Oh wow, that's a complicated and difficult question, based on what very little I know about the world bank, the IMF, etc. I'd venture that the answer to all of your questions is both yes and no.

Mostly no.

Complicated. Mostly no, a little yes.

It's pretty easy to find ranty progressive criticism of the World Bank. If you're serious about this question, though, watch and read Joseph Stiglitz.

In formal terms, the World Bank is supposed to alleviate poverty and assist economic development. The charge is that a) it doesn't do this as effectively as it could (a sin of omission, or a failure of implementation), and further b) that it actively works against the actual needs of the people it overtly serves (potentially taking the form of advancing corporatism and/or neo-colonialism). I think a) is an easy sell, b) a little less so.

I know several people who work at the DC headquarters, in admin positions. From their perspective, at least, it's great--good pay, great benefits, all that. I've been to lunch there, and the cafeteria is incredible. But I guess that's not what you're asking about.