Monitoring & Evaluation

Lessons learnt from the past experience
 Weak institutional collaboration and co-ordination among various
agencies
 Inadequate beneficiary and stake holders involvement in planning and
implementation of programme with a tendency towards top-down
approach resulting in lack sustainability of project activities
 Weak linkage with PRIs
 Poor cost recovery in many programmes and inadequately defined
benefit and cost-sharing arrangements
 Lack of appropriate and technical recommendations and norms
suitable for rainfed agriculture in different agro-climatic Zones
 Inadequate emphasis on equity aspects of watershed development
 Inadequate Monitoring & Evaluation of physical, financial performance
and quality indicators

Issues to be addressed
 Strategic co-ordination
 Harmonization of norms and guidelines
 Beneficiary and stakeholder commitment
 Linkage with PRIs
 Cost sharing arrangement
 Reaching marginalized and vulnerable groups
 Location-specific watershed-oriented research
 Strengthening Monitoring and Evaluation

Why Monitoring & Evaluation
 To develop a good monitoring & Evaluation system
 M & E is an inseparable component of the project to
provide regular feedback to the management on its weak
links to facilitate taking up necessary & timely corrective
steps on project implementation & to make the project
successful with the expected results
 Monitoring is the process of measuring, collecting,
processing & communicating information to assist the
management in project implementation

 Evaluation is a step further, it assess the physical, financial
inputs, personnel, activities and expected results. It
analysis whether these efforts are in the right direction of
achieving objectives results.
 “Learning” as the word devotes provides for corrective
measures based as the said monitoring and evaluation in
the course of the project formulations and executive from
the initial stage to till the completion of the project.

 Opportunity to observe and trace the path of the project
progress.
 Evaluation of specific activities at different stages to verify
whether project progress is on the expected lines.
 Reflects deficiency is planning and execution.
 Identify loopholes in project progress- adopt corrective
measures.

Types of Monitoring & Evaluation
1. Concurrent Monitoring.
a) Input – output monitoring.
b) Process monitoring.
c) Self assessment.
2. Discrete monitoring
a) Impact assessment.

Structure of Monitoring & Evaluation
Discrete monitoring
Impact Assessment
Independent M & L
(Frequency)
Concurrent monitoring
Input Output
monitoring
Process
monitoring
Self Evaluation
/ Assessment
By WDD at various
level with support
system by M &L
Independently by
M & L agency
By CBOs themselves
fecilitated,trained & supported by
PNGO/LNGO
Weekly Monthly Quarterly Annually
Continuously/
weekly/monthl
y/quarterly
Half yearly
Before the
project
interventio
ns
Mid term-
after 36
months of
the project
After
completion
of the
project

Input Output Monitoring
 Tracks the physical and financial progress of the
project implementation.
 Ensures monitoring of inputs, outputs and
installations based on quantifiable numbers and
time frame – facilitated through MIS which collects
relevant data and generates reports.

Objective of input output Monitoring
 To ensure that inputs are delivered within the specified time frame –
Indicative checklist on social mobilization, entry point activities, group
formation (SHG, AG, SWS-EC), training / capacity building, SWAP
preparation and implementation, would facilitate to verify and assess
the outputs expected from the stipulated interventions.
 To serve as an early warning mechanism – This shall provide
assistance in implementing corrective measures.
 Primarily, the watershed department, and SWS- EC (facilitated by
FNGOs) would be responsible for input / output monitoring of the
project at all levels. This would facilitate concurrent and transparent
monitoring. The regular monitoring would also involve the other
stakeholders in the project

Process Monitoring
 Process Monitoring (PM), when specifically referred, is a
set of activities designed to collect longitudinal information,
both qualitative and quantitative, on a dynamic platform”. It
focuses not only on inputs and outputs but more
importantly at ‘what drives a process’.
 PM is a tool that helps to provide the process and the
contextual data required for capacity building towards
effective programme implementation.
 The term ‘Process Monitoring’ is used to denote the activities of
consciously selecting processes. “Selectively and Systematically
observing them so as to ‘compare’ them with others and
communicating on that in order to learn how to steer and shape the
process”.

What to monitor
 The structural characteristics/institutions have defined
functionalities-each one has a specific role to play and a
well-defined jurisdiction to operate. Having several
institutions, it is to be ascertained that each plays its role to
the optimum in a given context. The ‘functional aspect’ of
each institution lead us to the questions:
 What to monitor: and thus guiding us to the indicators of
process monitoring’.
 When to monitor: the frequency/ time frame in which these
organizations to be monitored against their given
functionality.

Methodology
Sl.no Method adopted Nature of information collected, areas & institutions related
with
1
Focused group discussion
Mainly for gathering information from – SHGs, Ags and ECs, Level
of Awareness, Sensitisation, Environmental, Social equity aspects,
SWAP, etc.
2
Rapid rural Appraisal
For information about sensitization and awareness programmes
conducted by FNGOs; level of awareness about WS & Sujala &
programmes.
3
Participatory observation (Transect walks)
Where FNGOs were fecilitating AG meetings & SHGs; Delineation
& SWAP activities planning.
4 Survey through structured schedules (Mainly
to gather information from individuals)
For issues related to gender, Environmental awareness individual
participation level at the ECs, opinion about NGOs, Govt.
functioning & functioning & DWDO functioning.
5
Case studies
Comprehensive Recording of specific Case – studies in the
process as it occurred based on information at the grass – root
level by the participant people, NGO staff, or officials; These it may
include even a success story or any limitation of a AG, SHG or EC
functioning.
6 In addition to the above the field staff / scientists are advised to maintain the following:
 Daily field visit details chart.
 Daily field note book.
 Weekly summary report book.

Self Assessment
 ‘Self assessment’ is the assessment and evaluation of the project
progress by the stakeholders themselves at their level. ‘Sujala’ project
being conceived as a people planned and implemented project, it
mainly refers to the self assessment of CBOs viz – SHG, AG and SWS-
EC. Particularly self evaluation of SWS-EC is of most important
because, the project responsibilities, implementation and sustaining
the CBOs for the future in development perspective mainly lies with
these SWS-ECs.
 Self assessment is done through self applying a structured schedule;
which is eveloed by the PNGO.
 PNGO also orients training and capacity building for these CBOs in self
assessment.

SHG Monitoring
 Time Frame SHG Efficiency/Indicators
 1st to 3 months : Micro credit, Routine meetings
& Attendance
 II Quarters (3rd – 6th Months) :Micro credit based + WS
Concept (both equal weight
age)
 III Quarters (6th – 9th Months) :Credit based (less weight
age )
WS (more weight age)
 IV Quarters (9th – 12th Months) :Credit based + Routine
(still I w WS Base (added indicators with weight age)

Impact assessment
 Impact evaluation of the project is done to
assess the overall impact of project on the
natural resources and socio – economic
aspects. This is done through 10 %
sampling (socio – economic and natural
resources) with respect to baseline, mid
term and final assessment.

Stages of Impact Assessment
 Impact assessment is done in 3 stages:
1. Initial stage: Baseline survey – random sampling, control villages, GIS
analysis, natural resources survey, social aspects and other data.
2. Mid – term assessment coincides with mid term of project
implementation. Uses baseline information as benchmark.
3. Final Assessment: Coincides with end of project. Focuses on:
 Reduction in poverty of small and marginal farmers, landless persons,
women, and indigenous people.
 Impact indicators that allow for an assessment of the sustainability of
the institutions created by the project, sustainability of project
interventions, and overall improvement of the watershed.

Important indicators of assessment
 Socio – economic: Family details, Housing conditions,
Savings and Credits, Assets, Livestock,Food
consumption pattern, Details on the Basic Needs etc.
 Natural – resource based: Land Related Information,
Details on Irrigation, Water Management, Agricultural
Inputs, Pesticides, Farming Practices, Post –
harvesting Practices, Ground water and Surface water
details, Soil types and erosion etc.
 Others : Village infrastructure details, Common
Property resources etc.

M & E as a part of the project
programme
 Monitoring & Evaluation to be understood as a part of the
project. It is a part of the project component as any other
intervention activities like natural resource development
plan, agriculture action plan, IGA, VG Sub – plan or
capacity building of CBOs. The ultimate purpose of
Monitoring & Learning is to steer the ship of project in right
direction towards its goal. It is a part and parcel of the
project programme.

Monitoring & Evaluation

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Monitoring & Evaluation (20)

More from Devegowda S R (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Monitoring & Evaluation