such as the Corporate Goals and Sustainable Development Goals, as well as strengthening the integration of contributions by IFC and MIGA. Members noted that the new model should build on the work IFC is doing as part as the IFC 3.0 and that IEG will need to make appropriate changes to the way it validates country-level performance. The Committee noted testing and adjusting the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) plans would be an iterative process that will take time and require wide consultation and thus, appreciated Management’s commitment to define and test IEG’s suggested approach in a selected number of pilot countries and to keep the Board appraised of these pilots and of the possibilities of mainstreaming the approach. IEG emphasized that for a renewed system to be useful and utilized, reforms should not layer more demands ontop of the existing system, some practices have to be stopped so that new ones can take root- . Management noted that, for the new approach to be useful, it would need to be practical, grounded in field and operational realities as well as in client capabilities.  \nMembers underscored the value of strong collaboration across the different actors, including important roles for client driven ownership of country programs and capturing how the Bank Group contributes to country outcomes jointly with other development partners. Members encouraged management to consider incentive systems that would enable staff to focus on achieving higher development objectives, in particular funding and leadership support. Management noted that reforming  \n∗ This report is not an approved record.  \nthe system to allow for better reflection of achievement of higher development outcomes may require furthe","cbCainLBrbltHisF","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainLBrbltHisF","pdf",170083,4,1,2,"English","en",105,"# World Bank Group outcome orientation at the country level\n## Committee discussion and welcomed findings\n## Key gaps in the current country-level results system\n## Requested reforms and balance between attribution and contribution\n## Iterative MEL planning and pilot countries\n## Implementation principles and practical constraints\n## Collaboration, incentives, and board-level measurement understanding\n## Linkages to outcome classification and upcoming knowledge work","[{\"question\":\"What did the Committee on Development Effectiveness commend in the current approach?\",\"answer\":\"The Committee welcomed the report’s findings and recommendations, noting that the model is sound, teams mostly practice it well, and it supports a culture of results measurement for both operational teams and clients.\"},{\"question\":\"Which shortcomings did the Committee identify in the country-level results system?\",\"answer\":\"It found that the system did not effectively capture CPF objectives, explain the WBG’s contribution to changes in country outcomes, enable teams to respond to changing circumstances, or drive incentives and behaviors needed for accountability in country programs.\"},{\"question\":\"What reforms were encouraged to improve outcome orientation?\",\"answer\":\"The Committee encouraged better evaluation of pathways to country outcomes, more integrated contributions from IFC and MIGA, capturing higher development outcomes via institutional change and capacity building, and moving away from a false attribution-versus-contribution dichotomy.\"}]","World Bank Group Outcome Orientation at the Country Level - Report to the Board from the Committee on Development Effectiveness - Meeting of October 28, 2020 | PDF",1784482090,5,{"code":4,"msg":32,"data":33},"ok",{"site_id":25,"language":24,"slug":34,"title":13,"keywords":35,"description":14,"schema_data":36,"social_meta":86,"head_meta":88,"extra_data":90,"updated_unix":29},"world-bank-group-outcome-orientation-at-the-country-level-report-to-the-board-from-the-committee-on-development-effectiveness-meeting-of-october-28-2020","",{"@graph":37,"@context":85},[38,53,68],{"@type":39,"itemListElement":40},"BreadcrumbList",[41,45,48,51],{"item":42,"name":43,"@type":44,"position":21},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":46,"name":47,"@type":44,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",{"item":49,"name":12,"@type":44,"position":50},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":52,"name":13,"@type":44,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/world-bank-group-outcome-orientation-at-the-country-level-report-to-the-board-from-the-committee-on-development-effectiveness-meeting-of-october-28-2020/109725/",{"url":52,"name":13,"@type":54,"author":55,"headline":13,"publisher":57,"fileFormat":60,"inLanguage":24,"description":14,"dateModified":61,"datePublished":62,"encodingFormat":60,"isAccessibleForFree":63,"interactionStatistic":64},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":56},"Person",{"url":42,"name":58,"@type":59},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-07-30","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 did the Committee on Development Effectiveness commend in the current approach?","Question",{"text":75,"@type":76},"The Committee welcomed the report’s findings and recommendations, noting that the model is sound, teams mostly practice it well, and it supports a culture of results measurement for both operational teams and clients.","Answer",{"name":78,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":79},"Which shortcomings did the Committee identify in the country-level results system?",{"text":80,"@type":76},"It found that the system did not effectively capture CPF objectives, explain the WBG’s contribution to changes in country outcomes, enable teams to respond to changing circumstances, or drive incentives and behaviors needed for accountability in country programs.",{"name":82,"@type":73,"acceptedAnswer":83},"What reforms were encouraged to improve outcome orientation?",{"text":84,"@type":76},"The Committee encouraged better evaluation of pathways to country outcomes, more integrated contributions from IFC and MIGA, capturing higher development outcomes via institutional change and capacity building, and moving away from a false attribution-versus-contribution dichotomy.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":52,"og:type":87,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":58,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":89,"canonical":52},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":25},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":92},[93,97,101,105,109,114,119,122,127,130,134],{"id":21,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":94,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":96},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":20,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":30,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":120,"slug":121},30,"research-report",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":125,"slug":126},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":125,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":125,"slug":129},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":131,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":132,"show_sort_weight":131,"slug":133},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":135,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":47,"category_name":136,"show_sort_weight":30,"slug":137},19,"General","general"]