Snapshot review of Two World Bank COVID-19 Health support programs in Egypt Methodology The programs’ review was designed to be based on the following: A. A desk review of data available on the 2 world bank support programs: In assessing stakeholders’ engagement, the status of the project in terms of implementation, external and internal grievance redress mechanisms (GRMs), and access to information, the researchers relied on publicly disclosed documentation. The assessments conducted through a desk review helped with identifying the key gaps in information available to the public. However, it could not be relied on as a comprehensive means for holistic review. Hence, the importance of the contextual backdrop of the study, as it relied on media monitoring as a cross-referencing method to assess the extent to which the information available could be validated. B. Solicitation of additional information, assessment of data accessibility and transparency Upon the identification of the gaps within the information publicly available, the researchers attempted to directly contact the World Bank country office with specific questions regarding the gaps in information. The purpose behind this was to assess whether information not made publicly available, was accessible upon deliberate request. C. Practical trials related to the Grievances Redress Mechanisms (GRMs) With regards to the GRMs, an assessment of the previous World Bank GRM systems was carried out, coupled with the review of the stated GRM for these projects in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP). The specified GRM was tested out by carrying out a grievance trial and assessing the response (or lack thereof) and the process that follows it. Since no information was made available on the specific locations where the projects were implemented, the review covers the general process of the unified GRM system operated by the government and, on which the World Bank is resorting for its GRM process. If the collected information was deemed insufficient: D. A comparative analysis including other World Bank supported COVID-19 programs in comparable countries. The comparative approach included the methodological rigor that aimed to produce an assessment of the status of the World Bank COVID-19 Egyptian project in tangent with the various loans of the same nature. In order to carry out this comparative analysis in a valid manner, a set of criteria were developed that aimed to hold some variables constant, so that they hold a plausible comparative weight in analysis. The analysis started with a MENA regional analysis, which held the most importance, as most of the countries in the region are more likely to hold similar socio-economic, cultural, and political conditions. The criteria selected for comparative analysis were the following: 1. The loan had to be a COVID-19 response in the health sector 3