Results-Implementation: Hiwotie Walelign Alemu

ResultsImplementation
Trainer: Hiwotie
Walelign Alemu
Mobile: +251-918745675 hiwotiew@yahoo.com

2011
UNIPAN On line Training
Page 1
PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0
http://www.pdf4free.com
Course Description This online training course is designed as a brief introduction to Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME) for the Implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. Topics Included
History and Summary Reports of the MDGs Logical Framework Approach and RBME Monitoring Parameters Managing the Shift to RBME Course Sessions Click on each session to view the course. After completing all sessions, please take the survey and the assessment. Session I - The MDGs - History and Summary Reports Session II - The Performance Management Approach Session III - The Logical Framework Approach and RBME Session IV - Preparing for MDG-Based RBME Session V - Defining the Monitoring Parameters Session VI - Analyzing, Disseminating, and Using the Information Session VII - Managing the Shift to RBME
Assessment and Certificate
The survey should be completed before the assessment The password to access the assessment is available on the last page of the survey The time limit for the completion of the assessment is 60 minutes
Page 2
The assessment should be taken only once. The responses are tracked by name, email and IP address. Please note that only the results of the first attempt will be considered Digital certificates will be issued for users with score of 60% or higher Users with score lower than 60% can retake the assessment after two months Printed certificates will be mailed to the learners who submit an article on the suggested topic (instructions are available in the Printed Certificate button below)
The online training course Result-based Monitoring and Evaluation for MDG Implementation was developed under the leadership of Ms. Haiyan Qian, Director of the Division for Public Administration and Development Management (DPADM).
The Socio-economic Governance and Management Branch (SGMB), DPADM, UNDESA provided the overall guidance in the development of the substantive contents of the course. Research and authorship of the course were spearheaded by the Eastern Regional Organization for Public Administration (EROPA), Philippines. Mr. Adil Khan and Mr. Jacinto De Vera, Chief, SGMB, DPADM served as team leaders on the overall preparation and editing of the course. The proofreading, review and voice narration of the course were undertaken by Ms. Mary Christine Ong-Reyes (SGMB). Professor Emilia Boncodin of the University of the Philippines acted as the convenor and overall coordinator of the EROPA project team. Technical direction and supervision were provided by Dr. Eduardo Gonzalez, also of the University of the Philippines. The members of the team who designed and developed the courses different modules include: Ms. Ramonesa Ricardo, Ms. Magdalena Mendoza, Ms. Concepcion Pabalan, and Ms. Julie Catherine Paran. Mr. Allan Visitacion was the teams computer specialist, who transferred the modules texts and images onto the course software. All are at one time or currently associated with the Development Academy of the Philippines. Ms. Ma. Estrella M. Ocampo, EROPAs deputy secretary general for operations and administration, was the administrative coordinator.
Page 3
The first version of this course was developed under the leadership of Mr. Guido Bertucci, ex-Director of tDPADM. The interactive format of this online course was developed by Udutu Online Learning Systems Inc. in conjunction with KMB. On-going technical support is provided by Mr. Deniz Susar and Mr. Wai Min Kwok, both from DPADM/UNDESA, and Mr. Roger Mundell of Udutu Online Learning Systems Inc. Administrative support was previously provided by Ms. Elvira Doyle, and it is currently being provided by Ms. Michelle Alves de Lima.
Course Introduction The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have become a universal framework for development in UN member states that adopted the Millennium Declaration in 2000.
Though some targets are progressing well, other indicators have been found to be lagging behind in many of the developing countries. At the mid-point of the 2015 target date, many countries still find their accomplishments to be needful of focused and concerted action.
An improved knowledge on the monitoring and evaluation of development outcomes is believed to contribute to the proper accounting of efforts towards the MDGs and their results. It is in this context that this course was conceived.
Page 4
This module would be useful to the learner who may be new to the Millennium Development Goals and their implementation as well as to the practitioner who wishes to be quickly updated on the accomplishments of each of the eight goals. Module Objectives: By the end of this module, the learner will:
1.
Be familiar with how the MDGs were initiated and the global indicators for each
of the goals; 2. Be able to discuss the various agency and country approaches to achieving the
MDG targets and their current status; 3. Have a clear appreciation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) as the
context for learning Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME). This course contains audio. Please turn on your speakers.
Page 5
Topic List for Module 1 The Millennium Development Goals

The Millennium Declaration The Core Strategy Organizing for MDG Implementation The Goals and Targets
- Listing - Significance - Information on current progress of achieving the targets - Mapping the MDG accomplishments - How they are currently being treated by UN member states - programs and projects being implemented (examples) - Targets and indicators that have been developed for each - some country/program examples - Data sources and methodologies of data collection, analyses and reporting

Challenges to achieving these goals Proposals to overcome obstacles to achievement (general discussion)
Page 6
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), derived from the World Summits and conferences of the 1990s, were adopted in the Millennium Declaration by 189 nations, including 147 Heads of State and Government, on 8 of September of 2000. The Declaration sets out within a single framework the key challenges facing humanity at the threshold of the new millennium, outlines a response to these challenges, and establishes concrete measures for judging performance through a set of inter-related commitments, goals and targets on development, governance, peace, security and human rights. As a universally agreed agenda, MDGs bring unprecedented clarity to the shared responsibilities and objectives of all development parties: governments, international and civil society organizations, foundations and the private sector.
Global targets, however valid, cannot be imposed on countries, independent of their current situation and recent history. To be meaningful, they must be customized and tailored to national circumstances and built into national medium term goals and strategies. The MDGs represent a global partnership that has grown from the commitments and targets established at the world summits of the 1990s. They can be achieved if all actors work together and do their part. Poor countries have pledged to govern better, and invest in their people through health care and education. Rich countries have pledged to support them, through aid, debt relief, and fairer trade. The MDGs are not prescriptive. The approach allows for a country to define its targets and indicators according to its context. These become the countrys time-bound and quantified targets for addressing extreme poverty in its many dimensionsincome poverty, hunger, disease, lack of adequate shelter and exclusionwhile promoting gender equality, education and environmental sustainability. Basic human rights cut through all the goals: the right of each person to health, education, shelter and security.
Page 7
The strategy focuses on two levels: global and country-level, supported by activities at the regional level. The guiding principles for the overall strategy are that:
the MDGs have to be situated within the broader norms and standards of the Millennium Declaration;
all eight MDGs and their eighteen targets are equally important; broad national ownership and participation will be pivotal to the achievement of the MDGs;
partnership, with Governments but also with Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the private sector, will be essential;
much of the work required to achieve the MDGs is already underway but demands greater focus and sense of urgency;
the potential of the UN has to be mobilized fully to contribute towards meaningful results;
a focus on the MDGs neither diminishes nor precludes the important work of the UN system in other mandated areas. The nationalization of these goals and targets has provided for the design and implementation of specific programs and projects that contribute to the achievement of one or the other indicator, at a given level. National goals and targets have been identified. Indicators that have taken into context country specifics have been formulated. Various data gathering tools and techniques have been applied.
A context-specific approach rather than a standard or uniform model will be followed. The strategy recommends four core elements:
Page 8
1. Monitoring systematic and sustained tracking and review of progress towards the MDGsin terms of achievements, trends and shortfalls; 2. Analysis - definition and assessment of the policies needed to achieve the MDGs based on a consensus among partners on necessary policy and institutional reforms, investments, financing options and strategies for scaling up efforts; 3. Campaigning/mobilization Collaboration with a wide range of partners to foster a self-sustaining movement extending well beyond the UN system; 4. Operational activities goal-driven assistance (technical and financial) to address directly key constraints to progress on the MDGs, guided by the mandates, comparative advantage and resources of the UN system at the country level and recognising that the achievement of the MDGs is ultimately the responsibility of member states.
The complete copy of the MDG Core Strategy can be found in here. Brief History of the MDGs Organizing for MDG Implementation
Page 9
A global campaign was deemed necessary to ensure the MDGs were achieved by the target year 2015. The Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in his capacity as Chair of the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) was appointed to coordinate the campaign and countrylevel monitoring activities. It was clear that for the goals to be achieved by 2015, concerted effort among government, civil society organizations (CSO) and the private sector within a country, and external institutions that could provide funding and other resources, was necessary. That the MDGs brought together partners for change to support goals at global, regional and national level was unprecedented. Using the UN Core Strategy as guide, the UNDP focuses on coordinating global and local (country-level) efforts that: Campaign and mobilize for the MDGs through advocacy; Share the best strategies for meeting the MDGs in terms of innovative practices, policy and institutional reforms, means of policy implementation, and evaluation of financing.
The following arrangements have been made to ensure achievement of MDGs at the global and country levels: The UNDP coordinates the campaign and monitors MDG accomplishments at country level through their Country Teams (UNCT); The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), in collaboration with relevant agencies, leads the production of data and annual technical assessments of overall progress; The Millennium Project: Ten Task Forces composed of MDG subject experts, policy makers and practitioners-responsible for proposing the best strategies for meeting the MDGs; issued their final recommendations in the report Investing in Development: A Practical Plan to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals in January 2005; National Millennium Campaigns or Movements: coalitions that will accelerate and broaden effective action; The World Bank, IMF, European Commission (EC), the Organisation for Economic Development (OECD)/ Development Assistance Committee (DAC), regional development banks: work with UN and governments for integration of MDGs in PRSPs.
Partnership-building cuts across all four elements identified in the UN Core Strategy. CSOs are seen as the prime movers in securing broad-based mobilization and bottom-up demand for change.
Organizing for MDG Implementation

Governments of low-income countries prepare Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) through a participatory process involving local stakeholders and external development partners like the UNDP, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. A PRSP describes the macroeconomic, structural and social policies and programs that a country will pursue over several years to promote broad-based growth and reduce poverty. It also identifies financing needs and the associated sources of financing. The International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD), held in March 2002, was the first attempt to examine comprehensively the means of mobilizing resources for development, focusing on the goals and targets of the Declaration. The FfD Conference set the stage for policy decisions by the European Union and the United States which represented the first substantial pledge in more than a decade to reverse declining flows of official development assistance (ODA). (Source: The UN and the MDGs: A Core Strategy)
Page 10
Most of the projected population growth of about 2 billion people in the next 25 years is expected to be born in developing and emerging market economies. Many of these people will be doomed to poverty if countries do not exert concerted effort in helping themselves through sound policies and by the development community to increase its support of these countries efforts. The following five core principles underlie the PRSP The PRSP approach results in a comprehensive countrybased strategy for poverty reduction. It aims to provide the crucial link between national public actions, donor support and the development outcomes needed to meet the MDGs. PRSPs provide the operational basis for Fund and Bank concessional lending and for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.

approach. Poverty reduction strategies should be: country-driven, promoting national ownership of strategies through broad-based participation of civil society; result-oriented and focused on outcomes that will benefit the poor;
MDG Support, established in 2006, is designed to quickly mobilize technical support from across UNDP and the UN System to help developing country governments achieve the MDGs. The successor the UN Millennium Project, MDG Support works with countries by invitation, helping to prepare and implement national development strategies that are bold enough to achieve the MDGs.
comprehensive in recognizing the multidimensional nature of poverty;
partnership-oriented, involving coordinated participation of development partners (government, domestic stakeholders and external donors); and
The PRSP approach is by now well established in a substantial number of countries, increasing in country ownership.
based on a long-term perspective for poverty reduction.
It is continually being refined through regular reviews of implementation progress and to allow for countries greater flexibility to articulate their strategies, aligning donorfunded programs with country priorities and achieving the MDGs. Organizing for MDG Implementation UNIPAN On line Training Page 11
Goal-specific Assistance
The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, more commonly known as The Global Fund (www.theglobalfund.org), is a financing mechanism set up in 2002 in response to the need for a new funding stream directed toward funding projects which are proposed and desired by countries affected by the HIV/AIDS included in the scope of the MDGs. This was agreed on in the 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy. Aimed to help the poorest of countries, this funding stream is based on grants, not loans. Implementation is done by Country Coordinating Mechanisms, which are committees consisting of local stakeholder organizations which may include government, NGOs, the UN, faith-based and private sector groups. The Global Fund provides initial funding on the basis of the technical merits of project applications, as evaluated by a Technical Review Panel. Continued funding to programs is based solely on performance. Since its inception, the Global Fund has committed US $19.3 billion to more than 572 grants in 144 countries. World Bank estimates of additional financing requirements range from $40-$60 billion per year. The Millennium Project estimates that overall ODA required will be $152 billion in 2010, rising to $195 billion in 2015. Additional aid alone is not enough; policy reform and improving service delivery are also required. Countries need detailed and rigorous investment plans and policy frameworks for achieving the MDGs.
Page 12
What are needed to ensure countries are able to meet the MDGs? A policy and institutional environment that is conducive to poverty reduction:
The 18 targets drawn up alongside the eight Goals were expected to give governments and the international community specific and tangible improvements to aim within a fixed period of time, and make it easier to measure progress. The intention in the MDGs is that almost all of these targets will be achieved by 2015. The world has made significant progress in achieving many of the Goals. Unfortunately, such progress has been far from uniform across the world or across the Goals. There are huge disparities across and within countries. Within countries, poverty is greatest for rural areas, though urban poverty is also extensive, growing, and underreported by traditional indicators. The sub-Saharan Africa is the epicentre of crisis, with continuing food insecurity, a rise of extreme poverty, high child and maternal mortality, large numbers of people living in slums, and a widespread shortfall for most of the MDGs. Asia is the region with the fastest progress, but even there hundreds of millions of people remain in extreme poverty.
- Poverty reduction strategies - Institutional reforms - Fiscal and policy reforms - Capacity building Financial Assistance Domestic resource mobilization Framework for strengthening governance, promoting human rights, engaging civil society and promoting the private sector Greater accountability of governments, among others...
Meeting the Targets by 2015
Page 13
Quick Facts
The number of people in developing countries living on less than US $1 a day fell to 980 million in 2004; down from 1.25 billion in 1990. The proportion of people living in extreme poverty fell from nearly 19 percent over this same period. 682 million children worldwide are enrolled in primary school. But there are still around 77 million children who are missing out on a primary education. In 2006, 13 women were heads of state or government compared to 9 in 2000 and 12 in 1995. A record number of women took up top positions in 2006 in Chile, Jamaica, Liberia, the Republic of Korea and Switzerland. Under-five mortality rates dropped from 185 per 1,000 live births in 1990 to 166 per 1,000 in 2006. Since 1990, every region has made progress in ensuring that women receive antenatal care at least once during their pregnancy. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, where the least progress has occurred, more than two thirds of women receive antenatal care at least one time during pregnancy. As of December 2006, an estimated 2 million people were receiving antiretroviral therapy in developing regions. This represents 28 percent of the estimated 7.1 million people in need. The proportion of protected areas globally has steadily increased, and a total of about 20 million square kilometers of land and sea were under protection by 2006. The world's poorest countries pay over $100 million every day to the rich world.
Source: http://www.mdgmonitor.org
Global targets are presented according to the following geographical clusters: Africa o o Asia o o o o Oceania Latin America & Caribbean Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) o Europe o Asia
Northern Sub-Saharan
Eastern South-Eastern Southern Western
An MDG Progress Chart for 2010 shows these regions and their MDG accomplishments.
The MDGs Report 2010
Page 14
The many faces of poverty have brought difficulty to identifying the goals, their targets and progress indicators. The need to appreciate the country context is important in deploying these targets and identifying the measures for monitoring. For some of the indicators, the latest information available is from 2004 or 2005, given the lag time between collecting data and analyzing them.
Country data may differ greatly from data presented for the region to which a country belongs. The World Banks Development Data Group maintains a website, Building a Better World (http://devdata.worldbank.org/atlas-mdg/), which is actually an online atlas of the MDGs. Maps of the key indicators of each of the eight MDG Click on the image above to view the interactive map. goals are presented with values corresponding to a countrys attainment of a given indicator. Comparative values among countries can be presented by resizing country maps. Tables of supporting indicators can also be pulled up for a specific country.
The UN website http://www.mdgmonitor.org/ also contains interactive maps and news on specific country MDG accomplishments.
Page 15
Page 16
This module discusses the various approaches to planning and implementing development interventions, from a project management view to performance management; provides the perspective and tools for planning at the national, sub-national and local levels.
Module Objectives:
UNIPAN On line Training Page 17
By the end of this module, the learner should:
Poverty Reduction through Project Implementation In the past years, funding agencies, governments, civil society and other development workers have strived to develop mechanisms to improve the administration of development interventions. Integrated frameworks that look at results and impacts on the development situation have been developed. There was a need to shift perspective from primarily accounting for Governments all over the world, especially those of developing countries, have long struggled with concerns on poverty reduction, improving quality of life and human development. Governance is judged by the impact of policies, programs and other interventions on these outcomes. Inasmuch as poverty has many faces and has as many affecting factors, the approaches of government towards reducing it has ranged from specific projects to wide-scale national programs and enabling policies. Governments have used their own resources as well as development assistance to finance specific projects in the hope that these will improve situations of marginalization. Unfortunately, and maybe because of the need to account for resources used, most of the approaches in the past looked at the inputs to poverty alleviation efforts, rather than their results. Project and program reports tell about how much of the resources poured into the activities were
inputs or the use of resources to looking at the results that these inputs produce. The main paradigm shift for funders and implementers alike was to engage all stakeholders in defining development directions, identifying the outcomes that were desired and designing the interventions to achieve those outcomes. This has resulted in the development and practice of participatory or results-based monitoring and evaluation (RBME). This approach has changed the traditional way of looking at monitoring and evaluation (M&E) where project stakeholders were most often the targets of M&E rather than key actors. Consistent with this paradigm shift, some development institutions have taken to using the terms participant to refer to the beneficiaries of the development intervention,
Page 18
used, when, where, and possibly how, in order to account for resources requests in the project/program proposals. Focus for both implementers and donors were on inputs, rather on the results that were achieved. This approach has been found inadequate, if not defective, and not contributing much to poverty reduction.
to indicate the increase in involvement in activities that affect them. Instead of using the term donor, purchaser or investor, to refer to those who provide development assistance, the term funder is also used.
The above presentation tries to present the development of RBME in the context of performance management.
Click here or on the image to start viewing the presentation... overty Reduction through Project Implementation
Page 19
Clearly, different involvements in a programme or project would mean different needs for information. The RBME process strives to bring together these differing needs and interests into a shared picture of results. As key actors in the M&E process, stakeholders measure results and reflect on the interventions achievements and propose solutions based on local realities
Reflect on the learning in this module so far and answer the following questions: 1. How much do I know about projects and their management? 2. Does my organization have a project management framework? Do we have policy to support project implementation at all stages of the cycle? 3. What capacities do we have for project/programme
Stakeholders are involved in defining what will be evaluated, who will be involved, when it will take place, the participatory methods for collecting information and analysis to be used, and how findings are consolidated. Learning, proposing solutions and acting on them are also an important part of participation. Development results mean sustained improvement in the lives of people, especially those who are marginalized: infants and children, families in poverty, women, and the sick and in developing countries: more children educated, fewer infants dying, more families lifted out of poverty. A clear set of measures and a systematic way of evaluating the information gathered will ensure sustainability.
implementation? 4. If we were to design a project, what outcomes would I like/need to focus on? 5. I thought when we did strategic planning we were already doing results-based management. What is the difference? 6. What questions do I need to ask if I were to design a performance framework? 7. Do I need a system for prioritizing needs so I can decide on outcomes? What should this system include? 8. Does my organization have the capacity to support the implementation of a performance-based project management system? 9. Who would be interested in knowing about my project or its results? How would I get them to know about it?
Page 20
Measuring Results Achievements in governance can only be determined if monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is done. M&E is a powerful management tool that can be used to improve the way governments and organizations deliver goods and services and achieve results. Managing for development results involves using information to make better decisions and steer development efforts toward clearly defined goals. Developing countries focus on results so they can make better policy decisions and design better strategies. Development agencies focus on results to ensure that their support contributes to improving the lives of people in developing countries. Click here or on the image below to start viewing the presentation. Monitoring and evaluation are inter-dependent, yet separate processes. A good monitoring system tracks indicators on policy outcomes, impacts, inputs, outputs and process. A standard evaluation considers the effectiveness and efficiency of a policy by comparing its cost and performance to alternate uses of the same resources.
Timely feedback on results allows policy makers to determine whether development initiatives are being delivered effectively and are producing the intended effects.
To monitor policy inputs, public expenditure tracking surveys can follow funds from budget allocation to their intended purpose.
To monitor policy outputs, citizens' report cards can

evaluate access to and the quality of services provided. Bangladesh and Ethiopia have used these mechanisms, which also provide a tool for formalizing civil society engagement in the monitoring process.
A Case for Institutional Arrangements and Capacity Building toward MDG Achievement
Page 22
Peoples Republic of Bangladesh: Strengthening Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation Project* From 1999 to 2006, the Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED) and the Foreign Aided Projects Audit Directorate (FAPAD) were implementing an ADB-financed project on Strengthening Project Portfolio Performance. As follow-on another TA was provided in order to further reinforce the importance government gave to effective project implementation and monitoring and evaluation of projects and sectors. This second TA was designed to (i) review the M&E practices under all Government-implemented development projects, regardless of their funding sources, and strengthen the capacity of IMED and line agencies to implement results-based M&E; and (ii) strengthen FAPADs audit management, audit systems, and implement personal computer-based audit formats. IMED was challenged to redefine its mandate, role and is particularly seeking assistance to address the new challenges arising from functions within the Governments development planning and M%E system. It was charged with monitoring the attainment of Bangladeshs Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) 3 to assess progress made toward achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by the year 2015. The TA would develop and implement a reform agenda that would build effective and sustainable capacity and support IMED in applying RBM concepts to track the MDGs, grounded in the Governments monitoring mechanisms. For IMED to be effective in its new mandates there was a need for (i) enhancing M&E knowledge, techniques, and skills development; (ii) operationalizing and expanding the IMED MIS; and (iii) a comprehensive study on capacity development with linkages to the absorptive capacity of IMED. M&E under current IMED operations is largely focused on indicator calculation and information collection from executing agencies. However, the PRS requires that IMEDs role be elevated to assess the impact of the Governments Annual Development Program on achieving program and sectoral results and targets. Therefore, line ministries must take on responsibility for M&E at the project level, for which IMED, following project completion, will provide network capacity development support. Furthermore, IMEDs enhanced responsibilities under the PRS at the sector level will be carried out in close coordination with the General Economic Division (GED) of the
Page 23
Planning Commission, whose role is to monitor achievement of the broader PRS outcomes and objectives at a macro level, and assess their impact on progress toward MDGs. The five outputs below will (i) provide IMED with a strategic plan, support its implementation through capacity development and training, and enhance its MIS to support results-based M&E; and (ii) provide FAPAD with enhanced audit management tools. The following outputs were identified: 1. An Agreed-upon Strategic Plan for IMED, which would involve stakeholders at the policy and operational levels, with the draft to be approved by Government; 2. Capacity needs assessment and implementation of capacity development and training plans for IMED and FAPAD as well as other possible executing agencies; 3. Enhancement of MIS into a web-based online M&E system operationally linked to Line Ministries and Key Agencies, in collaboration with UNDP, other World Bank supported initiatives, and the local area network, among others; 4. Enhancement of FAPADs Audit Management formulation of capacity development plans and revisions to audit manuals; and 5. Recommendations for Follow-Up Support, based on assessment of achievement and impact of outputs 1-4. A design and monitoring framework was drafted, specifying project impact, outcome, outputs, activities and milestones, as well as their corresponding indicators, data sources and monitoring mechanisms. To ensure success, Assumptions and risks for each part of the results chain were identified. Click here to open the complete document. The above project was financed by the Japan Special Fund.
Page 24
The Logical Framework Approach and RBME: Synthesizing an M&E Strategy
Module Objectives: Module 2 presented a conceptual background of RBME and its development as well as some practice. In Module 3, you, the learner, will be asked to go through the process of coming up and synthesizing an M&E strategy and programme/project matrix that will be applicable to your context.
You will also be able to:
1. Explain the logical framework approach and its relationships with M&E and operation design;
2. Apply the processes involved in logical framework analysis on a case; and
Page 25
3. Prepare a draft list of steps using the LFA that may be applied to an actual development problem in your area.
Page 26
The Logical Framework Approach: A Background
Page 27
The logical framework approach (LFA) can be very useful for guiding project design and implementation. The basic ideas behind the LFA are simple and common sense for any design process. 1. Be as clear as possible about what you are trying to achieve and how it will be achieved. 2. Decide how you will know if you are achieving your objectives and put in place a monitoring system. 3. Make explicit the conditions (assumptions) outside the direct control of the project that are The Logical Framework Aproach (LFA) is a project design methodology or process. Other names for this process are Objectives Oriented Project Planning (OOPP) and, in German, Ziel Orientierte Projek Planung (ZOPP). The LFA method was developed by Leon J. Rosenberg for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in 1969. ZOPP was developed by GTZ. In 1990, an LFA Handbook published by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) made a significant contribution to LFA. It has since been practiced by many development agencies and project partners, benefited from such practice and has evolved into what it is now. The product of this methodology is a document a 4 x 4 matrixcalled the logical framework or critical for the project to succeed and assess the risk for the project if these conditions fail to arise or change. This can be translated simply into three basic questions:

Where are we going? How do we get there? How will we know we are getting there?
Page 28
logframe. The cells of the matrix (oftentimes called the Project Matrix) describe in succinct terms the most important features of a project. If the correct process was used to develop the content of the logframe, project design quality will be shown by the document. Design flaws will be readily apparent. The essence of using the LFA is to come up with a high quality project design. The common misuse of the LFA is making it an afterthought, trying to fill out the matrix after the project has been designed. Click here or on the image above to start the presentation.
Page 29
The Logic in the LFA The Vertical Logic - This is the reasoning which connects the Outputs, Purpose, and Goal (the three levels of objectives or results). Each of these links is connected by the hypotheses that, within the project environment, if a lower level result is accomplished, the next higher level objective is achieved. The Horizontal Logic - The fourth columnexternal factorsprovides the link between the levels of objectives. The question that is answered here, assuming achievement of a given level, is: What circumstances, decisions, or conditions outside the projects control could prevent the accomplishment of the next higher objective? An Ifthen logic is seen throughout the whole matrixi.e., if the activities are conducted as planned and the assumptions hold, then the outputs will be produced. And so on, up to the higher levels. This is called the temporal logic, and is the core of the logframe. Project designing is done during the initial planning process that defines the project. Since design in an ongoing process in project implementation, it may be necessary to continually adapt the project strategy in response to new understanding and to changing contexts (changing assumptions). A project is born from an identified problem, development issue or challengethe individuals or groups affected by this, and the conditions or factors surrounding and influencing the situation (the context). The desire to affect the issue requires the identification of a future state for such individuals or groups that will reflect better conditions. This future state is what is expressed as the desired results for the project (impact, outcome, outputs), mentioned in Module 2, and the objectives hierarchy (goal, purpose, outputs) in the LFA. Essentially, what is mentioned in the last column of the logframeassumptions and risksis the context surrounding the development issue, and which will affect project implementation. When you manage for results, project design, planning, and M&E are linked processes. The Link between LFA and RBME
Page 30
The Link between LFA and RBME The logframe matrix conveniently puts together and articulates programme/project design, planning and M&E elements. In the standard logframe, the objectives hierarchy (column 1) and the assumptions and risks (column 4) articulate the programme/project design. The performance indicators (OVI, column 2) and means of verification (column 3) describe M&E functions that serve to test whether or not the hypotheses articulated in the design are true. The logical framework matrix is the foundation document for both project design and M&E. It is understood that separate matrices would have to be made for projects that contribute to different outcomes or purposes, even if they lead to the same impact/goal.
Page 31
The Link between LFA and RBME
Planning is done regularly during project life. Its discussions and decisions on how to proceed with the project are based on data gathered during monitoring and evaluation, anchored on the picture of desired results. Except for the box on inputs in the logframe, the contents of the middle columnson OVI and MOVare concerned with M&E. These columns cite the important indicators that need to be measured in order to assess the extent of project accomplishment.
The logframe integrates the three processes: project design, planning, and M&E. The LFA is a very useful tool in designing and presenting a project from the implementation to post-implementation stages. It allows project planners to identify the logical linkages between a set of means and a set of ends. Using the LFA
The logframe is developed with key stakeholders. It is best used in a flexible and critical manner rather than rigidly, which means that the user is expected to:
Allow for opportunities for adaptation into project design, to consider changing environments and contexts;
Value outcomes by stating them explicitly in the logframe;
Include stakeholder aspirations and identifying opportunities rather than focusing only on problems; Click here to view full source.
Keep the logframe updated through annual review and replanning;
Track assumptions as part of M&E to help guide the project strategy.
The logframe shows the main activities for the life of the project and is the basis for the annual workplan and budget. For the logframe to be useful, it must have enough detail. It also must be updated to reflect the current project situation. Click here or on the above image to start the presentation.
Page 33
M&E is strongly influenced by project design. During project design, a broad M&E framework and strategy is developed which provides:
Enough detail to enable budget and allocation of technical expertise;
An overview of how M&E will be undertaken;
Guidance on how M&E will be set up during project start-up;
Guidance on how M&E findings will have an effect on project redesign (steering function of M&E)
The M&E strategy complements the highly summarized M&E information that is in the logframe.
Page 34
Module Objectives: In this module, you will be able to: Topic List for Module 4 - The Policy Basis for MDG Implementation
1. Identify the policy basis for implementing programmes, projects and activities that contribute to MDG accomplishment;
- Developing MDG-based National Development Strategies
2. Distinguish between and among the various levels of MDG implementation;
- Assessing Country Readiness for RBME
3. Discuss the processes used to assess country readiness for RBME, as applied to the MDGs; and
- Agreeing on Outcomes to Monitor and Evaluate
4. Discuss how to translate MDG goals and targets to outcomes within the country context. The Policy Basis for MDG Implementation
Page 35
Effective governance requires countries and governments to formulate a developmentoriented policy agenda. Marginalization of certain populations within a country necessitates focus on these populations where growth and development efforts are concerned. The MDGs present a global agenda which signatory countries have committed to accomplishing. Considered a peoples tool, the MDGs provide a collective venue for reducing the development gap among populations within a country as well as between and among countries. Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) were introduced by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in 1999. The aim of the PRSP was to describe a countrys macroeconomic, structural, and social policies and programs to promote growth and reduction of poverty. The Policy Basis for MDG Implementation
Page 36
Looking at the Levels of Governance Meeting MDG commitments means a country has to define or align development strategies consistent with the MDG goals and targets. It is necessary to adapt the global targets and indicators to the country context. The political and governing structure in a country presents a challenge to the MDGs. MDG-based national development strategies need to be identified and supported with policies that will allow for subnational implementation.
Advancing Development through Subnational MDG Reports: a case study of Albania*
Focuses on methodologies UNDP employed in order to provide concrete ideas to practitioners in other countries. At same time it recognizes the importance of coordinated action by the UN Country Team and the Government of Albania.
In Albania, UNDP and the UN Country Team, Government authorities and civil society have come together to prepare a series of sub-national MDG reports that are catalysing action on the MDGs. Albanias reports give local and national meaning to the global MDGs. They show where poverty lurks, and serve as a tool for participation and bottom-up development planning. This local planning in turn increases national attention to the MDGs and improves poverty-reduction efforts as Albania integrates the MDGs into its poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP). The preparation, dissemination and discussion of these reports have helped to:
increase awareness and ownership
Page 37
of the MDGs at the local, provincial and national levels;
identify the diverse dimensions of poverty;
adapt the MDGs to country and local needs and priorities;
reorient local planning around the reduction of poverty;
link local development plans to the national poverty reduction strategy and related plans, and the European Union Stabilisation and Association process;
strengthen decentralized government capacity; and
focus donor attention on local needs and raise funds.
Developing MDG-Based National Development Strategies
Page 38
UNDP utilizes its broad regional and thematic expertise to support governments in preparing and implementing MDG-based national development strategies. While such strategies are crucial to achieve the MDGs at the country level, the vast majority of them are not yet ambitious enough. To address each of the questions, UNDP works To be properly aligned with the MDGs, a national strategy needs to address several key issues: with its partners to support governments through the four key steps of preparing an MDG-based national development strategy:
1.
Ambitionare the targets far-reaching
I. Launch an effective and inclusive process for MDG-based planning;
enough to realistically reach the MDGs?
2.
Scopedoes the strategy take into
II. Take inventory: reviewing existing strategies and defining the baseline;
account all of the MDGs, or does it focus too narrowly on only a certain number?
III. Conduct a detailed, long-term assessment 3. Rigourare the targets substantiated by or MDG needs assessment to estimate the infrastructure, human resources, and financial requirements required to achieve the MDGs; a solid analysis of what inputs are needed to achieve them?
4.
Timeframeis the strategy grounded in
IV. Develop a short-to-medium-term national strategy drawing upon the MDG needs assessment;
a long-term assessment of those needs?
5.
Financingis the budget sufficient to These processes have to be brought to the local level in order to promote MDG localization.
finance the necessary inputs?
Page 39
6.
Monitoring and Evaluationis there a
This includes setting local goals and targets, planning how to achieve them, and strengthening local institutions to ensure they can be achieved. It also involves establishing
strategy for evaluating progress and making changes?
Please click on the link the link below to view the powerpoint presentation on Developing MDG-based national development strategies.
links between national policies and frameworks and their application at the local level.
Assessing Country Readiness for RBME
Page 40
Different organizations approach performance management in slightly different ways. Kusek and Rist present the ten steps listed in the inset. Other organizations have identified similar steps. This discussion will endeavor to build on the ten steps using the guidelines and experience of other organizations.
The need to contextualize the MDGs requires asking whether ones country/organization is ready for RBME. Such is the starting point of most approaches.
Click here to view presentation slides Agreeing on Outcomes to Monitor and Evaluate
Page 41
Setting goals is part of every decisionmaking processes of government or any organization. The MDGs simplify the decision-making process by laying out the development goals, targets and indicators.
Poverty is manifested in different ways in different countries. To clarify ones contribution to a specific goal, the local context has to be considered.
A participatory process of agreeing on outcomes at all levels is important. Knowing where you are going before you start moving is necessary.
This discussion will address (a) the importance of outcomes, (b) issues to consider in choosing outcomes to monitor and evaluate, (c) the importance of building a participatory and consultative process involving main stakeholders; and (d) the overall process of setting and agreeing on outcomes.
Page 42
Module Objectives After having defined and agreed on desired outcomes, it is necessary to proceed to selecting the performance indicators that would best reflect these outcomes. In this module, you will be able to discuss the processes that you need in order to:
Page 43
1. Translate the agreed outcomes to performance indicators and targets;
2. Establish baselines for the identified indicators;
3. Apply appropriate data gathering methods;
4. Establish a system for monitoring that will involve key stakeholders at all levels.
Monitoring as a Management Tool 1. The periodic tracking of progress (or lack thereof) of what was planned. 2. Provides systematic observation and documentation of information on the implementation of plans. 3. Ensures that programs and projects are implemented and managed efficiently and effectively. 4. Identifies problems in plan implementation in its early stage and allows decision makers and managers to address the problems or make appropriate adjustments for corrective actions. 5. Provides information on how ongoing and future efforts
Page 44
on the MDG can be improved. 6. Monitoring results contain both qualitative and quantitative data that can serve as inputs to evaluation. 7. Monitoring and evaluation, while very closely related produce different kinds of information. 8. Data that is systematically generated is essential for successful evaluations.
Defining the Monitoring Parameters Identifying Key Performance Indicators Performance indicators provide accurate and reliable evidence on the achievement of results. They measure progress by noting changes at different points in time. It measures positive and negative change (ADB 2004).
Performance indicators need to be dynamic and should evolve in response to changing national conditions. In identifying indicators, it is recommended that a consultation process be undertaken by the national statistical office or the planning office in the selection and compilation of country specific indicators. It is necessary that consensus is
reached to help build ownership on the selected indicators (United Nations 2003).
Best practice dictates that a limited number of reliable and effective indicators be identified to manage performance. In selecting indicators, one can be guided by the following criteria*:
Provide relevant and robust measures of progress towards the targets of the Millennium Development Goals; Be clear and straightforward to interpret and provide a basis for international comparison; Be broadly consistent with other global lists and avoid imposing an unnecessary burden on country teams, governments and other partners; Be based to the greatest extent possible on international standards, recommendations and best practices; Be constructed from well-established data sources, be quantifiable and be consistent to enable measurement over time. *Adopted from Indicators for Monitoring the Millennium Development Goals (2003). Quantitative Indicators are usually used for monitoring MDG results. Among the quantitative indicators used include the following:
Ratio (e.g. elementary participation rate in percent; maternal mortality ratio) Number (e.g. number of children immunized against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) Frequency (e.g. provision of de-worming drugs among 2-5 years old children twice a year) Tips in Identifying Performance Indicators: Work with stakeholder and technical experts to determine which indicators are important;
Avoid selection of too many indicators. Less is better; Information about indicators should be easy to gather and useful for management decisions; Performance indicators should be identified at all levels of results. Source: Kusek and Khatouri 2006
UN Millennium Declaration Agreements The UN Millennium Declaration which contains the MDGs provides a list of 48 quantitative indicators for monitoring progress towards eight goals and 18 targets. The list was presented in the Road Map towards the Implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration, by the Secretary General to the General Assembly in September 2001. The list of indicators, developed using several criteria, is not intended to be prescriptive, but to take into account the country setting and the views of various stakeholders in preparing country-level reports. The Table below shows examples of indicators being modified to suit the local context.
Indicators and Targets Targets are the quantitative and qualitative levels of the performance indicators that a
Page 47
country or organization wants to achieve at a given point in time. In RBM, one needs to: 1. Establish performance targets for each result as part of the indicator design process; 2. Track the indicators to see if targets are being met; 3. If targets are not being met, readjustment is done on the strategies. Using the national commitment to the MDGs as the starting point, there is need to translate country targets into sub-national targets.
Developing an M&E Plan
Page 48
Once performance indicators and targets are defined, an M&E Plan needs to be developed to serve as guide in monitoring and evaluating results. The plan identifies the data collection methods, the intervals at which measurement should occur (frequency or schedule of undertaking monitoring) and the responsible party for the activity. A sample M&E plan is shown in the table below:
Setting Baseline Data A baseline is a quantitative or qualitative description of the situation prior to the intervention against which progress can be assessed or compared. In many countries, the necessary work for establishing baselines has already been done. Data Gathering* Data Sources Data needed for monitoring the MDGs should come from well-established and reliable sources. Three main sources Results-based management entail that countries need to take stock of the current situation by defining the baseline status of MDG areas (poverty, maternal mortality rate, etc). Information on the performance indicator is very important at the onset to assist governments in establishing how far the country is from achieving the MDGs. Baseline data is also Administrative data
Page 49
include: Administrative Data Survey Data Expert advice
very useful in setting priorities.
Government agencies and ministries regularly collect data as part of their
Furthermore, knowing where you want to go is best supported by a clear knowledge of where you are coming from. Outcomes are clarified further by gathering baseline data on what the present conditions of a given development situation are in order to establish the gap.
regular function and for administrative purposes. For example, government statistical offices conduct surveys on household income, consumption and expenditure that provide useful data for tracking progress on the eradication of
Baseline setting would require estimating the current coverage of interventions to reach the MDGs. As much as possible, existing data sources need to be identified to establish baselines. Undertaking new surveys or collecting new data is sometimes not necessary. Information on performance indicators need to be compiled from various sources to establish clear baselines. Some of the questions that need to be answered include: How many people are currently reached by various development activities vis--vis MDGs? Who are being reached? Which government and nongovernmental bodies are involved in providing goods and services services?
poverty and hunger. Indicators on national poverty lines are commonly calculated by national agencies. Sector situation are usually sourced from the government agencies concerned (e.g. school enrollment data are usually recorded by the country education department or ministry).
Administrative data also provide information on government programs, projects and activities carried out by the agency or ministry. Similarly, civil society organizations both local and international also keep similar data on the services they
In setting baseline information, two things are considered: Data Acquisition Method. Data source, frequency/ schedule and responsibility for its collection; Data Analysis and Reporting Method. Frequency/ schedule, Analysis method, and responsibility of reporting.
provide. Government fiscal accounts and to some extent project documents also provide information that can be used to assess the allocation of funding for specific interventions.
* The contents of this section are largely based on Indicators for Monitoring the Millennium Development Goals (2003)
and Preparing National Strategies to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals: A Handbook (2005). Data Gathering Surveys and Censuses Surveys are another key source of information. One of the Data Collection and Source
most important source of information is the national census, Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education which provides basic demographic information from every household. Census data is used to calculate many important School enrolment data are usually recorded by statistics the per capita income, the maternal mortality ratio, access to specific services, etc. the country education ministry or compiled from surveys and censuses. Data on the population in the official age group for the Compared to surveys, censuses collect a more limited range primary level are available from national statistical offices, based on population of information from every individual instead of using a sampling technique to model the characteristics of the entire censuses and vital statistics registration. population. They are also used to verify administrative data, Nationally reported values will be the same as to derive proxy indicators, and to provide a sampling frame for household surveys (PARIS21 2004 in). Censuses can be the only source of information on about small areas within a country to allow disaggregation by internationally reported values only if the same methods and population estimates are used. For countries for which administrative data are not available, household survey data may be used to assess school attendance rather
small geographical or administrative units. Poverty mapping than enrollment. Among international techniques can use small-area census data to link to survey surveys, the Multiple Indicator Cluster data and dramatically increase the disaggregation of other indicators. Survey and Demographic and Health Surveys (and sometimes Living Standards Measurement Surveys and the Core Welfare Surveys, on the other hand, collect multiple pieces of information from the same people that are critical for understanding the drivers of poverty in its many forms. There are internationally supported household surveys, such as the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) conducted
Indicators Questionnaires in Africa) provide school attendance data. Source: UN 2003
by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and Macro International, the World Banks Living Standards and Measurement Surveys (LSMS), and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) conducted by UNICEF(UNDP 2005).
In monitoring MDG outcomes and outputs, surveys that meet the following criteria are recommended (UN 2003): They are nationally representative; Include a sufficiently comprehensive consumption or income aggregate (including consumption and income from own production; They allow for the construction of a correctly weighted distribution of consumption or income per person. Expert advice
Information and advice from development professionals in government, civil society organizations, international organizations, and donor agencies is another source of MDGrelated information. While quantitative data are an essential component of tracking progress, the information should be supplemented and interpreted through the advice and assistance of technical experts with experience in the country.
Page 52
Analyzing Monitoring Data Analyzing monitoring data basically involves comparing changes to the baseline data as well as targets. Once data It is said that if performance information is not being used is analyzed, one needs to determine what actively, then Results Based Management is not being conclusion or recommendation can be applied. Monitoring data provides stakeholders with useful Using Monitoring Data for Decision-Making
made to improve performance. Some tips information that can be used in decision making. in analyzing monitoring data are: Monitoring results inform policy making, so that it is
Ensure that data is gender disaggregated necessary that robust data are at hand. Once monitoring so that differences for men and women can be clearly shown; Analyze results data for individual results are available, it is best to communicate results to the potential users of the information the soonest possible time. The effective use of information depends on the
indicators or groups of related indicators; timeliness of the information. Reconcile data related to the indicators (by location, gender, race, age, etc.); Analyze relationships among performance indicators; Compare results with other relevant benchmarks; Evaluate why certain performance targets are being met and why some are not being met. Some useful questions that you can ask include:
Realistically, implementation problems can happen even with the best thought out plans. Monitoring alerts decisionmakers and managers alike on particular issues/problems that would in turn aid them in coming up with appropriate adjustments to mitigate the effects of the problem or make mid-course corrections as necessary. Moreover, information can also be used during project implementation to adjust strategies.
Are we on track? Are we delivering the expected outputs? Have the desired outcomes been achieved? What problems have been solved for the beneficiaries of the outputs? Who benefited from the programs and projects? How many benefited from the interventions?
If any of the questions above are answered in the negative, corrective actions need to be taken. If this is the case, it is important for the monitoring team to inform decision makers at the earliest possible time so that timely decisions can be made.
Page 54
Module 6: Analyzing, Disseminating, and Using the Information1 : The "E" in M & E
Module Objectives: By the end of this module, you would be able to:
The content of this module is largely based on
the Ten Steps to Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation by Kusek and Rist (2004), the International Program for Development Education Training (2007) and the UNFPA Programme Managers Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation Toolkit (2004).
1.
Distinguish between monitoring
and evaluation;
2.
Describe the value of evaluation to
the achievement of results;
3.
Identify the appropriate tools
needed to conduct evaluation and present evaluation findings for specific
Page 55
purposes and audiences; and
4.
Discuss how evaluation findings
can be used to improve performance, enrich project/programme and stakeholder knowledge, and learning.
Using Evaluation to Support a Results-based Management A results-based management system requires the establishment of an information and analysis system that covers both monitoring and evaluation. Whereas monitoring is generally applied to checking on the production of outputs relative to the inputs provided a given development intervention, evaluation is generally concerned with efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and sustainability.
Monitoring gives ongoing and up-to-date information on the direction of change, the pace of change, and the magnitude of change occurring as a result of a development intervention. Results monitoring can identify unanticipated changes. However, it cannot provide explanation how changes are coming about and establish attribution between the results and the intervention. Monitoring also cannot provide information on the strengths and weaknesses in the design of the intervention. Thus, there is a need for a systematic and objective evaluation.
CLICK HERE TO LAUNCH AND VIEW THE POWERPOINT SLIDES At the same time, you may also
Page 56
CLICK HERE TO OPEN OR DOWNLOAD THE LECTURE NOTES IN PDF
Policy, Programme and Project Level Evaluation
Page 57
Types of Evaluation
Evaluability Assessment
Evaluability assessment is a preliminary study to determine whether an evaluation would be useful and feasible.
Performance Logic Assessment Performance logic chain assessment evaluation strategy is used to determine the strength and logic of the causal model behind the policy, program, or project.
Pre-Implementation Assessment Pre-implementation assessment evaluation strategy addresses standards that should be clearly articulated before managers move to the implementation phase, to ensure that failure is not programmed in from the beginning of implementation.
Page 58
Process Evaluation Process evaluation describes how an intervention is operating and assesses how well it performs its intended outcomes.
Rapid Appraisal Rapid appraisal is real-time assessment and reporting, providing decisionmakers with immediate feedback on the progress of a given project, programme, or policy.
Case Study Case study is an evaluation strategy used when a manager needs in-depth information to understand more clearly what happened with a policy, programme, or project.
Impact Evaluation An impact evaluation attempts to find out the changes that occurred, and to what they can be attributed. It determines what portion of the documented impacts the intervention caused, and what might have come from other events or conditions.
Page 59
Outcome Mapping
Outcome mapping concentrates on evaluation of outcomes as behavioral change rather than the achievement of the development impacts because the latter are too downstream and a result of many interventions and efforts.
Goal-free Evaluation Goal-free evaluation assesses actual outcomes rather than intended outcomes. Predetermined goals are not permitted to narrow the focus of evaluation.
Multi-site Evaluation Multi-site evaluation is used to assess interventions that have been implemented in a variety of locations to understand variations.
Cluster Evaluation Cluster evaluation is similar to multi-site evaluation but its intention is to investigate about what happened across the clusters and ascertain lessons learned.
Participatory Evaluation Participatory evaluation is a collective assessment of stakeholders and beneficiaries of an intervention.
Social Assessment Social assessment examines the various social structures, processes, and changes within a group or community to ensure that social impacts of development projects and programmes are accounted for.
Meta-Evaluation
Page 60
A meta-evaluation establishes the criteria and procedures for systematically looking across those existing evaluations to summarize trends and to generate confidence (or caution) in the cross-study findings.
Page 61
Designing the Evaluation The evaluation process basically involves defining the purpose and questions for evaluation, identifying standards and measures, selecting evaluation approach, collecting and analyzing data, reporting and using findings. Click here to launch and view the powerpoint slides. At the same time, you may also open or download the lecture noted in pdf.
Evaluation Design Evaluation design is the total process of specifying a plan for:

Collecting data Analyzing data Reporting results Getting the results used
Evaluation Design Matrix
Evaluation design matrix organizes the evaluation questions and the plans for collecting information to answer the questions.
The matrix links descriptive, normative, and impact evaluation questions to design and methodologies.
Click here to open or download the lecture

notes in PDF.
CLICK HERE TO OPEN OR DOWNLOAD THE LECTURE NOTES IN PDF CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD TO LAUNCH AND VIEW THE POWERPOINT SLIDES.
Module 6. Analyzing, Disseminating, and Using the Information On-line Training Course on Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation for MDG Implementation
Page 63
A particular design requires a particular data collection instrument and field methodology. IPDET (2007) has complied the methods of data collection needed to support specific evaluation designs.
CLICK HERE TO OPEN OR LAUNCH THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION.
CLICK HERE TO OPEN THE LECTURE NOTES IN PDF PDF.
Module 6. Analyzing, Disseminating, and Using the Information On-line Training Course on Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation for MDG line Results-Based Monitoring Implementation Standards for Evaluation Using the findings: Feedback, Knowledge and Learning
UNIPAN On line Training NIPAN
Page 64
Evaluation Feedback A dynamic process which involves the presentation and dissemination of evaluation information in order to ensure its application into new or existing development activities. Learning A continuous dynamic process of investigation where the key elements are experience, knowledge, access and relevance. Challenges to Evaluation Technical Political
Technical and Political Challenges to Evaluation
There are technical and political challenges to results-based evaluation.
On the technical side, designing and building an evaluation system that can produce timely, reliable and objective information on the performance and results of projects, programmes, and policies necessitates competence and real institutional capacity. This institutional capacity includes, at a minimum, the technical ability to construct evaluation questions, indicators and measures; the means and ability to collect, aggregate, analyze, and report evaluation data; and competent development managers with knowledge and skills on what to do with evaluation information. Time and resources are needed to build this technical capacity but it is easier to manage than
political challenges.
Evaluations are political in nature. Evaluations, when used, become part of the political decision-making surrounding the project, programme or policy being evaluated. Since evaluations take positions on how well an intervention is doing or on what works and what doesnt, it becomes unavoidably political. Bringing evaluation information into the public arena can alter resource allocation decisions, trigger changes in institutional arrangements, and affect public perception on government effectiveness.
To deal with politics of evaluation, it is important to understand the dynamics of political process and consider political dimensions into the evaluation. Evaluators can anticipate resistance of development managers, government officials and even funders and manage resistance by sharing evaluation processes, criteria and methods publicly. CLICK HERE TO OPEN OR DOWNLOAD THE LECTURE NOTES IN PDF Then Click "NEXT" on the navigation on top to proceed to the next slide.
Module 6. Analyzing, Disseminating, and Using the Information On-line Training Course on Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation for MDG Implementation Political Nature of Evaluation 1. Evaluations, if they are used, become a part of the political decision process surrounding the program being evaluated 2. Evaluations, by taking a position about how well a program is doing, are inherently and unavoidably political.
Taking Politics Out of Evaluation 1. Evaluations should be objective, unbiased, and non-political inquiry into the effectiveness of programs or policies 2. Evaluations should produce hard evidence of actual outcome Dealing with Politics of Evaluation
1. Build political dimensions into the evaluation role 2. Share biases, criteria, inquiry, and methods publicly so that user will be able to take that into consideration 3. Maintain professional and ethical standards
Module Conclusion
In summary, this module described the Evaluation in the context of M & E, its types and uses. The module also delved on how to design the evaluation system from defining evaluation questions, designing the evaluation methodology including data collection and analysis, standards of a quality evaluation. Guidelines in writing and presenting evaluations as well as strategies to promote utilization of findings are also provided.
To check your overall understanding of the module, work on the final exercise.
Exercise 7: REFLECTION Consider a programme or project you are currently involved. If you are asked to plan the evaluation, how would you answer the following questions?
1.
What is your purpose of evaluation?
2.
Who will be the users of evaluation? What will be the involvement of stakeholders
in the process?
3.
What types of questions will you ask?
4.
Which evaluation approaches will be useful given your evaluation questions?
Page 67
5.
What data collection and analytical techniques will you use?
6.
What evaluation standards would you use?
7.
What communication strategies will you use to report the findings?
Module 7: Managing the Shift to RBME: Sustainability Mechanisms, at the Outset
Page 68

Results-Implementation: Hiwotie Walelign Alemu

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Results-Implementation: Hiwotie Walelign Alemu

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ResultsImplementation

Mobile: +251-918745675 hiwotiew@yahoo.com

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

Assessment and Certificate

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

Topic List for Module 1 The Millennium Development Goals

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

Organizing for MDG Implementation

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

comprehensive in recognizing the multidimensional nature of poverty;

based on a long-term perspective for poverty reduction.

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

Meeting the Targets by 2015

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

Eastern South-Eastern Southern Western

The MDGs Report 2010

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

By the end of this module, the learner should:

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

To monitor policy outputs, citizens' report cards can

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

The Logical Framework Approach and RBME: Synthesizing an M&E Strategy

You will also be able to:

2. Apply the processes involved in logical framework analysis on a case; and

UNIPAN On line Training

PDF Creator - PDF4Free v2.0

UNIPAN On line Training