introduce prospective evaluations. This allows for better alignment between IE questions and project design, results framework and implementation plans, and vice versa. In addition, intermediate IE products, such as baseline data analysis, can be used to adjust project design and implementation and identify other constraints that have to be addressed to ensure effectiveness (World Bank 2010). It is too early to capture the use of the IEs conducted under this model because many of them are still ongoing. However, there is evidence that IEs are becoming better integrated in projects over time: 52 percent of IEs initiated in 2009–10 are part of project M&E, compared with 38 percent initiated in 2007–08; this indicates that IEs can be expected to be more used. Survey data for completed IEs suggest that IEs that have been initiated later are better used: 47 percent of World Bank completed IEs initiated before 2005 were used to inform design of follow-on projects, compared with 60 percent of completed IEs initiated between 2005 and 2010. Closely linked with relevance, the timeliness of results is an important determinant of IE usefulness. Even if the questions are relevant, IEs can still fail to influence the evaluated projects if their results come too late to be incorporated into decision making. Limited use of IEs in assessing project impacts in ICRs because of lack of timeliness of IE outputs was evident in three World Bank IEs examined in the case studies: the Female Secondary School Education Assistance Project in Bangladesh, the Nutrition Enhancement Project in Senegal, and the Nutrition and Early Childhood Development Project in Uganda. In the Senegal Nutrition Project, the IE was still in progress at the time of the ICR, even though the IE was not assessing outcomes extending beyond life of the project. Another type of timeliness issue that limits use of IEs in design of followup projects is when the follow-up project is conceptualized/appraised before the current project closes and before IE results are likely to be available (for example, the Second Rural Transport Project in Vietnam). This impedes IE use in informing new project design. However, in the case of an IE assessing outcomes that manifest themselves much later after the project closes, synchronization with the project cycle is not realistic.23 There is some evidence that, at IFC, timeliness is not perceived as a significant problem: for seven of eight IEs for which survey responses were available, transaction leaders said that the IE was timely enough to be useful for the project. At the World Bank, there are signs that IEs are increasingly synchronized with the project cycle. For instance, 54 percent of completed IEs that were initiated since 2005 disseminated a baseline report to the project team, and 68 percent shared results on project implementation. Comparatively, 34 percent and 43 percent of completed IEs initiated before 2005 shared a baseline report and implementation progress report, respectively, with the project team. IEs of sound quality whose findings are credible and robust are more useful from an operational perspective. IEG found suggestive evidence that high-
Use and Influence of World Bank Group Impact Evaluations
107