 |
|
|
|
M&E Inputs to Project Management
For Monitoring and Evaluation Units (MEU) to be as effective as possible requires that the data collection and analysis system established provides a continuing input into the management of the project. Project officers involved in M&E need a minimum level of skills to provide such an input. In west Africa there has been a mixed experience with MEUs, both in terms of the reporting and the analysis of project progress and achievements. The first requirement of an MEU is often to produce a baseline survey, but this can be a very heavy load for a unit which is just being established.
The Ghana CPE commented favourably on the contribution that MEUs had made to the projects reviewed, but added that monitoring systems in most projects had not been fully utilised as management tools. In general, reporting was found to have been more quantitative than qualitative, and the development of impact indicators and beneficiary assessments was lacking. In Liberia, (063-LI) the CE found that the M&E unit had never had the confidence of management; it had not produced useful reports and had taken 45 months to produce an inadequate baseline survey. The CE concluded that it in this instance it would have been useful to employ long term TA to establish the M&E requirements and provide the MIS for project management. This situation arose because trained staff were not available at the beginning of the project. In the Magbosi Integrated Agricultural Development Project in Sierra Leone (021 SL) the MEU was the first one to be placed in the project organisation, rather than the Ministry. This unit performed adequately, but took four years to produce the baseline survey. In The Gambia (077-GA) the M&E system functioned reasonably well and identified most of the internal constraints facing the project, but failed completely to report on the external factors which were affecting farmers priorities and influencing project implementation. In Nigeria (177-NR) the I.E. concluded that the MIS system needed to be redesigned to better serve the needs of project management.
The main problems identified above are caused by the lack of adequately trained staff at the beginning of the project implementation and the inability to clearly define reporting and analysis requirements so that the information can be directly used by project management. An inescapable conclusion would appear to be that IFAD (and project design teams) place insufficient emphasis on the requirements for M&E, so that the priority assigned to M&E activities is too low. Another reason may be that there is a reluctance by recipient governments to create separate M&E units because staff could be difficult to re-absorb into government departments at the end of the project.
- Ideally M&E reports should become an integral part of management planning. This means M&E officers should be fully integrated into the management team, producing timely reports for planning purposes. External evaluation may then be necessary.
- Where staff numbers or capabilities are initially inadequate, then the MEU does not have much chance of establishing itself as a useful contributor to project management. It can therefore lose status and effectiveness within the PMU. In addition, baseline surveys are likely to be inadequate. This needs to be addressed by allowances for TA and training of project M&E staff in the early stages of implementation. Where staff capacity is initially inadequate, consideration should be given to seconding staff from ongoing IFAD funded projects in the same Region.
References:
1. The Gambia - Jahaly and Pacharr Smallholder Development Project, 077-GA% R077GACE, Completion Evaluation, 1994.
2. Ghana - Country Portfolio Evaluation, CPE96%CESGH96E, IFAD, 1996.
3. Liberia - Smallholder Rice Seed Development Project, 063-LI%R063LICE, Completion Evaluation, 1989.
4. Sierra Leone - Magbosi Integrated Agricultural development Project, 021-SL, Mid-term Evaluation, 1984.
