Design, Monitoring, and Evaluation – Capacity Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Indirect Beneficiaries reportedly reached during the past year by 32 projects in eight Country Offices ranged from 800 (individual project in Malawi) to 247,500 (individual project in Mali). The median number of Indirect Beneficiaries for Country Offices (Figure 13) ranged from 2,500 (Malawi) to 58,800 (Mali). Figure 13: Indirect Beneficiaries reached last year (in Thousands) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 NOT AVAILABLE Bolivia Latin America East Africa South & West Africa Asia NOT AVAILABLE Haiti Nicaragua Peru Egypt Ethiopia NOT AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE 3.4 Information Processing and Use NOT AVAILABLE Kenya Rwanda NOT AVAILABLE Somalia Sudan N NOT AVAILABLE Sudan S NOT AVAILABLE Tanzania W Bank / Gaza NOT AVAILABLE Benin, Ghana & Togo NOT AVAILABLE Malawi Mali NOT AVAILABLE Mozam bique Niger Sierra Leone Zam bia Afghanistan Bangladesh Note: Numbers represent Median Data was queried on how information from monitoring and evaluation was processed and used and the information needs that it met (Tables 3.4.1 and 3.4.2). Three of the 189 projects used MER ® for collecting and processing data from monitoring and evaluation (two projects in Ethiopia and one project in Afghanistan). One project in Somalia “was using the MER software which it later abandoned due to non-conformity of the intervention logic and data collection requirements with those required by the software”. Twenty-four percent of all projects have some other Management Information System (MIS) to collect and process data. More projects have some form of MIS for collecting and processing data in South and West Africa (45%) and Asia (43%) than any other region. In spite of the lower use of MER ® or other MIS, 36% of projects reported satisfaction with the existing software for collecting and processing data (without specifying what software they use). More projects say they have satisfactory software programs in Latin America (52%) and Asia (47%) than any other region. Through analysis of DMECA data, MIS was identified as an area of improvement in projects in Angola, Bolivia, Somalia, Kenya, Nicaragua, Sudan, and South Sudan. DME CA Global Synthesis 28 India
MIS needs attention. Box 2: The State of MIS (Comment from CARE-Gulf of Guinea) In one of the projects, the information system has made the write-up of reports more efficient and this is one of the main uses for specialized information software. (Comment from CARE-Bolivia) Some information systems had to be reconstructed several times, because they did not respond to the project indicators. (Comment from CARE-Bolivia) MIS is an area for improvement. (CARE-Sudan) Fifty percent of all projects have data management systems that contribute to accurate and timely reports. At least 50% of projects in Asia, East Africa, and Latin America have data management systems that contribute to accurate and timely reports. The needs that the reports from the data management systems were meeting are reported in Table 3.4.2. At least 65% of projects have systems that generate reports fulfilling the needs of Project Management and Donors. Thirty-three to 44% of projects have projects data management systems that generated reports fulfilling the needs of Partners, Country Office Senior Management, Field Supervisors, or Participants. Twenty-seven percent of project reports met the needs of Sector Coordinators and only 11% of projects generated reports that met the needs of CARE International Member Headquarters. As compared to other regions, more projects in Asia and Latin America produce reports that they say met the needs of Project Management (at least 76%), Donors (at least 70%), or Participants (at least 39%). More projects in East Africa generated reports that met the needs of partners (60%) and Country Office Senior Management (64%) than any did the projects in the other regions. While more projects in Asia met the needs of Sector Coordinators (60%) and more projects in Latin America met the needs of Field Supervisors (44%) than in any other region. Reports and the information generated was not fully meeting the needs of stakeholders – as reported in the analysis of DMECA from Bolivia, Sudan, and South Sudan. DME CA Global Synthesis 29
Page 1 and 2: Design, Monitoring, and Evaluation
Page 3 and 4: Executive Summary Introduction: Dur
Page 5 and 6: What methods are used to count and
Page 7 and 8: The self-ratings and the measures o
Page 9 and 10: 1. Introduction CARE’s work in ov
Page 11 and 12: • On one occasion, respondent gen
Page 13 and 14: Table 3.1.1: Concept Paper, Source
Page 15 and 16: Eighty-four percent of projects hav
Page 17 and 18: 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Boliv
Page 19 and 20: Table 3.2.4: Initial Diagnosis, Log
Page 21 and 22: Table 3.2.5: Review of Proposals Pr
Page 23 and 24: 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 5 4
Page 25 and 26: Country Office and Region Table 3.3
Page 27 and 28: Table 3.3.2: Pattern and Rigor of B
Page 29 and 30: Between 62 and 78% of all projects
Page 31 and 32: 2.0 (Ethiopia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone
Page 33 and 34: 3.3d Tracking Project Participants
Page 35: 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 NOT AVAILABLE B
Page 39 and 40: Country Office and Region * Multipl
Page 41 and 42: Table 3.5.1: Training, DME Skills,
Page 43 and 44: hoc across regions without any soun
Page 45 and 46: esults that the analyzed data has b

Design, Monitoring, and Evaluation – Capacity Assessment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?