Advancing Global Development Through the World Bank’s Phased Project Model

The World Bank’s evaluation of the Multiphase Programmatic Approach highlights its success in fostering learning and continuity while addressing complex development challenges, though gaps in coherence, adaptability, and internal collaboration remain. Strengthening design, resources, and alignment with country strategies is essential for maximizing its potential.

The Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank recently evaluated the Multiphase Programmatic Approach (MPA), introduced in 2017 to manage complex, long-term development engagements. Designed to achieve large-scale objectives, the MPA structures projects into shorter, linked phases, offering flexibility, learning opportunities, and continuity. With vertical MPAs focusing on single countries and horizontal MPAs spanning multiple regions, the approach is particularly suited for adaptable and scalable activities. This evaluation assessed the MPA's performance in coherence, continuity, learning, and adaptability, finding notable successes in some areas and identifying gaps in others that need refinement to fully leverage its potential.

Strengths in Learning and Continuity

The MPA demonstrated significant success in fostering learning and ensuring seamless continuity between project phases. The phased structure allowed for adaptation to local contexts while ensuring progress toward overarching goals. Vertical MPAs, which target long-term objectives within single countries, effectively utilized overlapping phases to maintain momentum and avoid gaps in support. Meanwhile, horizontal MPAs, particularly prominent in Africa, tackled regional challenges like food security and energy access, leveraging regional platforms for knowledge-sharing and operational efficiency. For instance, the Western Balkans Trade and Transport Facilitation program benefited from standardized processes and shared resources among participating countries, addressing logistical challenges collaboratively.

Continuity emerged as a core strength of the MPA. Its design allowed uninterrupted engagement, especially for projects spanning multiple phases. Risks to continuity, such as political instability or changing government priorities, were effectively mitigated through overlapping phases and robust programmatic structures. However, in cases where program design did not align with local contexts, continuity faced challenges, including delays and low disbursement rates. Despite these limitations, the MPA showcased resilience, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected settings, where long-term commitments are essential for building trust and supporting institutional development.

Coherence and Collaboration: Room for Improvement

While the MPA aims to enhance coherence by fostering partnerships within the World Bank and with external stakeholders, evidence of its superiority over traditional approaches in this area was limited. Vertical MPAs aligned well with long-term national goals, supporting partnerships within countries, but their ability to foster cross-sector collaboration within the World Bank was less evident. Horizontal MPAs showed promise in aligning with regional objectives and encouraging partnerships. However, concrete outcomes, such as increased co-financing or deeper collaboration with development partners, were inconsistent.

The evaluation found that MPAs were not significantly better than alternatives in motivating cross-sector collaboration within the Bank. This gap underscores the need for a stronger emphasis on internal coherence to fully realize the benefits of the MPA’s programmatic structure. Respondents noted that while horizontal MPAs supported alignment with regional objectives, individual country priorities sometimes conflicted with broader program goals, highlighting the need for a balance between national and regional interests.

Learning and Knowledge Sharing Shine

Learning emerged as one of the MPA’s strongest aspects, particularly in its ability to integrate insights from earlier phases into subsequent ones. Horizontal MPAs leveraged regional platforms to enable peer-to-peer learning among participating countries, fostering operational efficiency and technical expertise. For example, the West Africa Food System Resilience Program used regional platforms to exchange strategies for addressing food security challenges. Similarly, vertical MPAs supported institutional learning, allowing in-depth engagement with complex cross-agency programs.

The evaluation noted that while learning activities were well integrated into MPA phases, institutional arrangements for managing and financing these activities needed strengthening. Learning often relied on trust funds, rather than dedicated budgets, limiting its sustainability. Nonetheless, respondents emphasized the effectiveness of the MPA’s long-term structure in creating opportunities for learning that extended beyond individual projects, enhancing broader institutional capacity.

Adaptability: A Mixed Picture

Adaptability, a key promise of the MPA, showed mixed results in the evaluation. While the phased design theoretically allows for frequent stocktaking and course correction, evidence from restructuring data did not support a significant difference between MPAs and non-MPAs in this regard. Adaptation often depended on the quality of initial program design and the responsiveness of implementing agencies. Early restructuring in MPAs sometimes reflected inadequate preparation rather than inherent flexibility.

Horizontal MPAs demonstrated potential for adaptation through regional platforms, which allowed countries to join based on their readiness and adapt activities to local needs. However, this flexibility was not always realized in practice, partly due to the youth of the MPA portfolio. As more projects progress into later stages, the approach’s adaptability is expected to become more apparent.

Scaling Up with Refinements

The evaluation highlighted areas where the MPA could improve to better address complex development challenges. Strengthening coherence by anchoring MPAs more firmly in country strategies and aligning them with broader World Bank programs could enhance collaboration and long-term impact. Additionally, providing dedicated resources for learning activities and improving institutional arrangements would bolster the MPA’s role as a platform for innovation and knowledge-sharing. Clarity in setting program objectives, ensuring they are ambitious yet adaptable, was also recommended.

The report emphasized the trade-offs between scale, speed, and complexity in implementing MPAs. Emergency MPAs, such as those deployed during the COVID-19 response, benefited from operational flexibilities that enabled rapid disbursements and swift achievements. However, these conditions may not apply universally to non-emergency contexts. For MPAs to consistently deliver at scale and speed, their design and implementation must be intentionally geared toward these objectives. The evaluation concluded that as the MPA portfolio matures, continued refinement and evaluation will be critical to fully harness its potential in addressing the world’s most pressing development challenges.