1. Adaptable Program Loans (APLs): Emerging Findings
Operations Policy and Country Services
June 18, 2002
opcs 1

2. Contents
When to Use APLs
Facts and Figures
Emerging Findings
Outlook

3. When to Use APLs
When there is a long-term vision of sector reform (buy-in from relevant stakeholders)—rationale in PER
When there is upfront agreement on the policy framework and triggers—risk management aspects
When there is a need for donor coordination under a common strategy

4. Facts and Figures 112 APLs for $5 billion, or 9% of Bank volumes
APLs avg. 10 years compared to 6 years for others
APLs avg. 2-3 phases of 3-4 years each
APLs avg. $100 mil. per program; $40 mil. per phase

5. Facts and Figures
APLs under implementation:
Sectoral share:

6. Finding: APLs by Type

7. Findings: PER Work in APLs
88% of APLs approved fell within an IMF program or Bank adjustment program underpinning macro/fiscal policy
84% of APLs had the necessary policy framework in place
62% of APLs are underpinned by recent PER

8. Findings: Triggers
Triggers are mostly of the input/output type, but also of institutional/capacity building and policy reforms—mixed approach
too much emphasis on output indicators says too little about progress on institutional/policy reforms
too much emphasis on institutional/policy reforms does not say whether reforms are working in practice

9. Findings: Triggers
Triggers are based on tangible and concrete performance targets essential for the success of the program
More specificity in triggers helps guide implementation and discourage unambiguous monitoring results
Triggers more specific in higher performing countries

10. Findings: M&E
25% of APLs had the necessary M&E systems in place at the outset of the program (e.g., like having the software but not the hardware to run the program). Most of these were sector-wide APLs.
40% of APLs had the necessary baseline information at the outset of the program.
50% of APLs incorporated M&E in management decision making—mixed record on accountability

11. Findings: M&E
80 percent of APLs had performance indicators consistent with the APL program and trigger strategy
Selectivity of performance indicators important for triggers (most triggers are drawn from performance indicators and in some cases they are the same)
APLs forces task manager to think ahead about triggers and performance indicators—their progressive sequencing in time and how they link the different phases to the long-term development program.

12. Findings: M&E New approaches are emerging in some APLs:
Donors and borrowers are beginning to assess performance based on outcome and results at the program level—beyond the project level—and this is happening particularly in some sector wide APLs
But still early to tell—not that many second phase APLs around

13. Findings: Why not many second phase APLs

14. When to Use APLs
When there is a long-term vision of sector reform (buy-in from relevant stakeholders)—rationale in PER
When there is upfront agreement on the policy framework and triggers—risk management aspects
When there is a need for donor coordination under a common strategy

15. Outlook Outlook for APLs: APLs here to stay-- will continue growing
We continue to learning
So far, APLs being used as intended – to support the implementation of long-term development programs.
Adaptable Lending: Third Review of Experience (forthcoming).