01.06.2013 Views

to download PDF of full document - SPARC Nigeria

to download PDF of full document - SPARC Nigeria

to download PDF of full document - SPARC Nigeria

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

attention/action by OSSAP-MDGs and highlight<br />

inconsistent reporting <strong>of</strong> parameters by state teams<br />

(for example, a completed project with zero<br />

percent quality compliance) facilitated the<br />

transition <strong>to</strong> the new goal-based 2009 M&E<br />

reporting format.<br />

The 2009 M&E Exercise<br />

The process <strong>of</strong> moni<strong>to</strong>ring and evaluation adopted<br />

in 2009 included site visits by the states‘ teams <strong>to</strong><br />

DRG-funded MDGs projects and programmes in<br />

the communities. The teams conducted interviews<br />

with beneficiaries. Meetings with the direc<strong>to</strong>rs <strong>of</strong><br />

the state MDGs and MDAs Desk Officers in the<br />

state were held.<br />

Both qualitative and quantitative data were<br />

collected. Qualitative data was collected using indepth<br />

interviews and focus group discussions<br />

(FGDs) with the stakeholders in the communities<br />

and observations using a set <strong>of</strong><br />

templates/benchmarks for the different project<br />

categories 4 <strong>to</strong> assess project performance and<br />

possible impact <strong>of</strong> the DRG projects. The<br />

quantitative data collected was used <strong>to</strong> measure<br />

the actual extent <strong>of</strong> work done on each project and<br />

<strong>to</strong> assess the status <strong>of</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> the<br />

project. This data was then fed in<strong>to</strong> the web portal<br />

for further analysis. The status <strong>of</strong> completion <strong>of</strong><br />

work on each project moni<strong>to</strong>red (i.e. Abandoned,<br />

Completed, Ongoing or Not Started) was also<br />

generated and the quality <strong>of</strong> project execution (i.e.<br />

Good, Average and Bad) established. Projects<br />

were identified as ‗abandoned‘ in cases where the<br />

project had started but the contrac<strong>to</strong>r had not been<br />

<strong>to</strong> the project site for up <strong>to</strong> six months and as ‗Not<br />

Started‘ where site visits indicated that the project<br />

had not yet started.<br />

4 The benchmarking assisted in measuring the progress <strong>of</strong> work in<br />

the different sites by providing a means for apportioning a<br />

percentages rate <strong>of</strong> completion on each element <strong>of</strong> the work stage<br />

(See Appendices on Benchmarking) as agreed by the OSSAP-MDGs,<br />

consultants and civil society organisations (CSOs).<br />

What is new about the 2009 M&E Report?<br />

For the year 2009 M&E exercise, following the<br />

mid-term review <strong>of</strong> progress made on the MDGs<br />

and given the fact that the country is in the process<br />

<strong>of</strong> a transition <strong>to</strong> a new government, this M&E<br />

report attempts <strong>to</strong> begin <strong>to</strong> address the challenge<br />

<strong>of</strong> working within the Goal-based orientation <strong>of</strong><br />

the MDGs by going beyond the reporting style <strong>of</strong><br />

previous M&E Reports on inputs, activities, and<br />

outputs <strong>to</strong> now emphasise outcomes and impacts<br />

by clustering DRG project activities and<br />

expenditures in<strong>to</strong> the MDGs they are intended <strong>to</strong><br />

achieve. This, however, posed the additional<br />

challenge <strong>of</strong> defining and attributing the<br />

contributions <strong>of</strong> each project, MDA and others<br />

<strong>to</strong>wards the achievement <strong>of</strong> the different MDGs.<br />

The portal was able <strong>to</strong> meet these challenges by<br />

creating system <strong>to</strong>ols for identifying and capturing<br />

M&E data pertaining <strong>to</strong> the cross-contributions <strong>of</strong><br />

each implementing agent <strong>to</strong> the achievement <strong>of</strong><br />

the different MDGs. By doing this, OSSAP‘s<br />

ability <strong>to</strong> assess and describe the impact <strong>of</strong> DRG<br />

interventions and their contributions <strong>to</strong> an MDG<br />

and/or set <strong>of</strong> MDGs was greatly improved. This<br />

way it would be easier for OSSAP <strong>to</strong><br />

communicate progress <strong>to</strong>wards achieving the<br />

MDGs as well as assess the individual and<br />

collective contributions <strong>of</strong> all the implementing<br />

agents <strong>to</strong> the achievements <strong>of</strong> the goals which<br />

will, in turn, serve as the basis for justifying future<br />

requests for DGR funds as well as for people,<br />

facilities and other resources from the political<br />

leaders.<br />

This increased ability <strong>to</strong> effectively communicate<br />

the performance <strong>of</strong> DRGs projects in the face <strong>of</strong><br />

increasing visibility <strong>of</strong> OSSAP-MDGs as an organ<br />

<strong>of</strong> transparency and accountability <strong>to</strong>wards<br />

achievement <strong>of</strong> the MDGs, responds <strong>to</strong> existing<br />

perceptions that the DRGs and the OSSAP-MDGs

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!