Hundreds of evaluations are performed each year by the IFIs, on projects, countries and special topics. The types of evaluations range from periodic updates done by in-country staff to the occasional special assignments given to blue ribbon panels.
This section deals with nine kinds of evaluations prepared by the institutions -- some disclosed, but some still not available. The gaps make it harder for observers to understand the institutions.
Because of their importance, the time and effort put into evaluation exercises is considerable, involving many departments and often outside experts. The start of these evaluation proceedings often goes unheralded, and public participation in the process is usually quite limited. One exception is when the IMF, on a case-by-case basis sometimes discloses “draft terms of reference,” which generally define the parameters of the evaluation.
As the project progresses, the IFIs circulate draft findings and recommendations internally, and maybe to selected outsiders for informal comment.
But in their penultimate form, just before going to the boards for approval, the final draft evaluations are rarely disclosed.
After approval, some evaluations are released. The most commonly prepared evaluations deal with many topics: specific countries or regions, sectors and themes, and policies and programs. The institutions least likely to release these reports are the AfDB, the EBRD, the EIB, the IDB, the IFC, and MIGA. In general, evaluations of private sector projects are last likely to get disclosed.
The background materials that go into the reports, including work done by outside research consultants, also should be releasable, but these documents are usually not disclosed.
Annual reports on the institutions’ portfolio performance and from their internal evaluation offices should be disclosed, and are with a few exceptions. However, important evaluation documents are at times not disclosed, such as the annual report by the IFC’s evaluation unit to the board and two other key IFC reports, the annual “overview” report and the annual Director-General’s reports.
Overall, the better performers in this area include the ADB, the IDB, the WB, and the IMF, but there is considerable room for improvement.