Funaab Presentation in Cotonou 2015

1. ACE PROJECT WORKSHOP, COTONOU
Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta
Mon. 16th – Fri. 20th November, 2015

2. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI 1 DLR1.1
Establishment
of the Running
of CEADESE
Office
Office
Accomodation
and Staff
Administrative
tools
100%
Functional
office.
Administrative
and Academic
Staff
-
DLR 1.2
Coordination
Meetings
Number of
Meeting held 100%
16
Coordination
Meetings held
-
DLR 1.3
World Bank
Meeting /
Workshops
Regular
attendance at
World Bank /
AAU Meeting
100%
4 meetings
attended
-
Status of Implementation of Activities

3. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI DLR1.4
Technical /
Management
Training
Number of
StaffTrained
10%
Fiducial
Training of 2
Centre staff
Financial
Constraints
DLR 1.6
Development
ofWebsite
Functional
website 100%
Website up
and Running -
DLR 1.7
Industrial
Relations
MoUs signed
13%
2 MoUs Legal issues
delaying
MoU.
Causing
delay
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

4. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI 1 DLR 1.8
Internal and
External M & E
Number Result
Frame work
submitted
100%
2 Result
Framework
submitted
-
DLI 2 DLR 2.1
Masters
Student
a.) No Masters
curriculum
Developed or
Revised
100%
1.) 28 Masters (4
Regional).
2.) 2 New
curriculum
Developed for
6 programmes
3.) Curriculum
Revised into 5
programmes
-
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

5. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.2
PhD students
a.) No PhD
b.) Curriculum
Developed
100%
100%
1.) 37 PhD (3
regional)
2.) New
curriculum
Developed for
5 Programmes.
3.) Curriculum
Revised into 5
programmes
-
DLR 2.3
Short-term
courses for
students
No of
Participants
0%
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

6. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.4
Outreach
periods
(Faculty and
Students)
No. of student
completing at
least 4 weeks
of internship
100% 1.65 students
on internship
2.) 65 Faculties
on Supervision
-
DLR 2.5
Accreditation
1.Internal
Accreditation
(Mock)
2.NUC
Resource
Verification
0%
1.Delay in
funding
2.NUC has no
benchmark
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

7. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT
OBTAINED
REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.6
Research
Publications
No. of papers
published
0% Students’
Research yet to
start
DLR 2.7
Externally
Generated
Revenue
Amount of
Revenue
generated
100%
N10,250,000
$52,030.50
DLR 2.8
Improved
Teaching &
Learning
Environment
No. of Faculties
upgraded/renov
ated/provided.
Hostel/Creche/
Book/Cleaning
0% 0 Funding
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

8. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT
OBTAINED
REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 3 DLR 3.1
Timely
withdrawal
application
No. of timely
withdrawal
100% 1 timely
withdrawal
application
for 1st dis-
bursement
Preparing
Interim financial
Report for
December, 2015
DLR 3.2
Functional
University
Audit
Committee
No. of Reports
0% 0
No meeting
yet??
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

9. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT
OBTAINED
REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 3 DLR 3.3
Functional
internal audit
No. of Reports
100%
Several
reports -
DLR 3.4
Web
transparency
on financial
management
Timely and full
disbursement in
website. - 0
Awaiting for
external audit
report
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

10. DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTEDRESULTS
% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-
DATE
RESULT
OBTAINED
REMARKS:
EXPLANATION
DLI 4 DLR 4.1
Third party
Procurement
Verification
1.) Procurement
Plan
2.) Appointed
procurement
Consultant.
3.) No. of
Procurements
verified
1. 100%
2. 0%
3. 0%
1.) Plan
approved
Funding delay
DLR 4.2
Timeliness of
Procurement
Process
1.) Procurement
Plan
2.) No. of
Procurements
completed as
scheduled on Plan
1. 100%
2. 0%
1.) Plan
approved
Funding delay
Status of Implementation of
Activities – Cont’d

11. 2015 ACE IMPLEMENTATION
MONITORING FORM

12. Date and Period of
Reporting:
May 2015 –
November, 2015
Issues Comments
Did you undertake
a kick off meeting
with all partners?
Yes, in the form of
stakeholders meeting
Were stakeholders
included in kick off
meeting?
YES

13. Are coordination,
management and
financing arrangements
clearly defined and do they
support institutional
strengthening and local
ownership?
•Depending on the role of
the partner in the project.
•Institutional partners for
lectures and supervision
•Industry partners
internship & supervision
What reporting
arrangements are in place
between you and the
partners?
•Partners coordinators
report to Programme
Leader Director.
•Academic Board /
Management Board.

14. What monitoring
arrangements are in
place/envisaged?
Role for M & E
What management tool are
you using, if any? Does it
incorporate the activity
section of the IP? Does it
constantly relate and reflect
the DLIs
Regular meeting
of Board

15. Is the timescale and/or
range of activities realistic?
Do you think a review is
necessary?
Not often realistic
especially
procurements.
A review is
necessary
To what extent are
activities implemented as
scheduled? If there are
delays how are they
rectified?
For academic
activities –Yes

16. Are funds committed and
spent in line with the
implementation plan?
Are there any variations?
What are the reasons?
Yes.The Accounting
software is rigid on pre
budgeted amount. However
when it come to spending on
research – variation
Have all planned outputs
been delivered to date?
And in a logic sequence?
Academic activities –Yes
Procurement – No
Have the planned results
to date been achieved?
Academic –Yes

17. Are the DLIs/results
appropriate and are
they being reported
against?
The DLIs are appropriate
and reported against
Have all planned
target groups access
to / using project
results/services
available so far?
Target groups have
access. No project
results yet. Our students
are designing their
research to solve
problems

18. Are there any factors
which prevent target
groups accessing the
results/services?
None
If appropriate, how
flexible is the project in
adapting to changing
needs/circumstances?
Not very flexible in
terms of financial
commitments