| |
1) The programme’s design called for a high number of measures (55) for a fourteen-month implementation period, and with no regard for the country’s limited institutional capacity
|
2) The weak coherence of reform measures in the logical framework can undermine the achievement of programme objectives.
|
3) The weak external support coordination and monitoring system prevents optimum collection of a country’s external financing data.
|
4) Choosing a minimal number of strategic measures as triggers improves programme implementation performance.
|
5) In a fragile country context, any reform support programme must be accompanied by a suitable stakeholder capacity building action plan.
|
6) Programmes designed for fragile countries must be sufficiently flexible to adapt to the constraints of the generally weak institutional capacity.
|