1. EVALUATION THEORY, APPROACHES AND PRACTICES IN THE PHILIPPINES 1 st M&E Network Forum, 7-8 November 2011, Crown Plaza, Manila, Philippines

2.  Since its inception 35 years ago, IFAD focused on rural poverty reduction. IFAD programmes/projects aim to increase incomes of rural poor  Measurement of incomes has traditionally proven to be a challenge, even for well- qualified research outfits  Project managers, often operating in remote areas, do not have access to human & technical resources necessary for results measurement

3. Performance of M&E systems was habitually one of the weak spots in IFAD projects

4. In 2001, IFAD developed its highly referenced Guide for Project M&E -- http://www.ifad.org /evaluation/guide/ providing essential tools and guidance (methodology, templates for ToRs, logframe applications, etc.) http://www.ifad.org /evaluation/guide/

5. But, the MDGs set out poverty/hunger reduction as Goal Number 1 IFAD faced a need to report on results & impact in terms of MDGs– harmonisation and aid effectiveness agenda

6.  Standardised methods were therefore developed- “RIMS”  Comprehensive system for results and impact measurement in use by all IFAD-funded projects  Based on a standard list of indicators (output/outcome/ impact)  Mandatory, periodic reporting to IFAD-HQ Weaknesses persisted in collecting information required to report on aid effectiveness

7. 2nd LEVEL RESULTS [OUTCOMES] IMPACT Annual reporting to IFAD from PY1 onwards Annual reporting from PY2/PY3 onwards Reporting three times in project cycle: baseline, mid-term and completion Project M&E system RIMS Impact Surveys 1st LEVEL RESULTS [OUTPUTS]

9.  IFAD’s RIMS mandatory, proxy measures to demonstrate increasing income: ◦ Asset ownership, using Principal Components Analysis ◦ Child nutrition (anthropometrics)  RIMS also includes measures for other MDG-related indicators  Impact-level indicators are measured at baseline, mid-term and completion (normally a 5 to 7 year span)

11.  From IFAD pre-defined standard indicators, projects select only relevant output/outcome measures  Standardisation means data can be aggregated at province, agency, national, regional or global level  RIMS as minimum requirement: projects expected to develop more extensive M&E base  Impact indicators focused on goal and objective level: contribution rather than attribution  Impact assessment focuses on most essential questions: minimalist survey  Harmonisation: Anthropometric data in accordance with WHO and UNICEF global standards  Avoid duplication in efforts: Where UNICEF or national agencies provide data for project area, nutrition surveys not required

12. RIMS was introduced in the PH in 2006. Most projects conducted baseline impact surveys only, but are regularly reporting 1 st and 2 nd level indicators.  Project RIMS progress reporting focuses on quantitative data. Qualitative reviews are undertaken during supervision  RIMS level 1 & 2 data are validated through joint supervision missions with NEDA, and annual country programme reviews  Learning approach: involving project and agency staff

18.  Standardized indicators permit to track project progress as well as aggregate measures across all projects;  RIMS is low cost and can be implemented by project teams or its partners. Results can be validated by other exercises like supervision mission, annual country programme reviews;  Some impact indicators are difficult to interpret; e.g. food insecurity are highly sensitive to annual variations in food production;  Outcome surveys may be needed to show trends in short/medium-term outcomes, & explain results chain (links from outputs to impact);

19. RIMS has ability to report across agencies, provinces and projects on overall country programme. However, it requires:  Computerized MIS that can facilitate and validate data entry, accessible to stakeholders;  Improved data collection at grassroots level (timely, complete, accurate way).