6. For Development Objectives, while the percentage of highly satisfactory projects increased slightly in FY00, there was a decline in the percentage of projects that were rated satisfactory and an increase in projects rated unsatisfactory. AFR and EAP account for the largest proportion of unsatisfactory ratings – in absolute terms as well as relative to their share of the portfolio. The increase in unsatisfactory ratings is mostly the result of poor performance of GEF projects in two EAP countries, and as a consequence EAP now accounts for one third of the U ratings for IP and one third of the U ratings for DO.
Box 1: Implementation Progress and Global Objectives Ratings, FY97-00. FY97 (49 projects) FY98 (62 projects) FY99 (56 projects) FY00 (84 projects) Implementation Progress Highly Satisfactory 20% 18% 12% 12% Satisfactory 67% 66% 79% 77% Unsatisfactory 12% 16% 9% 11% Development/Global Objective Highly Satisfactory 28% 18% 16% 17% Satisfactory 65% 74% 80% 76% Unsatisfactory 6% 8% 4% 7%
Projects at risk 7. GEF projects at risk declined for the second successive year from 21% in FY98 to 15% in FY99 to 11% in FY00, which is below the Bank-wide average of 15%. Improvements in the AFR GEF portfolio contributed to the reduction in the percentage of projects at risk. Although AFR's percentage of GEF projects at risk (29%) is lower than FY99's 37%, it is still higher than the FY98 level of 24%, substantially higher than any other region (which ranged from 0% to 8%), and higher than the AFR region-wide average (15%). 8. Out of the five actual problem projects in FY99, three remained in the active portfolio by the end of FY00 and two of these had been upgraded from problem project status (Cameroon Biodiversity and Jordan Gulf of Aqaba). In FY00, there were five new actual problem projects, resulting in a net increase of one over FY99 to a total of six (in addition to Kenya Tana River continuing from FY99, West Africa Community-Based Natural Resources and Wildlife Management, Lake Victoria, Ghana Natural Resource Management, Indonesia COREMAP, and Ukraine ODS). 9. Of the six potential problem projects in FY99, five remained in the active portfolio by the end of FY00 and four of these were upgraded from potential problem project status (Madagascar Environment Program, Zimbabwe Park Rehabilitation, Belarus ODS and Russia Biodiversity), while one was downgraded to actual problem project status (Lake Victoria). In FY00, there were only two potential problem projects (Honduras Biodiversity and Congo Wildlands; the latter was subsequently closed in FY00). 82