A Presentation on the Report of the Monitoring and Evaluation Exercise conducted between 1st January - 30th June, 2011 Presented By Jil Mamza Monitoring and Evaluation Officer HealthAssess Nigeria Ltd 24 September, 2011

Acknowledgement The contributions and support of the M&E team members is highly regarded and appreciated: The community representatives, Aboji Village The Project Manager The World Bank’s Representative Dayara State Government Representative

Introduction Context Aboji Village is densely populated - Population size: about 1.3 million 39% of the population are males, 61% are females Has 500,000 children below 5 years Has a long history of health problems:  Maternal mortality ratio – 140 per 10,000 live births  Under 5yrs mortality rate of 62 per 1000 live births  Lingering diarrhoeal diseases epidemic  Up to 50,000 children admissions within 5 yrs

Introduction Context Recently had vomiting and diarrhoea epidemic:  With over 12,500 children admissions in 2 weeks  Over 5,000 child mortality cases in 2 weeks  Caused by contamination of the only water source The people have very low literacy rate:  14% (females) and 22% (males) Poverty: 87% of the population live on <$1 a day. Only 1 primary health care centre which is inadequate

Introduction Programme description In a bid to stop more children from dying, the World Bank’s has provided a non-renewable grant of 1.5 Billion Naira to provide Aboji village with an alternative water supply

Introduction Programme description Aim To eradicate child mortality due to vomiting and diarrhoea in Aboji Village by 2016 Objectives: To improve access to safe drinking water supply To discourage the domestic use of water from the contaminated source

Introduction Programme description Funds to be provided in two instalments:  At programme commencement  After mid-term evaluation The purpose of M&E exercise is to:  Monitor implementation process  Measure the performance and achievements  Determining the effectiveness and sustainability

Method Key M&E Questions How well is the project implementation plan going? How much of the action plan has been achieve so far? How likely will the goal be achieved in good time? Is the programme achieving its goal How much of the problem has the project solved? What is the success rate of the programme? How effective is the programme?

Method Indicators measured Compliance of action plan Quality of implementation Judiciousness of money spent Sufficiency of resources available Performance rate of action plan Quality of services provided

Method Data collected Work breakdown structure and schedule Financial reports of programme execution child mortality rate Frequency of visits to water source Household access to clean drinking water Proportion boreholes yielding drinkable water Proportion of villagers aware of hygiene practice

Method Sources of data Programme Manager’s worksheet Health facility surveys records Death records or registers Records of completed clean water sources provided Record of weekly stream visit Periodic supervision report Survey records

Method Data collection techniques Examination of records Structured interviews individuals and groups Direct Observation Clinical examination Needs Analysis techniques

Method Place of data collection Primary health care centre Nearby hospitals Project sites Residential houses

Method Activities covered during M&E exercise Input Examined knowledge, competence and task of human resources Examined equipment and materials being used:  To compared their costs against budget and  Availability and needs over time Examined cash flow and compared availability of money to resources required

Method Activities covered during M&E exercise Process Monitored activities to ensure compliance with action plan and budget Assessed the quality of service in relation to programme standard Assessed the relevance of activities as well as performance rate of action Examined periodic supervision report

Method Activities covered during M&E exercise Outcome Immediate results of work output was examined Examined level of awareness of the people Monitored daily household visit to water source and uptake Evaluated effectiveness of project Examined death records

Method M&E Team 1 Project Manager 1 M&E Officer 1 Community representative 20 Indigenous focus group members (villagers) 1 World Bank’s Representative 1 State Government’s Representative

Method Timetable

Results Evidence shows project complied with action plan, i.e.  number of staff and their respective competencies met the required specification  financial report of expenditure was well accounted for and summarised in the full report. Performance: out of 1000 boreholes set to be completed at mid-term  923 are completed and 910 are working up to required standard.  Proportion of boreholes yielding drinkable water to the target population stands at 1 to 597 children

Results Table 1: Household visits to water source HouseholdSizeNo. Visits (%) No. Successful Use (%) No. Failed Use (%) Average visit per household Benu5 (6%)3033 (19%)126 (7%)2907 (21%)607 Facti7 (8%)792 (5%)54 (3%)738 (5%)113 Kogina25 (28%)0000 Wara7 (8%)174 (1%)55 (3%)119 (1%)25 Nasiru4 (4%)1476 (9%)65 (4%)1411 (10%)369 Pati2 (2%)1000 (6%)00500 Adama5 (6%)146 (1%)18 (1%)128 (1%)29 Baliki8 (9%)1602 (10%)158 (9%)1444 (11%)200 Bono2 (2%)1513 (9%)85 (5%)1428 (11%)757 Gongi4 (4%)1784 (11%)455 (26%)1329 (10%)446 Tariki9 (10%)1127 (7%)125 (7%)1002 (7%)125 Yozo4 (4%)831 (5%)125 (7%)706 (5%)208 Jigi4 (4%)648 (4%)31 (2%)617 (5%)162 Kado4 (4%)2131 (13%)432 (25%)1699 (13%)533 Total90 (100%)16257(100%)1729 (11%)13528 (83%)181 Mean

Results Figure 1 show Kogina household having the highest % of people (28%), while Pati had the lowest (2%)

Results Results from Table 1 shows that on the whole:  94% of the people in Aboji village visited the alternative water source.  Only 11% of the people had a successful visit to the alternative source  the percentage of failed visit was 83%

Results Figure 2: no record of visits Kogina household. Unlike Kogina, Pati visited but had no record of successful use

Discussion Findings the target has not been achieved when compared to the set target at onset. With only 11% of successful use out of the 94% visits, the project is said to achieve a very low success thus, Ineffective However some improvement was achieved when compared with the uptake at baseline. low uptake of alternative water could be attributed to the lack of knowledge and awareness

Conclusion The alternative water source project implementation was well done and according to action plan. A large number of the people (about 94%) from Aboji village visited the alternative source. However, only a very small percentage (11%) are said to have been successful in using the water. Hence, the project is said to have achieved a very low level of success when compared with the set target The project pace is NOT good, if continued at this pace the 5-year target will NOT be met.

Recommendations More awareness and health promotion campaigns should be introduced:  behavioural change models  community development

Thank you!