Monitoring & Evaluation System “Learning to Improve” Making evidence work for development.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Scaling-up the UNDP-UNEP Poverty and Environment Initiative January 2007 environment for the MDGs.
Advertisements

WCDR Thematic Panel Governance: Institutional and Policy Frameworks for Risk Reduction Annotated Outline UNDP – UNV – ProVention Consortium – UN-Habitat.
Delivering as One UN Albania October 2009 – Kigali.
Role of CSOs in monitoring Policies and Progress on MDGs.
Lucila Beato UNMIL/HRPS
UN Participating Organisations Briefing January 2009 MDG Achievement Fund.
MDG-F Background Agreement signed between Spain and UNDP on 18 December 2006 Euros 528 million (US$ 710 million) Four years Supporting UN efforts towards.
UNDP Global Programme Mr. Magdy Martinez-Soliman Director a.i., Bureau for Development Policy New York - 3 September 2014 United Nations Development.
Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar January 2014 Global Poverty Action Fund Community Partnership Window Funding Seminar.
Comprehensive M&E Systems
Overview of UNDAF process and new guidance package March 2010 u nite and deliver effective support for countries.
Policy on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment June 2012 Sylvia Cabus Gender Advisor USAID/Bureau of Food Security.
Measuring Governance with Pro- Poor and Gender Sensitive Indicators: Process flow chart as a tool for promoting gender-responsive governance & identifying.
THE ROLE OF STOP TB GHANA PARTNERSHIP Chief Austin A. Obiefuna National Coordinator SECRETARIAT CO-HOSTED BY AFRO GLOBAL ALLIANCE (GH) & GHANA SOCIETY.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION A GENERAL OVERVIEW A PRESENTATION AT ISSER 28 June, 2013 By Bruno B. Dery.
Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
December To share best practices from the experience of 100 NSDS implemented over the last years. To take into account international community.
Application Form Part 1, Sections 4-9 How to Apply Seminar 16 th September 2010 – Copenhagen Kirsti Mijnhijmer.
Independent Monitoring & Evaluation for Accountability Presented to Health Sector Steering Committee, 21 st July 2009.
Localizing the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) UN-HABITAT Nairobi.
Caribbean Community Secretariat 2nd meeting of the Advisory Group on Statistics San Ignacio – Belize 25 June 2008 Introduction and Objectives of NSDS day.
February 21, JAS Consultation between the Government of Tanzania and Development Partners February 21, 2006 Courtyard Hotel, Dar es Salaam.
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.
Operational Plan for UNAIDS Action Framework: Addressing Women, Girls, Gender Equality and HIV February 3, 2010.
Knowledge Management April Background  Agreement signed between Spain and UNDP on 18 December 2006  Euros 528 million + 90 million (24 Sept. 2008)
Aaron Zazueta Chief Evaluation Officer 2013 EVALUATION IN THE GEF.
1 1 st M&E Network Forum Crowne Plaza Galleria Manila, Quezon City November 2011 M&E in the Philippines: Challenges and Prospects DDG Rolando G.
M&E in the GEF Carlo Carugi Senior Evaluation Officer Expanded Constituency Workshop Dakar, Senegal - July 2011.
Session 3 CPDP Formulation Process Project for Capacity Development for Implementing the Organic Law at the Capital and Provincial Level (PILAC 2)
IMPLEMENTING UNCT PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR GENDER EQUALITY AND THE EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN (GENDER SCORECARDS) DESK REVIEW Prepared by the UNDG.
The Next Stage for Results in Africa. Context 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness 2006 Mutual Learning Events Uganda & Burkina Faso 2007 Hanoi.
South African – Flemish (SAF) Development Programme DGOS-attachés 2003 VVOB.
Senior Evaluation Officer GEF Independent Evaluation Office Minsk, Belarus September 2015 Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations.
Corporate Evaluation Plan Joint informal Executive Board Meeting May 2014 New York, NY Marco Segone Director, UN Women independent Evaluation.
1 The United Nations Demographic Yearbook and the Work Programme for Social Statistics Expert Group Meeting to Review the United Nations Demographic Yearbook.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
Vito Cistulli - FAO -1 Damascus, 2 July 2008 FAO Assistance to Member Countries and the Changing Aid Environment.
Catholic Charities Performance and Quality Improvement (PQI)
Material produced under Phare 2006 financial support Phare TVET RO 2006/ Project financed under Phare EUROPEAN UNION MERI/ NCDTVET-PIU.
Waisea Vosa Climate Change Unit Division of Political and Treaties Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.
Monitoring & Evaluation System “Learning to Improve” Making evidence work for development.
UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM IN MADAGASCAR Coordination of the UNDAF Process and the Role of the United Nations system Organizations Joint session of UNDP/UNFPA,
Presenter:- Mrs. Josette Maxwell-Dalsou Chief Economist Economic Planning Ministry of Finance, Economic Affairs and National Development.
Monitoring and Evaluation Systems for NARS organizations in Papua New Guinea Day 4. Session 11. Reporting.
Monitoring and Evaluation Systems for NARS organizations in Papua New Guinea Day 4. Session 10. Evaluation.
Understanding DWCPs, tripartite process and role of Trade Unions How the ILO works at a national level.
Module 8 Guidelines for evaluating the SDGs through an equity focused and gender responsive lens: Overview Technical Assistance on Evaluating SDGs: Leave.
“Delivering as One” through Joint Programming and Joint Programmes
Understanding DWCPs, tripartite process and role of Trade Unions
Auditing Sustainable Development Goals
MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN THE GEF
Application Form Sections 4-9 Christopher Parker & Kirsti Mijnhijmer 28 January 2009 – Copenhagen, Denmark European Union European Regional Development.
The value of UNCAC Session 5.
Overview Rationale Context and Linkages Objectives Commitments
Claire NAUWELAERS, independent policy expert
UNDP-UNEP POVERTY & ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE (PEI): MID-TERM REVIEW
Results of the Organizational Performance
Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations
GNC Global Partners Meeting Washington 30/03/16
Gender mainstreaming in environmental
Understanding DWCPs, tripartite process and role of Trade Unions
Overview Rationale Context and Linkages Objectives Commitments
MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN THE GEF
Understanding DWCPs, tripartite process and role of Trade Unions
The GEF Public Involvement Policy
MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN THE GEF
MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN THE GEF
MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN THE GEF
Presentation transcript:

Monitoring & Evaluation System “Learning to Improve” Making evidence work for development

Contents Rationale of the M&E Users and needs Principles of the M&E Units of analysis and dimensions of study Elements of the M&E Products of the M&E M&E share of responsibilities M&E constraints M&E linkages: KM, decision making and learning

Rationale: Why should the MDGF have a M&E system? It is a requirement included in the legal agreement between the Donor (Spain) and UNDP It is an obligation, included in all signed joint programs It is necessary: if we want, scaling up programs into policies and spread solutions to achieve MDGs at Global level It is useful: As it is part of the program managing cycle and is the best way to measure progress, detect problems, correct them, improve performance and learn at local and global level

Who are the users of the M&E system what are their needs in terms of Information?

For 5 minutes discussion: Are we missing anyone? Are most of the views of stakeholders included? This is an attempt to let your tacit knowledge flow

What kind of principles should the MDGF’s M&E system incorporate? PRINCIPLES

What kind of principles should the MDGF’s M&E system incorporate? Accordance with UNEG and DAC/OECD standards Oriented to well balanced learning and accountability purposes Evidence-based: consistent data, information or knowledge to support judgments and conclusions of monitoring and evaluation

What kind of principles should the MDGF’s M&E system incorporate? Built on an aggregation scheme: Elements of M&E (indicators + evaluations, etc) in lower levels add up in higher level of inquire Measure (DELTA), describe, analyze understand the object of study (JP+C+W+MDGs) and use results to improve program and policy performance

What dimensions should the MDGF M&E system cover? What questions should it answer?

Joint ProgramsCountries 1 st M&E Level Joint programs 2 nd M&E Level Countries Environment and Climate Change Gender Equality Women’s empowerment Culture & development Economic democratic Governance Youth, Employment and Migration Conflict prevention & Peace Building Children Food Security and Nutrition Development and the Private Sector 3th M&E Level Windows Monitoring Aspects Input-Products-Results-Processes Evaluation Dimensions -Quality of the program formulation -Program objectives attained -Contribution to MDGs & other development indicators, gender -Replication: Scale up -Innovation -UN system Coordination -Delivering as One -Ownership -Alignment -Harmonization -MFDR -Mutual Accountability -Delta change, effects in citizens’ life Monitoring Aspects -Results (UNDAF+PRS) -Processes (Coordination) Evaluation Dimensions Induced effects on: -MDG at country level -Other Development indicators -UN system Coordination -Delivering as one -Ownership -Alignment -Harmonization -MFDR -Mutual Accountability -UN country pilots 4 th M&E Level MDG Achievement Fund Monitoring Aspects -Results Evaluation Dimensions Quality of partnership Spain/UNDP: Added Value as a mechanism to Progress MDGs achievement The Secretariat’s role and added value Induced effects on: -Linkage of windows and MDGs -Other Development indicators -UN system Coordination -Delivering as one -Ownership -Alignment -Harmonization -MFDR -Mutual Accountability -Effects on citizens' life Joint Programs Countries Monitoring Aspects -Results as an aggregate of the JP -HR/Gender/Environment Evaluation Dimensions New themes:: Culture & migration Induced effects on: -MDG at country level -Other Development indicators (Peace and Culture) -UN system Coordination -Delivering as one -Ownership -Alignment -Harmonization -MFDR -Mutual Accountability

Please in 5 minutes What are the 3 most burning questions an M&E system should it answer?

What elements comprise the MDGF M&E system Monitoring indicators: to measure progress and trends in the short and medium-term at the (inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes) Field visits: to monitor JP in depth and prepare and manage evaluations as well as disseminate results and provide feedback from recommendations Evaluations: to review programs and value the worth of the dimension of study JP, at country level, in thematic windows and the MDGF as a whole Meta-evaluations: to review the quality of the evaluations (JP + Country) conducted and produce robust evidence at window level to link these evidence to MDG achievement Desk reviews and data collection & analysis: from a variety of sources to contribute with information and knowledge to the M&E+KM system

What products will the MDGF M&E system create and offer? Field monitoring reports Country monitoring reports Mid-term evaluations reports Impact evaluation reports Country evaluations (case studies)reports Meta-evaluations reports In depth review reports MDGF global reports (midterm + final) Special activities under the M&E+ Information & Advocacy focus country initiative

MDG F Achievement Fund M&E USER Responsibilities to be takenDeliver the products MDG-F Secretariat Support the UN country teams in the collection of the information and the reporting procedure for monitoring indicators and activities Design 24 thematic and process indicators to feed MDGF M&E system. Design generic terms of reference for mid-term evaluations. Work with UN country teams customizing mid-term evaluation’s terms of reference Design 8 meta evaluations studies 1 for each window of activity Support and facilitate the ongoing evaluations, assuring quality and participation through all their phases: desk review, field work report drafting, publication and dissemination. Assure that recommendations from monitoring system and evaluations mainstream the manager’s decisions and correct programs’ deviations, guarantee that knowledge created serves as a input for the knowledge management system. Implement a calendar of field missions to carry out M&E activities Elaborate a protocol guide to monitoring visits Implement the calendar of field visits to carry out the above mentioned activities The strategy of M&E for MDGF Country monitoring reports+ special countries with high learning and knowledge transfer potential The MDGF mid-term evidence-based report Mid-term evaluations Country evaluations At least 3 Impact evaluations ( experimental or/and quasi- experimental) meta evaluation studies The MDGF evidence-based final report

MDG F Achievement Fund M&E USERResponsibilities to be takenDeliver the following products UN Country Team Collect and report information on the following indicators: On joint program implementation at 3 levels :(3 input, 3 output, 3 outcome) (best, medium and worst indicators, to observe trends) (quarterly reported) 3 indicators on joint program coordination (supplied by MDGF Secretariat) (quarterly reported) 3 thematic indicators per active window in the country (every six months, supplied by MDGF Secretariat) Report on all Joint Program indicators designed by themselves ( annually) Facilitate the M&E processes and activities according to the guidance and principles supplied by the MDGF Secretariat Integrate recommendations from M&E to improve programs Adapt the templates for TOR for final evaluations joint program and country evaluations as well as financing t final evaluations Special activities under the initiative focus countries (Ethiopia, Mauritania, Morocco,Timor Leste, Philippines, Bosnia Herzegovina, Brazil, Ecuador, Honduras) Monitoring Quarterly reports Final evaluations M&E framework activities Report in coordination indicators And thematic indicators

MDG F Achievement Fund M&E Timeframe

What are the constraints we would face in such a enterprise? budget, time, data, political constraints What level of involvement and what work load can the staff from the JP take? Organizational issues, Who is responsible for what part of the system? Joint program, for real? Do joint programs have the necessary coordination mechanisms to allow for joint monitoring and evaluation? Will the users of the M&E system willing to collaborate to implement it ? Is data available at a reasonable cost and on time? Will we have the political support to implement it?

M&E linkages: KM, decision making and learning M&E is an enormous source of knowledge and will generate an extraordinary amount of valuable explicit and tacit knowledge as well as organizational and general knowledge that will have to be delivered at the right moment, to the right persons in the adequate format for the purposes needed. KM system could also become a source of data, information and knowledge for M&E system, is a reciprocal 2 way relation. The ultimate goal of evaluation is recommend actions to improve decision making and improve performance of programs and policies so all evaluations should focused on utilization of their findings and recommendations