By Amos Aar
As the World Bank rewards governance reforms with billions of naira, the latest Human Capital Opportunities for Prosperity and Equity (HOPE) Governance Programme disbursement raises a critical question: what separated the successful states from those left behind?
Twenty (20) Nigerian states shared $27 million (about N37 billion) in performance-based grants under the World Bank-supported HOPE Governance Programme after meeting governance reform benchmarks in education, primary healthcare and public financial management.
The programme assessed states on reforms in basic education planning, primary healthcare financing, Local Government budgeting, public financial management and transparency.
Beneficiary states included Abia, Adamawa, Bayelsa, Borno, Delta, Edo, Ekiti, Enugu, Gombe, Imo, Jigawa, Kano, Kebbi, Kogi, Nasarawa, Ondo, Plateau, Taraba and Yobe, with some states qualifying under multiple performance indicators.
However, while the successful states were rewarded for implementing key reforms, several others, including Benue,
Akwa Ibom, Bauchi, Cross River, Ebonyi, Kaduna, Katsina, Kwara, Lagos, Niger, Ogun, Osun, Oyo, Rivers, Sokoto, Zamfara did not benefit from the latest disbursement for varying reasons, prompting thorough scrutiny of governance standards, transparency and public sector accountability across the federation.
Unlike conventional intervention programmes that release funds upfront, the HOPE Governance Programme ties financial incentives to measurable reforms verified through independent assessment.
Participating states were assessed on indicators including improved planning and budgeting for basic education and primary healthcare, harmonised local government budgeting systems, and the publication of Citizens’ Budgets and other key financial documents to enhance transparency and accountability.
According to programme officials, only states that met the agreed governance benchmarks qualified for the incentive grants. States that missed out generally failed to meet stipulated assessment criteria, submitted required documents after the deadline or did not publish mandatory documents on their official websites for independent verification.
The initiative shows a shift by international development partners towards results-based financing, where governments receive incentives only after independently verified reforms rather than through unconditional funding.
For states that did not benefit, however, the reasons were not entirely the same.
Benue State Commissioner for Finance, Michael Oglegba, told this reporter that the state was still in the programme’s preparatory phase and had only recently completed the required agreement with the Federal Government.
“That’s what they call pre-project preparation. So it’s from next year that we will get reimbursed. We just signed the agreement. As I speak with you, there’s one we just signed this week with the Federal Government on the finance,” Oglegba explained.
His explanation suggests Benue expects to participate fully in subsequent funding cycles rather than viewing its exclusion as a failure to meet governance performance benchmarks.
Similarly, the Anambra State Government maintained that it did not participate in the programme. The World Bank also indicated that the state did not express interest in joining the relevant phase of the HOPE Governance Programme and was therefore neither assessed nor disqualified.
Efforts by this reporter to obtain official explanations from other non-beneficiary states were unsuccessful as of press time.
Emails sent to the HOPE Programme National Coordinator and the World Bank seeking clarification on why the performance-based funding model was introduced and why some states did not qualify were not responded to before publication.
Despite those unanswered questions, public policy experts say the initiative represents a significant shift in development financing.
Dr. Garshagu Atovigba, Associate Professor of Mathematics Education at Moses Orshio Adasu University, Makurdi (MOAUM), described performance-based financing as an appropriate strategy for improving governance standards across Nigeria.
“I think it is an appropriate model for promoting governance reforms in Nigeria,” he said.
He also supported rewarding states based on measurable governance outcomes, arguing that incentives tied to performance encourage accountability and responsible management of public resources.
According to him, the initiative strengthens rather than weakens Nigeria’s federal system.
“Performance-based funding complements Nigeria’s federal system.
“It trains, coaches and leverages governors in better running their governments, as some don’t even know what to do with the funds in their hands. The World Bank’s HOPE programme provides frameworks for performance.”
The HOPE Governance Programme mirrors the World Bank’s growing preference for Programme-for-Results (PforR) financing, under which governments receive funding only after independently verified reforms are achieved.
The approach has previously been applied in Nigeria through initiatives such as the State Fiscal Transparency, Accountability and Sustainability (SFTAS) Programme and the State Action on Business Enabling Reforms (SABER), both of which rewarded states that implemented measurable governance and public financial management reforms.
Supporters of the model argue that it encourages transparency, prudent management of public resources and improved service delivery by linking funding to verifiable results rather than political promises.
Critics, however, contend that states with weaker institutional capacity should receive greater technical support to compete fairly in future assessment rounds.
For governance advocates, the latest disbursement means attracting development funding is increasingly becoming less about making promises and more about demonstrating measurable improvements in transparency, financial management, education planning and healthcare delivery.
As future assessment rounds approach, the challenge before states that missed out will not simply be securing World Bank funds but implementing the reforms needed to improve public services, strengthen accountability and restore citizens’ confidence in governance.
