Introduction to Project Concept, Lifecycle

2. PROJECT MONITORING &
EVALUATION
By
Prof. Dr. Sajjad Mubin

3. Text and Reference Books
1. Evaluating Development Programmes and Project (2nd Ed.) by Reidar Dale, Sage Publishers (2004)
2. Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for Results, United Nations Development Programme Evaluation
Office, New York (2002)
3. Monitoring & Evaluation: Some Tools, Methods & Approaches published by the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank (2004)
4. Handbook for Monitoring and Evaluation, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
(2002)
5. Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating for development results, UNDP (2009)
6. Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation of Human Resources for Health (with special applications for low-
and middle-income countries) , World Health Organization (2009)
7. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) System for the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development
Programme (CAADP), Working Paper No. 6 (March 2010)
8. Monitoring and Evaluation: A Guidebook for Nutrition Project Managers in Developing Countries by F. James
Levinson published by The World Bank, Human Development Network by International Food and Nutrition
Center, The World Bank (1999)
9. A UNICEF Guide for Monitoring and Evaluation (1984)
10. Monitoring & Evaluation Manual, Project Implementation Unit (PIU), Indian Council of Agricultural Research,
New Delhi (2007)

4. INTRODUCTION TO DEVELOPMENT
SECTOR
Session 1
Session 1

5. PUBLIC FINACIAL MANAGEMENT
National Financial Commission Award
 Earlier in 1991, the financial resources were vertically distributed at a
fixed ratio of 20:80 among federal and provincial governments
 Later in 1991, NFC Award was changed and 63.12% of collected
revenue of taxes were directed to the federal government and 37% to
the four provinces.
 In 2001, allocating ~50% of revenue to the four provinces
 In 2005, the formula was finalized and enacted the award under the
NFC program by the ratio of 52:48.
 In 2009, The seventh NFC award has allotted /enacted 82.98% of
financial grants to four provinces to weight to population, in which
approximately ~10.3% of financial grants shares were asked to be
spend on reduce poverty in the country Under the new formula,
approximately ~51.74% of revenue shares were directed to Punjab;
~24.55% to Sindh; ~14.62% to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa; and ~9.09% to
Balochistan Province; all shares were distributed based upon their
performances.

6. PUBLIC FINACIAL MANAGEMENT
NFC
SHARE
OF
PUNJAB
NON-
DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENT
Core Annual
Development Plan (85%)
Below the Line
(15%)

7. SECTOR-WISE BREAKUP OF DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS OF PUNJAB (2013-14)
Rs. in Million
No.of project
Allocation
(2013-14)
2561 240,000.00
38%
31%
6%
6%
4%
15%
Social sector Infrastructure development
Production Service
other special programe
80,300
Sales
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000
special programe other
Service Production
Infrastructure development Social sector

8. SECTOR-WISE BREAKUP OF DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS OF PUNJAB
A - Social Sectors
i. Education
ii. Health
iii. Water Supply & Sanitation
iv. Social Protection
v. Regional Planning
vi. Local Government & Community
Development
B - Infrastructure Development
i. Roads
ii. Irrigation
iii. Public Buildings
iv. Urban Development
C - Production Sectors
i. Agriculture
ii. Forestry, Wildlife & Fisheries
iii. Food
iv. Livestock
v. Industries
vi. Mines & Minerals
D - Services Sectors
i. Information Technology
ii. Commerce & Investment
iii. Labour & HR Development
iv. Transport
v. Emergency Service
vi. Tourism
E - Others
i. Environment
ii. Information, Culture & Youth Affairs
iii. Auqaf & Religious Affairs
iv. Human Rights & Minority Affairs
v. Access to Justice Programme
vi. Planning & Development
F - Special Programme / Packages
i. Special Infrastructure
ii. Special Packages
iii. Low Income Housing
iv. Population Welfare
ANNUAL
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN 2018-19

9. 1991
3558
3734
4000
6000
7368
8345
9361
14328
17227
19245
21722
24155
27000
30000
46155
69959
103472
113750
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000
Defence
Inter Provincial Coordination
Law and Justice
Science and Technology
Climate Change
P&D and Special Initiatives
Housing and Works
Railways
Kashmir Affair and GB
National Highway Authority
10 July 2023 9
— Total outlay of the PSDP for the fiscal year 2020-21 is Rs 2.1 trillion
— The share of federal PSDP is Rs 900 billion while that of provincial PSDP is Rs
1.235 trillion.
HIGHLIGHTS OF ALLOCATIONS PSDP 2020-21

10. DEVELOPMENT PORTFOLIO OF PUNJAB (2021-22)
10 July 2023 10

11. PUBLIC SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
 The world “development” is used in numerous contexts. In all these
contexts, it denotes some kind of change. Therefore, most briefly
stated, development is viewed as a process of “societal change”. It
may also express a state that has been attained through some
noticeable change, for instance, improvement in literacy rate &
health of general public, improvement in socio-economic
conditions of the public, improvement in transportation system,
improvement in IT skills of targeted beneficiaries, reduction in
poverty etc.
 This change occurs due to certain “intervention” called
development project.

12. PUBLIC SECTOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
 Development projects are initiated with intent of providing
multipurpose services. Besides providing basic necessities
related to health, education, transportation, water &
sanitation and housing, provide services to general public,
generate revenue and employment.
 Although the performance of public sector development
projects has been improved in many aspects over the years
however, their Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems, in
particular needs to be improved at various level of project
execution.

14. ……cont….
Some Basic Difference Between Privately Owned and Publicly Owned Projects
Description Private Public
Purpose Provide goods and / or services at a
profit; maximize profit or minimize cost
Protect health, Protect lives and property; Provide
services (at no profit); Provide jobs
Sources of capital Private investors and lenders Taxation; Private lenders
Method of financing Individual ownership; Partnerships;
Corporation
Direct payment of taxes; Loans without interest;
Loans at low interest; Self-liquidating bonds;
Indirect subsidies; Guarantee of private loans
Multiple purpose Moderate Common (e.g. reservoir project for flood control,
electrical power generation, irrigation, recreation,
education)
Project life Usually relatively short (5 to 20 years) Usually relatively long (20 to 60 years)
Relationship of suppliers
of capital to project
Direct Indirect, or none
Nature of “benefits” Monetary or relatively easy to equate to
monetary terms
Often non-monetary, difficult to quantify, difficult
to equate to monetary terms
Beneficiaries of project Primarily, entity undertaking project General Public
Conflict of purpose Moderate Quite common (dam for flood control vs.
environmental preservation)
Conflict of interests Moderate Quite common (between agencies)
Effect of politics Little to moderate Frequent factors; Short-term tenure groups;
Financial and residential restrictions, etc.
Measurement of
efficiency
Rate of return on capital Very difficult; No direct comparison with private
projects

15. From 34 indicators
• on track on 11
• off track on 23
15

16. Problematic Projects: Bulk Water Supply
Project
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
1,926
8,440
7427
In
Millions
Cost Delay
Starting Year Initial
Gestation
Period
Actual Year of
completion
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2005
2007
2017
In
Years
Time Delay
Initial
Approved
Cost
Revised
Cost
Remaining
Cost

17. CONCEPTUALIZING PROJECT LIFECYCLE
• The Project Lifecycle has four
phases: Initiation, Planning,
Execution and Closure.
• The Project lifecycle provides
stakeholders and team
members with visibility,
synchronization points, and
decision points throughout the
project.
October, 2020 17

18. Project Initiation
Project Planning
Approval
Project Execution
Origination
Impact/
Degree
of risk
PC-I
Preparation
Efforts/
Cost
Time
Concept
Clearance
(PC-II)
Execution of project
(Design,
Erection/Installation/Construction)
Termination
Planning
phase
Degree of risk
Cumulative
Cost
Project Closure
Project
Terminal
Evaluation
(PC-IV)
PC-I
Approved
(PDWP)
Implementation
Project
Performance
Monitoring
(PC-III)
Project
Impact
Evaluation
(PC-V)
Pre-PDWP
Project
Scrutiny
(Project
Appraisal)
18
PROJECT LIFECYCLE
(Public Sector Projects)

19. INTRODUCTION TO
MONITORING & EVALUATION
Session 2
Session 2

20. What is Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E)?
• The body of social science known as evaluative research is the
systematic collection of information on design, implementation
and effect on targeted populations (Rossi and Freeman, 1993).
• Ideally, the process is divided into ongoing monitoring system
and periodic evaluation with some special studies designed to
answer specific questions about project.
• Monitoring and Evaluation are distinct through related efforts,
with different overall objectives and therefore, require to
differently designed systems.

21. NEEDS FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATION
• Constrained development budget
• Ever-rising expectations from citizens
• Quantity and quality of public services..
• Sustainability of projects and continuity of service delivery
• Efficiency and effectiveness
• Transparency, accountability and good governance.
• Project Learning / lesson learnt
• Desire for curbing and controlling corruption and other
leakages
• Growing requirements from international donors, banks etc
To achieve this objective, governments are increasing the
utilization of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system to
significantly improve the performance of public policies,
public programs and projects.

22. IMPORTANCE OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION
• M&E has become an essential
element of Good Governance.
• Therefore, M&E systems are
developed, overhauled and
strengthened.
• M&E systems ensures improvement
in performance / results /
effectiveness of public projects.
• Level of M&E and project success are
mapped in World Bank projects.
72%
75%
55%
30%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Highly
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Moderately
Unsatisfactory
Moderately
Satisfactory
Satisfactory
Highly
Satisfactory
.

23. WHY TO MONITOR & EVALUATE?
 To assess an a policy, project or programme’s
performance;
 To analyse how objectives are being met and are
resulting in desired changes;
 To learn how different approaches analyzes the
program/projects’ outcomes and impact;
 To understand stakeholders’ perspectives;
 To ensure the program/project accountability;
 To improve program/project management and process
planning;
 To learn lessons for future planning.

24. M&E SYSTEM
1. Performance monitoring process on the supply side i.e. focus
on activity wise input and output.
2. Evaluation process on the demand side response and it
requires baseline data and surveys with a focus on
outcomes. (Has to be handled by an independent agency).
3. Learning and Knowledge management to replicate best
practices &/or highlight failures.
* Source: Presentation by Mr. Assaye Legesse of the World Bank at the NAIP Workshop on Monitoring &
Evaluation System on August 9, 2007
** Demystification i.e. to explore or to remove mystery surrounding something

25. M&E Discusses;
• Measure the stages; inputs, processes, outputs, outcomes and
impacts for development projects/programs
Performance Indicators
• Clarify the objectives of a project/program or policy, identify
performance indicators at each stage along with risks involved in
achieving objectives
Logical Framework Approach
• Similar to the Logical Framework Approach but corresponds to the in-
depth understanding of the project/programs’ working
Theory-based Evaluation
• It can be used to collect standardized information from a carefully
selected sample of people or households
Formal Surveys

26. • A quick & low cost formal method of collecting data to provide
context and interpretation for quantitative along with qualitative
data
Rapid Appraisal Method
• Active involvement in decision making process for those with a
stake in a project/program and generate a sense of ownership in
the M&E results and recommendations
Participatory Methods
• Track the flow of public funds and determine the extent at which the
resources are utilized, provide evidence for delays & leakages etc
Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys
• Assess whether or not the costs of an activity can be justified by the
outcomes and impacts.
Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

27. • Cost-benefit analysis measures both inputs and outputs in
monetary terms
• Cost-effectiveness analysis estimates inputs in monetary terms
and outcomes in non-monetary quantitative terms
Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
• A systematic identification of the effects-positive or negative,
intended or not
• Informing decisions on whether to expand or modify the
project/program
• Drawing the lessons for improving the design and management
of future activities
Impact Evaluation

28. M&E IN A PROJECT CYCLE
Identification of
Project
Formulation of
Project
Approval of Project
Execution of
Project
Monitoring of Project
Leaned/Decide
/Adjust
Completion of
Project
Evaluation of
Project

29. MONITORING
• Monitoring is concerned primarily with the ongoing collection
and review of information on project implementation,
coverage and use by collecting information on a regular basis
throughout the life of a project a
• Monitoring system can be used to assess the quality of
project inputs and services, the timeline of service delivery,
the degree to which the targeted individuals and communities
are reached, the acceptability and actual use of services, the
costs involved in implementing the program, and the extent
to which actual implementation coincides with the project’s
implementation plan. An effective monitoring system also
provides an important input for project staff supervision.

30. MONITORING*
• A continuing function that uses systematic
collection of data on specified indicators to
provide management and the main
stakeholders of an ongoing development
intervention with indications of the extent of
progress and achievement of objectives and
progress in the use of allocated funds. (OECD
DAC Glossary).
*Guidelines for Project and Programme Evaluations, Australian Development Cooperation, 2009

31. TYPES OF MONITORING & ITS PROCEDURE
 Internal Monitoring
 External Monitoring
Provincial Level Monitoring placed under;
 Planning & Development Board
The P&D Board collects the progress reports on the following
prescribed performa in respect of all ADP projects from the
concerned departments/agencies;
1. Monthly Progress Report (P-III a)
2. Quarterly Progress Report (P-III b)
3. Annually Progress Report (P-III c)
 Chief Minister’s Inspection Team
The team carries out monitoring and inspection of specific
development projects on the direction of Chief Minister and
reports are submitted for further follow-up action.

32. M&E WORKING
Project
Start
Project
Finish
Set Project
Objectives
(Planned)
E E
M M M
M
Actual Project
Objectives
(Achieved)
Time
(Gestation
Period)

33. EVALUATION
• General Definition
i. Evaluation = Process of judging the merit or worth of something.
ii. Qualitative aspect of determining the outcomes of an activity.
iii. Systematic process of determining the extent to which objectives
are achieved.
iv. Evaluation is the systematic assessment of the worth or merit of
some object.
v. Accurately measuring quantity and quality of things.
vi. Evaluation is the systematic acquisition and assessment of
information to provide useful feedback about some object.
• Project or Program Evaluation
Project or Program evaluation is a systematic method for collecting,
analyzing, and using information to answer basic questions about
policies, targets v/s achievement, financial and physical
performance and impact of project or programs.

34. EVALUATION*
• The systematic and objective assessment of an
on-going or completed project or programme,
its design, implementation and results. The
aim is to determine the relevance and
fulfillment of objectives, development
efficiency, effectiveness, impact and
sustainability. (OECD DAC Glossary).
*Guidelines for Project and Programme Evaluations, Australian Development Cooperation, 2009

35. EVALUATION*
• Evaluations are generally conducted by independent, external
experts.
• An evaluation analyses complex issues and captures intended
and unintended effects. Evaluations investigate the reasons
why certain aspects of a project or programme have or have
not been implemented as planned.
• Evaluations are carried out either during the project cycle
(Mid-term Evaluation, Formative Evaluation) or at the end of a
project or programme (Ex-post Evaluation, Final Evaluation,
Impact Evaluation, Summative Evaluation)
*Guidelines for Project and Programme Evaluations, Australian Development Cooperation, 2009

36. TYPES OF EVALUATION
There are many different types of evaluations depending on the
object being evaluated and the purpose of the evaluation.
a) Formative evaluations strengthen or improve the object being
evaluated -- they help to examine the delivery of the program or
technology, the quality of its implementation, and the
assessment of the organizational context, personnel, procedures,
inputs, and so on.
a) Summative evaluations, in contrast, examine the effects or
outcomes of some object -- they summarize it by describing
what happens subsequent to delivery of the program or
technology; assessing whether the object can be said to have
caused the outcome; determining the overall impact of the
factor beyond only the immediate target outcomes; and
estimating the relative costs associated with the intervention.

37. TYPES OF EVALUATION
1. FORMATIVE EVALUATION includes:
 needs assessment determines who needs the program, how
great the need is, and what might work to meet the need.
 evaluability assessment determines whether an evaluation
is feasible and how stakeholders can help shape its
usefulness.
 structured conceptualization helps stakeholders define the
program or technology, the target population, and the
possible outcomes.
 implementation evaluation monitors the fidelity of the
program or technology delivery.
 process evaluation investigates the process of delivering the
program or technology, including alternative delivery
procedures

38. TYPES OF EVALUATION (Cont’d)
2. SUMMATIVE EVALUATION can also be subdivided:
 outcome evaluations investigate whether the program or
technology caused demonstrable effects on specifically
defined target outcomes.
 impact evaluation is broader and assesses the overall or
net effects -- intended or unintended -- of the program or
technology as a whole
 cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis address
questions of efficiency by standardizing outcomes in terms
of their dollar costs and values
 secondary analysis reexamines existing data to address new
questions or use methods not previously employed
 meta-analysis integrates the outcome estimates from
multiple studies to arrive at an overall or summary
judgment on an evaluation question.

39. TYPES OF EVALUATION (Cont’d)
• Pre-approval Evaluation (project appraisal)
Evaluating the availability of all types of inputs including money,
men material, machinery, finance, project design time frame and
location etc
• On-going Evaluation/Monitoring (PC-III)
It is carried out during the execution of the project with the
objective to keep a stage-by-stage watch upon the project
• Terminal/Performance Evaluation (PC-IV)
It is carried out after the completion of the project to evaluate all
physical and financial inputs involved vis-a-vis actual achievements.
Directorate General (M&E) of P&D Department carries out this
evaluation
• Impact Evaluation (PC-V)
It aims assessing the impact of the project to the beneficiaries of
the project area after one or more than one years project
implementation. Directorate General (M&E) of P&D Department
conducts this evaluation

40. MONITORING V/S EVALUATION
Session 3
Session 3

41. Monitoring Evaluation
Regular, Continuous: day-to-day Periodic: (e.g. Post Project)
Routine collection of information In-depth analysis of achievements and impact
Measuring project performance and
progress
Measuring impacts
Focuses on inputs, activities and leads
towards intended outputs
Starts on output, focuses on outcomes and
impacts
Alerts managers & gives solution for
problem solving
Provides managers with strategy and policy
options
Self-assessment Third Party/ External analysis
Measuring efficiency Measures effectiveness , confirming project
benefits and expectations
Tracking project implementation progress Ex-post assessment of effectiveness and
impact
Reports to programme managers ,
supervisors, funders, programme
supervisors, funders
programme managers, funders, policy-makers,
beneficiaries community (beneficiaries)
MONITORING vs. EVALUATION

42. MONITORING, EVALUATION OR BOTH
 Assess the quality and quantity of project?
 Assess and review the timelines of project?
 Review implementation of project activities?
 Identify operational constraints to project efficiency and
effectiveness thus helping the planners and managers improve
implementation?
 Determine whether a project is serving intended beneficiaries?
 Provide information to improve targeting ?
 Help to identify the effects that are attributable to a project?
 Provide information which will permit cost effectiveness
comparisons with other projects seeking to accomplish same
objectives?
 To check the relevance of project with national policies and
community demand?
 Asses the cost input of project?

43. MONITORING, EVALUATION OR BOTH
 Meet accountability requirement of donors as well as other
stakeholders?
 Serve a vehicle to increase community participation?
 Which of the following is NOT considered “monitoring”?
– Counting the number of people trained
– Tracking the number of brochures disseminated
– Attributing changes in health outcomes to an intervention
– Collecting monthly data on clients served in a clinic
• Evaluations measure____________
– The timeliness of a program's activities
– The outcomes and impact of a program's activities
– How closely a program kept to its budget
– How well the program was implemented

44. THANK YOU