The PIM Assessment resulted in theestablishment of an Action Plan to strengthen the system.Given weak institutional capacity and limited resources, thePlan should include quick-win options where possible,particularly in the early recovery phase. Evidence showsthat the process by which projects are delivered (scale,community involvement, expertise of project managers, etc.)can be more important than getting projects built quickly.This is an important balancing act to consider. Awell-sequenced short-, medium- and long-term PIM Action Plancan be organized as follows: i) Formalize the institutionalsetting (establishing management functions inside the PIMcycle); ii) Develop capacity building in project design,appraisal and selection; iii) Improve capital investmentproject design, appraisal and selection; iv) Enhance thelegal and regulatory framework of the PIM system; v) Improveprocess registration of projects via an Integrated Bank ofProjects (IBP); vi) Establish regularly revisited projectselection and prioritization criteria; vii) Formalize use ofkey performance indicators; and viii) Improve PIP–PPP inproject management and ex-post evaluation.