Contents -- Abbreviations -- Definitions of Evaluation Terms -- Acknowledgments -- Foreword -- Avant-propos -- Prólogo -- Arabic Foreword -- Executive Summary -- Résumé analytique -- Resumen ejecutivo -- Arabic Executive Summary -- IFC Management Response to IEG-IFC -- Chairperson's Summary: Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) -- Advisory Panel Statement -- 1 Strategic Context -- Growing Participation of the Private Sector in Development -- Global Financial Crisis -- Implications for IFC -- Part I: Financing Development -- 2 Performance of IFC Investment Operations -- Portfolio Pattern -- Project Development Results -- Impact and Implications of the Global Financial Crisis -- Part II: Knowledge for Development -- 3 Performance of IFC Advisory Services -- Knowledge, Development, and the Private Sector -- Growth of IFC Advisory Services and Strategic Considerations -- Organizational Alignment of Advisory Services -- Delivery of IFC Advisory Services -- Results of IFC Advisory Services -- 4 Conclusions and Recommendations -- Conclusions -- Recommendations -- Appendixes -- A: Project Sample Representativeness-Investment Operations -- B: Project Evaluation Methodology-Investment Operations -- C: Further Details on Results Characteristics-Investment Operations -- D: Risk-Adjusted Expected Development Outcome Regression: Model Specification, Analysis, and Preliminary Results -- E: Chronology of IFC Advisory Services -- F: Advisory Services Facilities, by Region -- G: Project Sample Representativeness-Advisory Services -- H: Project Evaluation Methodology-Advisory Services -- I: Findings from IFC-Commissioned Reviews of IFC Advisory Services -- J: High-Level Comparison of IFC Advisory Services with Other Multilateral Development Banks -- Endnotes -- Bibliography -- Boxes -- 2.1 How Are Project Development Outcomes Rated?.

2.2 IFC Investment Outcome Rating -- 2.3 Illustrations of High and Low Project Development Outcomes -- 2.4 Measuring IFC Work Quality -- 2.5 Projects under Implementation in the Downturn Are Most Vulnerable to the Crisis -- 3.1 How Does IFC's Delivery Approach Compare with That of Other Development Institutions? -- 3.2 How Is Development Effectiveness Rated? -- 3.3 What Does Strong Advisory Services Development Performance Look Like? -- 3.4 Illustrations of Low Development Impact -- 3.5 Illustrations of IFC Additionality -- 3.6 How Is IFC Additionality Rated? -- Figures -- 1.1 Stronger Growth Has Generally Been Associated with Increased Private Capital Flows -- 1.2 Knowledge Accumulation Is Key for Future Productivity -- 1.3 Growing Share of Bank Group Financing to the Private Sector -- 1.4 Bank Group Knowledge Services Are Increasingly Aimed at the Private Sector -- 2.1 IFC's per Client Exposure Has Doubled in the Last Ten Years -- 2.2 IFC and World Bank IDA Operations Increased over FY06-FY08 -- 2.3 IFC Has Made Up a Higher Share of Multilateral Development Bank Finance in Asia, MENA, and LAC -- 2.4 Project Development Outcomes and IFC Investment Returns Improved in the Last Three Years -- 2.5 Improvement in 2006-08 Followed Historically Weak Performance in 2004-05 -- 2.6 Country Business Climate Risk Improved in Most Regions -- 2.7 IFC Work Quality Improved Again -- 2.8 Strong IFC Work Quality Can Help Clients Overcome Risk -- 2.9 Strong Additionality Is Important for Effective Risk Mitigation -- 2.10 Better Ratings Again in Europe and Central Asia and in Latin America and the Caribbean -- 2.11 IFC Appraisal Quality and Realized Additionality Were Much Weaker in East Asia and the Pacific and in Sub-Saharan Africa -- 2.12 External Risks Were Highest in Sub-Saharan Africa -- 2.13 Performance Was Strong in IFC's Strategic Sectors.

2.14 Environmental and Social Effects Performance Weakened in 2008 -- 2.15 Environmental and Social Effects Performance Has Declined Sharply for Financial Intermediary Operations -- 2.16 Project Development Outcomes and IFC Profitability Were Strongly Correlated -- 2.17 On a Cumulative Basis, High/High Outcomes Were Achieved Half the Time -- 2.18 Best Results When IFC Investments Were Made in the Wake of a Crisis -- 2.19 Global and Regional Investments Tend to Perform Less Well Than Single-Country Investments -- 3.1 Rapid Growth in Advisory Services Operations and Staff -- 3.2 Seventy-Seven Percent of Advisory Services Staff Are Based in the Field -- 3.3 Access to Finance Is the Largest Business Line -- 3.4 Highest Share of Operations Is in Sub-Saharan Africa -- 3.5 Delivery Structure for IFC Advisory Services Projects in Africa -- 3.6 Country Assistance Strategies Provide Limited Coverage of Other Knowledge Providers -- 3.7 Discussion of Activities and Complementarities with Others in Project Approvals Is Weak -- 3.8 Donor Commitments, by Region, FY05-FY08 -- 3.9 Most Advisory Operations Featured No Client Contributions -- 3.10 Project Completion Report Quality, by Business Line -- 3.11 Project Completion Report Quality, by Region -- 3.12 About One-Fifth of Advisory Services Operations Are Linked to IFC Investment Services Operations -- 3.13 Advisory and Investment Services Linkages Are Greatest for Access to Finance Operations -- 3.14 Majority of Operations in IDA Countries Are Similar to Official Aid Pattern -- 3.15 Strategic Relevance Was Often Rated High, Impact Achievement Much Less So -- 3.16 Environmental and Social Sustainability Project Ratings Have Lagged Behind Those of Other Business Lines -- 3.17 Ratings of Operations, by Region -- 3.18 Country Conditions: Better Ratings Where Country Business Climate Risk Is High.

3.19 The Overall Relationship between Advisory and Investment Services Performance Is Moderate -- 3.20 Better Advisory Services Ratings When Combined with IFC Loans Rather Than Equity -- 3.21 Stronger Performance in Repeat or Combined Advisory Services Operations -- 3.22 Client Commitment: Better Ratings When Client Contributed -- 3.23 Project Implementation: Local Presence Is Associated with Better Results -- 3.24 Higher Role & Contribution, Better Ratings -- 3.25 Better M&E Quality, Better Ratings -- 3.26 Similar Performance for Projects That Began between Periods 2003-05 and 2006-08 -- 3.27 Slightly Lower Performance for Recently Completed Operations -- Tables -- 2.1 Methodologies Employed by IEG to Evaluate IFC Investment Operations -- 2.2 IFC Tended to Invest in Countries with Lower Prior Levels of Foreign Direct Investment to GDP -- 2.3 In Argentina, Performance Fell Dramatically as the Business Environment Deteriorated -- 2.4 Selected Lessons from Regional and Global Investments -- 3.1 Methodologies Employed by IEG to Evaluate IFC Advisory Services -- 3.2 IFC's Main Advisory Services Client Is Government -- 3.3 Government Clients Predominate for Business Enabling Environment and Infrastructure Work -- 3.4 Two Main Funding Sources: Donors and IFC -- 3.5 Donor Funding Leverage Has Been Highest in South Asia -- 3.6 Middle East and North Africa Region and Infrastructure Have the Most, Though Still Limited, Cost Contributions by Clients -- 3.7 Some Free or Near-Free Advisory Services Operations Cross-Subsidize IFC Investments -- 3.8 Ratio of Staff to Consultant Expenses Is Roughly 1:1 -- 3.9 Few External Reviews Have Thus Far Focused on Impact -- 3.10 By Business Line, Resources Have Tended to Be Allocated to Countries in Greatest Need -- 3.11 Selected Ratings, by Product.