Tool for M

Views:
 
Category: Education
     
 

Presentation Description

No description available.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

Monitoring & Evaluation:

Monitoring & Evaluation Farrukh Waseem Mirza District Coordinator CIDA-SOHIP Mianwali

Performance Indicators:

Performance Indicators Performance indicators are measures of inputs, processes, outputs, outcomes, and impacts for development projects, programs, or strategies. When supported with sound data collection—perhaps involving formal surveys—analysis and reporting, indicators enable managers to track progress, demonstrate results, and take corrective action to improve service delivery . Participation of key stakeholders in defining indicators is important because they are then more likely to understand and use indicators for Management decision Making.

Performance Indicators:

Performance Indicators Effective means to measure progress toward objectives . Facilitates benchmarking comparisons between different organizational units, districts , and over time. Poorly defined indicators are not good measures of success. Tendency to define too many indicators, or those without accessible data sources, making system costly, impractical, and likely to be underutilized. Often a trade-off between picking the optimal or desired indicators and having to accept the indicators which can be measured using existing data DISADVANTAGES: ADVANTAGES:

The Logical Framework Approach:

The Logical Framework Approach The logical framework ( LogFrame ) helps to clarify objectives of any project, program, or policy. It aids in the identification of the expected causal links—the “ program logic ”—in the following results chain: inputs, processes, outputs (including coverage or “reach ” across beneficiary groups), outcomes, and impact . It leads to the identification of performance indicators at each stage in this chain, as well as risks which might impede the attainment of the objectives. The LogFrame is also a vehicle for engaging partners in clarifying objectives and designing activities. During implementation the LogFrame serves as a useful tool to review progress and take corrective action.

The Logical Framework Approach:

The Logical Framework Approach Ensures that decision-makers ask fundamental questions and analyze assumptions and risks. Engages stakeholders in the planning and monitoring process. When used dynamically, it is an effective management tool to guide implementation, monitoring and evaluation If managed rigidly, stifles creativity and innovation. If not updated during implementation, it can be a static tool that does not reflect changing conditions. Training and follow-up are often required. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Theory-Based Evaluation:

Theory-Based Evaluation Theory-based evaluation has similarities to the Log Frame approach but allows a much more in-depth understanding of the workings of a program or activity—the “program theory” or “program logic.” In particular, it need not assume simple linear cause-and effect relationships.

Theory-Based Evaluation:

Theory-Based Evaluation Provides early feedback about what is or is not working, and why. Allows early correction of problems as soon as they emerge. Assists identification of unintended side-effects of the program. Helps in prioritizing which issues to investigate in greater depth, perhaps using more focused data collection or more sophisticated M&E techniques. Provides basis to assess the likely impacts of programs Can easily become overly complex if the scale of activities is large or if an exhaustive list of factors and assumptions is assembled. Stakeholders might disagree about which determining factors they judge important, which can be time-consuming to address. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Formal Surveys:

Formal Surveys Formal surveys can be used to collect standardized information from a carefully selected sample of people or households. Surveys often collect comparable information for a relatively large number of people in particular target groups.

Formal Surveys:

Formal Surveys Findings from the sample of people interviewed can be applied to the wider target group or the population as a whole. Quantitative estimates can be made for the size and distribution of impacts. With the exception of CWIQ, results are often not available for a long period of time . The processing and analysis of data can be a major bottleneck for the larger surveys even where computers are available. Household surveys are expensive and time-consuming. Many kinds of information are difficult to obtain through formal interviews. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Rapid Appraisal Methods:

Rapid Appraisal Methods Rapid appraisal methods are quick, low-cost ways to gather the views and feedback of beneficiaries and other stakeholders, in order to respond to decision-makers’ needs for information.

Rapid Appraisal Methods:

Rapid Appraisal Methods Low cost. Can be conducted quickly. Provides flexibility to explore new ideas. Findings usually relate to specific communities or localities—thus difficult to generalize from findings. Less valid, reliable, and credible than formal surveys. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Participatory Methods:

Participatory Methods Participatory methods provide active involvement in decision-making for those with a stake in a project, program, or strategy and generate a sense of ownership in the M&E results and recommendations.

Participatory Methods:

Participatory Methods Examines relevant issues by involving key players in the design process. Establishes partnerships and local ownership of projects. Enhances local learning, management capacity, and skills. Provides timely, reliable information for management decision-making. Time-consuming if key stakeholders are involved in a meaningful way. Potential for domination and misuse by some stakeholders to further their own Interests. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys:

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys Public expenditure tracking surveys (PETS) track the flow of public funds and determine the extent to which resources actually reach the target groups. The surveys examine the manner, quantity, and timing of releases of resources to different levels of government, particularly to the units responsible for the delivery of social services such as health and education. PETS are often implemented as part of larger service delivery and facility surveys which focus on the quality of service, characteristics of the facilities , their management, incentive structures, etc .

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys:

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys Supports the pursuit of accountability when little financial information is available. Improves management by pinpointing bureaucratic bottlenecks in the flow of funds for service delivery. Government agencies may be reluctant to open their accounting books. Cost is substantial. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis:

Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis are tools for assessing whether or not the costs of an activity can be justified by the outcomes and impacts. 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:

Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Good quality approach for estimating the efficiency of programs and projects. Makes explicit the economic assumptions that might otherwise remain implicit or overlooked at the design stage. Useful for convincing policy-makers and funders that the benefits justify the activity. Fairly technical, requiring adequate financial and human resources available. Requisite data for cost-benefit calculations may not be available, and projected results may be highly dependent on assumptions made. Results must be interpreted with care, particularly in projects where benefits are difficult to quantify. ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Impact Evaluation:

Impact Evaluation Impact evaluation is the systematic identification of the effects – positive or negative, intended or not – on individual households, institutions, and the environment caused by a given development activity such as a program or project. Impact evaluation helps us better understand the extent to which activities reach the poor and the magnitude of their effects on people’s welfare. Impact evaluations can range from large scale sample surveys in which project populations and control groups are compared before and after, and possibly at several points during program intervention; to small-scale rapid assessment and participatory appraisals where estimates of impact are obtained from combining group interviews, key informants, case studies and available secondary data.

Impact Evaluation:

Impact Evaluation Provides estimates of the magnitude of outcomes and impacts for different demographic groups , regions or over time. Provides answers to some of the most central development questions – to what extent are we making a difference? What are the results on the ground? How can we do better? Systematic analysis and rigor can give managers and policy-makers added confidence in decision-making . Some approaches are very expensive and time-consuming, although faster and more economical approaches are also used. Reduced utility when decision-makers need information quickly. Difficulties in identifying an appropriate counter-factual ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES:

Monitoring & Evaluation Framework Document :

Segment for M&E Framework Monitoring & Evaluation Framework Document

Thanks a lot:

Thanks a lot Any Question

authorStream Live Help