1. Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Asian Financial Crisis Response Trust Fund Review
Overview of Progress 6/28/2006

2. Outline This presentation focuses on:
Progress in portfolio implementation
Impact of the Action Plan adopted at last year’s Review Meeting
Benefits from completed grants
Strategic coordination in the field
Brief update on Country programs
Visibility

3. What are the Key Achievements
Highly positive impact of the Action Plan: current disbursement rate is 72% and is estimated to reach 80-85% by end-December when the program closes.
In-country steering committees (ICSCs) have played proactive roles in grant monitoring and implementation

4. What is the Composition of the Portfolio ASEM TF2 Portfolio by Country as of June 2006 (million US$)
The portfolio contains:
71 approved grants totaling $39.1 million
Active portfolio: 39 active grants ($24.4 million)
Closed portfolio: 29 completed grants ($13.3 million)
3 cancelled grants ($1.4 million)
3 grants have been cancelled, due to poor performance or shifts in the priorities of recipient countries

5. What is the Composition of the Portfolio ASEM TF2 Portfolio by Sector as of June 2006 (million US$)
Sectoral proportions vary among countries
In total:
$20.3 million to financial projects
$18.8 million to social sector projects

6. What is the Speed of Implementation? (as of June 15, 2006)
Disbursements are 72 percent of the total grant amount
Disbursement rates vary among countries:
China: 84%
Indonesia: 60%
Philippines: 54%
Thailand: 81%
Vietnam: 76%
Region: 70%
Disbursements are now $25.4 million, up from $12.8 million a year ago and $19.2 million in October 2005
Disbursement rates range from more than 70 percent in China and Thailand to 51 percent and below in Indonesia and the Philippines

7. Why an Action Plan?
The following were the key agreements reached at the ASEM TF2 Annual Review Meeting in Washington (April 2005):
progress under ASEM had been positive, but grant implementation must be accelerated,
intensified monitoring and evaluation would help to expedite grant implementation, and
an action plan – which was endorsed in principle by Partners -- should be implemented.

8. Action Plan: What are the Main Elements
Periodic portfolio reviews by in-country steering committees and World Bank
Recognize good performers
Scale back or cancel non-performing grants
Strengthen capacities of weak implementing agencies
Promote visibility of ASEM
The Plan was agreed in May 2005 and quickly took effect.

9. What have been the Results: Positive impact on portfolio
Improvement in speed of implementation; disbursements doubled in one year
Stronger grant monitoring by in-country steering committees
Regular portfolio reviews with the line agencies
Training for implementing agencies in financial management and procurement

10. Disbursement Data (September 2004 – December 2006)

11. Topping up and scaling back: Why
Based on recommendations by the ICSCs:
China
Four successful grants topped up
One grant cancelled
Indonesia
Two grants allowed to close as scheduled, with unused balances cancelled
Philippines
One grant restructured
Thailand and Vietnam
In each country, one successful grant topped up

12. What have been the visible benefits of ASEM TF2
Most completed grants have achieved clear effects on policy making and program design: some major policy reforms
ASEM grants have leveraged resources from other donors
Close collaboration between partner countries (clients) and development partners (donors)
Simple and streamlined procedures adopted in most countries, but consistent across region

13. What has been the role of the ICSCs
Playing a very active role: Over the past year, in-country steering committees, have played proactive roles in grant monitoring and implementation
Feedback provided: All ICSCs have stressed the positive contribution of ASEM TF2 to their countries’ ability to withstand crises and reduce poverty and vulnerability
Philippines: ICSC members helped the implementing agencies to identify possible sources of risk in delivering their expected outputs and helped them come up with measures to manage those risks; the risk mitigation measures have been incorporated in the action plans for individual grants.
Thailand: ICSC established a trouble-shooting team to help implementing agencies to solve problems faced by individual grant projects; the team is drawn from the World Bank, the Public Debt Management Office, and the Fiscal Policy Office.
Vietnam: ICSC meetings have provided a useful forum for grant-project managers to seek and obtain help on specific implementation problems.
Indonesia: Bank staff have been actively engaged with implementing agencies to speed up implementation and disbursement, and have met regularly with representatives of the Government and the EC to discuss problems and progress. Indonesia’s Central Planning Agency (which chairs the ICSC), the EC, and the World Bank plan to revive ICSC meetings to expedite disbursements and monitor implementation of the remaining portfolio

14. What have been the World Bank Actions to Accelerate Portfolio Implementation
Bank task teams and implementing agencies have prepared time-bound action plans for slow moving grants. The action plans are monitored by the ASEM Secretariat and Country Trust Fund Coordinators.
Increased number of missions from Bank HQs to discuss ASEM grants with recipients.
ASEM Progress Reports are discussed with Partners in the field.

15. Program Overview: China
14 grants totaling $7.7 million
5 grants completed (3 in financial/corporate sector; 2 in social sector)
Significant implementation progress in past 12 months
Proactive In-Country Steering Committee
Disbursements now 78 percent
Full disbursement expected by time of program closure

16. Program Overview: Indonesia
17 grants totaling $6.8 million
7 grants completed (3 in financial/corporate sector, 4 in social sector)
1 grant cancelled
Faster implementation progress in past 12 months;
GOI regularly reviews project progress
Disbursements now 51 percent, up from 26 percent a year ago
Good progress under the Action Plan:
World Bank devoted more resources to help implementing agencies speed implementation
Central Planning Agency (which chairs ICSC), plans to revive ICSC meetings to expedite remaining disbursement and implementation

17. Program Overview: Philippines
9 projects totaling $5.2 million
3 grants completed, all in the financial/corporate sector
1 grant cancelled
Disbursements still below 50 percent, but
Speed of implementation much improved for most grants
Under the Action Plan, the proactive In-Country Steering Committee guided an intense effort to speed up implementation and disbursement.
Terms of reference have now been finalized for most components and procurement actions have been completed.

18. Program Overview: Thailand
11 grants totaling $7.2 million
6 grants completed (2 in corporate/governance sector and 4 in social sector/governance)
Proactive ICSC
Problems now resolved for four slow-disbursing projects listed in the Action Plan
Disbursements now 74 percent
Disbursements expected to be 98 percent by program closure

19. Program Overview: Vietnam
17 grants totaling $9.2 million
6 completed (2 in financial/corporate sector; 4 in social sectors)
ICSC closely monitors grant closing dates
Disbursements now 66 percent
Disbursements expected to reach 93 percent by program closure

20. What has been done to promote Visibility
Efforts continue to increase visibility of ASEM TF2 Program.
ASEM Trust Fund website: High degree of openness and transparency exercised in the management (Feedback from Evaluation Team).
ASEM Progress Reports circulated widely in recipient countries – effort being made to have ASEM be recognized as an important process for development work.

21. A good outlook
Overall grant disbursement projected at percent at the end of the program (comparable to the disbursement rate of ASEM TF1)
Message should be conveyed to the In-country steering committees that they must continue to play proactive roles in grant monitoring and implementation