1 MONITORING & EVALUATION FOR CDD OPERATIONS BEYOND THE RHETORIC & MYTHS Susan Wong EASSD/EACIQ.
-
Upload
vanessa-watts -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of 1 MONITORING & EVALUATION FOR CDD OPERATIONS BEYOND THE RHETORIC & MYTHS Susan Wong EASSD/EACIQ.
1
MONITORING & EVALUATION FOR CDD OPERATIONS
BEYOND THE RHETORIC & MYTHSSusan Wong
EASSD/EACIQ
2
Favorite Top 5 Myths:
1. “CDD will solve all our development problems”
2. “One size fits all, one instrument fits all…”3. “M + E = PR”4. “Just push a button & all your information
problems will be solved”5. “Fix the format and that will solve the
problem.”
3
Monitoring & Evaluation
Monitoring Project managers learn what works, what
doesn’t, and why. Measure progress against workplans
Provide feedback for real time decision-making
Evaluation What impact are we having? Have we reached
the project’s stated goals over the long term?
4
State of M&E
Bank review found that only 5-10% of Bank projects had sound evaluation plans, including defined impact indicators and comparison groups. (Ezemenari et al, 2000)
Document review of 34 ongoing EAP/CDD projects found that 7 projects or 20% had baseline, comparison groups, qualitative work
5
What Do We Normally Monitor?
Progress against workplan (inputs, outputs)
Examples: Are funds being used as planned? Are poor, women, and vulnerable groups
participating in the process?
6
What Do We Usually Measure in CDD for Impact?
Poverty/ Welfare Dimensions Has CDD been effective at reducing poverty?
Does it reach the poor effectively?
Infrastructure Has CDD improved access to services, quality,
utilization? Are CDD projects cost effective compared to
other service delivery mechanisms?
7
Local Governance/ Empowerment Do CDD projects promote changes in local governance
and empowerment? transparency, participation, inclusion esp. of women
and vulnerable groups, accountability, greater demand for improved service delivery, satisfaction w/services
Social Dynamics Increases in social capital, conflict resolution
8
Issues & Constraints Faced
Measuring multiple results in CDD (multi-sectoral, measuring empowerment…)
Lack of in-country specialized skills and capacity esp. for impact evaluations
Limited government commitment to evaluation
Timing
Costs – who foots the bill? Many are paid thru TFs
Need to do a better job of using information from M&E keep the info relevant and flowing
9
These constraints can be overcome….
… but it takes effort, some ingenuity
… and money!
10
How Are We Monitoring?
Examples of monitoring mechanisms in some EAP/CDD projects:
Internal project monitoring, information systems
Independent monitoring by civil society groups, village committees
Grievance & complaint resolution mechanisms
Case studies
Supervision
11
Community Participatory Monitoring in Aceh
12
Training for Independent NGO Monitors
13
How Do We Evaluate?
Key Guiding Principles in Impact Evaluation:
Comparison/control groups – the counterfactual
Baseline data
Quantitative & Qualitative methods
14
Evaluation Tools
Some tools for evaluating in EAP/CDD projects:
Household surveys
Qualitative case study work
Cost effectiveness & EIRR analyses
External thematic evaluations (procurement, micro-finance, quality of infrastructure, etc.)
Audits
15
Examples from Indonesia
Kecamatan Development Project For KDP1, spent $2.4 million out of loan (<1%) over 4 years
for M&E. For KDP2, $2.9 million.
Monitoring – field monitoring, community part.mon, case studies, NGO/journalist independent monitoring, grievance/complaints, financial reviews, supervisions
Evaluation – impact survey, audits, special thematic studies (infra, loans, cost-effectiveness, corruption, communications)
Studies – “shine a light on dark areas”
16
Some KDP Evaluation Findings:
Cost effectiveness – avge 56% less expensive than equivalent works under Min of Public Works
High rates of return – avge EIRR 39% to 68% High quality infrastructure – 2004 independent
evaluation found that 94% of 108 projects sampled were ranked good or v. good technical quality. Wider evaluation for KDP2 due out in May 2005
Quick Disbursing – over last 4 FYs, KDP had on avge a 25% higher disbursement ratio than RD projects; 34% higher disbursement ratio than HD projects.
17
KDP Evaluation Findings (cont)
Poverty/welfare impacts – 1st stage targeting indicates pro-poor targeting. Insufficient data available for poverty targeting w/in kecamatan. Per capita expenditures in KDP vs. non-KDP areas show increases. (Preliminary data, Alatas
forthcoming) Participation – Participation in KDP activities shows
increases over the years, esp. for women in decision-making meetings.
Corruption – Audits show leakage <2% of project costs. High buy-in & satisfaction among communities, central
and local governments.
18
Examples Using the Information
Example 1: Economic Loan Portfolio Evaluations showed poor performance in KDP1 led
to complete redesign for KDP2
Example 2: 2004 Corruption Study Randomized interventions for: (a) increasing
community participation in monitoring; (b) increasing probability of external audits
600 villages in East/Central Java,road projects Methodology and findings to be incorporated into next
project cycle, e.g. written invitations & accounts
19Corruption Study (photos courtesy of Ben Olken)
20
Philippines KALAHI Baseline Courtesy of Rob Chase, SDV
Phasing - 3rd Phase treatment municipalities - Before project starts in those municipalities Sampling - 4 survey provinces - Using existing data, match 2 treatment municipalities and 2 control municipalities in each province - Visited 2,400 HH - HH survey and barangay official survey Measuring impact on: - Poverty, access, empowerment & governance
21
Take Aways (& what I would have done differently)
Tap into Trust Funds! M&E takes an enormous amount of time & different
levels of expertise. Hire specialized assistance for certain areas (e.g. impact surveys).
On MIS, start w/ the basics & add the bells and whistles later. Keep it as simple as possible.
Ensure that information flows in multiple directions. Think thru the levels of information needs. Take the
time to find out what those needs are. Embed results and M&E findings into mgmt decision-
making.