APR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan Perez


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

APR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan Perez

  1. 1.  Annual Performance Review and South-South Cooperation Event 1-6 November 2010 Nanning, China
  2. 2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation <ul><li>Outline </li></ul><ul><li>Review of the PM&E definition </li></ul><ul><li>Why the need for PM&E </li></ul><ul><li>Participation within the PM&E </li></ul><ul><li>PM&E experience in WMCIP & NMCIREMP </li></ul><ul><li>- why </li></ul><ul><li>- how </li></ul><ul><li>- what (concepts, tools & applications, benefits, </li></ul><ul><li>learning, success factors, challenges) </li></ul><ul><li>- who </li></ul><ul><li>Policy recommendation to IFAD </li></ul>
  3. 3. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation <ul><li>What is PM&E? </li></ul><ul><li>PM&E is a process where stakeholders at various levels (i.e., local people, policy makers, development agencies, implementing government ministries) undertake monitoring (measuring, recording, collecting information) and evaluation (analyzing and communicating information) of a particular project, program or policy, distribute control over the content (objectives, indicators), the process (methods, timing, workload, evaluation design) and the results (positive and negative changes, issues) of M and E, and collaborative in pinpointing and acting on corrective actions. (Oakley, 1988; World Bank 2008; Jackson and Kassam, p.3) </li></ul>
  4. 4. Why the need for PM&E… <ul><li>Recent developments impacting M&E </li></ul><ul><li>Macro level </li></ul><ul><li>(a) International initiatives (i.e.,Millennium Development Goals [MDGs], Highly Indebted Poor Country [HIPC] Initiative, World Trade Organization [WTO] membership, the National Poverty Reduction Strategy Approach); and, </li></ul><ul><li>(b) internal schemes (i.e., decentralization, deregulation, bureaucratic downsizing) in public sector management </li></ul><ul><li>These occurrences have pushed to the forefront a critical developmental question: </li></ul><ul><li>Are desired results and outcomes in the sector and national levels being achieved by policies, programs, and projects implemented by governments? Because of these the need for a development paradigm evolved that accentuated results, partnership (government, private sector, and civil society), coordination, accountability, ownership, sustainability). </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>The need for “M&E of outcomes” at the national and global levels led to the birth of Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation (RBME), which builds on conventional M&E’s assessment of implementation quality of inputs and outputs (the “what, why and how”) by adding a greater focus on outcomes and impacts (the “so what”) for a country. </li></ul><ul><li>Micro level of Projects - RBME included elements that could help address the lack of real local participation in M&E: </li></ul><ul><li>i) added emphasis on stakeholder perceptions of change </li></ul><ul><li>ii) more qualitative progress information on outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>iii) collaboration with strategic partners, and </li></ul><ul><li>iv) assessment of partnership success </li></ul>
  6. 6. Who wants to know what has changed? <ul><li>Government </li></ul><ul><li>Funding institutions/donors </li></ul><ul><li>Non-Government Organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Community institutions/beneficiaries </li></ul><ul><li>Private organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Civil society </li></ul><ul><li>Others </li></ul>
  7. 7. Participation within the PM&E Cycle Governments, FIs, local people Project Identification and Preparation Completion and “ End-Evaluation” Appraisal and Approval Becomes part of design and budget: capacity dev’t, intentional activities for local people Implementation Project management follow through: mentoring, counterparting PM&E Cycle Decide who participates Take action Share results (RQ 2) Analyze results Gather information Develop forms and indicators Establish goals Co-decision maker Co-developer Co-analyst Co-collector Participation
  8. 8. Why “community” PM&E was implemented <ul><li>Recommendation of the IFAD Supervision Mission (WMCIP) </li></ul><ul><li>Participatory M&E included in the project design (NMCIREMP) </li></ul><ul><li>M & E manual </li></ul>
  9. 9. How was it implemented <ul><li>Engaged NGOs </li></ul><ul><li>Conduct capability building training with local partners </li></ul><ul><li>(i.e., barangay LGUs, IP leaders) </li></ul><ul><li>Pilot test (i.e., WMCIP) </li></ul>
  10. 10. PM&E Cycle at Community Level Feedback & lessons learned <ul><li>Co-developer </li></ul><ul><li>Co-collector </li></ul><ul><li>Co-analyst </li></ul><ul><li>Co-decision maker </li></ul>Evaluation Completion Implementation Monitoring Re-planning/ Adjustments
  11. 11. NMCIREMP/WMCIP PM&E Concepts and Processes <ul><li>Beneficiaries and local stakeholders participates in: </li></ul><ul><li>selection of indicators to be monitored </li></ul><ul><li>conduct monitoring on sub-projects/activities implemented in their area </li></ul><ul><li>collect and analyze data/information gathered </li></ul><ul><li>Adjust/redesign implementation scheme </li></ul><ul><li>Submit findings/results to regular Project structures to form part of the regular M & E system at the Project level </li></ul>
  12. 12. Who were involved? <ul><li>Self-help group members </li></ul><ul><li>Community institutions members </li></ul><ul><li>Barangay/LGU officials </li></ul><ul><li>Project Implementing Team Members </li></ul><ul><li>NGO staff </li></ul><ul><li>Local Community Volunteers </li></ul><ul><li>Other community members </li></ul>
  13. 13. PM&E tools and its applications <ul><li>SIHAGA (Self Help Group Assessment) – evaluation of SHG maturity performance </li></ul><ul><li>OMA (Organizational Maturity Assessment) – evaluation of CI maturity </li></ul><ul><li>FS and DED (Feasibility Studies and Detailed Engineering Designs) – measurement of construction progress and quality control </li></ul><ul><li>Simple Business Plans – monitoring & evaluation of sales and marketing efficiency </li></ul><ul><li>NGOs Performance Evaluation/Assessment – assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the NGOs in terms of providing the expected services/assistance to the beneficiaries </li></ul>
  14. 14. What are the PM&E benefits? <ul><li>Enhanced project beneficiaries’ capacity to implement, monitor, & evaluate local development initiatives; </li></ul><ul><li>Enhanced feed backing mechanisms and systems at the community level; </li></ul><ul><li>Learn from experiences and replicate best practices </li></ul><ul><li>Enhanced effectiveness and efficiency (ensuring inputs are on time and at cost) in sub-project implementation at the community level because monitoring, analysis of data, and feed backing are being done in less time needed and undertaken by the beneficiaries and stakeholders themselves. </li></ul><ul><li>Consolidate feedback from the beneficiaries on the quality, quantity of services and interventions provided </li></ul><ul><li>Sustainability monitoring (ensuring O & M compliance) for completed community rural infrastructure projects </li></ul>
  15. 15. Learning… <ul><li>PM&E can be developed and used with community participations as long as its design fits with the information needs of the community. </li></ul><ul><li>Increases ownership of the project, a sense of accountability of the project results the communities, and could improve overall project activities and outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Need for continuous capacity building – requires understanding of the tools but an overall understanding of community dynamics; needs regular capacity building training; fields exposures, on-the-job training </li></ul><ul><li>Community leaders are more effective facilitators </li></ul><ul><li>PM&E allows for better results, gives continuity and sustainability to projects beyond project life because the beneficiaries participated in designing the system based on criteria they have chosen rather than imposed indicators </li></ul>
  16. 16. Contributing success factors <ul><li>Operates/mainstreamed within the existing structure of DAR </li></ul><ul><li>Operates within the context of a multi-level MES (project, program, sector (AR/RD) levels) </li></ul><ul><li>Operates in a continuum (from project design to post-project completion </li></ul><ul><li>Support funds from IFAD and ENRAP-IDRC </li></ul>
  17. 17. Challenges… <ul><li>not all those who were trained became facilitators (e.g., lack the skill) </li></ul><ul><li>attendance in PM&E related activities </li></ul><ul><li>needs time </li></ul><ul><li>some tools are not applicable for those who cannot read and write </li></ul>
  18. 18. Policy recommendations to IFAD <ul><li>The participatory M&E system should form part of the design of regular M&E systems of development projects funded by IFAD and other donors/funding institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Sufficient funds should be allocated to PM&E to allow flexibility to attain the desired result. The project funds estimated for M& E were insufficient. Funds for other M&E activities were sourced from grants (IFAD, ENRAP-IDRC) </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>Maraming salamat po! </li></ul>