| General Information |
Project/Program |
Project |
| Project Name |
Economic and Public Sector Capacity Building Project |
| Duration |
Approval Date: 6/25/2002 Closing Date (original): 6/30/2006 (actual): 12/31/2007 |
| Donor |
World Bank |
| Implementiong Organization |
The Council for Administrative Reform |
| Sector and/or Subsector Classification |
Government Administration |
| Region |
No region was specified in the Implementation Completion Report. |
| Financing |
The project's total costs amounted to USD 5.75 million, the IDA financing USD 5.5 million and the borrower financing USD 0.26 million. |
| Analytical Information |
Stakeholders |
World Bank, International Development Association, Australian Aid, Royal Kingdom of Cambodia, Canadian International Development Agency, Civil Society Organization, Economic and Finance Institute (of the Ministry of Economy and Finance), Economic and Financial Policy Planning and Monitoring Unit, Human Resource Development Unit, International Development Fund, German Development Cooperation, Logistic Support Unit, Quality Assurance Group, Royal School of Administration, Shot Term Consultant, Training Coordination Office, Task Team Leader, The Council for Administrative Reform, Affected People, Civil Society, target group (public servants, trained staff, public servants). |
| Cross-cutting Issue |
Environment |
Changes of staff and leaders led to confusion and delays of implementation. |
| Gender |
No information regarding gender was to be found in the implementation report. |
| Impact Analysis |
The project aligns with the World Bank's Country Assistance Strategy. Later on the project was more focused on aligning with the National Strategic Development Plan and achieving the Cambodian Millennium Development Goals. In 2005, the Bank had shifted its focus from attempting to change the whole government to being committed to working with ministries and counterparts. The ICR notes this as a 'bottom up' approach. |
| Effectiveness |
Ownership/Partnership |
Evaluation |
According to the ICR, World Bank did not have sufficient collaboration and cooperation with other stakeholders. The ICR rates the Bank's performance as unsatisfactory due to shortcomings of commitment to the project and parallel sector reforms. The project did not initiate an optional stakeholder workshop. Discussions were held informal and ICR reports efficiency and effectiveness could have been increased if senior officials had also participated. |
| Rating |
2/5 |
| Policy Coherence/Harmonization |
Evaluation |
Harmonization was difficult, the Bank staff and Committee of Administrative Reform had disputes of where to settle the pilot program. After the adjustments in 2005, the two parties were able to negotiate and settle the bottlenecks; the ICR criticizes the adjustments and settlements could have turned out more positive. |
| Rating |
3/5 |
| Evaluation Framework |
Evaluation |
Harmonization was difficult, the Bank staff and Committee of Administrative Reform had disputes of where to settle the pilot program. After the adjustments in 2005, the two parties were able to negotiate and settle the bottlenecks; the ICR criticizes the adjustments and settlements could have turned out more positive. |
| Rating |
3/5 |
| Alignment/Composition of Finance |
Evaluation |
Overall, the Implementation Completion Report criticized the World Bank for lack of monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring and evaluation was hard to access due to numerous indicators being not initiated (components being partly completed), vague, and redundant. There was no formal mid term review of the project and none of the detailed quarterly progress reports were completed with the exception of some adequate financial monitoring reports. |
| Rating |
2/5 |
| Other Remarks |
As the project developed, the project was extended due to more interest on governance and capacity development. According to the ICR, this project is not considered as one of the most successful projects in Cambodia. |
