Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI 360 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-884-8000 Fax: 202-884-8432.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Template: Making Effective Presentation about Your Evidence-based Health Promotion Program This template is intended for you to adapt to your own program.
Advertisements

Content of an M&E Matrix
Indicator Performance Tracking Table
Evaluation Capacity Building Identifying and Addressing the Fields Needs.
Overview M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Maputo 19 and 20 September 2011.
Donald T. Simeon Caribbean Health Research Council
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
High-Quality Supplemental Educational Services And After-School Partnerships Demonstration Program (CFDA Number: ) CLOSING DATE: August 12, 2008.
Sam Lopez, NPD Program Manager, OELA
Improving Program Outcomes: Workshop on Uses of Title II Reporting Requirements Beatrice Lorge Rogers Tufts University TOPS FSN Knowledge Management Workshop.
Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar January 2014 Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar.
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Refining a Theory of Change 1 Barbara Reed & Dan Houston November 2014.
Sierra Leone Consortium for Relief and Development (CORAD) CARE Int., AFRICARE, Catholic Relief Services, World Vision Int. Action Plan for Making Monitoring.
M&E Plan Overview M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop Addis Ababa
HOW TO WRITE A GOOD TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR FOR EVALUATION Programme Management Interest Group 19 October 2010 Pinky Mashigo.
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
Evaluation of Math-Science Partnership Projects (or how to find out if you’re really getting your money’s worth)
The Evaluation Plan.
Multisector Program Integration
Food For Peace: Title II Programs and Gender 1 FSN Knowledge Sharing Meeting November 15, 2012 Presented by Michelle Gamber, MA, DrPH AAAS Fellow, FFP.
1 Introduction to Evaluating the Minnesota Demonstration Program Paint Product Stewardship Initiative September 19, 2007 Seattle, WA Matt Keene, Evaluation.
KEYWORDS REFRESHMENT. Activities: in the context of the Logframe Matrix, these are the actions (tasks) that have to be taken to produce results Analysis.
Tracking of GEF Portfolio: Monitoring and Evaluation of Results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Aaron Zazueta March 2010 Hanoi, Vietnam.
Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax:
MARKETS II M&E FRAMEWORK AND CHALLENGES Joseph Obado.
Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in West and Central Africa Accra, Ghana, 9-11 July 2009 Tracking National Portfolios and Assessing Results.
2013 NEO Program Monitoring & Evaluation Framework.
UNDAF M&E Systems Purpose Can explain the importance of functioning M&E system for the UNDAF Can support formulation and implementation of UNDAF M&E plans.
Tracking national portfolios and assessing results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Western and Central Africa Dakar, May 2007.
Development Hypothesis or Theory of Change M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Maputo 19 and 20 September 2011 Arif Rashid, TOPS.
Monitoring & Evaluation Presentation for Technical Assistance Unit, National Treasury 19 August 2004 Fia van Rensburg.
Commodity Management Capacity Building Project Supported by The Office of Food for Peace.
Senior Evaluation Officer GEF Independent Evaluation Office Minsk, Belarus September 2015 Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations.
Tracking national portfolios and assessing results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in West and Central Africa June 2008, Douala, Cameroon.
Changing the way the New Zealand Aid Programme monitors and evaluates its Aid Ingrid van Aalst Principal Evaluation Manager Development Strategy & Effectiveness.
1 The project is financed from the European Union funds within the framework of Erasmus+, Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of.
Evaluate Phase Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0774/Information Technology Capital Budgeting Tahun: 2009.
Monitoring Afghanistan, 2015 Food Security and Agriculture Working Group – 9 December 2015.
27/04/2017 Strengthening of the Monitoring and Evaluation system for FTPP/FTTP in FAO /SEC December 2015 FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.
ACTED AME Appraisal, Monitoring and Evaluation. Summary 1/ ACTED AME department 2/ AME Responsibilities 3/ AME throughout project cycle 4/ Involvement.
Practical Experiences - Evaluation of Program 1 Geneva January 29, 2016.
NFM: Modular Template Measurement Framework: Modules, Interventions and Indicators LFA M&E Training February
Development of Gender Sensitive M&E: Tools and Strategies.
Evaluation What is evaluation?
Developing a Monitoring & Evaluation Plan MEASURE Evaluation.
Rose Ann M. Renteria, PhD, MPA AED Center for Health Communication No. 847 (Government Evaluation TIG) Session: Think Tank Room Texas A.
Monitoring and Evaluation for UNDP/GEF projects MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF UNDP/GEF PROJECTS Inception Workshop, Baikal Lake Watershed Project,
Monitoring and Evaluation Systems for NARS organizations in Papua New Guinea Day 4. Session 10. Evaluation.
How to Prepare and Manage FFP Mid-term Evaluations Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington,
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan
Food for Peace Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop for
Monitoring and Evaluation
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Session: 5 Using the RDQA tool for System Assessment
Session 1 – Study Objectives
FY 16 Refine and Implement
Research Program Strategic Plan
Arif Rashid, FFP M&E Team Lead
Mercy Corps PAHAL Data Use
FAO South Sudan Juba, November 2017
منهج الإطار المنطقي وإطار الرصد والتقييم وإطار النتائج
Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations
4.2 Identify intervention outputs
CHANGE IS INEVITABLE, PROGRESS IS A CHOICE
Session: 9 On-going Monitoring & Follow Up
Integrating Gender M&E Capacity Strengthening Workshop, Addis Ababa
Presentation transcript:

Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance III Project (FANTA) FHI Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC Tel: Fax: Website: Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring and Evaluation Workshop for FFP Development Food Assistance Projects

Session Objectives By the end of the session participants will have: 1.Shared their thoughts about the benefits of M&E 2.Reviewed the FFP M&E and Reporting Requirements and identified those that seem challenging to their projects Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Who will benefit from the results of your M&E work and how/why? Activity 1: Share your thoughts… Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Session Objective Review FFP M&E and reporting requirements for the lifecycle of a project Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Next Section Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Project Lifecycle: What are the M&E and Reporting Requirements at Each Stage? Proposal stage Start Up Midway End of project End of Year 1 End of Year 2 End of Year 3 End of Year 4 Learning Information from M&E system closed Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Requirement 1 : LogFrame Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Narrative SummaryIndicators Data SourcesAssumptions Goal Project Purpose Sub-purpose Immediate Outcome Output Input Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

LogFrame is a matrix that summarizes the Theory of Change and shows what the project intends to do and how, what the key assumptions are, and how outputs and outcomes will be monitored and evaluated. Levels of LogFrame: goal, purpose, sub-purpose, immediate outcomes, outputs, inputs Goal, purpose, sub-purpose, and immediate outcomes should be stated as results (not activities). All elements of the LogFrame should be measurable and context specific. Requirement 1 : LogFrame Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Theory of Change LogFrame Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRS) Plans on: annual monitoring, data analysis, management, safeguard, dissemination, use, quality assurance, evaluation M&E staffing plan and structure Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Requirement 2: M&E Plan Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

IPTT should include: Baseline/final evaluation and annual monitoring indicators All applicable FFP “required” and “required if applicable” indicators Mission/F indicators, gender and environmental indicators (linked to performance of project activities only) Indicators related to all levels of the LogFrame Levels of disaggregation and targets for all indicators Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Requirement 2: M&E Plan (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Aims to help USAID learn more systematically from its work and increases accountability Calls for “large” and “pilot/innovative” projects (of any size) to undergo evaluations that are external Projects designed based on a proven Theory of Change should undergo performance evaluations, whereas “pilot/innovative” projects should undergo impact evaluations (the latter only if feasible) USAID Evaluation Policy issued in January 2011 Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Most evaluations will be external (i.e. third-party contractor or grantee managed by USAID, not by the implementing partners) Decision on whether impact or performance evaluation at discretion of operating unit (FFP) Most FFP food security projects will likely undergo performance evaluations (not impact evaluations) for the time being USAID Evaluation Policy (continued) Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Next Section Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

PVOs should attend the FFP M&E workshop (held by FANTA) Madagascar: November 4-13, 2014 Burundi: November 17-25, 2014 Malawi: December 8-17, 2014 Two days intro sessions followed by technical assistance one-on-one for each award Requirement 3: FFP M&E workshop Start Up Stage Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Submit revised LogFrame, IPTT, Theory of Change (ToC) - due 20 days to FFP after the M&E workshop. Target values for baseline/final evaluation indicators are submitted as percentage point change during proposal stage. No need to update these targets until after baseline survey conducted BUT target values for annual monitoring indicators required with submission of revised IPTT 20 days after workshop Requirement 4: ToC, Logframe, IPTT Start Up Stage Requirements Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Requirements #5: Submit comprehensive M&E Plan and Detailed Implementation Plan (DIP)—due 60 days after the M&E workshop to FFP Strongly encouraged: Attend new M&E Plan workshop held by TOPS in coordination with FFP. Start Up Stage Requirements Start Up Stage: Requirement 5 Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Third-party survey firm (not PVO) to conduct baseline study Projects can start implementation before data collection for the baseline is complete! Quantitative study must use population-based household survey (simple pre- post designs required only) Baseline survey must be comparable to the final evaluation survey Data collected for impact and some outcome indicators from IPTT; includes FFP gender indicators Start Up Stage Requirements Requirement 6: Baseline Study Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Third-party survey firm (not PVO) to conduct baseline study Study will include a qualitative component to add richness and context to the quantitative results Completed within first year of implementation as early as possible (and ideally during the “lean season”) Baseline report will provide results by PVO and for the overall FFP program implementation areas Datasets also required to be submitted to comply with USG Open Data requirements PVO can conduct other formative research, as needed Start Up Stage Requirements Baseline Study (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Next Section Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Submit annual results report (ARR)—retrospective reporting relative to US fiscal year (Oct 1–Sept 30) Annual Requirements Annual Results Report ARR Narrative Attachments to FFPMIS FFPMIS Data Entry Requirement 7: Annual Results Report Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

1.ARR Narrative containing: Annual Food Assistance Project Activities and Results Lessons Learned Annual Requirements Annual Results Report (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

2. Attachments to FFPMIS: Success Stories Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) IPTT Data Source Descriptions Detailed Implementation Plan (DIP) Expenditure Report Technical Sectors Tracking Table Program Design and Performance Reports Supplemental Materials Annual Requirements Annual Results Report (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

3. FFPMIS Data Entry: Monetization and Cost Recovery Tables Standardized Annual Performance Questionnaire (SAPQ) Beneficiary and Resource Tracking Tables Annual Requirements Annual Results Report (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Next Section Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Reasons for conducting MTE:  Learn from successes, acknowledge problems  Assess implementation progress and roadblocks Participatory, qualitative assessments are encouraged Process evaluation Team leader must be external MTE team should comprise expertise in all technical sectors and cross-cutting issues addressed by project No MTE team members should have previous responsibility in design/implementation of project under evaluation Midway Requirements Requirement 8 (PVO): Mid-term Evaluation Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

MTE finalized for FFP 5-year development projects by mid PY3 Not required to include quantitative component or be population- based like baseline/final evaluation Midterm report to be submitted to FFP 3 months after data collection ends or qualitative study conducted Midway Requirements Mid-term Evaluation (continued) Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Project Lifecycle, M&E and Reporting Requirements Midway Requirements Start Up Stage Requirements Project End Requirements Annual Requirements Next Section Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

Third-party survey firm to conduct final evaluation study (quantitative and qualitative) Quantitative study must use population-based household survey (simple pre-post designs required only) Final evaluation survey must be comparable to the baseline survey same impact and outcome indicators and questionnaires same time of year Most will be performance evaluations with pre-post designs. Project End Requirements Requirement 9: Final Evaluation Study Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

FFP Request for Applications do/agriculture-and-food-security/food- assistance/programs/development-programshttp:// do/agriculture-and-food-security/food- assistance/programs/development-programs FFP ARR Guidance and-food-security/food-assistance/guidance/implementation-and- reportinghttp:// and-food-security/food-assistance/guidance/implementation-and- reporting USAID Evaluation Policy Resources Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements

This presentation is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the support of the Office of Health, Infectious Diseases and Nutrition, Bureau for Global Health; and the Office of Food for Peace, Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance, United States Agency for International Development (USAID), under terms of Cooperative Agreement No. AID-OAA-A , through FANTA, managed by FHI 360. The contents are the responsibility of FHI 360 and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. Food for Peace Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Requirements