Independent Evaluation Group
                      Work Program and Budget (FY20) and Indicative Plan (FY21-22)

                                     Report to the Board from the
                   Budget Committee and the Committee on Development Effectiveness ∗

                                             Joint Meeting of June 3, 2019


        The Budget Committee and the Committee on Development Effectiveness (the Committees) met
to consider the Independent Evaluation Group Work Program and Budget (FY20) and Indicative Plan
(FY21-22) (R2019-0142[IDA/R2019-0172, IFC/R2019-0169, MIGA/R2019-0066]).

         The Committees were supportive of IEG’s Work Program and Budget (FY20) and Indicative Plan
(FY21-22). They were particularly pleased with IEG’s proposed six streams (FCV, Gender Equality,
Maximizing Finance for Development, Human Capital, Climate Change, Growths and Transformation); its
strategic framework; the framing of key questions; its support to Evaluation Capacity Development (ECD)
and IEG’s efforts to align its work program with key strategic priorities of the WBG, the Forward Look,
IDA special themes and the Capital Package commitments. They applauded IEG’s development impact
focus noting that work in this area would help strengthen WBG outcome orientation.

        Some members noted that Governance and Institutions should be a standalone work stream to better
align IEG’s work program with the IDA19 framework. IEG noted that while Governance would not be a
standalone work stream, IEG would ensure that the governance dimension is systematically addressed in
the questions driving the work themes; when addressing questions at the level of individual evaluations;
and that it would increase attention to governance questions as part of the CPE program. Members
commended IEG’s efforts to reduce bunching through work planning and were encouraged to learn that
IEG will mainstream gender and governance across its work and an increase of its focus on Country
Program Evaluations (CPEs). Members commended IEG’s efforts to reduce bunching through work
planning and were encouraged to learn that IEG will mainstream gender and governance across its work
and an increase of its focus on Country Program Evaluations (CPEs). They welcomed IEG’s efforts to
broaden somewhat the scope of the FCV Post-conflict reconstruction evaluation and its intent to create a
wider narrative on WBG’s progress in FCV. Deeming meso-evaluations as a valuable instrument for the
Board, the Committees were pleased to learn that IEG would move toward shorter and more focused
evaluations. They were also encouraged by IEG’s emphasis on making evaluation findings more
meaningful, enhancing learning and knowledge sharing and working closely with Management and the 5Is.
Members requested more information on the Management Action Record (MAR) reform process, noting
IEG’s plan to update the Board during the Results and Performance (RAP) discussion.

        They welcome IEG’s commitments to engage with IAD to discuss their potential contribution to
the Doing Business Report assessment and do a synthesis report on biodiversity as input for the upcoming
UN summit. A member noted that an evaluation of the Social Protection and Labor Strategy would help
inform ongoing discussions between the Bank and its client counties on expanding and sustainably
financing social safety nets. Members were encouraged to learn that IEG would consider adding the Social
Protection Strategy to their work program after coordinating with WBG Management on the adequate
timing for this evaluation.




∗
    This report is not an approved record.