Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 MONITORING AND EVALUATION: ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE Presentation by: Chris O. Itsede ( Ph.D ) Director General WAIFEM At the Conference on Monitoring.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 MONITORING AND EVALUATION: ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE Presentation by: Chris O. Itsede ( Ph.D ) Director General WAIFEM At the Conference on Monitoring."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 MONITORING AND EVALUATION: ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE Presentation by: Chris O. Itsede ( Ph.D ) Director General WAIFEM At the Conference on Monitoring and Evaluation in Nigeria Legislature, held in Lokoja, Nigeria, 10 th – 13 th March, 2007

2 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20072 FLIGHT PATH SECTION 1-INTRODUCTION SECTION 2-CONCEPT OF MONITORING SECTION 3-RATIONNALE FOR MONITORING SECTION 4-TYPES OF MONITORING SECTION 5-CONCEPT OF EVALUATION

3 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20073 FLIGHT PATH (CONTD.) SECTION 6-WHY EVALUATE A PROJECT? SECTION 7-EVALUATION PROCEDURES SECTION 8-CONSTRAINTS TO EFFECTIVE M & E SECTION 9-SUCCESS FACTORS FOR EFFECTIVE M&E SECTION 10-ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE SECTION 11-KITTING UP FOR M & E

4 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20074 1. INTRODUCTION Profile of the Sub-Saharan African Economy Macro instability - high inflation Slow growth High unemployment Poor infrastructure Heavy government involvement in the production chain

5 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20075 INTRODUCTION (CONTD.) Scant attention placed on Monitoring and Evaluation in the past littered the landscape of public programs/projects: White elephants Abandoned projects Inflated contracts Scant attention to environmental impact assessment (EIA) (often triggers resistance/rejection Delay in project completion Cost overrun → abandonment

6 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20076 INTRODCUTION (CONTD.) Policy responses to reverse trend: PRSP, NEEDS, Visions, all with a heavy dose of public investment programs Need for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

7 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20077 2. CONCEPT OF MONITORING Process of continuous or periodic assessment of programme/project implementation, identify problems and proffer remedial actions. Involves a 2-way learning and accountability process entailing a bi-directional flow of information between project stakeholders. Connotes the process of observing, measuring, recording, collating, processing information for necessary decision/action.

8 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20078 3. RATIONALE FOR MONITORING Provides information on the state of play of programme/project vis-à-vis original plan and costs. Identifies constraints to implementation and suggests solutions. Tends to put stakeholders on their toes. Enhances efficient management of resources, accountability, transparency and assures value for money. Feeds into impact assessment at project completion.

9 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/20079 4. TYPES OF MONITORING Programme/Project monitoring may take any or a combination of the following techniques: i) Offsite monitoring -review of documents/data to ensure compliance with approval or plans (Budget Performance)

10 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200710 TYPES OF MONITORING (CONTD.) ii) On-site: -Physical inspection of work done (construction projects) -Monitoring essentially seeks to ensure compliance of project implementation with planned schedule/phases and dates -Inputs conform to quality and quantity and are delivered on schedule.

11 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200711 On-site (Contd.) -Are all parties keeping faith with the plan/schedule? -Have there been changes or modifications? -Were they duly authorised? -What solutions exist for observed lapses?

12 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200712 5. CONCEPT OF EVALUATION Process of assessing a programme/project’s relevance, cost, efficiency, effectiveness and impact in relation to its objective. Track progress towards the overall goal of the programme/project/activity

13 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200713 6. WHY EVALUATE A PROJECT? Provides feedback on relevance, effectiveness, impact, outcomes and sustainability of the programme/project. Feedback could serve as template for adjusting current activities or shaping future ones. Improves the policy formulation process through identification and dissemination of lessons learned.

14 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200714 7. EVALUATION PROCEDURES A) Background Research:  conduct thorough desk research on project.  assemble helpful data and information. B) Questionnaire:  questions must seek to ascertain extent to which project has met objectives, its contribution to ultimate goal.  getting impressions of stakeholders C) Field survey/interview:  validation of responses to questions and forming your own impressions

15 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200715 EVALUATION PROCEDURES (CONTD.) D) Report Writing:  share draft report with key stakeholders to elicit comments, inputs and updates before final report and conclusions.  consultation facilitates acceptance and implementation of recommendations. E)Conduct a follow-up after a reasonable lapse of time.

16 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200716 8.CONSTRAINTS TO EFFECTIVE MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) Poor database about project/activity. Failure to involve stakeholders. Lack of well defined Monitoring and Evaluation framework. Inadequate and untimely resource flows for M & E action Improper coordination by cooperant agencies (some work at cross purposes). Inadequate human, material and financial resources. Lukewarm or hostile disposition of project staff towards M&E officials.

17 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200717 9. SUCCESS FACTORS FOR EFFECTIVE M&E Sound technical knowledge of the activity, programme, project or sector to be monitored or evaluated. Get all stakeholders to buy into M&E process. Involve stakeholders to select/design performance indicators (link funding to level of performance). Agree “success” or “failure” indicators or parameters before the fact (enforceable after the fact). Adequate resourcing of M&E operatives.

18 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200718 SUCCESS FACTORS FOR EFFECTIVE M&E (CONTD.) Timetable should be known to all concerned ab initio. Ensure proper coordination/sequencing with cooperant agencies/institutions. Keep a good database of public investment projects. Sound knowledge of budgeting, procurement and tendering process. Familiarity with due process procedures. M&E process should be economical to avoid adding deadweight costs to the project.

19 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200719 10. ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE Provides the legal framework for M & E. Ensures transparency, accountability and value for money in public projects. Optimisation of public investment programme (US Co). Provides a second opinion on public projects.

20 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200720 ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE (CONTD.) Ensures projects conform to local and international standards/regulations. Ensures adequate and timely resourcing of approved projects. Follows up on recommendations of previous M&E to ascertain level of implementation.

21 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200721 11. KITTING UP FOR M & E Got the legal backing? Got the organisational framework in place? How about the human resource complement? (Establish a multi-discipline back office with cutting edge skills). What about the infrastructure, including the soft and hardware?

22 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200722 KITTING UP FOR M & E (CONTD.) Have adequate financial and other special resources been provided for? Is the source of funding of the M & E process free from encumberances? Build sustainable capacity for back office operations including M & E. Leverage modern ICT in M & E operations. Professionalise the M & E function

23 dr.itsede/m&e/lokoja/200723 Thank You


Download ppt "1 MONITORING AND EVALUATION: ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE Presentation by: Chris O. Itsede ( Ph.D ) Director General WAIFEM At the Conference on Monitoring."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google