105609 For Official Use Only CLR Review Independent Evaluation Group May 10, 2016 1. CAS/CPS Data Country: Bulgaria CAS/CPS Year: FY11 CAS/CPS Period: FY2011– FY2013 CASCR/CPSCR Review Period: 2011 – 2013 Date of this review: May 10, 2016 2. Ratings CLR Rating IEG Rating Development Outcome: Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory WBG Performance: Fair Fair 3. Executive Summary i. Bulgaria is an upper-middle income Eastern European country with a population of about 7.2 million. In 1989, it began a transition from a centralized political and economic system towards a multi-party parliamentary democracy and a market economy. By 2011, Bulgaria’s per capita income was about $7,600, slightly lower than 50 percent of the European average. Poverty stood at around 21 percent of the total population, with ethnic minorities (Roma, Turks) prominent among the poor. Social indicators were slightly better than the average for comparable Eastern European and Central Asian countries, with life expectancy at birth around 75 years, primary school enrollment averaging 96% of the relevant age group and good coverage of water and sanitation services. The country’s economy was dominated by the service sector which accounted for about 60 percent of value added, followed by industry (30 percent) and agriculture (5 percent). ii. The World Bank’s Group Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for Bulgaria was prepared following the country’s accession to the EU in 2007 and shortly after the global economic crisis of 2008/9 and the election in mid-2009 of a new administration – which came to power on a platform of socio-economic reforms and accelerated EU integration. The (then) new administration (with about 40% of seats in parliament) opted to operate as a minority government, enabling the appointment of a technocratic, reform-oriented Cabinet, albeit leaving itself open to the political risks associated with the lack of a parliamentary majority. (In fact, the country experienced frequent changes of Government over the CPS period with negative repercussions for the CPS program’s impact.) iii. The CPS for Bulgaria – covering the 2.5-year period from May 2011 to December 2013 --was developed against this backdrop and within the framework of the Country’s National Reform Program (NRP) 2011-2015, an adaptation of the Europe 2020 strategy that included specific national strategies and targets. The NRP had four main emphases: (i) improved infrastructure with a focus on better connectivity to Europe; (ii) improved opportunities and skills for young people; (iii) a strengthened business environment including reduced taxes, increased investment (including in innovation), fiscal stability and Euro area membership; and (iv) strengthened institutions and the rule of law. iv. The CPS objective of helping to strengthen Bulgarian institutions and policies to achieve “smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” was fully aligned with the NRP priorities. Taking account CLR Reviewed by: Peer Reviewed by: CLR Review Coordinator Neeta Sirur Eduardo Fernandez Mark Sundberg IEGEC Consultant Maldonado Manager, IEGEC IEGEC Consultant Surajit Goswami Lourdes Pagaran IEGEC Consultant CLR Coordinator, IEGEC For Official Use Only CLR Review 2 Independent Evaluation Group of the large volume of financial resources available to Bulgaria from EU funds, the CPS pioneered a new model of knowledge-based country engagement building on the RAS program, which was characterized by close collaboration between the Government and the World Bank with support from the EU. The main focus in this regard was selective, fee-based Bank support for policy support and the preparation and implementation of Bulgaria’s investment program for financing through the EU Structural Funds. The aim was to enable the Government to leverage the Bank’s knowledge and experience to accelerate investment projects and more effectively absorb large volumes of EU funds. v. Accordingly, the CPS program was organized into three focus areas, and retained flexibility to enable responsiveness to Government needs/requests. The first focus area, which aimed to further NRP goals, foresaw provision of knowledge and advisory services for policy and program development in six areas, including innovation, education, public finance/administration, competitiveness with a focus on the business regulatory environment, green growth and climate actions and social inclusion. The second focus area –involving advisory services as well as ongoing operations – sought to prepare complementary, large investment projects in transport, water and social inclusion for financing from EU Structural Funds. The third focus area aimed to provide financing for priority, results-based projects that were ineligible for funding by European institutions. vi. Based on the assessment of the individual objectives included in the Results Matrix for this CPS, the overall rating on development outcome is Unsatisfactory. About half of the objectives were assessed as Not Achieved, two objectives were rated mostly Achieved and three were rated Partly Achieved. In terms of Focus Areas, Focus Area 2 was judged to be Moderately Unsatisfactory, with Focus Areas 1 and 3 rated Unsatisfactory. Across all Focus Areas, objectives that were achieved were clearly linked to Bank interventions under the CPS, but insufficient attention was paid to the contribution of IFC interventions and their relationship to the overall CPS outcomes. vii. Taking into account the various dimensions of WBG performance in Bulgaria with respect to CPS design and implementation, IEG rates WBG performance as Fair. Although development outcomes for the CPS period were Unsatisfactory, and there were important shortcomings with respect to the design of the results matrix, internal WBG cooperation and risk identification/mitigation, the WBG does deserve credit for pioneering a new modality for work in EU member countries, which represents an important “win-win” approach for the country, the Bank and EU institutions if adequately implemented. The potential benefits of the Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) model are attested to by its adoption in other EU member countries in the 5 years since it was first adopted in Bulgaria. viii. IEG generally concurs with the lessons identified in the CLR, including: (i) continuing to build flexibility into CPS programming to adapt to changing client conditions and needs; (ii) taking care to ensure that RAS engagement effectively expands access to, and absorption of, available EU funds, while building the basis for future reforms; (iii) using self-financed AAA to move forward or open up dialogue in promising areas for reform; and (iv) ensuring a strong, relevant results framework – with an appropriate time-frame -- in the CPS design phase. This latter point is especially important in a program that places most emphasis on AAA to achieve results, given the longer time frame needed to proceed from the analytical phase to changes on the ground. In addition to these lessons, IEG would like to note that greater attention to closer cooperation between the Bank and IFC in CPS design and implementation – especially in areas of mutual expertise and experience, such as energy, banking and business climate –is critical in order to both improve the quality of WBG assistance and have greater impact on the ground. Finally, it is worth noting the importance of preparing a Progress Report, even given a short CPS time frame, especially in the event of changing country circumstances, in order to both document and validate program changes as well as adjust expected development outcomes to reflect changing realities. For Official Use Only CLR Review 3 Independent Evaluation Group 4. Strategic Focus Relevance of the WBG Strategy: 1. This World Bank Country Partnership Strategy for Bulgaria was prepared following Bulgaria’s accession to the EU in 2007 and shortly after the global economic crisis of 2008/9 and the election in mid-2009 of a new administration – which came to power on a platform of socio-economic reforms and accelerated EU integration. The (then) new administration (with about 40% of seats in parliament) opted to operate as a minority government, enabling the appointment of a technocratic, reform- oriented Cabinet, albeit leaving itself open to the political risks associated with the lack of a parliamentary majority. (In fact, the country experienced frequent changes of Government over the CPS period with negative repercussions for the CPS program’s impact.) The focus of the Government during CPS design was on implementing an agenda of structural reforms both to: (i) overcome the impact of the 2008-2009 global economic and financial crisis and accelerate convergence to EU living standards; and (ii) tackle important institutional and governance issues which the EU was monitoring through the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM), established expressly for Bulgaria and Romania. In addressing these challenges, the country had access to substantial financial support from the EU’s Structural and Cohesion Funds – with Euro 6.7 billion allocated to Bulgaria for the period 2007-13. 2. The WBG strategy for Bulgaria was developed against this backdrop and within the framework of the Country’s National Reform Program (NRP) 2011-2015, which included four main emphases: (i) improved infrastructure with a focus on better connectivity to Europe; (ii) improved opportunities and skills for young people; (iii) a strengthened business environment including reduced taxes, increased investment (including in innovation), fiscal stability and Euro area membership; and (iv) strengthened institutions and the rule of law. These NRP objectives represented an adaptation to the Bulgarian context of the main features of the Europe 2020 Strategy. Paralleling Europe 2020 objectives, the NRP set specific targets for 2020 in relation to employment (>76%), investment in innovation/R&D (1.5% of GDP), strong business climate, energy efficiency (25% increase), share of renewable energy (>16% of total consumption); reduction in school dropout (<11%), higher education achievement (36%) and poverty reduction (260,000 people to be lifted out of poverty). 3. The CPS objective of helping to strengthen Bulgarian institutions and policies to achieve “smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” was fully aligned with NRP priorities. Given the sizeable development financing available from the EU, the CPS appropriately de-emphasized transfer of WBG financial resources (except in selected instances to complement knowledge transfer activities) while emphasizing provision of knowledge services aimed both at supporting the achievement of NPR targets and facilitating the absorption of EU funds by Bulgarian institutions. An important innovation of this CPS was the effort by the Government and the WBG to develop a workable mechanism for scaling up the provision of WBG knowledge and advisory services via fee-based arrangements -- in turn, through close coordination with key European institutions including the EC, EIB and the EBRD. The main focus in this regard was selective, fee-based Bank support for policy support and the preparation and implementation of Bulgaria’s investment program for financing through the EU Structural Funds. The aim was to enable the Government to leverage the Bank’s knowledge and experience to accelerate investment projects and more effectively absorb large volumes of EU funds. 4. The CPS program was organized into three focus areas, and retained flexibility to enable responsiveness to Government needs/requests. The first focus area, which aimed to further NRP goals, foresaw provision of knowledge and advisory services for policy and program development in six areas, including innovation, education, public finance/administration, competitiveness with a focus on the business regulatory environment, green growth and climate actions and social inclusion. The second focus area –involving advisory services as well as ongoing operations – sought to prepare complementary, large investment projects for financing from EU Structural Funds,focusing primarily on For Official Use Only CLR Review 4 Independent Evaluation Group transport, water and social inclusion. The third focus area aimed to provide financing for priority, results-based projects that were ineligible for funding by European institutions. 5. Both Bank and IFC activities were identified in the CPS, principally in support of the first two focus areas. By and large, IFC was expected to focus on business regulation advisory services, agribusiness (including land consolidation), energy, transport and banking. However, these activities appeared to be “add-ons” to the Bank program and the expected outcomes of IFC activities were not reflected in the results framework (as discussed further below). While relevant to the country’s needs and responsive to Government requests, the CPS program was unduly optimistic with respect to the likelihood of maintaining the key conditions (political continuity/stability and strong country ownership) needed to ensure that the CPS main instrument –RAS – would effectively contribute to the country’s development goals. Even if underlying conditions had been ideal throughout CPS implementation, a smaller, less ambitious program would have been preferable at the outset, given that this was the first CPS focused principally on RAS and the short implementation time horizon of just 2 years and 7 months. Selectivity 6. The CPS program was selective (though it arguably could have been more so), with attention paid to ensuring synergies between the WBG program and those of the main EU institutions operating in Bulgaria. Most importantly, the CPS showed considerable restraint with respect to new lending, focusing instead on supporting Bulgaria in policy and program development and preparation of investment operations for financing through EU funds. In terms of areas of focus as well, the WBG program foresaw engagement in a few clearly defined areas, linked directly to the NRP and Europe 2020 objectives. These areas played to the WBG’s past experience in Bulgaria. While maintaining focus on country needs, the CPS did reduce the number of areas of WBG involvement. For example, while recognizing the crucial importance of governance and judicial reform in the Bulgarian context, the WBG correctly opted to leave this area principally to the EU, which had the appropriate expertise and leverage to play a strong role in this area. Alignment 7. Although the Bank had not articulated the corporate twin goals at the time this CPS was prepared, its objectives, design and actual program were generally consistent with these corporate priorities. At the most direct level, the CPS, under focus areas 1 and 2, focused squarely on promoting shared growth and inclusion, with a particular focus on the Roma population, which was disproportionately poor in Bulgaria as in many other European countries. Similarly, the CPS continued support (begun under the previous CPS) for early childhood programs to serve children in vulnerable circumstances. Financing and advisory services for education, skills development and broader youth programs were also an important initiative in support of poverty reduction and shared prosperity. The CPS focus on competitiveness was also supportive of the goal of shared prosperity through its support for SMEs and agricultural productivity – areas in which the bottom 40 percent of the population are disproportionately represented. Similarly, the CPS emphases on sustainable use of Bulgaria’s water and forestry resources, renewable energy and energy efficiency are fully aligned with the WBG’s corporate goals, which place considerable emphasis on ensuring that development strategies take careful account of environmental sustainability. For Official Use Only CLR Review 5 Independent Evaluation Group 5. Development Outcome Overview of Achievement by Objective: 8. The three focus areas collectively had ten objectives, the first of which encompassed 6 objectives, with the remaining two focus areas including three objectives and one objective, respectively. The objectives, milestones and outcomes assessed here are drawn from the CPS results framework, as no progress report was prepared during the CPS period. The WBG’s progress in achieving the objectives is discussed below, drawing on the CLR self-assessment as well as supplementary materials available to IEG. Focus Area I: Policy Reforms for NRP to achieve Europe 2020 Strategy1 9. Objective #1: Strengthened policies, aligned instruments and effective institutions for high quality R&D. The first objective within this focus area aimed to help develop a more favorable climate for business innovation through strengthened policies, aligned instruments and effective institutions for high quality R&D. The Bank’s support for national R&D programs and institutions was provided through an Innovation RAS, implemented over the CPS period. Key results measure included: (i) completion of a functional review of science, technology and innovation institutions; (ii) adoption by Government of a new innovation strategy; (iii) increased use of competitive mechanisms for allocation of government innovation resources; and (iv) completion of an evaluation of the EU-supported competitiveness operation program and adoption of the ensuing recommendations. The first of these results was substantially achieved by 2013. While progress was made towards development of the innovation strategy during the CPS period, review by the EC and subsequent approval by the Bulgarian Council of Ministers occurred only at the end of 2014, nearly a year after the CPS period. Based on the data available it is not clear as to whether the third result was achieved. While the CLR presents data showing an increase in financial allocations for innovation, no information is provided as to whether any or how much of this funding was allocated via competitive procedures. The last result, pertaining to evaluation of the Innovation OP and adoption of recommendations, was mostly achieved, in that the Government accepted the recommendations of the evaluation and incorporated them into the OP draft sent to the EC for approval. Finally, as noted candidly in the CLR there is some question as to whether analytical and advisory work undertaken through the Innovation RAS was ultimately “owned” by the key national actors involved, raising questions about future sustainability. In view of these findings, IEG rates this objective as Partially Achieved (PA). 10. Objective #2: Improved quality of basic and secondary education by strengthening the accountability framework and improved quality and relevance of higher education through strengthened governance, accreditation and performance-based funding. This objective aimed to improve education through strengthened decentralized school management, reforms to assessment requirements, better teacher pedagogical skills, revision of the legal framework and a revised strategy for higher education. These reforms, supported through two Programmatic Education TAs and a multi- country AAA activity on Higher Education, aimed at furthering progress towards the NRP targets of reducing school dropout to 11% and increasing the proportion of the population with higher education certification to 36%. However, no baseline or end-CPS indicators were provided for either of these quantitative measures, thus precluding any assessment of the extent to which progress was made during the CPS period. The only specific results measure included in this area was the introduction of 1 Europe 2020 is a 10-year strategy proposed by the European Commission in March 2010 for advancement of the EU economy. It aims at "smart, sustainable, inclusive growth" with greater coordination of national and European policy . For Official Use Only CLR Review 6 Independent Evaluation Group standard assessments at the end of each stage of the basic and secondary education cycle. This milestone appears to have been achieved, but its impact (if any) on quality and drop-out is not available. In addition, there were no indicators to measure improvements in the quality and relevance of higher education. Although the CLR reports that AAA recommendations were incorporated in Bulgaria’s higher education strategy, there is no information on whether the strategy was implemented given the volatile political situation in the country. As with innovation, many of the education reforms promoted through the CPS program failed to take hold, reflecting frequent changes of Government during the period. Based on this assessment of program impact, IEG rates this objective as Partially Achieved (PA). 11. Objective #3: Public Finance and Public Administration-- Improved efficiency and effectiveness of public expenditures. Specific results measures in relation to this objective were qualitative in nature, involving improved Ministry of Finance capacity to optimize spending on public sector wages, employment and investment as well as to design public finance policies in support of competitiveness. CPS activities in support of this objective included Bank analytical work: namely, the ECA Flagship report on “Golden Growth”, a Bulgaria-specific study on options for “Mitigating the Impact of an Aging Population” and a study on public expenditures entitled “Policies f or Growth and Competitiveness”. All these reports were well received in the country and assessed in the CLR to have been influential. Specifically, the Bank AAA directly supported the Ministry of Finance in identifying expenditure optimization programs that supported the Government in tackling public sector wages and employment, leading, in turn, to a sharp reduction in the fiscal deficit from over 4% in 2009 to under 1% by the last year of the CPS. Progress within the Ministry of Finance on policies in support of competitiveness could not be assessed, as responsibility for public investment prioritization was shifted to the Council of Ministers by the end of the CPS period. However, in view of the strong impact and ownership of AAA work and progress with respect to the fiscal deficit, IEG rates this objective as Mostly Achieved (MA). 12. Objective #4: Reduction of administrative burdens at central and local levels, through effective implementation of the Better Regulation Program and the Administrative Burden Reduction Action Plan. Achievement of this objective was to have been measured in three ways: (i) survey findings showing that businesses perceived a reduction in red tape/government requirements in line with the NRP; (ii) completion/submission of regulatory impact assessments of key legislation and (iii) adoption of a new policy on State fees. Given the significant concerns reported by Bulgarian businesses with respect to red tape and other bureaucratic hurdles this was (and remains) an important element of Bulgaria’s EU convergence effort. However, little progress was made on this objective during the CPS period, in large part because the RAS activity that was intended to support it did not go forward, as a result of political changes. The CLR does not report if business climate surveys found any changes with regard to business perceptions about administrative burdens. A study of the State Fees regime was conducted, with Bank support, and was followed up by Government but it did not lead to the adoption of a new policy within the CPS time frame. AAA activities – Better Regulation for Higher Growth AAA and a technical note on Administrative Barriers to Business Growth at the Municipal Level – did help to maintain a policy dialogue in this area and could lead to future support in key areas such as e-government, streamlining of municipal requirements and other barriers. In addition, IFC interventions in financing heavy industry and support for the banking sector may have had some impact on improving the business climate but were not considered in the CLR, which included no discussion concerning the linkage between IFC investments and any changes to business regulations. In this context, IEG rates this objective as Not Achieved (NA). 13. Objective #5: Reduce energy consumption in buildings through scaled-up program to improve energy efficiency in public and residential buildings. Improved resilience to climate change and strengthen carbon trading management . This objective, pertaining to green growth and climate action, encompassed actions to help scale up a program for energy efficiency in public and residential buildings, support development of the gas sector, adopt a climate change adaptation For Official Use Only CLR Review 7 Independent Evaluation Group strategy and action plan, support capacity development for carbon trading and GHG mitigation and strengthen forest governance. This ambitious set of outcomes was to have been achieved through a variety of RAS instruments including, inter alia, AAA (for design of an Energy Efficiency program, a Climate Change and Green Growth strategy, and a Gas Supply Study) an Institutional Development Fund (IDF) to strengthen capacity for carbon trading and a Green Investment Scheme (GIS) operation in support of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) mitigation in forestry. In actuality, only the Gas Study and IDF grants came to fruition during the CPS period. All the remaining activities were either cancelled or postponed beyond the CPS period as a result of changing priorities within the Government and/or reallocation of EU funding. IFC financing was ongoing in the power sector, with a focus on renewable energy and energy efficiency. However, neither the CLR nor the original CPS established a clear linkage between these IFC investments and the specific outcomes expected under this objective. In light of these findings, IEG rates this objective as Not Achieved (NA). 14. Objective #6: Increased social inclusion by developing better integrated mechanisms for inclusion of vulnerable groups, including early childhood development, as well as increased use of EU funds. This objective aimed to increase enrollment in early childhood programs of: (i) children from vulnerable groups including Roma; and (ii) children with disabilities by 25 percent in 2013 relative to 2011. These results were to be achieved through an ongoing Bank-supported Social Inclusion Project (SIP), which, in turn, was to be scaled up through new, complementary funding from EU sources during CPS implementation. The constrained fiscal environment during the CPS period meant that implementation of the SIP was severely delayed, considerably slowing down progress in achieving the desired coverage of the targeted groups. While the CLR reports that SIP managed to cover an additional 1,000 or so children during the CPS period, this figure is not broken out by ethnicity or disability, making it hard to relate it to the desired results. Moreover, there is no baseline information on how many children (if any) were covered by the program at the start of the CPS period. Finally, as the CLR acknowledges, services provided through the SIP were limited to regular kindergarten services, with specialized social inclusion services introduced only in the post-CPS period. Similarly, EU support for the program, which was expected by end-CPS, appears to have begun well after the CPS period, in 2015. In this context, IEG rates this objective as Not Achieved (NA). 15. Focus Area I is rated Unsatisfactory (U). Of the six objectives included in this focus area, half were rated not achieved, two were partially achieved and only one was rated mostly achieved. It should be noted that each individual objective comprised several parts, many of which could have been separate objectives in themselves, in terms of their scope and expected impact. This, in turn, suggests that the expected outcomes may have been overly ambitious, especially given the reliance on RAS AAA activities to achieve them, contributing to the poor result. In addition, several of the outcomes were difficult to measure with any precision given their relatively loose formulation and the frequent absence of the necessary baseline information to enable comparisons. Finally, it is worth noting here that in many instances the indicators themselves were more in the nature of output milestones rather than true measures of the desired outcome. This is elaborated further below, in the section on the Results Framework Focus Area II: Strategies and Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds Absorption 16. Objective #7: Strengthened road sector governance, management and EU funds absorption capacity. Improved roads and border infrastructure. The first objective under the second Focus Area sought to improve road transport as measured by achievement of: (i) institutional reforms to improve the absorption of EU funds, (ii) the construction of 300km of national roads, and (iii) the improvement of two border crossing facilities. These results were to be achieved through two ongoing projects for road rehabilitation and transport and trade facilitation respectively as well as a new RAS activity to support improved road sector performance and absorption of EU funds. Based on the information provided in the CLR, the expected milestones (new road construction and improvement of border crossings) were achieved. Although the CPS did not include outcome indicators, it is worth For Official Use Only CLR Review 8 Independent Evaluation Group noting that the ICRR for the Trade Facilitation project reported that the average border entry time at one of the two rehabilitated border posts was reduced by 50 percent from 88 to 44 minutes. Restructuring of the Roads Infrastructure Agency was still in progress at the end of the CPS period. This suggests that the process for decision-making in the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works related to absorption of EU funds was not entirely reformed by the end of the CPS period. Overall, given the strong results in most areas, IEG rates this Objective as Mostly Achieved (MA). 17. Objective #8: Increased EU-financed investments in the water sector through strategic priority setting, water master plans, and strengthened institutional capacity. The main WBG instrument in support of this objective was the Municipal Infrastructure Development Project, approved in FY10. The project had several implementation delays, with progress towards the PDO consistently rated U or MU by management during the CPS period. This, in turn, meant that several of the expected results were only partially achieved during the CPS period. Nonetheless, some progress was made with respect to preparatory works for new water dams and water treatment facilities. 51 water master plans, covering the entire country were under preparation although their approval and the selection of priority investments for future financing from EU Structural Funds occurred only in the post CPS period. Finally a new water and sanitation strategy was prepared and adopted with support from a Bank RAS, “Bulgaria Water Sector Strategy”, and detailed action plans and regulatory changes made (including revision of the Water Act) to enable smooth implementation of national and regional water investments in line with the master plans. Based on these results, this objective is rated Partially Achieved (PA). 18. Objective #9: Increase participation of Roma population in society through stepped-up, integrated, transparent and results-focused. The final Objective under the EU funds absorption focus area focused on increasing inclusion, principally through the establishment of a one-stop shop or service to address basic needs of the Roma population – including e.g., social assistance, employment/job search services and housing. It should be noted that the one-stop shop and related services were to have been financed by the EU, on the basis of a strategy and action plan supported by the Bank through a RAS. Although the a National Roma Integration Strategy (NRIS) was prepared through the RAS and disseminated in the country, follow up work in support of implementation of the NRIS was cancelled due to changes in Government and EU program planning and no new institutions for service provision were established. In this context, IEG rates the Objective Not Achieved (NA). 19. Focus Area II is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU). The rating reflects the individual ratings for the three objectives. Good results were achieved with respect to road transport and, to a lesser extent, in the water and sanitation sectors. In both objectives, however, the CPS results framework and the CLR focused more on outputs than final outcomes, making it hard to assess actual changes on the ground (e.g., in reduced transport costs and times). There were some data on border crossing times included in the ICRR’s for the trade facilitation project, as reported above in the paragraph on Objective 7. Progress with regard to social inclusion was very limited and Bulgaria remained a long way from implementing a system of support for the Roma by the end of the CPS period. Social inclusion/social justice issues are critical in Bulgaria, both for achievement of the twin goals and compliance with the EU Acquis. Focus Area III: Complementing EU Financing 20. Objective #10: Financially sustainable and modernized railways system. The last CPS objective aimed to modernize, and improve the financial sustainability of the railway system in Bulgaria. Despite strong cooperation on railway sector reform (including preparation of a Bank-supported DPL series and a complementary investment loan) in the first year of the CPS, the Government subsequently decided not to proceed with reforms in this sector funds. The Government did subsequently undertake reforms on the sector, but these did not cover the full spectrum of reforms envisaged in the CPS and their impact with respect to financial sustainability cannot be verified. As a For Official Use Only CLR Review 9 Independent Evaluation Group result, the objective is rated Not Achieved (NA). Focus Area III is, therefore, rated Unsatisfactory (U). Overall Assessment and Rating 21. Based on the preceding evaluation of the individual objectives included in the Results Matrix for this CPS, the overall rating on development outcome is Unsatisfactory (U). As summarized in the table below, specified objectives were assessed as Not Achieved in about half of all cases, two objectives were rated mostly Achieved and three were rated Partly Achieved. In terms of Focus Areas, Focus Area 2 was judged to be Moderately Unsatisfactory, with Focus Areas 1 and 3 rated Unsatisfactory. Across all Focus Areas, objectives that were achieved were clearly linked to Bank interventions under the CPS, but insufficient attention appeared to have been paid to the contribution of IFC interventions. Objectives CLR Rating IEG Rating Focus Area I: Policy Reforms for NRP to achieve Unsatisfactory Europe 2020 Strategy Objective 1: Innovation Partially Achieved Partially Achieved Objective 2: Education Partially Achieved Partially Achieved Objective 3: Public Finance and Public Administration Mostly Achieved Mostly Achieved Objective 4: Business Environment Not Achieved Not Achieved Objective 5: Green Growth and Climate Action Not Achieved Not Achieved Objective 6: Social Inclusion, including Roma Partially Achieved Not Achieved Focus Area II: Strategies/Institutions to Accelerate EU Moderately Unsatisfactory Funds Absorption Objective 7: Transport - Roads Mostly Achieved Mostly Achieved Objective 8: Environment, Water and Agriculture Partially Achieved Partially Achieved Objective 9: Social Inclusion, Including Roma Not Achieved Not Achieved Focus Area III: Complementing EU Financing Unsatisfactory Objective 10: Transport - Railways Not Achieved Not Achieved 6. WBG Performance Lending and Investments 22. There were four Bank-financed operations under implementation at the start of the 2011-2013 CPS period, all of which were consistent, in terms of objectives and content, with NRP and CPS priorities – namely, roads/transport (2 operations), municipal infrastructure/water (1 operation) and social inclusion (1 operation). Total commitments for these operations amounted to US$503 million equivalent, of which about US$ 328 million was undisbursed at the beginning of FY11. New lending was anticipated in the form a DPL programmatic three series and an investment loan for the railway sector, for a total of about US$407 million. In addition, a limited amount of grant financing (about US$8.6 million equivalent) was provided through the Bank. These included eight grants over the CPS period, five related to energy and environment plus one each for anti-corruption, social sector institutional development and business incubation. The bulk of the CPS program involved provision of knowledge and advisory services by the Bank, most of it on a reimbursable basis (see below Analytic and Advisory Activities and Services). In view of the new approach adopted in this CPS and the need to For Official Use Only CLR Review 10 Independent Evaluation Group calibrate the program with EU institutions and Government priorities, the CPS was planned for a relatively short period of slightly over 2.5 years, and the CPS document emphasized the need for flexibility throughout implementation. In fact, given a change in Government priorities with respect to reform of the railway sector, the planned DPL series, though largely prepared, was canceled. Thus actual new lending over the CPS period amounted to 0. 23. Portfolio performance during the CPS period was relatively poor, both in absolute terms and in comparison with ECA and Bank-wide averages. All three projects still active in the final year of the CPS (committed amount of about US$228 million) were at risk at the end of FY13, reflecting significant implementation delays. These delays, in turn, were related to the highly constrained fiscal environment and political uncertainty. The number of projects at risk was highest in FY13 (3 projects), rising from two at-risk projects in FY12. IEG reviewed two projects that closed over the CPS period, rating the roads project moderately satisfactory and the transport and trade facilitation project as satisfactory. 24. There were eight IFC investment projects, with US$208.7 million of net commitment, at the inception of the CPS period and which remained active during the 2011-2013 period. About 46 percent of these investments were in Manufacturing. During the review period, IFC committed another US$204.3 million through five more investments, of which the two biggest were to develop solar power generation and the services sector. The CLR made no comments on the IFC portfolio. Of the thirteen investments in the portfolio only one closed during the CPS period. This project was self-rated as successful by IFC but IEG has not yet validated the result. Analytic and Advisory Activities and Services 25. Knowledge transfer – especially through reimbursable advisory services for policy, regulation and program design, capacity building and project/program preparation -- was at the heart of this CPS, in a striking departure from the more usual focus on lending. This approach was innovative and appropriate in light of the substantial financial resources available for Bulgaria from EU institutions and the limited national capacity to effectively program and absorb the funds. Of 19 ongoing and planned AAA activities included in the CPS, 12 were delivered as planned. Several of the remaining 7 were initiated during the CPS period, but completed and discussed with Government in FY14 or beyond. Since this CPS was designed to run from May 2011 through the end of calendar year 2013, at least 2 of these activities may have been completed within the CPS period. However, in the absence of precise dates in the CLR, this is difficult to determine. Moreover, in keeping with the CPS focus on flexibility and responsiveness, a number of new AAA activities were added during the CPS period. These new activities all appear to have been consistent with the objectives of the CPS and with the priorities laid out in the NRP. 26. IFC had one advisory service (AS) project, a PPP to reform the water sector, which was approved before the review period for US$1.4 million and implemented during the review period. At completion, IFC rated this project as Mostly Unsuccessful, which was then rated similarly by the IEG. During the review period, IFC approved another AS PPP project but chose to terminate it within the same fiscal year. Results Framework 27. The results framework exhibited a number of design flaws, despite reasonable logical links between program emphases and desired results. There were issues with the results chain in some instances, where the planned WBG instruments did not seem to be commensurate with the objective sought. A case in point is objective 9: where increased participation of the Roma population in society is the expected result of an RAS to support the development of a National Roma Integration Strategy (NRIS). Even if the assumption was that the strategy would be adopted quickly by a committed administration, the timeframe for seeing the end outcome of a better integrated Roma minority would definitely have been well beyond the CPS period, given the time needed for the strategy to be For Official Use Only CLR Review 11 Independent Evaluation Group implemented on the ground. 28. Several of the outcome indicators specified in the matrix were qualitative in nature, especially in areas related to capacity building or institutional development. Even objectively measurable indicators frequently lacked baseline indicators or mechanisms for monitoring progress. Moreover, most indicators were output rather than outcome focused – e.g., in the roads sector the measures selected related to the length of roads constructed or the rehabilitation of border crossing posts rather than to outcome measures such as reductions in cost and time for the end-beneficiaries. In several cases, the outcome/results measures failed to capture the scope and range of issues supported through the CPS. One case in point is education. As discussed previously, the education agenda supported a wide range of issues – from accountability frameworks for decentralized school management, to pedagogical methods of primary and secondary teachers and even a new framework for higher education. However, the results matrix included only a single measure related to the introduction of standardized assessment at each stage of the education cycle at basic and secondary levels. No baseline was available for this measure and the matrix provided little guidance on the relationship between this measure and the Bank’s broad support to the sector. This, in turn, means that achieveme nt of the indicator cannot necessarily be construed as successful implementation of Bank-supported education activities. Similar issues were encountered in other areas of the matrix as well. 29. Finally, it is important to note that IFC investments and their expected outcomes were not systematically included in the results framework, even in sectors such as renewable energy or business climate improvement where IFC activities were directly relevant to CPS objectives. In some instances, the CPS team might have correctly judged the prospects and chosen to exclude IFC projects from delivering on the outcomes. For example, the results framework might have downplayed the IFC program to Focus Area 2 (Strategies and Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds Absorption) through a “pilot” Public Private Partnership water sector AS project by anticipating the low probability of the project to bring the mandate to a successful completion. However, in other instances, the RF simply missed the opportunity to articulate well the relevance of the IFC program. For example, for Focus Area 3 (Complementing EU Financing), the RF could have been more imaginative to include private EU investments that led to productivity improvements in the services sector. Similarly, as part of improving Competitiveness, in Focus Area 1, the results matrix could have included indicators for steel and glass manufacturing where IFC had investments. Partnerships and Development Partner Coordination 30. One of the strongest features of the CPS’ design and implementation was the systematic attention paid to partnerships, especially with EU multilateral institutions including the European Commission, the European Investment Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions. As necessitated by the nature of the CPS program itself (and the design/objectives of the three CPS focus areas), close consultations between the Government, the Bank and EU institutions began during CPS preparation and continued throughout the implementation period as well. Indeed, the design of this CPS, which represented an innovative approach to coordination among the Government and key external partners, could serve as a useful model for other countries in the ECA region with similar access to external funds coupled with a need for technical and advisory support. In fact, the RAS model, developed through this CPS has already been adopted in other EU member states, and will likely continue to be refined as necessary Safeguards and Fiduciary Issues 31. There were two projects in the Transport sector that were closed and validated by IEG during the review period. The Second Trade and Transport Facilitation project, a category “A” operation, triggered four safeguard policies – Environmental Assessment, Involuntary Resettlement, Natural Habitats, and Physical Cultural Resources. According to the ICR, “project implementation was in compliance with the Bank’s environmental and social safeguards p olicies and with due diligence For Official Use Only CLR Review 12 Independent Evaluation Group documents such as Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and Resettlement Action Plans.” Although there were some temporary safeguard issues that arose during implementation, they were handled properly. The other transport project also triggered the Environmental Assessment safeguard. According to the ICR, the EMP was satisfactorily implemented by contractors and monitored by the Supervision Engineer and Road Infrastructure Agency. There were no cases brought to the Inspection Panel during the review period. Overall, compliance with safeguard policies was satisfactory. 32. Between FY11-15 INT received four serious complaints that required investigation. Three of these complaints were unsubstantiated but one, in the Health sector, was investigated as part of much broader, international case that ultimately resulted in sanctions. None of the complaints in Bulgaria have raised specific, serious concerns over the fiduciary or other management systems of Bank- supported investments to date. Ownership and Flexibility 33. It is difficult to accurately determine the extent of country ownership of this CPS program given the frequent political changes that occurred in Bulgaria during the latter half of the CPS period. As the CLR notes, three different administrations held power in the short CPS time frame of two years and eight months, leading to shifting policy priorities as well as significant delays related (at least in part) to political transitions. While the GERB administration, which was in office at the time of CPS preparation and during the first year or so of implementation, apparently had strong ownership of the CPS agenda in terms both of substance and modality, subsequent administrations may have had less commitment to, or focus on, the CPS objectives and program. Moreover, without a parliamentary majority, even the GERB administration had to retreat from some reform areas foreseen in the CPS. The in-built flexibility of the CPS program was important in this regard, enabling adjustments to the program including postponement or cancellation of some activities (e.g., the green growth agenda) and the addition of several AAA activities to address emerging priorities. WBG Internal Cooperation 34. Notwithstanding the joint CPS?, the internal cooperation between the Bank and IFC appears to have been relatively limited in Bulgaria, especially by comparison with many other CPSs developed during the same period. Factors pointing to poor cooperation include the limited incorporation of IFC activities in the CPS description and, particularly, the results framework (see above). There is also no evidence that the Bank and IFC conducted any joint business planning exercises to specify the focus areas, forms of engagement and milestones for possible joint work for Bank and IFC, even in areas such as renewable energy, business growth and business climate where there might have been considerable complementarity between the Bank and IFC programs. There may also have been missed opportunities for cooperation in transport and municipal water, both areas in which IFC has considerable experience. To the extent that advance planning for IFC investments is difficult (and perhaps undesirable) given the somewhat opportunistic element in IFC investment, many country teams typically elect to more fully integrate IFC activities into the results framework at Progress Report stage. In this instance, the absence of a Progress Report precluded this option. There is no indication either in the CPS or in the CLR that MIGA played a role in Bulgaria during the period of this CPS. Risk Identification and Mitigation 35. The CPS identified four main risks to the CPS program -- namely, political economy, macro vulnerability, governance and implementation weaknesses, and availability of EU resources to complement the Bank-provided RAS. An additional risk that materialized, which might have been better foreseen and planned for, was the country’s highly constrained fiscal environment which affected implementation of key Bank-financed operations such as the SIP and Municipal Water. To the extent that the Bank was a participant in Bulgaria’s macro and fiscal dialogue, there was likely sufficient information available to anticipate the impact on investment operations and the outcomes that they For Official Use Only CLR Review 13 Independent Evaluation Group were expected to achieve. The Bank did make efforts to secure commitments for adequate financing for ongoing projects only after these materialized. At least in hindsight, it would appear that the CPS underestimated the magnitude of some of the risks that it did identify, with negative implications for achievement of the outcomes sought. This is especially true of the political economy risks, which were already high at the time the CPS was prepared and could have argued for a more modest program (in terms of results) than the one that was in fact included in the CPS. The decision to maintain considerable flexibility in the program helped to partially mitigate this risk, but the changes were never reflected in the CPS results framework, as no Progress Report was ever prepared. The CLR reports that a review of the CPS program was conducted in May 2012 with a view to reflecting program adjustments and extending the CPS time frame by two years. However, the Government had no interest in extending the CPS time frame so this effort was shelved and a decision was taken to allow the CPS to lapse on schedule and design a new CPS grounded in a Systematic Country Diagnostic. Overall Assessment and Rating 36. Taking into account the various dimensions of WBG performance in Bulgaria with respect to CPS design and implementation, IEG rates WBG performance as Fair. Although development outcomes for the CPS period were Unsatisfactory, and there were important shortcomings with respect to the design of the results matrix, internal WBG cooperation and risk identification/mitigation, the WBG does deserve credit for pioneering a new modality for work in EU member countries, which represents an important “win-win” approach for the country, the Bank and EU institutions if adequately implemented. The potential benefits of the RAS model are attested to by its adoption in other EU member countries in the 5 years since it was first adopted in Bulgaria. 7. Assessment of CLR Completion Report 37. In general terms, the CLR report was well-written and focused on outcomes, but somewhat short on detail. The text and results matrix were, for the most part, consistent with the CPS and provided relatively clear links between WBG-supported activities and the results obtained. The CLR did not, however, provide much detail on the changes in country circumstances and the specific ways in which the WBG responded to these changes. As noted earlier, the absence of a well-designed results framework with clear baselines and objective measures negatively affected the CLR’s assessment of the program, given the obvious difficulties encountered in determining whether specific outcomes had been met. 8. Findings and Lessons 38. IEG generally concurs with the lessons identified in the CLR, including: (i) continuing to build flexibility into CPS programming to adapt to changing client conditions and needs; (ii) taking care to ensure that RAS engagement effectively expands access to, and absorption of, available EU funds, while building the basis for future reforms; (iii) using self-financed AAA to move forward or open up dialogue in promising areas for reform; and (iv) ensuring a strong, relevant results framework – with an appropriate time-frame -- in the CPS design phase. This latter point is especially important in a program that places most emphasis on AAA to achieve results, given the longer time frame needed to proceed from the analytical phase to changes on the ground. In addition to these lessons, IEG would like to note that greater attention to the potential role of closer cooperation between the Bank and IFC should be incorporated from the outset – especially in areas of mutual expertise and experience, such as energy, banking and business climate – in order to both improve the quality of WBG assistance and have greater impact on the ground. Finally, it is worth noting the importance of preparing a Progress Report, even given a short CPS time frame, especially in the event of changing country circumstances, For Official Use Only CLR Review 14 Independent Evaluation Group in order to both document and validate program changes as well as adjust expected development outcomes to reflect changing realities. Annexes CLR Review 15 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 1: Summary Achievements of CPS Objectives Annex Table 2: Bulgaria Planned and Actual Lending, FY11-FY14 Annex Table 3: Analytical and Advisory Work for Bulgaria, FY10 - FY13 Annex Table 4: Grants and Trust Funds Active in FY11-13 (in US$ million) Annex Table 5: IEG Project Ratings for Bulgaria, FY11-15 Annex Table 6: IEG Project Ratings and Comparators for Bulgaria, FY11-15 Annex Table 7: Portfolio Status for Bulgaria and Comparators, FY11-13 Annex Table 8: Disbursement Ratio for the Bulgaria, FY11-13 Annex Table 9: Net Disbursement and Charges for Bulgaria, FY11-14 Annex Table 10: Total Net Disbursements of Official Development Assistance and Official Aid for Bulgaria Annex Table 11: List of IFC Investments in Bulgaria Annex Table 12: List of IFC Advisory Services for Bulgaria Annex Table 13: IFC Net Commitment Activity for Bulgaria Annex Table 14: Economic and Social Indicators for Bulgaria, 2011 - 2013 Annexes CLR Review 17 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 1: Summary of Achievements of CPS Objectives CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy 1. CPS Objective: Strengthened policies, aligned instruments and effective institutions for high quality R&D (Partially Achieved) (i) The CLR reports that during the period of October 2012-September 2013: Functional review of institutions and policies relevant to science, technology, and innovation completed; December 2013: final analytical report (Governance and Institutional Indicator: (i) Strategic/functional Development of Bulgaria’s Innovation System in the Context of Smart review completed for the institutions Specialization) with recommended design of the governance and institutional responsible for science, technology model for institutions responsible for policy development and implementation and innovation; relevant to science, technology and innovation also completed. December 2013: Functional review of the science and research system and (ii) New Innovation and R&D Strategy detailed action plan (Action Plan on Innovation Commercialization Services) on Source: CPS, CLR, adopted by the Government; increasing the impact of science on industrial activity through effective Competitiveness through commercialization of research and innovation completed. Innovation TA (FY10-12) (iii) Increasing share of government August 2013: Functional review of research and higher education institutions in P078931 and Innovation Major Outcome funding for innovation and science is Bulgaria and specific recommendations on aligning the research system to RAS (FY13-14). Measures allocated through competitive selection industry needs, promoting research excellence, increasing the impact of science mechanisms; and research towards a knowledge-based economy, and improving the creation While CPS provides date of advanced human capital by research and higher education institutions. for target, CLR lacked it. (iv) Evaluation of “OP Competitiveness” is completed and its (ii) The CLR reports that the analytical backbone for Bulgaria’s RIS3/innovation recommendations are adopted in the strategy completed (Inputs to Bulgaria’s RIS3, August 2013) and supported the 2014-2020 programming cycle. Government in developing the RIS3 (July-December 2013); Government accepted some recommendations, which were included in the draft RIS3 Baseline: No (innovation strategy) presented to the EC for approval. Innovation strategy for Target: Yes Smart Specialization of Republic of Bulgaria, 2014-20, was approved by CoM in November 2014. (iii) The CLR reports that in September 2013: Government approved BGN 20 million (€10 million) to replenish the National Innovation Fund, compared to zero funding in the period 2010-2013. Annexes CLR Review 18 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy Government dedicated EU and national funding for innovation and science is projected to double in the 2014-2020 funding period - funds slated to promote research and innovation will increase from €211 million in the 2007 -2014 period to €520 million (under all relevant Operational Programs, OPs). The Government is committed to increase R&D spending from 0.5 percent of GDP in 2014 to 1.5 percent in 2020. R&D spending increased from 0.59 percent of GDP in 2010 to 0.65 percent in 2013. (iv) The CLR reports that evaluation of the Operational Program on Competitiveness (OPC) 2007-2013 completed (October 2012-February 2013) and informed the design of the innovation component of the OP Innovation and Competitiveness (OPIC) 2014-2020, including design of innovation funding instruments and financial engineering instruments (March- December 2013); Government accepted most recommendations and these were included in the draft OP presented to the EC for approval. December 2013: Pre-feasibility studies for large-scale innovation projects to be funded under OPIC that would spur knowledge-led growth (final report, Innovative Infrastructure Flagship Projects). Bank support was provided through AAA: 1. Enhancing Bulgaria’s Competitiveness and Export Performance through Technology Absorption and Innovation (P078931) NLTA – final Policy Note: Going for Smart Growth: How Research and Innovation Can Work for Bulgaria published January 2012. 2. Innovation RAS (FY13-14). 2. CPS Objective: Improved quality of basic and secondary education by strengthening the accountability framework and improved quality and relevance of higher education through strengthened governance, accreditation and performance-based funding (Partially Achieved) Annexes CLR Review 19 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy The CLR reports that external student assessment system is implemented at the end of each educational stage. However, work on integration into the school accountability systems has not yet been completed. First steps in this direction were undertaken in 2013 by piloting implementation of the “value added” measure of school performance. Through this pilot, test results of all Bulgarian students were used in a statistical model to isolate the impact of family and background of students on test results and, based on that, to derive a measure for school accountability that reflects the school’s contribution to the test results of the students. In 2014 and in 2015, the pilot has been expanded to test a broader set of statistical models to inform the Government’s decision for a potential nation-wide application of the school value added performance. Source: CPS, CLR and Programmatic Education Indicator: External student Two consecutive drafts of the Law on Preschool and School Education Sector TA (FY11-13) assessment system implemented at (prepared by two different governments) reflected key recommendations the end of each educational stage stemming from Bank policy advice, including establishment of school councils as a governance structure, strengthening of the national student assessment Baseline: No framework and school inspection, improving equity aspects of financing, introducing elements of performance based financing of schools, expanding Target: Yes access to preschool education, etc. However these drafts were not fully voted by the changing Parliaments. Key Bank recommendations on higher education were reflected in the draft strategy for Development of Higher Education in Bulgaria, including changing the new Higher Education Institution’s (HEI) governance model by expanding participation of external (to academic staff) stakeholders in strategic decision making, changing HEI’s financing by strengthening the performance-based component of HEI’s financing formula, and strengthening the quality assessment framework. Key recommendations from the Bank’s SABER Teachers Policy Assessment were incorporated by the Government in its Strategy for Development of the Pedagogic Staff and a number of legislative and program changes were Annexes CLR Review 20 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy introduced to facilitate fast-track implementation of some of the report’s recommendations. The government formally incorporated the strategy into its 2014 national development plan, which identifies “education and life-long learning” as top budget priorities, with major new spending outlays on teacher retention programs and efforts to attract good teachers in hard to staff schools. Bank support was provided through AAA: 1. Programmatic Education Sector TA (FY11-13) (P146246) – key output was the SABER Teachers Assessment. 2. Programmatic Education Sector TA (FY14-15) (P122454) – key outputs include SABER Early Childhood Development and Workforce Development Assessments and a PISA Note (FY14). 3. Higher Education AAA for ECCU5 Countries (FY11-13) – Strengthening Higher Education in Bulgaria: Options for improving the models of governance, quality assurance and financing of higher education published 2013. 3. CPS Objective: Improved efficiency and effectiveness of public expenditures (Mostly Achieved) i) The CLR reports that public expenditure optimization in 2010-2013 relied on Indicator: i) Strengthened capacity of freezing public sector wage bill and reducing public sector employment and Ministry of Finance to identify helped reducing the fiscal deficit to below 1 percent of GDP from 4.2 percent in expenditure optimization programs in 2009. selected areas (public sector wage bill, General government employment, which was one of the highest per 1000 employment and public investment); Source: CPS, CLR, among the regional comparators declined by 0.9 percent per year between 2010 Bulgaria: Public and 2013 as overlapping structures and responsibilities were reduced. ii) Enhanced analytical capacity of Expenditure Policies for The Public Expenditure Policies for Growth and Competitiveness reports that “in Ministry of Finance to design public Growth and 2013 the aggregate wage bill would increase by 4.2 percent and in 2014 by 6.4 finance policies in support of Competitiveness percent. Strict control over new hires and wage rises is critical if Bulgaria is to competitiveness. reduce the deficit to 0.5 percent of GDP by 2014 and also finance necessary infrastructure investments”. Baseline: No ii) The CLR reports that Bank analytical work – i.e., Policies for Growth and Target: Yes Competitiveness and Macro-fiscal Impact of Aging – is highly valued and Annexes CLR Review 21 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy appreciated by government. If/when the government determines to act; it has enhanced capacity to do so. Follow-up on specific recommendations was hindered by political instability during the CPS period. In 2014 the Bank commenced work on the second part of the Golden Growth report for Bulgaria focused on competitiveness (completed in 2015) and the government acted in accordance with Bank recommendations, demonstrating the Bank’s value added. Bank support was provided through AAA: 1. Policies for Growth and Competitiveness AAA (FY11) (P124703) – final report, Bulgaria: Public Expenditure Policies for Growth and Competitiveness published 2012. 2. Bulgaria Golden Growth Study: Macro-fiscal Impact of Aging (FY13) (P144411) – final report, Mitigating the Economic Impact of an Aging Population: Options for Bulgaria published 2013. 4. CPS Objective: Reduction of administrative burdens at central and local levels, through effective implementation of the Better Regulation Program and the Administrative Burden Reduction Action Plan (Not Achieved) i) The CLR reports that based on the Bank’s 2013 Enterprise Survey, 28.5 % of Indicator: i) Reduction of firms in Bulgaria report that practices of the informal sector are the biggest Administrative and Regulatory Burdens hurdle. Political instability and corruption take 2nd and 3rd position with each in compliance with national reform one out of 7-8 companies reporting that this is an issue. Access to finance is an programs as assessed/ confirmed obstacle reported by one out of 20 companies. According to the same survey through surveys of firms; results, 23 % of firms in the sample have an internationally recognized quality certification, while only 15 percent of the companies use technology that is Source: CPS and CLR ii) Submission of regulatory impact licensed from foreign companies. In addition, the survey reports that senior assessments for key legislation; managers in Bulgaria spend on average 16 percent of their time dealing with requirements of government regulation and taxes. iii) Adoption of a Policy on State Fees ii) The CLR reports that no regulatory impact assessments for key policies and Baseline: No legislation have been conducted. The regulatory impact assessment instrument, which is considered international best practice, continues to be underused in Target: Yes Bulgaria. Annexes CLR Review 22 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy E-government services at the municipal level are limited. A package of over 40 government measures was introduced in late 2013, but implementation is lagging. iii) The CLR reports that the Bank provided an analytical diagnostic of the state fees regime and, based on it, the government hired a consultancy to undertake a comprehensive functional review. However, the Policy on State Fees is not yet adopted. Bank support was provided through: AAA 1. Better Regulation for Higher Growth AAA (FY10-11). 2. Administrative Burden to Businesses Municipal Study (FY12-13). IFC IFC financing in heavy industry, banking sector. 5. CPS Objective: Reduce energy consumption in buildings through scaled-up program to improve energy efficiency in public and residential buildings. Improved resilience to climate change and strengthen carbon trading management (Not Achieved) i) The CLR reports that the Security of Gas Supply Study, which focused on Source: CPS and CLR Indicator: i) Institutional assessment diversification of gas supply sources and delivery routes (as a result of the 2009 including assessment of capacity supply interruption), also discussed the role of gas in Bulgaria’s energy mix to needs completed, mechanism for large meet energy efficiency targets. Under the Study, analytical concepts and an scale energy efficiency program in innovative modeling approach were also developed to identify least cost public and residential buildings measures to improve security of gas supplies and options to maximize developed, and scaled-up activities commercial benefits from gas trade. The model was handed over to experts launched; from the Ministry of Economy and Energy and key agencies in the gas sector, including Bulgaria Energy Holding (BEH), Bulgargaz, and Bulgartransgaz. ii) Analytical capacity to prepare strategies and action plans in the gas ii) The CLR reports that a rapid diagnostic assessment of selected issues in the sector to ensure reliable and diversified power sector was undertaken in response to a request from the 2013 caretaker energy supplies developed; government. It identified a series of immediate and short-term actions targeted at improving public confidence, financial viability, and affordability of the energy Annexes CLR Review 23 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy iii) Climate change adaptation strategy sector, including scaling-up energy efficiency programs in the residential sector. and action plan prepared and The Bank’s recommendations were endorsed by the care-taker government and approved by inter-ministerial made public by the Minister of Economy and Energy; the assessment has coordination committee; served as a reference for needed sector reforms. iv) Institutional capacity for iii) The CLR reports that the Bank report on financial disaster risk management participation in carbon trading insurance options for Bulgaria was completed to raise awareness of the role that strengthened through staff training and insurance can play in climate change adaptation and highlight some of development of methodologies and Bulgaria’s disaster risk management efforts. It constitutes an important input to procedures for participation in EU ETS; the national climate change adaptation strategy being formulated by the government. v) Analytical capacity for evaluating costs and benefits of GHG mitigation in The Bank analytical support to the Ministry of Environment and Water – Climate key sector developed; Change Directorate in FY12 included 2 technical workshops with the National Adaptation Strategy Working Group; Draft ToR for the development of a set of vi) Government decides on new forest coherent climate and hydrologic projections for Bulgaria (consistent with IPCC sector institutional setup, based on and EU projections) based on work already done by the Bulgarian Academy of sound economic and institutional Science, review and synthesis of available work on the impact of climate change analysis, international best practice, on the hydrologic cycle in Bulgaria, and its impact on basin water balances and and models of good forest governance the availability of water resources for current and future uses. Baseline: No iv) The CLR reports that the Wood Residue to Energy Carbon Finance Project, which aimed to reduce greenhouse gases generated at the Svilosa AD pulp Target: Yes manufacturing plant, led to total verified emission reductions from May 1, 2004 to December 31, 2012 of 476,881 tCO2e. The Project generated 106 percent of the verified emissions reductions as contracted under the Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement. All CO2 emissions from the Project were regulated under the EU Emission Trading Scheme. v) The CLR reports that National Trust for Eco Fund (NTEF) IDF grant contributed to some extent to defining the mechanisms related to the implementation of carbon trading mechanisms, such as the green investment scheme and the EU emission trading scheme through helping to define the role Annexes CLR Review 24 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy of NTEF in implementation of these schemes for financing of GHG-reducing projects. The capacity building part of the project was successfully completed, as well as tailored to the needs and demands for training both for the NTEF and MoEW. NTEF and MoEW experts and staff have increased knowledge in climate change policy at EU and UNFCCC level and also in positioning of NTEF in international networks. vi) The CLR reports that the Forestry Sector Institutions Reform Support IDF grant significantly contributed to the elaboration and adoption of new forest sector legislation: a new Forest Law was adopted (State Gazette April 8, 2011), under which new structures were established (six state owned forest enterprises). A new regulation for timber sale was prepared and adopted, following wide consultation with stakeholders. The grant supported the development of the new structures and operationalization of their roles of managing state forest assets (by developing Standard Operating Procedures and providing technical input to the Timber Sales regulation). It also supported new structures designed and established within the Executive Forest Agency to support non-state forests and control of forestry activities. Bank support was provided through: AAA 1. Security of Gas Supply Study AAA (FY13) – final report, Republic of Bulgaria: Options to Improve Security of Gas Supply published in 2013. 2. Rapid diagnostic assessment of selected issues in the power sector (FY13). 3. Analytical support to Energy Efficiency in Housing, as part of the preparation of potential large scale Energy Efficiency Program (FY11). 4. Climate Change and Green Growth AAA (FY12) Annexes CLR Review 25 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy 5. Climate Change and Green Growth AAA (FY14) – final report, Insurance Against Climate Change: Financial Disaster Risk Management Insurance Options for Climate Change Adaptation in Bulgaria published in 2014 IDF Grants 1. Forestry Sector Institutions Reform Support (FY11-14) (P120228). 2. NTEF IDF (FY12-15). IFC 1. IFC financing in power sector, with focus on renewable energy and energy efficiency. 6. CPS Objective: Increased social inclusion by developing better integrated mechanisms for inclusion of vulnerable groups, including early childhood development, as well as increased use of EU funds (Not Achieved) The CLR reports that significant delays (almost three years) in implementation of the Social Inclusion Project led to unachieved targets for enrollment of children with disabilities. However, the completed construction works of new preschool Indicator: Enrollment of (i) children facilities enabled the enrollment of 1,107 children (including vulnerable children) from vulnerable groups including as of December 2013, with provision of services following in 2014, including Roma; and (ii) children with disabilities services for early intervention of disabilities with the start of the school year in Source: CPS and CLR in early childhood education programs September 2014. Project delays stemmed from an initial change of the increased by 25 percent in 2013 implementing agency, followed by a period of insufficient annual expenditure The proposed milestone relative to 2011 limits imposed on the project by the government due to fiscal constraints. In 2013, indicators lacked baselines the project was successfully restructured and the implementation was unblocked, and targets. Baseline: i) Not provided; ii) Not thus ensuring that the PDO could be met within the extended implementation provided period if sufficient resources are made available for the implementation of the social services, supported by the Project. The extension of the project also Target: i) Not provided ii) Not provided improved the prospects for a seamless transition of the funding of SIP services from the Project to the EU funding mechanism. ISR P100657 Annexes CLR Review 26 Independent Evaluation Group CPS - May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 1: Policy Reforms for Actual Results IEG Comments National Reform Program to (as of current month/year) Implement Europe 2020 Strategy Number of children with disabilities and other special needs enrolled in mainstream kindergartens and preschool groups through the project Baseline: 0 (2012) Actual: 0 (December 2013) and 3165 (June 2015) Target: 3000 (September 2015) Number of children aged 3-7 newly enrolled in kindergartens and preschool groups through the project Baseline: 0 (2012) Actual: 0 (December 2013) and 362 (June 2015) Target: 150 (September 2015) Bank support was provided through: Lending Social Inclusion Project (FY09-16) (P100657). AAA Poverty and Social Policy Monitoring AAA (FY12) (P118274). Annexes CLR Review 27 Independent Evaluation Group CPS May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 2: Strategies and Actual Results IEG Comments Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds (as of current month/year) Absorption 7. CPS Objective: Strengthened road sector governance, management and EU funds absorption capacity. Improved roads and border infrastructure (Mostly Achieved) i) The CLR reports that the Roads Infrastructure Agency (RIA) started a restructuring of its organization in line with Bank recommendations. ii) The CLR reports that through Road RAS the Bank has significantly contributed to better informed decision-making process related to EU funds absorption. The Indicator: i) Road infrastructure Bank has developed a number of strategic documents, including Road Strategy, agency (RIA) restructured; Mid-term Operational program, IT Strategy, and Business Plan, which have provided sound analytical basis for MRDPW decision making. In parallel, ii) Process for decision-making in extensive capacity building for MRDPW and RIA staff took place. Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works Road Infrastructure iii) The CLR reports that over 300 kilometers (km) of national roads were Agency (MRDPW) related to rehabilitated (117 km Class I, 130 km Class II, and 63 km Class III roads). This is absorption of EU funds is reformed; Source: CPS, CLR, ISR and ISRR Major consistent with the data provided in the Road Infrastructure Rehabilitation Project Outcome (FY07-13) (P099894) ICRR. iii) At least 300 km of national roads Measures rehabilitated and road management iv) The CLR reports that the reconstruction of Kapitan Andreevo border crossing system effectively used; point and the construction of the 3.5 km access road to Kapitan Andreevo are operational as a result of the Second Trade and Transport Facilitation Project. iv) Two Border-crossing facilities The Kalotina border-crossing facility benefited from equipment upgrades and Kapitan Andreevo and Kalotina and institutional capacity strengthening measures under the project, though the full 3.5 km access road to Kapitan reconstruction planned under the Project was dropped (priority was given to Andreevo are improved. Kapitan-Adreevo, the largest crossing point in Bulgaria, on the Bulgaria-Turkey border). This did not negatively impact Project outcomes as Project indicators Baseline: Not provided showed significant improvements in transit times through the border crossing points (see 2014 ICR). Target: Not provided Bank support was provided through: Lending Road Infrastructure Rehabilitation Project (FY07-13) (P099894). Annexes CLR Review 28 Independent Evaluation Group CPS May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 2: Strategies and Actual Results IEG Comments Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds (as of current month/year) Absorption Second Trade and Transport Facilitation Project (FY07-14) (P094018). AAA: Improving Roads Sector Performance, Capacity and EU Funds Absorption RAS (FY13-16). 8. CPS Objective: Increased EU-financed investments in the water sector through strategic priority setting, water master plans, and strengthened institutional capacity (Partially Achieved) Indicator: i) Preparatory works for the i) The CLR reports that Municipal Infrastructure Development Project faced completion of three new water dams delays related to the timeliness of the procurement processes and issuances of and water treatment plants as well as construction permits, and budgetary constraints in 2012 and 2013. Construction one dam rehabilitation are completed of one of the dams (Neykovtsi) was dropped (updated cost estimates were higher and civil works started rehabilitation; than the initially projected). Preparatory works for the remaining dams have been completed. [The construction of one of the dams (Plovdivtsi) started in FY15. ii) Regional Master Plans for water The Project has been restructured and extended to allow for the completion of and wastewater for the entire territory works. of Bulgaria (excl. Sofia City) are prepared; ISR Sequence 10 (June 2014) iii) Priority sector investments As of January 2014, the water damns and water treatment plants had not been completed. On August 2014, the project was restructured with key element Source: CPS, CLR and ISR P099895 identified in the Master Plans are selected for future financing from including an extension of the closing date by 24 months until December, 31, Structural Funds; 2017 and a reduction in the scope of works under Component 3 (Completion and Rehabilitation of Dams). As of February 2016, construction and rehabilitation of iv) New strategy for water and waste dams and water plants was still experiencing delays and only the contract for water utilities is developed and Plovdivtsi Dam had been signed (ISR Sequence 14). approved by Government. The Water Act is revised to ensure appropriate ii) The CLR reports that regional water and waste water master plans (51 in total) implementation of the Regional outlining short-term, mid-term, and long-term investment priorities for water and Master Plans. waste water were prepared and adopted in December 2013/January 2014. Baseline: No ISR Sequence 10 (June 2014) As of June 2014, all 51 plans were undergoing final approval procedure. Target: Yes Annexes CLR Review 29 Independent Evaluation Group CPS May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 2: Strategies and Actual Results IEG Comments Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds (as of current month/year) Absorption iii) The CLR reports that since the water and waste water Master Plans were approved only in December 2013/January 2014, implementation was delayed. Priority sector investments identified in the Master Plans are expected to be selected for future financing from the OP Environment (2014-2020) agreed with the EC. iv) New strategy for the water supply and sanitation (WSS) sector was developed in September 2013 and approved by the government in March 2014 (the RAS engagement was key in this regard). This strategy includes a planned significant increase in investment levels for both renewal/ replacement and for EU acquis compliance. The strategy includes an action plan with actions to optimize costs, improve regulation, and enhance sustainability of services. The CLR reports that the Water Act was revised inter alia to enable Regional Water Associations to sign contracts with the Regional water utility companies which is a precondition for the implementation of the Regional Master Plans. Bank support was provided through: Lending Municipal Infrastructure Development Project (FY10-18) (P099895). AAA RAS - Bulgaria Water Sector Strategy (P120703) 9. CPS Objective: Increase participation of Roma population in society through stepped-up, integrated, transparent and results-focused national strategy and actions (Not Achieved) Indicator: Establishment of fully The CLR reports that support expressed in public consultations for the integrated one-stop shop or service preparation of the National Roma Integration Strategy (NRIS). Review of the Source: CPS and CLR for Roma social assistance, housing, local implementation framework of NRIS completed by the Bank and and labor market services disseminated to government counterparts. The planned follow-up support for NRIS implementation through RAS did not materialize during the CPS period. Baseline: Not provided Annexes CLR Review 30 Independent Evaluation Group CPS May 2011- December 2013 – Focus Area 2: Strategies and Actual Results IEG Comments Institutions to Accelerate EU Funds (as of current month/year) Absorption The qualitative research report on gender dimensions of Roma inclusion was Target: 10 Roma communities (2013) undertaken to better inform future interventions. Bank support was provided through: AAA 1. Roma Exclusion in ECA – Economic Costs, Education Drivers, Policy Measures AA (FY10-12). 2. Gender Dimensions of Roma Inclusion (FY14) (P130455) – final report, Gender Dimensions of Roma Inclusion: Perspectives from Four Roma Communities published 2014 Annexes CLR Review 31 Independent Evaluation Group CPS May 2011- December 2013 – Actual Results Focus Area 3: Complementing EU IEG Comments (as of current month/year) Financing 10. CPS Objective: Financially sustainable and modernized railways system (Not Achieved) Indicator: i) National railway operator BDZ EAD is restructured and its Planned lending program in the railways sector was suspended at the financial viability improved; request of the government: the first Programmatic Railway Sector DPL and a Railway Infrastructure Rehabilitation Project were prepared and Major ii) Sector productivity is improved: a) negotiated at the time of the CPS, but the government subsequently Source: CPS and CLR Outcome staff productivity, b) track productivity indicated that additional reforms were necessary, and eventually decided Measures not to proceed with Bank support in the railway sector. Baseline: i) Not provided; ii) Not provided Bank support was provided through: Target: i) Not provided; ii) a) AAA increased by at least 45%; b) Railways Policy Note (FY13-14) (P145398). increased by at least 25% Annexes CLR Review 32 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 2: Bulgaria Planned and Actual Lending, FY11-FY14 Proposed Approval Closing Proposed Approved Outcome Project ID Project name FY FY FY Amount Amount Rating Project Planned Under CPS 2011-13 DROPPED Railway Sector DPL 2011 105 DROPPED DROPPED Railway Infrastructure Rehabilitation 2011 92 DROPPED DROPPED Railway Sector DPL 2012 105 DROPPED DROPPED Railway Sector DPL 2013 105 DROPPED Total Planned 407 Unplanned Projects during the CPS Period Total Unplanned Approval Closing Approved On-going Projects during the CPS Period FY FY Amount P094018 BG TTFSE 2 2007 2014 53 IEG: S P099894 ROAD INFRASTRUCT REHAB 2007 2013 123 IEG: MS P099895 MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCT DEVT 2010 2018 119 LIR: MU P100657 SOCIAL INCLUSION PROJECT 2009 2016 59 LIR: MS P102160 SIR DPL2 (DDO) 2009 2012 150 IEG: MU Total On-going 503 Source: Bulgaria CPS, WB Business Intelligence Table 2a.1, 2a.4 and 2a.7 as of 03/23/16 *LIR: Latest internal rating. MU: Moderately Unsatisfactory. MS: Moderately Satisfactory. S: Satisfactory. HS: Highly Satisfactory. Annex Table 3: Analytical and Advisory Work for Bulgaria, FY10 - FY13 Proj ID Economic and Sector Work Fiscal year Output Type General Economy, P124703 Policies for Growth and Competitiveness FY11 Macroeconomics, and Growth Study P118274 Poverty & Social Policy Monitoring FY12 Not assigned P131216 Bulgaria Green Growth Benchmarking FY12 Sector or Thematic Study/Note P144411 Bulgaria Golden Growth: Fiscal Impact FY13 Sector or Thematic Study/Note P130455 Gender Dimensions of Roma Inclusion FY14 Sector or Thematic Study/Note P147206 Bulgaria Productivity Growth FY15 Sector or Thematic Study/Note Proj ID Technical Assistance Fiscal year Output Type P120703 Water Sector Strategy TA FY11 Not assigned P078931 BG Competitiveness thru Innovation TA FY12 Not assigned P118225 Gas Dialogue FY13 Not assigned P123219 BG Regulatory Reform FY13 Not assigned P143111 BG - Consumer Protection and Financial T FY13 Not assigned P145623 Power Sector Diagnostic Assessment FY13 Not assigned P122454 TA Program for Education Sector FY14 Not assigned P131556 FBS-19-FY12 Innovation FY14 Not assigned P145398 Bulgaria Railways TA FY14 Not assigned P145996 Climate Change and Green Growth FY14 Not assigned P146968 BG Financial Consumer Protection FY14 Not assigned Proj ID Technical Assistance Fiscal year Output Type P147227 Bulgaria Aging Dissemination FY14 Not assigned P148711 Bulgaria Competition TA FY14 Not assigned P146246 Programmatic Education Sector TA FY15 Not assigned P147477 Bulgaria power sector options paper FY15 Not assigned P151656 Activation and Skills for LM Inclusion FY15 Not assigned P152947 Bulgaria National Reform Program FY15 Not assigned Annexes CLR Review 33 Independent Evaluation Group Proj ID Economic and Sector Work Fiscal year Output Type P154117 Bulgaria National Reform Program VC FY15 Not assigned Source: WB Business Intelligence 3/22/16 Annex Table 4: Grants and Trust Funds Active in FY11-13 (in US$ million) Project Approval Closing Approved Project name TF ID ID FY FY Amount P118427 Strengthening the National Trust Eco- TF 99613 2012 2015 203,000 Fund's Financing and Implementation Capacity P123817 Business incubation impact assessment TF 99443 2012 2013 200,000 & capacity building in ECA P120228 Forestry Sector Institutions Reform Support TF 96228 2010 2014 430,000 P102160 Social Sectors Institutional Reform TF 57777 2007 2009 708,000 Development Policy Loan (SIR DPL II) P103835 IDF-Combating Corruption: Strengthening TF 58170 2007 2011 475,000 Anti-Corruption Capacity in the Office of the Prosecutor General P077575 DISTRICT HEAT (PCF) TF 54641 2005 2013 628,000 P077575 DISTRICT HEAT (PCF) TF 53790 2005 2013 4,336,000 P075560 WOOD RESIDUE TO ENERGY TF 52196 2004 2014 1,575,000 Total 8,555,000 Source: Client Connection as of 3/21/16 Annex Table 5: IEG Project Ratings for Bulgaria, FY11-15 Exit Total IEG Risk to Proj ID Project name IEG Outcome FY Evaluated ($M) DO Road Infrastruct. MODERATELY SATISFACTORY MODERATE 2013 P099894 Rehab. 103.4 2014 P094018 BG TTFSE 2 45.1 SATISFACTORY MODERATE Total 148.5 Source: AO Key IEG Ratings as of 3/21/16 Annex Table 6: IEG Project Ratings and Comparators for Bulgaria, FY11-15 RDO % RDO % Total Total Outcome Moderate or Moderate or Region Evaluated lEvaluated Outcome % Sat Lower Lower ($M) (No) % Sat ($) (No) Sat ($) Sat (No) Bulgaria 148.5 2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ECA 17,673.1 123 87.0 75.2 56.4 46.7 World 102,015.0 1,219 81.3 70.5 62.7 49.5 Source: WB Business Warehouse as of 05/21/16 * With IEG new methodology for evaluating projects, institutional development impact and sustainability are no longer rated separately. Annex Table 7: Portfolio Status for Bulgaria and Comparators, FY11-13 Fiscal year 2011 2012 2013 Total Bulgaria # Proj 3 4 3 10 # Proj At Risk 2 1 3 6 % Proj At Risk 66.7 25.0 100.0 60.0 Annexes CLR Review 34 Independent Evaluation Group Fiscal year 2011 2012 2013 Total Net Comm Amt 230.5 351.1 228.6 810.2 Comm At Risk 171.5 118.7 228.6 518.8 % Commit at Risk 74.4 33.8 100.0 64.0 ECA # Proj 290 256 246 792 # Proj At Risk 40 47 47 134 % Proj At Risk 13.8 18.4 19.1 16.9 Net Comm Amt 22,649.7 23,091.9 24,699.7 70,441.2 Comm At Risk 2,116.9 2,668.4 3,844.0 8,629.3 % Commit at Risk 9.3 11.6 15.6 12.3 World # Proj 2,059 2,029 1,964 6,052 # Proj At Risk 382 387 414 1,183 % Proj At Risk 18.6 19.1 21.1 19.5 Net Comm Amt 171,755.3 173,706.1 176,202.6 521,664.0 Comm At Risk 23,850.0 24,465.0 40,805.6 89,120.6 % Commit at Risk 13.9 14.1 23.2 17.1 Source: WB BI as of 03/21/16 Annex Table 8: Disbursement Ratio for the Bulgaria, FY11-13 Fiscal Year 2011 2012 2013 Overall Result Bulgaria Disbursement Ratio (%) 6.73 21.10 17.61 14.62 Inv Disb in FY 22.04 61.84 40.51 124.39 Inv Tot Undisb Begin FY 327.57 293.08 229.98 850.63 ECA Disbursement Ratio (%) 20.51 25.92 24.15 23.49 Inv Disb in FY 2,806.39 3,498.43 2,925.82 9,230.64 Inv Tot Undisb Begin FY 13,682.49 13,495.75 12,113.73 39,291.97 World Disbursement Ratio (%) 22.38 20.79 20.60 21.23 Inv Disb in FY 20,933.36 21,048.24 20,510.39 62,491.99 Inv Tot Undisb Begin FY 93,516.54 101,234.29 99,588.04 294,338.88 * Calculated as IBRD/IDA Disbursements in FY / Opening Undisbursed Amount at FY. Restricted to Lending Instrument Type = Investment. AO disbursement ratio table as of 3/21/16 Annexes CLR Review 35 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 9: Net Disbursement and Charges for Bulgaria, FY11-14 Period Disb. Amt. Repay Amt. Net Amt. Charges Fees Net Transfer FY11 22,043,424.9 95,935,238.4 (73,891,813.5) 18,166,250.3 353,873.8 (92,411,937.6) FY12 61,841,151.1 94,812,603.8 (32,971,452.7) 24,281,848.3 257,207.3 (57,510,508.3) FY13 40,506,591.0 109,753,534.5 (69,246,943.5) 10,462,217.4 135,302.3 (79,844,463.1) FY14 30,622,449.1 111,958,617.5 (81,336,168.4) 5,416,098.0 66,518.5 (86,818,784.9) Report Total 155,013,616.1 412,459,994.2 (257,446,378.1) 58,326,414.0 812,901.8 (316,585,693.9) World Bank Client Connection 3/21/16 Annex Table 10: Total Net Disbursements of Official Development Assistance and Official Aid for Bulgaria Development Partners 2011 2012 2013 No Data available DAC Countries, Total 0 0 0 Multilateral, Total 0 0 0 Development Partners Total 0 0 0 Source: OECD Stat, [DAC2a] as of May 1, 2014 Annex Table 11: List of IFC Investments in Bulgaria Investments Committed in FY11-FY15 Project Cmt Project Primary Sector Grnfild Net Project Size Net Loan Net Comm ID FY Status Name Code Equity Wholesale and 33393 2013 Active E 94,868 65,590 - 65,590 Retail Trade 31246 2012 Active Trade Finance G 40,000 40,000 - 40,000 31543 2012 Active Electric Power G 117,258 61,965 - 61,965 32319 2012 Active Trade Finance E 5,000 2,200 - 2,200 29688 2011 Active Primary Metals E 95,833 34,579 - 34,579 Sub-Total 352,959 204,334 - 204,334 Investments Committed pre-FY11 but active during FY11-15 Industrial & 28501 2010 Active Consumer E 103,553 24,822 - 24,822 Products 28664 2010 Active Trade Finance E 20,000 20,000 - 20,000 Wholesale and 29354 2010 Active E 46,599 22,548 - 22,548 Retail Trade 26836 2009 Active Electric Power G 423,496 48,537 - 48,537 Glass 28387 2009 Active E 11,986 11,986 - 11,986 Manufacturing 26737 2008 Active Real Estate E 58,736 21,625 21,625 Glass 26312 2008 Closed E 72,722 36,244 - 36,244 Manufacturing 25090 2006 Active Primary Metals G 102,539 22,977 - 22,977 Sub-Total 839,631 187,114 21,625 208,739 TOTAL 1,192,590 391,448 21,625 413,073 Source: IFC-MIS Extract as of end June 30, 2015 Annexes CLR Review 36 Independent Evaluation Group Annex Table 12: List of IFC Advisory Services for Bulgaria Advisory Services Approved in FY11-15 Primary Impl Impl Total Project ID Project Name Project Status Business Start FY End FY Funds, US$ Line Sofia District Heating 600488 2015 2015 TERMINATED PPP 4,847 PPP Sub-Total 4,847 Advisory Services Approved pre-FY11 but active during FY11-15 Primary Impl Impl Total Funds, Project ID Project Name Project Status Business Start FY End FY US$ Line 25032 Bulgaria Water 2006 2013 CLOSED PPP 1,478,593 Sub-Total 1,478,593 TOTAL 1,483,440 Source: IFC AS Data Annex Table 13: IFC Net Commitment Activity for Bulgaria 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Financial Markets - Trade Finance (TF) 42,200 42,200 Agribusiness & Forestry - Manufacturing 34,579 34,579 Wholesale and Retail Trade 65,590 65,590 Infrastructure 61,965 61,965 Telecom, Media, and Technology - Construction and Real Estate Total 34,579 104,165 65,590 - - 204,334 16.9% 51.0% 32.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% Source: IFC MIS as of 1/20/16 Annex Table 14: Economic and Social Indicators for Bulgaria, 2011 - 2013 BGR ECA World Series Name 2011 2012 2013 Average 2008-2012 Growth and Inflation GDP growth (annual %) 1.6 0.2 1.3 1.0 0.9 2.5 GDP per capita growth 2.2 0.8 1.8 1.6 0.6 1.3 (annual %) GNI per capita, PPP 15,020.0 15,590.0 15,500.0 15,370.0 27,564.5 13,892.8 (current international $) GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$) 7,080.0 7,270.0 7,500.0 7,283.3 25,040.7 10,302.6 (Millions) Inflation, consumer prices 4.2 3.0 0.9 2.7 2.7 3.8 (annual %) Composition of GDP (%) Agriculture, value added (% 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 2.0 3.1 of GDP) Industry, value added (% of 29.6 29.5 27.6 28.9 25.6 26.7 GDP) Services, etc., value added 65.1 65.1 67.1 65.8 72.4 70.2 (% of GDP) Annexes CLR Review 37 Independent Evaluation Group BGR ECA World Series Name 2011 2012 2013 Average 2008-2012 Gross fixed capital formation 21.1 21.4 21.2 21.2 19.9 21.9 (% of GDP) Gross domestic savings (% 22.6 19.3 20.8 20.9 22.4 22.5 of GDP) External Accounts Exports of goods and 62.3 63.4 67.0 64.2 41.2 29.8 services (% of GDP) Imports of goods and 61.4 66.2 67.6 65.0 39.1 29.8 services (% of GDP) Current account balance (% 0.2 (0.9) 1.7 0.3 of GDP) External debt stocks (% of 89.5 99.7 99.8 96.3 GNI) Total debt service (% of 8.1 8.9 9.5 8.8 GNI) Total reserves in months of 5.3 6.5 5.9 5.9 6.3 13.4 imports Fiscal Accounts /1 General government 31.154 33.126 34.547 32.9 revenue (% of GDP) General government total 33.051 33.574 36.341 34.3 expenditure (% of GDP) General government net lending/borrowing (% of -1.897 -0.448 -1.795 -1.4 GDP) General government gross 14.827 17.082 17.586 16.5 debt (% of GDP) Social Indicators Health Life expectancy at birth, 74.2 74.3 74.5 74.3 76.6 71.0 total (years) Immunization, DPT (% of 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.0 95.3 85.5 children ages 12-23 months) Improved sanitation facilities (% of population with 85.9 86.0 86.0 86.0 92.8 65.9 access) Improved water source (% 99.1 99.0 99.0 99.0 94.8 82.1 of population with access) Mortality rate, infant (per 10.9 10.5 10.1 10.5 10.9 34.9 1,000 live births) Education School enrollment, 85.1 85.7 87.1 85.9 76.0 52.8 preprimary (% gross) School enrollment, primary 100.9 99.5 99.2 99.9 102.1 108.2 (% gross) School enrollment, 93.2 93.1 98.7 95.0 101.3 73.9 secondary (% gross) Population Population, total (Millions) 7,348,328.0 7,305,888.0 7,265,115.0 7,306,443.7 895,631,334.3 7,090,433,836.0 Population growth (annual (0.6) (0.6) (0.6) -0.6 0.3 1.2 %) Urban population (% of 72.6 73.0 73.3 73.0 70.3 52.4 total) Source: DDP as of 2/17/2016 *International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2016
Группа Всемирного банка · CPF Completion and Learning Review Review
Bulgaria - Completion and learning review for the period FY2011– FY2013 : IEG review
Открыть оригинал документа
Полный текст размещён на сайте публикующей организации. lawenc.com индексирует метаданные и ведёт на официальный источник.
Полный текст
Основные сведения
Организация
Группа Всемирного банка
Тип документа
CPF Completion and Learning Review Review
Страна
Болгария
Источник
Всемирный банк