When crises hit, governments need to act fast — delivering support to those affected before it's too late. But too often, weak delivery systems, outdated data, and unpredictable financing get in the way. Over the past decade, the World Bank has helped countries build adaptive social protection (ASP) systems to address these challenges. How well has this support worked?

A new IEG evaluation of the World Bank’s support for ASP in 70 shock-prone countries offers important lessons. The evaluation finds that the Bank made meaningful contributions to strengthening social protection systems — especially in the areas of program design, data systems, and financing tools. But performance during actual shock responses was uneven, especially in reaching new beneficiaries.

Here are three takeaways on what worked — and what needs more attention — in building strong systems for ASP.

1. Delivery chain and data systems are foundational — but need to go further

The World Bank focused much of its support on strengthening the delivery systems of routine social protection programs. This included investments in information systems, targeting mechanisms, and digital payment platforms. In 58 out of 67 countries with active ASP projects reviewed, the Bank helped build or improve core delivery chains, and in 70 percent of countries, it supported enhancements to social registries and beneficiary databases.

For example, in Colombia, World Bank support contributed to overhauling the national social registry, which helped deliver COVID-19 transfers more efficiently. In Nepal, efforts focused on improving interoperability across data systems.

Yet coverage remains incomplete. In several countries, registries excluded key vulnerable populations, especially in urban and informal areas, limiting their usefulness during crises. The evaluation recommends expanding registry coverage and linking it to early warning systems to better trigger timely responses.

2. Financing systems remain underdeveloped

Having systems in place is only half the battle — countries also need money at the right time.

Countries like India and Kenya that developed national disaster risk financing strategies were better prepared to respond to emergencies. In Malawi, preset triggers and prepositioned financing enabled the Social Cash Transfer Program to scale up quickly during climate-related shocks.

Still, many countries remain heavily dependent on external funding, with limited ability to finance crisis response domestically. The Bank’s growing support for contingency funds, insurance schemes, and risk-layered approaches offers a promising path forward—though it still needs to be paired with better delivery and data systems.

3. Institutional fragmentation limits effectiveness

Strong systems require strong coordination — yet institutional fragmentation remains a major challenge. The evaluation found that overlapping mandates and weak collaboration between social protection and disaster risk management (DRM) agencies hindered response efforts in many countries.

In Mauritania, by contrast, the Bank supported the creation of an integrated shock response mechanism, leading to improved alignment with humanitarian partners and more coherent delivery.

Going forward, the Bank can do more to support institutional linkages — for example, by promoting joint stress testing between social protection and DRM agencies, and ensuring ASP is embedded in national disaster response strategies.

Looking ahead

The World Bank has played a central role in helping countries build stronger ASP systems. However, to deliver when it matters the most, countries need systems that are not only technically sound, but also inclusive, financed, and institutionally coherent.

IEG’s evaluation recommends that the Bank:

• Continues investing in social protection systems that serve both regular and shock response functions;
• Expands and updates data systems to ensure full coverage of vulnerable populations;
• Supports pre-arranged financing strategies that enable timely responses; and
• Fosters institutional linkages between social protection and disaster risk management agencies.

When the next crisis hits — whether a flood, pandemic, or food price shock — these investments will be key to protecting lives and livelihoods.