Project Evaluation, Recycling and Closing

2,871 views
2,276 views

Published on

Published in: Business

Project Evaluation, Recycling and Closing

  1. 1. Project Evaluation and Recycling Prepared by: Michael John D. Sison MDM student Presented to: Josefina B. Bitonio, DPA Professor DM 211 Project Development and Management
  2. 2. RANGESAMY, 2008
  3. 3. Project recycling Topics at glance Project tools and techniques Project evaluation and recycling d. Stages of project life Project Evaluation and Recycling
  4. 4. Monitoring is defined as the routine collection and use of data to assess progress in achieving programmed objectives. These data are generally derived from program records What is monitoring?
  5. 5. What is a project? Project Manager A project is a package of:  Objectives  Outputs  Activities  inputs Project Staff Project Beneficiaries Mercado: 2005
  6. 6. What is the origin of evaluation? Evaluation has its origin in the Latin word “Valupure” which means the value of a particular thing, idea or action (Rengasamy, 2008).
  7. 7. Evaluation is the process of analyzing program and project inputs, transformation processes , and the effect and impact of outputs and outcomes against explicitly stated goals and objectives (Mathur and Inayatullah as cited by Miclat, 2005). What is evaluation?
  8. 8. Differences between monitoring and evaluation (United Nations Evaluations Group, accessed 2014)
  9. 9. Project evaluation assesses activities that are designed to perform a specified task in a specific period of time. For example, a three-day workshop on volunteerism, a one-year fundraising program, a three-year HIV prevention intervention, a five-year career development innovation, or an ongoing newcomer youth orientation and integration training program are all projects that you can evaluate (Zarinpoush, 2006). What is Project Evaluation?
  10. 10. • To assess project results • To improve project management and process planning • To promote learning • To understand different stakeholders’ perspectives • To ensure accountability In general, the purpose of monitoring & evaluation based in Rengasamy (2008) can be:
  11. 11. 1. Efficiency refers to the amount of time and resources put into the project relative to the outputs and outcomes. A project evaluation may be designed to find out if there was a less expensive, more appropriate, less time-consuming approach for reaching the same objectives. 2. Effectiveness describes whether or not the research process was useful in reaching project goals and objectives, or resulted in positive outcomes. 3. Relevance or appropriateness describes the usefulness, ethics, and flexibility of a project within the particular context. Underlying reasons (Rengasamy, 2008) for monitoring and evaluating are frequently framed in terms of:
  12. 12. What will happen if we mix the three? It will enable judgment about whether the outputs and outcomes of the project are worth the costs of the inputs. Effectiveness, efficiency and appropriateness can be considered for the different methods, tools and approaches rather than questioning the value of the research approach as a whole (Rengasamy, 2008).
  13. 13. What to Monitor and Evaluate (Rengsamy, 2008)? Outputs • describe the concrete and tangible products of the research as well as the occurrence of the research activities themselves. Processes • describe the methods and approaches used for the project. Impact • describes overall changes that occur in the community to which the project is one of many contributing factors. Reach • describes who is influenced by the project and who acts because of this influence. Outcomes • describe the changes that occur within the community or with the project managers that can be attributed, at least in part, to the project process and outputs. Understanding the condition of the community/target group before the project was initiated is useful in order to provide a point of comparison for monitor and evaluating changes that occur during the project. Baseline survey conducted at the beginning of the project can provide a point of reference for comparison and for understanding change in the community/target group.
  14. 14. Program Project Logmap Mercado:2005 User (Community) Effects Personal Outcomes Organization Impacts Social Improved: 1. Capacity 2. Efficiency 3. Effectiveness 4. Performance 5. Productivity 6. Quality 7. Profitability 8. Empowerment 9. Access 10. Availability Increased: 1. Per capita income 2. Employment raised 3. Life expectancy 4. Literacy rate Decreased 1. Mortality rate 2. (In)fertility rate Consumers Objectives Improved: 1. Awareness 2. Knowledge 3. Attitude 4. Skills 5. Practice
  15. 15. Purpose of Evaluation (Rengasamy, 2008) From an accountability perspective: It is to make the best possible use of funds by the program managers who are accountable for the worth of their programs. Measuring accomplishment in order to avoid weaknesses and future mistakes. VERSUS From a knowledge perspective: Understanding people’s participation & reasons for the same. It is to establish new knowledge about social problems and the effectiveness of policies and programs designed to alleviate them. Evaluation helps to make plans for future work.
  16. 16. Examples of Evaluation Purpose Statements (Zarinpoush, 2006) • To assess the degree to which project objectives were achieved. • To document the lessons learned. • To provide recommendations for project development and improvement. • To examine the changes that resulted from doing the project. • To provide input to guide decision making for the upcoming renewal and extension of project funding.
  17. 17. Principles of Evaluation (Rengasamy, 2008): It has a sense of continuity. It has a sense of continuity. It is inexpensive It has a minimum hindrance to day-to- day work. It has a total participation, thus, shows program totality. It can be shared.
  18. 18. Preparing the Evaluation Study Proposal (Miclat, 2005) Theoretical Framework • The launching pad of the study from the abstract into the empirical world. Methodology • It discusses the methods and procedures to be used in the study. Research Designs • The blueprint of procedures that enable a researcher to arrive at valid and reliable findings and conclusions. Sampling Technique • Involves the population or universe to guarantee the validity of the study. Research Instrument • The data gathering device a researcher uses to gather data relevant to the study. Treatment of Data • The procedures on how the data would be analyzed taking into consideration the objectives of the study.
  19. 19. Additional two items on Methodology (Miclat, 2005) The preparation of a research budget to carry out the study successfully should be stipulated. Funding Requirements The preparation of a time schedule in the conduct of the various activities of the evaluation study to maximally use time, money and manpower should also be included. Timetable
  20. 20. ●Impact evaluation ●Ex- post evaluation or (Summative / Terminal / Final) ●Final evaluation 3. PROGRAM COMPLETION STAGE ●Monitorin g Evaluation or Ongoing / interim. ●Concurren t evaluation 2. PROGRAM MONITORING STAGE1. PROGRAM PLANNING STAGE STAGES IN PROJECT EVALUATION (RENGASAMY, 2008) ●Pre – investment evaluation ●Formative evaluation ●Ex – ante evaluation or Early / Formulation ●Pre-project evaluation ●Exploratory evaluation ●Need assessment ●Formative evaluation ●Ex – ante evaluation or Early / Formulation ●Pre-project evaluation ●Exploratory evaluation ●Need assessment
  21. 21. CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE (RANGESAMY, 2008)
  22. 22. STEPS IN EVALUATION (RANGESAMY, 2008) Learning about the program Creating on evaluation plan and evaluation indicators Briefing the concerned people about the evaluation plan and indicators Revising and elaborating the evaluation plan Initiating evaluation Utilizing/Sharing information
  23. 23. Implementing the Evaluation Study (Miclat, 2005) Data Gathering and Processes Writing the Research Report Presentation and Analysis of Data Finding and Conclusions
  24. 24. Types of Evaluation: Evaluation can be categorized under different headings (Rangesamy, 2008): A) By timing (when to evaluate) ●Formative Evaluation ●Summative Evaluation B) By Agency. Who is evaluating? ●Internal Evaluation ●External Evaluation C) By Stages ●On going ●Terminal ●Ex – post
  25. 25. Internal or External Evaluation (based on Rangesamy, 2008) Internal Evaluation It is also known as Enterprise Self Audit. It is a continuous process which is done at various points and in respect of various aspects of the working of an agency by the agency staff itself i.e. staff board members and beneficiaries. VERSUS Internal Evaluation This is done by outsiders /Certified Management Audit. Some donors may send consultants in order to see how far the standards laid down are put into practice. Inter agency evaluation. In this type two agencies mutually agree to evaluate their program by the other agency. Inter agency tours.
  26. 26. Desired Situation Sustained benefits and impact Present Situation Mid-Term review End-of project or final evaluation Ex-post or impact evaluation Time Source: Rangesamy, 2008
  27. 27. Tools/ Techniques based on Rangesamy, 2008: ● First Hand Information ● Formal/Informal Periodic Reports ● Evaluation is also carried out through formal/informal reports *Formal Reports consist of: -Project Status Report -Project Schedule Chart -Project Financial Status *Informal reports such as: ● Anonymous Letters, Press Reports, Complaints by Beneficiaries & Petitions, etc. ● Graphic Presentations ● Standing evaluation review committees ● Project Profiles Methods of Evaluation
  28. 28. Areas of Evaluation (Rangesamy, 2008): Purpose: The review the objectives of the agency / project and how far these are being fulfilled. Programs: Aspects like number of beneficiaries, nature of services rendered to them, their reaction to the services, effectiveness and adequacy of services etc. may be evaluated. Staff: The success of any welfare program / agency depends upon the type of the staff an agency employs. Their attitude, qualifications, recruitment policy, pay and other benefits and organizational environment. These are the areas which help to understand the effectiveness of the project / agency. Financial Administration: The flow of resources and its consumption is a crucial factor in any project / agency. Whether the project money is rightly consumed any over spending in some headings, appropriation and misappropriation. These are some of the indicators that reveal the reasons for the success or failures of any project. General: Factors like public relations strategies employed by the project /agency, the constitution of the agency board or project advisory committee and their contribution future plans of the agency are important to understand the success or failures of any project.
  29. 29. PROJECT EVALUATION (RANGESAMY, 2008) Analysis on how successful the project has been in Transforming the means (i.e. the resources and inputs allocated to the project) through project activities into concrete project results Provides the stakeholders with information on inputs/costs per unit produced Overall Objectives Efficiency Means + Preconditions Activities+ Assumptions Results + Assumptions Project Purpose + Assumptions Change utilization action allocation Analysis on how well the production of project results Contributes to the achievement of the project purpose, i.e.: Are there clear Indications of changes and improvements that benefit the beneficiaries of the project? Uses base-line information on the pre project situation as a starting point Effectiveness Impact Analysis of the overall effects of the project Analysis of the contribution of the project purpose to the overall objectives Focus on long-term changes in the environment of the project “Collection” and analysis of information at the levels of communities and society at large focusing on the final beneficiaries of the project Also analysis of unintended impacts (negative and positive)
  30. 30. Views About Evaluation (Rangesamy, 2008): ● Evaluation as an analysis – determining the merits or deficiencies of a program, methods and processes. ● Evaluation as an audit – systematic and continuous enquiry to measure the efficiency of means to reach their particular preconceived ends. In the Agency Context: ● Evaluation of administration means appraisal or judgment of the worth and effectiveness of all the processes (e.g. planning, organizing, staffing, etc.) designed to ensure the agency to accomplish its objectives.
  31. 31. What is Project Recycling? Definition of Project Recycling This is a process of iterations and reiteration. This is a post project activity wherein a separate planning based on results will have to be prepared. Depending upon the results of the project reports/analyses a project may be replicated or modified to suit the time, place, beneficiaries of the intended project (CLSU). The results of outputs and outcomes in terms effects and impacts are eventually recycled and feed-backed as inputs in the planning process (Miclat, 2005).
  32. 32. Is there a need for publication and dissemination of the evaluation? Publication and dissemination of the evaluation
  33. 33. Project Evaluation and Recycling Model (Sison, 2014) Data Gathering and Processes Writing the Research Report Presentation and Analysis of Data Finding and Conclusions Publication and Dissemination of the Evaluation Plan Update Project Recycling, Re-modification or Removal? Embark on ‘new’ Project Evaluation Evaluation Study Implementation by Miclat, 2005
  34. 34. Stages of Project Life (Bitonio, 2014) Project Initiation Project Planning Project Execution Project Closure Communication
  35. 35. What are your answers? • What went right? • What went wrong? • How do you make the next project process better? • Best Practices?
  36. 36. At the end of the Project Project Initiation Project Planning Project Execution Project Closure Post Implement Review Monitor and Control Plan the Project Define the Project Communication • Client Satisfaction input/report • Formal acceptance • Project Schedule (Actual vs. Estimated) • Lessons Learned
  37. 37. Project Life with Recycling Cycle (Sison, 2014) Communication Publication and Dissemination of the Evaluation Plan Update Project Recycling, Re- modification or Removal? Embark on another Project with ‘new’ criteria for Project Evaluation Project Initiation Project Planning Project Execution Project Closure Post Implement Review Monitor and Control Plan the Project Define the Project
  38. 38. Closing the Project
  39. 39. Closing the Project • Closing projects involves gaining stakeholder and customer acceptance of the final products and services, and bringing the project to an orderly end. • Closing includes verifying that all of the deliverables are complete, planning for transition of products and services into the organization, and preparing a final presentation and report. • It is also important to reflect on what can be learned to improve future projects. As philosopher George Santayana said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  40. 40. Closing a project involves creating: –Administrative closure procedures –Contract closure procedures –Final products, services, or results –Updates to organizational process assets Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  41. 41. • In closing out a project, you must prepare: – A customer acceptance/project completion form – A final report and presentation – A transition plan (provided as part of the final report) – A lessons-learned report (after a “sticky note” party) • Organizing an event/celebration/luncheon, etc. for the project team to celebrate a job well done. Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  42. 42. Sample Table of Contents for a Final Project Report
  43. 43. Sample Customer Acceptance /Project Completion Form Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  44. 44. Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  45. 45. Sample of Lessons Learned Report
  46. 46. Lessons Learned Report Cont. Source: sbuweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  47. 47. References: BOOK Miclat, Jr. Eusebio F. Strategic Planning in Education: Making Change Happen. Rex Book Store, Inc. 2005. WEB Rengasamy, Srinivasan. There is No Management without Monitoring. slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/srengasamy/project-monitoring- evaluation-s- presentation?utm_source=slideshow&utm_medium=ssemail&utm_campaign= download_notification Posted Oct. 11, 2008 Accessed March 10, 2014 Bitonio, Josefina B. Project Development and Management 2014 ________________. Project Recycling. Chapter7.doc syllabus clsu Zarinpoush, Fataneh Project Evaluation Guide for Nonprofit Organizations. Imagine Canada. 2006 ________________________. Toolkit to Combat Trafficking in Persons. United Nations Evaluation Group. 08-58296_tool_10-1.pdf buweb.tcu.edu/mackay/INSC%2040813/Lectures
  48. 48. #ProjEvalReport to evaluate!

×