Seeks to inform the Boards of Executive Directors of the IDB and IDB Invest on the extent to which, under its current policy framework, the MICI has been effective and efficient in 

1. resolving the complaints it receives concerning environmental and social impacts of projects due to alleged noncompliance with the IDB Group’s environmental and social safeguards policies and standards; and 
2. promoting institutional learning with regard to environmental and social safeguards and standards and their implementation in IDB Group projects.

The evaluation also seeks to report on the mechanism’s accessibility to requesters and the extent to which the MICI has performed its duties independently, objectively, impartially, and transparently.

The current policy corrected important problems identified by OVE in its 2012 evaluation which impeded the MICI from functioning properly. However, one key issue that remained pending is the legal exclusion that continues to be grounds for differing interpretations and a major factor limiting the effective operation of the MICI. Other limitations have arisen in the implementation of the policy over the last years, but they have largely been resolved by the MICI in a manner consistent with the intervention logic of the accountability mechanisms. This is evidence that there is sufficient room for the MICI to manage the limitations of the current policy, provided it is done within the parameters of the intervention logic for this type of mechanism. Accordingly, a new comprehensive policy review is not required at this point.

Between December 2014 and June 2020:

• 72 complaints or requests originating in 17 countries.
• 15 (21%) were declared eligible and became cases of the Consultation Phase and/or the Compliance Review Phase.

In general, MICI is operating in accordance with the principles set forth in its policy: independence, objectivity, impartiality, transparency, and efficiency. The handling of cases in the compliance review phase highlights the more formidable challenges involved in a process that is by nature contentious and has been subject to practices compromising the independence of the MICI. The MICI has been subject to decisions by the Board of Executive Directors on issues that have affected its ability to act independently. In addition, despite improvements in the relationship between Management and the MICI, which is contentious by nature, certain practices by Management hinder the MICI’s work, restricting its ability to act independently. In certain specific situations, the MICI also acted in a way that undermined its own independence.

The evaluation found major progress in the MICI’s functioning as a result of the restructuring of the mechanism and the MICI’s process of institutional learning and consolidation since the approval of its policy in 2014. The MICI has acted independently from IDB Group Management in being able to define its work plan and manage its resources. Furthermore, there has been a significant change in its operations regarding the monitoring and observance of the Bank’s procedures and regulations. There are important opportunities for continuing to strengthen the internal capacities of the mechanism. To date, there is no plan for continuous training of MICI staff. While the MICI has built significant capacities in recent years, in a context of more complex cases, the MICI does not have staff with experience in the practical implementation of the environmental and social safeguards policies and standards.