Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
INTRODUCTION
Monitoring
and Evaluation (M&E) is a process that helps improve performance and
achieve results. Its goal is to improve current and future management of
outputs, outcomes and impact. It is mainly used to assess the performance of
projects, institutions and programs set up by governments, international
organizations and NGOs. It establishes links between the past, present and
future actions (World bank, 2007).
Monitoring
is a continuous assessment that aims at providing all stakeholders with early
detailed information on the progress or delay of the ongoing assessed
activities. It is an oversight of the activity's implementation stage. Its
purpose is to determine if the outputs, deliveries and schedules planned have
been reached so that action can be taken to correct the deficiencies as quickly
as possible (World bank, 2007).
An
evaluation is a systematic and objective examination concerning the relevance,
effectiveness, efficiency and impact of activities in the light of specified
objectives. The idea in evaluating projects is to isolate errors not to repeat
them and to underline and promote the successful mechanisms for current and
future projects (World bank, 2007).
Monitoring
and evaluation involves twelves components in planning for result based
monitoring and evaluation of any project as follows;
Organizational structures with
M&E functions; Define for each organization its
specific authority and responsibility with respect to M&E and the processes
for shared decision making among organizations. Establish a national M&E
technical working group. Define its scope of work, membership criteria and
procedures for meeting, making and communicating its decisions. Develop and implement
a national strategy for human capacity development to support data collection,
management, analysis and use. Assess and track the overall performance of the
M&E system on a regular basis (UNAIDS, 2008).
Human capacity for M&E;
Define a national strategy for human capacity development for M&E that
projects human resources needs and focuses on pre-service and in-service
training, professional development and professional standards. Coordinate
M&E training, technical assistance, and training and technical assistance
providers (UNAIDS, 2008).
Partnerships to plan, coordinate,
and manage the M&E system; Compile an inventory
of organizations involved in M&E. Establish a mechanism for coordination
and communication among organizations involved in M&E, Set-up management
mechanisms that will allow the national M&E technical working group to
effectively support the stakeholders (UNAIDS, 2008).
National, multisector M&E plan;
Institutionalize coordinated M&E planning procedures for key M&E
stakeholders, including periodic M&E assessments and performance monitoring
linked to the National AIDS Strategic Plan. Dedicate staff time and resources
to align the national M&E plan to the monitoring and evaluation of the
country’s broader development plans. Organize a training program to rollout the
implementation of the national M&E plan (UNAIDS, 2008).
Annual, costed, national M&E
work plan; Establish and maintain a planning unit to lead and
oversee the Joint Annual Program Review. Coordinate a workshop of stakeholders
to develop the work plan, cost activities and assign responsibility for
implementation of each activity. Establish and maintain a unit with
responsibility for managing and coordinating financial (UNAIDS, 2008).
Advocacy, communication and culture
for M&E; Develop an advocacy and communication
strategy for disease specific M&E that outlines activities and provides
resources to encourage national investment in the M&E system and
evidence-based decision-making. Develop advocacy materials addressing the utility
of M&E and specific actions points. Establish and maintain a communications
infrastructure for M&E-related information, including a dedicated
communications team or unit with responsibility for the timely production and
distribution of useful M&E information targeted at key audiences (UNAIDS, 2008).
Routine program monitoring;
Develop, distribute and maintain standardized tools and clear operational
guidance for data collection, analysis and reporting. Provide training on the
tools and guidance for all appropriate individuals/organizations. Produce a
clear plan for timely collection of high-quality data as part of the Health
Information System Assess existing information technology systems; fill gaps in
skills and equipment (e.g., hardware and software). Implement regular assessments
of the quality of program monitoring data, including data from the Health
Information System using an existing standard tool (UNAIDS, 2008).
Surveys and surveillance;
Conduct regular strategic planning for defining evidence-informed data needs
and the role of surveys and surveillance in addressing these needs. Develop and
implement a strategy for the management of data collection efforts focused on
surveys and surveillance and for data sharing, which respects security and
confidentiality concerns. Conduct health facility surveys (e.g. Site based
facility surveys, Service Availability Mapping Surveys); Vital Registration;
population based surveys (e.g. MICS, DHS and DHS+, AIS, BSS, PLACE, SAVVY)
(UNAIDS, 2008).
National and sub-national databases;
Establish procedures through which data can be obtained and managed in
alignment with government policies, data flows, and the design of the national
disease-specific databases. Establish a technical working group including
representatives from the various sectors in charge of collecting and compiling
disease specific data to guide and harmonize databases and to assure quality of
data (UNAIDS, 2008).
Supportive supervision and data
auditing; Establish national standards and procedures for
data quality assurance in accordance with international standards. Agree on
data quality standards with relevant sectors and organizations, including
consensus on standardized protocols and tools for data audits and assessments.
Support a data auditing unit for oversight of auditing and audit reports.
Organize regular meetings between external data auditors and internal staff
responsible for data quality.
Evaluation and research;
Organize a national workshop with relevant individuals and organizations to
agree on priority questions for evaluation and research as part of a national
agenda-setting process. Establish procedures for implementation of the national
evaluation and research agenda Establish ethical procedures for evaluation and
research and implement a mechanism for ensuring adherence. Maintain a regularly
updated national inventory of evaluation and research studies. Establish a
mechanism for sharing evaluation and research findings, including the synthesis
and interpretation of programmatic implications of the findings. Organize an
annual national conference to discuss the implications of evaluation and
research findings (UNAIDS, 2008).
Data dissemination and use;
Develop and implement guidelines on data confidentiality and data release with
explicit decision-making processes and authorities. Develop a decision calendar
to identify key points in the year when critical decisions are made and data
are needed. Develop and implement a communication strategy and plan for M&E
products tailored to different audiences. Conduct an analysis of barriers to
data use using existing tools (UNAIDS, 2008).
CONCLUSION
Therefore,
monitoring evaluation faces with many challenges such as multiplicity of
actors, each with their own monitoring sub-system, that are not integrated into
the national M&E system. Weak capacity to collect good quality data due to
non-standardized definitions for data; duplication of data from multiple
registers; and lack of or inappropriate use of tools. National routine program
monitoring and linkages between facility-based and community based services
remains weak. Difficulty in conducting surveys particularly in capturing
hidden, stigmatized and mobile populations. Limited skills to extract and
aggregate indicator data, and non-submission of consolidated indicators.
Limited disaggregation of data by age, sex, and key populations. Difficulty in
estimating population sizes to inform program planning and implementation.
Limited documentation of best practices and evidence of how national M&E
systems and data are influencing decision-making at the country level and A
dearth of evaluation information and operations research to address questions
of efficacy/effectiveness, efficiency, and assess client satisfaction and the
main bottlenecks to the scaling-up and impact of HIV interventions.
REFERENES
UNAIDS
(2008). Organizing Framework for a Functional National HIV Monitoring and
Evaluation
System. Geneva: UNAIDS.
World
Bank (2007). Guidelines on Costing National HIV M&E Work Plans. Washington
DC:
World Bank
Binnendijk,
Annette. 2000. “Results Based Management in the Development Cooperation Agencies: A Review of Experience.”
Comments
Post a Comment