Report 6 Performance Monitoring Plan
  • No tags were found...

Report 6 Performance Monitoring Plan

I. BACKGROUNDIWRM II PROJECTThe Integrated Water Resource Management II Project(IWRM II) builds on the successful IWRM I projectcompleted in 2008. It is being implemented by theMinistry of Water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI) toincrease productivity of water use, water use efficiency,equity of allocation, and water quality. The project issupported by the United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID). International Resources Group(IRG), as prime contractor, and the Integrated WaterManagement Unit (IWMU), the MWRI counterpart,lead and coordinate the project. The project becameeffective on 25 January 2009 and completes on 30September 2012.The project comprises eight principal tasks, which areshown in the box at right.IWRM II Project Tasks1. Formation and development of BranchCanal Water User Associations (BCWUAs)2. Sustainable local financing for canal anddrain maintenance3. Improvements in water productivity andefficiency4. Wastewater reuse5. Regional water management organizations6. Formation of Integrated Water ManagementDistricts (IWMDs)7. Establishment of information managementsystems8. Capacity building of MWRI personnelPERFORMANCE MONITORING PLANPURPOSEThis Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) is intended (a) to provide feedback to project managersduring project implementation and (b) to provide a comprehensive and coherent information basewhich can be used to assess its outcomes. It is a deliverable called for in the contract betweenUSAID and IRG and is due 6 months from the effective date of the contract. In addition to thesetwo primary functions, the practices of setting objectives, defining indicators, collecting data, andcomputing indicators, as required by the PMP, can be readily adapted to serve as an ongoingperformance monitoring and benchmarking activity for MWRI. Performance benchmarking is animportant management tool which can be used to compare the relative performance of differentorganizational units, such as the MWRI’s Integrated Water Management Districts (IWMDs) andGeneral Directorates (GDs), and improve overall system and organizational performance.This PMP is based on the M&E approach employed under the IWRM I project which preceded thepresent one. Indicators and data collection activities developed under that project are described inthe publication A Performance Monitoring and Evaluation System for Integrated Water Management Districts. 1PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND ASSESSMENTEffective M&E begins with the goals and objectives specified for an activity. The remainder of theM&E process then results in judgments about the program’s intermediate and final success inachieving those goals and objectives.1 Svendsen, M. and I. Elassiouty. August 2004. IRG Red Sea Sustainable Development and Improved Water ResourcesManagement Component (USAID RSC/WP), Cairo.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 1

A goal is a broad statement of what a program would like to accomplish. It portrays a positive futurecondition.Objectives are specific, measurable, appropriate, realistic, and time-bound statements describingwhat the project hopes to accomplish. Objectives say what is to be achieved. They do not say how itis to be achieved. The project implementation plan must do that. Project objectives must both beclearly stated and must have “buy-in” from key project stakeholders. This means that they must bedeveloped through a consultative process that recognizes that different groups of stakeholders; and engineers, men and women; are likely to have different interests which need to bebrought together in the set of specified objectives.Once goals and objectives are established, indicators are formulated to measure progress and changerelative to project objectives. Indicators are objectively measurable gauges of progress towardachieving an objective or measuring the impact of a specific intervention. Indicators are neutral. Thatis, they do not have value judgments built into them. An indicator of “yield” therefore is simply themeasure of output per unit area. The indicator itself does not imply that a particular value of yield,say 3 tons/feddan for example, is good or bad.An objective can have more than one indicator. However, it is better to have a limited number ofindicators that everyone understands than many complex ones. Indicators can be based on bothquantitative and qualitative information.Specifying values of indicators to be achieved is the job of targets. The indicators themselves,remember, are neutral. Targets are specific values of indicators that the program wishes to achievethrough its actions.In order to measure changes resulting from program implementation, it is necessary to know whatconditions existed before implementation began. A baseline provides a starting point from which tomeasure progress. It establishes the pre-program values of the chosen indicators. Without baselineinformation, it may be impossible to determine what has changed, when, and by how much.After a baseline is established, the monitoring program will continue to collect data at suitableintervals that can be used to compute the indicators chosen. Indicators used to assess progress andresults will necessarily be the same indicators for which baseline values were established. Periodicallythe monitoring data collected will be processed to create a new set of values for the indicators andthe new values compared with previous values and the baseline values so that judgments aboutprogram progress and effectiveness can be made.REPORTINGThe PMP monitoring information will be compiled quarterly and annually and will feed into thequarterly, annual, and final project reports to USAID. The quarterly and annual compilations will alsobe used internally to help managers guide project implementation.2 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

II. OBJECTIVES AND INDICATORSPROJECT OBJECTIVESThe primary objectives of the IWRM II, as given in the Task Order, are the following.1. Increased productivity of water resources2. Increased efficiency of water resources3. More equitable allocation of water resources4. Improved water qualityTable 1 shows the relationship between the 4 project objectives and the 8 project tasks identified inthe Task Order. Major contributions to project objectives are shown by solid circles. Secondarycontributions are shown by open circles. Note that these are informal judgments by the author andnot the result of a formal process. The table simply illustrates the nature of the relationship betweenthe project’s objectives and tasks and provides a basis for the M&E plan which follows.Table 1 IWRM II Objectives and TasksProject ObjectivesProject TasksIncreased productivity ofwater resourcesIncreased efficiency ofwater resourcesMore equitable allocation ofwater resources1 Formation and development of BCWUAs • • •2 Sustainable local financing for canal and drain maintenance ○ •3 Improvements in water productivity and efficiency • • •4 Wastewater reuse • ○5 Regional water management organizations ○ ○6 Formation of IWMDs ○ • •7 Establishment of information management systems ○ • • ○8 Capacity building of MWRI personnel • • •Improved water qualityThe matrix relationship between project objectives and tasks suggests a two-fold strategy for projectmonitoring, based on two different types of indicators – implementation indicators and outcomeindicators – as discussed below.IMPLEMENTATION INDICATORSImplementation indicators are used to monitor the execution of project activities. That is, theymonitor the inputs supplied by the project to achieve desired change. Because they are relatedPERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 3

directly to project inputs, they can be keyed to the 8 project tasks shown in Table 1. Proposedimplementation indicators, organized by project task, are shown in Tables 2, and 3.Implementation indicators will have annual targets associated with them so that progress can beassessed as the project unfolds. Target values have been established for the four years of the projectfor these indicators, together with a set of baseline values that represent pre-project conditions. Ingeneral, baseline values of the indicators used in this project will be zero. If necessary, targets will beadjusted as the project progresses.IWRM II M&E IndicatorsTask Indicator Units1.11.1.a1.1.b1.1.c1.1.d1.1.e1.21.2.a1.2.b1.2.c1.31.3.aTarget Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target ActualFormation and Development of Branch Canal Water User Associations (BCWUAs)Number of IWMDs with staffedWater Advisory TeamsNumber 0 45 45 45 45Number of GDs with staffed WaterAdvisory TeamsNumber 0 8 8 8 8Share of planned BCWUAsestablished by Ministerial decreePercent 0 50 100 100 100Share of BCWUAs with maintenancepriorities and action plans Percent 0 0 50 100 100Share of BCWUAs monitoring andreporting on Branch Canal watersupplyPercent 0 0 50 100 100Sustainable Local Financing for Canal and Drain MaintenanceDecree prepared and submitted forapproval0/1 0 1 1 1 1BCWUA cost sharing systemguidelines submitted for approval0/1 0 1 1 1 1Cost sharing system guidelinesimplemented on Branch CanalsNumber 0 0 0 22 45Improvements in Water Productivity and EfficiencyNumber of farmers receiving trainingon High-Value Crops and water Number 0 100 300 500 800saving technology1.4 Wastwater Reuse1.4.a Feasibility plan submitted forapproval1.4.b Number of partnership agreementssignedTable 2 IWRM II Implementation Indicators, Water UsersCumulative Targets and AccomplishmentsBaselineYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 40/1 0 1 1 1 1Number 0 0 0 2 24 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

IWRM II M&E IndicatorsTask Indicator Units2.12.1.aRegional Water Management OrganizationsBusiness plan submitted to MWRI forapprovalCumulative Targets and AccomplishmentsBaselineYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual0/1 0 0 1 1 12.1.b Business plan implemented 0/1 0 0 0 0 12.2 Formation and Development of Integrated Water Management Districts (IWMDs)2.2.a Number of IWMDs established withfully staffed senior positionsNumber 0 45 45 45 452.1.b Number of IWMDs with completedintegrated maintenance plansNumber 0 0 45 45 452.2.c Number of IWMDs with a trainingroom established and equippedNumber 0 20 45 45 452.2.d Number of General Directorates witha computer training centerestablished and equippedNumber 0 8 8 8 82.2.e2.32.3.a2.3.b2.3.c2.3.d2.3.eTable 3 IWRM II Implementation Indicators, Water SuppliersNumber of IWRM I IWMDsparticipating in coordination meetingsNumber 27 27 27 27 27Establishment of information Management Systems for Sustainable Water Resources ManagementNumber of IWMDs with calibrationsfor all authorized inflow and outflowstructuresNumber 0 0 45 45 45Number of IWMDs with MISDinstalled and operationalNumber 0 0 45 45 45Number of IWMDs with completedand approved water resource Number 0 0 0 45 45management planNumber of IWMDs with waterresource information systems Number 0 0 45 45 45installed and operationalNumber of Branch Canals with flowsmonitored by IWMDNumber 0 0 0 0 45Capacity Building of MWRI Personnel2.42.4.a Candidates selected Number 0 20 50 50 502.4.b Candidates accepted by AmericanUniversity Cairo and local universities Number 0 20 50 50 502.4.cCandidates graduated with M.S.degreesNumber 0 0 0 20 50OUTCOME INDICATORSOutcome indicators are used to monitor and assess the results produced by the project inputs. Thatis, they monitor the combined effects of the activities implemented by the project. They cannot,therefore, be related directly to individual project tasks, but should measure achievement of projectobjectives. As specified in the Request for Proposals (RFP) and the project work plan 2 , and as shownin Table 1, outcome indicators will fall into four categories (1) water productivity, (2) efficiency ofwater use, (3) equity of water distribution, and (4) water quality. Proposed outcome indicators areshown in Table 4.Some of the outcome indicators can easily be adapted for use in an ongoing performancemeasurement and benchmarking system. This technique was adopted by some of the Districts inIWRM I and it will be proposed to IWRM II Districts for adoption as well. A sample Districtperformance monitoring form is shown in Annex 1.2 IRG. 2009. Annual work plan year 1 (January – December 2009). Cairo.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 5

Table 4 IWRM II Outcome IndicatorsOutcome Indicators Short Name Units Scope FrequencyProductivityP1 Value of output per unit water delivered Water Productivity LE / m 3 select branch canals seasonalP2 Value of output per unit area Land Productivity LE / feddan selected branch canals seasonalP3 Complaints Complaints # / 1,000 feddans all project, 45 districts seasonalP4 Farmer satisfaction with irrigation service Farmer Satisfaction % all project, 8 directorates seasonal (years 1 and 4)P5 High value crop area / total area High Value Crop Area Ratio feddan / feddan select branch canals seasonalP6 Value of high value crop output / value of total output High Value Crop Output Ratio LE per feddan / selected branch canals seasonalLE per feddanEfficiencyE1 Water delivered / unit area Actual Water Supply m 3 / fedddan all project, 45 districts seasonalE2 Water delivered / target volume Delivery Performance Ratio m 3 / m 3 all project, 45 districts seasonalE3 Water delivered / actual potential evaoptranspiration Relative Water Supply m 3 / m 3 all project, 45 districts seasonalE4 Delivery target volume / actual potential evapotranspiration Target Multiplier m 3 / m 3 all project, 45 districts seasonalEquityEq1 Coefficient of Variation of delivery/unit area ratio among IWMDs Water Supply Equity (Directorate) dimensionless all project, 45 districts seasonalEq2 Coefficient of Variation of delivery/target ratio among IWMDs Delivery Equity (Directorate) dimensionless all project, 45 districts seasonalEq3 Satisfied farmers in MC heads/satisfied farmers in MC tails Main Canal Satisfaction Ratio # / # all project, 8 directorates seasonal (years 1 and 4)Eq4 Satisfied farmers in BC heads/satisfied farmers in BC tails Branch Canal Satisfaction Ratio # / # all project, 8 directorates seasonal (years 1 and 4)6 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

PRODUCTIVITYThe key indicator of productivity is the value of output per unit water delivered. This is the measurethat the project intends to improve. It must be used with some caution, however, because water isonly one of the many factors that affect value of output. Moreover, since water is not priced inEgypt, farmers don’t make decisions on the basis of water productivity but rather on the basis ofresources that are expensive or strictly limiting. Hence a useful supplemental indicator is the value ofoutput per unit area – the traditional measure of “yield”, where land is regarded as the scarceresource.Number of complaints received by the IWMD was shown during IWRM I to be un-correlated withfarmer satisfaction with irrigation service and hence of limited usefulness in assessing quality ofservice or productivity. However, because its use in ingrained in MWRI practice, extending downfrom British times, it has been included here.Farmer satisfaction with irrigation service is the indicator most directly related to farmers’ judgmentsabout the quality of irrigation service. Although not explicitly tied to water productivity, it is animportant independent indicator of quality of irrigation service provision, the primary mechanism bywhich the project intends to influence water productivity.Increasing the area planted to high-value, lower water-consuming crops (HVLWCC), i.e. horticulturalcrops including orchards and spices, and introducing technologies to save water are other importantproject strategies for increasing water productivity. Although it is not feasible to attempt to changecropping patterns across the entire two million feddan service area covered by the project, selectedareas will be targeted for such changes and the area and value of output monitored.EFFICIENCYEfficiency of water delivery and use is closely related towater productivity. In this case, indicators will aim atmeasuring the amount of water delivered to individualDistricts relative to several different standards. Thesestandards include the area served, the target volume forthe District established in collaboration with the WaterDistribution Center (WDC), and the potentialevapotranspiration (PET) of the crop mix planted (seebox at right). In addition, the target volume for eachDistrict will be compared with its ex post PET value toprovide an indication of the physical and manageriallosses that are programmed into the target figures for theDistricts. This yields a set of explicit “multipliers” thatreflect the magnitude of the allowance over and abovePET that the Directorate and the WDC have allocated tocover operational losses in particular Districts.Potential Evapotranspiration (PET)PET represents the environmentaldemand for water from an adequatelywatered crop. It is usually defined for ashort green crop that completely coversthe ground, such as turf, and adjustedslightly for the particular crop inquestion, e.g. maize, rice, sugarcane,cotton.Actual ET may be less than potentialET if the crop is not well supplied withwater and hence cannot use water atthe maximum rate. In this case yieldswill generally be suppressed as well.EQUITYEquity of water distribution is also related to water productivity. This is because more evendistribution of water within a branch or main canal command area will tend to raise yields in waterpoor areas while having little impact on yields in water excess areas. The net effect will be to increasethe average yield of the unit.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 7

Two types of indicators are used to measure equity of water distribution. One is a statistical measure,the coefficient of variation (CV). The CV is a measure of dispersion of a set of values around anaverage and so the smaller it is, the less variability there is in the set of values, i.e. the greater theequity. The CV will be computed for both the variability of the Actual Water Supply amongDistricts, and the variability of the Delivery Performance Ratio among the Districts.The second pair of indicators for equity is based on client satisfaction surveys. The underlying idea isthat the more similar the percentage of satisfied farmers in the tail ends of canals is to the percentagein the head reaches, the more equitable is the distribution. This ratio will be computed foraggregations of both main canals and branch canals across the project.This was an indicator used during IWRM I on an intensive basis to measure quality of irrigationservice at the District level. Under IWM II, assessments will be made at the Directorate, Governorate,and project level in the initial and final years of the project only.WATER QUALITYWater quality occupies a somewhat different place in the project goal set. Although nominally aproject objective, there are no mechanisms included under the project to achieve a widespreadchange in water quality. Indeed, water quality improvements lie largely outside the purview of theMWRI itself, being primarily dependent on municipal and industrial waste water discharges into theNile and into irrigation canals, agricultural chemical use, and solid waste dumping into canals by themillions of residents in the thousands of towns and villages across the country. Hence, while we willobtain and report results of the ongoing water quality monitoring program of the MWRI, we do notexpect the project to have an appreciable impact on levels of the various water quality parameters.In particular locations, pilot activities to use wastewater streams to grow trees and other non-foodcrops will be supported by the project, and intensive water quality measurement will be an integralpart of these efforts.8 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

III. DATA SOURCESData for the M&E activity will come from four principal sources. Implementation indicators aresimply indications of whether or not individual IWMDs and Directorates have completed particularsteps in the implementation process. Information on when these steps are taken will be recorded bythe Task Team Leaders and reported to the M&E Team Leader.Data for the outcome indicators will come from three additional sources. The first is the datacollection and management system which will be set up in each of the 45 IWMDs under Task 2.3,Establishment of Information Management Systems for Sustainable Water Resources Management,of the project. The databases established under this system will include information on waterdeliveries to the IWMDs, cropping pattern data reported to the IWMD by the local AgriculturalAdministration Unit (AAU), and complaints filed with the IWMD by farmers. It will also includedaily inflow data for the BCs which will be used in productivity assessments. This data will becompiled by the MWRI Directorates and reported regularly to the MWRI Irrigation Sector, theIWMU, and the consultant team in Cairo and used to compute project M&E indicators.A number of steps are necessary before this data begins to flow, and so there will be delays in ourhaving access to it for M&E purposes. These steps include specifying District boundaries,designating authorized measuring points for all significant inflows and outflows for each District,developing rating curves for each measuring point, and computing water volumes from stagereadings being collected as an ongoing function of the pre-existing Irrigation Districts. Likewise,linkage with local AAUs and harmonization of Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reform and MWRIboundaries is required before crop area data begins to flow to the IWMDs. Fortunately needed dataon flows and on cropping patterns can be computed retroactively, and so while there will be lags inreporting M&E information based on these data, a complete set of data should ultimately beavailable for all four years of the project.It was learned during IWRM I that reported service areas of IWMDs are often badly out of date, andso once boundaries of the new integrated Districts are defined, an early project activity will be todetermine the current cultivable area of each District using a standard set of steps, together withGlobal Positioning System (GPS) and remote sensing (RS) techniques. These area values will then beused to compute that indicator which is to be reported on a unit area basis.A second source of outcome data is a sample survey planned for years one and four of the project.The survey was designed by Cairo-based project personnel and the survey consultant. Themethodology being employed is shown in Annex 2. The survey will be administered to 44 farmers ineach District or a total of around 2,000 farmers. Its planned level of precision at the District level is15%, at the Directorate level, 5.4% and at the all project level 2.2%. It will focus on assessing farmerperceptions of the quality of their irrigation and drainage services, reported crop yields, andknowledge of water user organizations. The survey employs a stratified design with two BranchCanals (BCs) selected from each District – one from the head reaches of the irrigation system and asecond BC at the tail end of the system. Eleven farmers are to be selected from the head of each ofthese BCs and another 11 from the tail.The first round of the survey will establish a baseline in each Directorate, while the final round willmeasure changes at the conclusion of the project. Because of reduced sampling density in the presentproject, it will not be possible to characterize individual Districts using this data, as the samplingerror for such a small sample will be large. Data will be used at the Directorate and all-project levels.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 9

A third source of information will be supplemental agricultural data obtained from AAUs by projectconsultants. Data on crop yields obtained through the AAU will be the primary source of data forassessing changes in yield and water productivity. However, because the accuracy and precision ofthis data is unknown, it will first be verified by crop cut sampling in selected areas conducted byproject agronomic consultants. Agronomic consultants will also obtain farm gate price informationfor each directorate at the end of each season.Remote sensing will be used to cross check the crop area figures obtained from the AAUs to feed theMatching Irrigation Supply and Demand (MISD) system, which is a part of the planned District-leveldata system. Remote sensing work will focus particularly on those areas targeted for conversion tohigh value crops. This approach will use high resolution satellite images to assess changes incropping patterns between the beginning and the end of the project and to determine the areaconverted from field crops in general, and rice in particular, to horticultural crops. Cropped areainformation, coupled with AAU information on yields of particular crops and crop prices, will beused to generate the water and land productivity indicators and the two high-value, lower waterconsumingcrop indicators.Once BCWUAs are established and begin to function, they will be asked to record the timing ofwater deliveries to their branch canals and report their level of satisfaction with the irrigation serviceprovided to them. A draft form for assessing delivery patterns and performance is shown in Annex 3.However, because the BCWUAs will not be functional during the initial year of the project, it willnot be possible to establish a pre-project baseline using this approach, and hence the information willnot be useful for assessing project outcomes. However, the introduction of this monitoringapproach as soon as practicable can lead its use in future MWRI performance assessment programs.10 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

IV. ANALYSIS AND REPORTINGIMPLEMENTATION INDICATORSCreation of the implementation indicators (1.1.a through 2.4.c) is simple and straightforward. Mostare simply numbers of occurrences (e.g. “number of IWMDs with training centers established anequipped) which are summed across Districts and reported against targets. Gender effects will bedisaggregated wherever possible and appropriate.OUTCOME INDICATORSMost of the outcome indicators require some data-based computation to create. These are discussedindividually below.PRODUCTIVITYValue of crop output for one targeted Branch Canal in each Directorate will be computed from area,yield, and price data for all important crops grown on the BC to create a Water Productivityindicator. Water delivered to the BC will be computed from measured daily BC inflows, net of anyintended outflows, and summed for the season. Gross value of output divided by the volume ofwater delivered to the BC will provide the primary water productivity measure for these targetedareas. In addition, each BC targeted for HVLWC crops will be paired with another BC in the sameDistrict which is not targeted for change. The same variables will be measured for these paired BCsand results from the two compared. Water Productivity is expected to rise over the course of theproject.Gross value of output will also be put on a per unit area basis by dividing its value for the selectedBCs by the BC net irrigable area to obtain values of Land Productivity. The paired non-targetedBCs will be measured in the same way and the two compared.The number of complaints filed with each IWMD will be extracted from IWMD databases, dividedby the net irrigable area of the District, and multiplied by 1,000 to obtain a Complaints indicator –the number of complaints per 1,000 feddans – for each District. This value is not expected to be areliable predictor of quality of irrigation service among Districts. However, it is expected to indicatethe effectiveness of BCWUAs in helping to solve user problems before they become formalcomplaints. This value is expected to fall over the course of the project.The percentage of farmers in each Directorate satisfied with irrigation service comprises the FarmerSatisfaction indicator. It will be computed from sample survey data and reported. This value isexpected to rise by the end of the project.The area devoted to high-value, lower water-consuming crops in the one targeted branch canal ineach Directorate will be divided by the total cropped area for the branch canal to obtain the fractionof the branch canal devoted to high value crops – the High Value Crop Area Ratio. The sameprocess will be followed for the value of high value crops relative to the total value of output in theselect branch canals to produce the High Value Crop Output Ratio.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 11

EFFICIENCYWater delivered to each District will be computed from measured canal inflows, net of outflows, andsummed for the season. This value will be divided by the District’s net irrigable area to obtain theActual Water Supply (AWS) indicator. This value can be compared with the project-wide averageto identify Districts with particularly high or low levels of water application. Baseline and subsequentvalues can also be compared to determine if Actual Water Supply is declining. Declines are expected,but this indicator is less reliable than the following one which also includes information on thespecific water needs in each District.Volumes of water delivered will be divided by the target volumes set for each District by the WDCto obtain a Delivery Performance Ratio (DPR) for each District. Target volumes are establishedin advance of the season based on the previous year’s cropping pattern and on expected losses duringdelivery. This is an important planning and management tool. Values of this indicator can also becomputed on a 15-daily basis throughout the season so that managers can make adjustments on areal-time basis. Target volumes are based on physical crop needs, but also include allowances forunavoidable losses, such as canal seepage en route to farmers’ fields. Ideally, the value of this indicatorfor the season and for each 15-day period should be 1.0, implying a perfect match between theintended delivery and the actual delivery. These ratios are expected to move closer to 1.0 as theproject progresses.At the conclusion of the season, when the actual crop areas for the season are known, a RelativeWater Supply (RWS) can be computed. This indicator provides an after-the-season look at theamount of water provided, relative to computed crop needs, assuming that crops were never waterstressed 3 .The final indicator in this set is the Target Multiplier. This indicator shows the ratio between thedelivery target set for the District and the computed water need of the crops grown. This ratio willusually be greater than one, since some unavoidable losses are generally incurred in the deliveryprocess and so the target will generally exceed the computed crop water needs. The level of theselosses varies from District to District, but higher than average values are a signal that expected lossesare large and that the system may benefit from a physical upgrade, such as gate repair or canal lining;improved maintenance; or improved management. At times, though, this ratio may be less than one,as might be the case if farmers use (unmeasured) pumped drainage water extensively to supplementcanal supplies, in which case surface water deliveries may be less than computed crop needs. TheTarget Multiplier is expected to decline over the course of the project as sources of loss andinefficiency are identified and mitigated.EQUITYThe coefficient of variation (CV) is a statistic that measures dispersion around an average value. Assuch, where values of the statistic being assessed are expected to be similar, a smaller CV indicatesgreater equity. The CV of two measures of efficiency – AWS and the DPR – will be computed tosee how much variability is present in each of these indicators among Districts. These equitymeasures are termed Water Supply Equity (Directorate) and Delivery Equity (Directorate) Thevalue of each is expected to decline over the life of the project, indicating that managers atDirectorate and District levels are doing a better job of dividing available water equitably among the45 Districts. Delivery Equity (Directorate) is particularly important in this regard.3 That is, it is based on the potential crop evaoptranspiration, which only occurs when crops are fully supplied with water.Actual evapotranspiration may be less than the potential if crops did experience water stress during the season, since if theydo not have the water, they cannot use, or transpire, it. In this case, yields will also be suppressed.12 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

Percentages of satisfied farmers from the sample survey data for each season in Years 1 and 4 will becomputed separately for farmers in the head end Branch Canals and those in the tail end of theDistrict. The ratio of these two satisfaction levels, the Main Canal Satisfaction Ratio, will indicatehow equitable the distribution of water among Branch Canals is, as rated by water users. If they areequally satisfied, as they should be in an ideal world, then the ratio would be 1.0. If the head-endfarmers are more satisfied, as is typically the case, then the ratio will be greater than unity. This valueis expected to move closer to 1.0 by the end of the project. This ratio measures the effectiveness ofthe Directorate and District managers as a group, but cannot separate the performance of individualDistricts.Computing a similar ratio for the water users in the heads and tails of the Branch Canals yields aBranch Canal Satisfaction Ratio. This ratio should also be 1.0 and reflects the success of theDistrict personnel and farmers who are managing and maintaining the BC in distributing waterevenly along its length. This indicator will be computed for groups of irrigators at the Directorateand all-project level, but cannot be reliably computed for individual Districts.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 13

V. PLAN IMPLEMENTATIONImplementation of the M&E plan is closely integrated into the implementation of the project itself.The M&E Team Leader will provide overall coordination and leadership for the activity, supportedby one or two visits annually by the Senior M&E Specialist. Task Team Leaders will be responsiblefor keeping records to document implementation and for data retrieval from the IWMD databases.TIMETABLEAn initial timetable of M&E activities is shown below. This timetable will be updated in subsequentannual M&E reports.1. M&E Plan completed in July 2009.2. Calibration of IWMD inflow and outflow structures proceeds over the next 8 to 16 monthsto allow volumetric flow calculations to be made for both baseline and subsequent seasons.3. Calibration of inflow structures to at least two Branch Canals in each District over the next 8to 16 months to allow volumetric flow calculations to be made for both baseline andsubsequent seasons.4. The first (baseline) sample survey round to take place during the second quarter of CY 2009.5. Database and data collection system development and strengthening at the IWMD levelproceeds over the first 3 years of the project. Districts begin reporting monitoring data assoon as they have completed one full season of data collection, expected during Project Year2.6. Record keeping by the Branch Canal Water User Associations is implemented as they areestablished. with the first ones accomplishing this in Project Year 2.7. Reporting on implementation indicators by Task Team Leaders begins in the third quarter ofProject Year 1 for all IWMDs and continues throughout the project.8. M&E Specialist works with M&E team members in October 2009 to prepare first annualM&E report.9. In subsequent years, M&E data flow to a central point in the IWMU through the datasystems established under the project.10. A follow-up farmer satisfaction field survey to be carried out during Project Year 4.11. M&E Specialist works with M&E team annually in October to prepare annual reportsubmissions and on other occasions as needed.TRAINING NEEDSTraining for the sample survey enumeration will be carried out by the contractor implementing thesurveys. The extensive training to be provided by the project under Task 2.3 Establishment ofInformation Management Systems for Sustainable Water Resources Management will create almostall of the skills needed to collect the remaining data required by the M&E activity. Training in M&Etechniques may be provided to MWRI staff as required and on request.14 PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN

ANNEX 1: SAMPLE DISTRICT PERFORMANCEMONITORING FORMDistrict Performance Profile(Monthly)Month: Mar. 2009Directorate: West QenaWaterRotation ScheduleDistrictWater M m3/monthDelivery Water ComplaintsAvailabilityFarmersDelivery Demand vs deliveryComplaintsViolationsWater satisfaction (maxArea (fed) Demand Target Delivery vs Target vs Target Demand (m3/da/fd) irrig. drain. total last Year Violations last year Head Tail Reliability = 3, min =0)Esna 61402 43.756 33.189 41.176 1.241 1.32 0.94 21.63 1 0 1 4 14 35 1 0.9 0.95 2.8Arment 39321 28.763 21.971 25.276 1.150 1.31 0.88 20.74 1 0 1 1 27 2 1 1 1 3Nakada 33945 24.700 21.579 24.100 1.117 1.14 0.98 22.90 4 0 4 2 6 11 1 0.94 0.92 2.6Naga Ham. 50051 30.232 22.000 33.940 1.543 1.37 1.12 21.87 0 0 0 1 0 9 1 0.96 1 3Abo Tisht 37025 15.081 16.041 19.600 1.222 0.94 1.30 17.08 2 0 2 2 3 4 1 0.99 1 3GDA 221744 142.532 114.780 144.092 1.255 1.217 1.044 20.844 8 0 8 10 50 61 1 0.96 0.97 2.88Note:a - Rotation Schedule & Farmers satisfaction data to be determined from Form No. 8.b - Farmer Satisfaction; 3 Excellent, 2 Good, 1 Fair, 0 BadPERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 15

ANNEX 2. SAMPLE SURVEYMETHODOLOGYFarmer-based Performance Monitoring of Irrigation ServiceDelivery1. BackgroundThe GOE is implementing an aggressive irrigated area expansion program. This is in turn reducingthe supply of water per feddan. In addition, the high cost of operating and maintaining the waterdelivery infrastructure is a serious constraint on the national budget because farmers pay a very lowportion of the actual costs. This further compounded by decreasing water quality as the waterconveyance system is increasingly used for waste disposal.The objective of IWRM II is to provide technical assistance, training, commodities, and small grantsin support of the decentralization of water management decision-making and an increasedparticipation of all rural inhabitants in such decision-making in East Delta Region. Forty-FiveDistricts have already been restructured into IWMDs in the eight directorates. With decentralizationand participation, it is expected to achieve improvements in the quality of irrigation services providedto farmers.2. Monitoring SystemAn important component of the project is the monitoring and evaluation of the IWMDs in order toprovide the project stakeholders with the information needed to follow and manage the project’sprogress and assess its outcomes and impacts. An M&E Plan has been developed for the projectwhich includes a number of indicators of objective achievement. Some of these indicators requiredata on farmer perceptions related to irrigation service, and the following survey design andmethodology is intended to facilitate obtaining these data.2-1 Methodology and Survey DesignSome data for M&E program will be drawn from the data systems of the IWMDs. Other data willbe collected from farmers served by the IWMDs through a field survey. The survey will collectneeded information from farmers to determine the equity of water distribution. This data will bebased on farmer satisfaction with the irrigation service provided analyzed in terms of the spatialdistribution of the responses. This task includes several activities.• Sample Design to represent the head and tail reaches of the main canal within each District aswell as branch canals within each District.• Questionnaire development.• Questionnaire pre-testing.Following is a detailed description of each of the mentioned activitiesPERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 16

2-2 Sample Design and SelectionRespondents. The respondents for the survey will be farmers who are responsible for decisionmaking regarding water management, agriculture land use, and crop selection. Some of these farmersmay be landowners, while others may work on land owned by someone else. The farmer may bemale or female.Sample Size. Since the main objective is to have indicators at the District level, the overall targetsample of farmers will be a minimum of 40 and a maximum of around 60 per District based on thearea of the District. The sample size is determined by two factors mainly:1- The resources available (human and financial resources)2- The requirement for data analysis.Data available from the IWRM II include the District name, area, and number of branch canals. TheDistrict area varies from 20,000 feddan to 83,400 feddan, and the number of branch canals variesfrom a minimum of 1 branch canals per District to a maximum of around 59 canals.(The target sample from each District is shown below). The proposed sample will be around 1980farmers from all 45 Districts.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 17

East Delta Governorates, Directorates and districtsGovernorate Directorate DistrictTarget NumberSample ofFarmersNumber ofSample ofBCAverage No. ofSelectedFarmers on BCDamiettaDamietta 44 2 22Faraskour 44 2 22Total 88 4 44Portsaid 44 2 22DamiettaElkantra Gharb 44 2 22ElsalamElmataria 44 2 22San Elhagar 44 2 22Total 176 8 88TotalKebli Aga 44 2 22Bahri Aga 44 2 22Meet Sowaid 44 2 22East DakahliaKebli Elmansoura 44 2 22Bahri Elmansoura 44 2 22Dekerness 44 2 22Shark Elmanzala 44 2 22DakahliaGharb Elmanzala 44 2 22Total 352 16 176Meet Ghamr 44 2 22Deyarb Negm 44 2 22South Dakahlia Kebli Elsenbllawain 44 2 22Bahri Elsenbllawain 44 2 22Temaie Elemdeed 44 2 22Total 220 10 110TotalEltal Elkebeer 44 2 22Elismailia 44 2 22Shamal Elismailia 44 2 22IsmailiaIsmailiaElsuez 44 2 22Shark Elbohirat 44 2 22Elsheekh Zayed 44 2 22Total 264 12 132Shark Belbeis 44 2 22Elmollak 44 2 22Faquos 44 2 22Salhia Abo Hammad 44 2 22Eltolombaat 44 2 22Ganoob Elsalhia 44 2 22Shamal Elsalhia 44 2 22SharkiaTotal 308 14 154Menya Elkamh 44 2 22Hehia 44 2 22East Sharkia Shark Faquos 44 2 22Gharb Faquos 44 2 22Elhosaynia 44 2 22Total 220 10 110TotalShoubra 44 2 22Qalyoub 44 2 22Toukh 44 2 22Benha 44 2 22Qualubia QualubiaKafr Shoukr 44 2 22Mashtool Elsouk 44 2 22Gharb Belbeis 44 2 22Shebeen Elkanater 44 2 22Total 352 16 176Grand Total 1980 90PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 18

A list of all the branch canals in each District will be obtained and divided into three equal groupsbased on water availability (excellent, moderate, and poor) by District managers and their staff. Thesample will then be selected in two stages.First Stage.A number of branch canals will be selected from each District, stratified by water availability in thebranch canal. Two branch canals will be selected randomly from Districts; one from each of thethree groups of canals.Second Stage.The IAS will prepare a list of landowners on each sample branch canal and provide this to the surveyconsultant who will select the sample. The number of farmers in each sub-sample will be determinedin proportion to number of farmers on the branch canals using the following formula:No. of farmers to be selected on Branch canal=T ×NN 1Where:T: Total Target sample of farmers per DistrictN 1 : Number of farmers on the selected Branch CanalsN: Total number of farmers on selected Branch Canals in the DistrictThen the target number of farmers will be selected using random systematic sampling. The numberof farmers will be selected representing the position of their along the branch canal randomly (thehead and tail). During the field phase of the survey, landowners who are not actual farmers will bereplaced with the actual farmer of the land.2-3 Questionnaire Development and PretestOne questionnaire has been developed for this survey. The questionnaire has been revised by theM&E consultant as well as technical staff at the IWRM II and other stakeholders. The farmerquestionnaire includes information on:• Irrigation services including farmer satisfaction with the quantity and time availability ofwater, crops cultivated and its productivity and equity between farmers.• Knowledge of Water Users Association among farmers and communication with Districtofficials• Background information about farmers work and income other than agriculture.The questionnaire was developed in both English and Arabic. After revision it was finalized inEnglish and then translated into Arabic. A brief manual for enumerators was developed for thetraining, including general guidelines for conducting an interview and specific instructions for askingeach question.A small pretest will be conducted with the draft questionnaire on one of BC in Lower Egypt. Twoexperienced interviewers from the vendor will be trained for one day and will interview a total of 50PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 19

farmers. Each will be within one of the four initial IWMDs formed during a previous project. Basedon experience gained in the pretest, the questionnaire will be finalized for the main data collection.3. Design Training Program and Data collection3-1 EnumeratorsSelecting and training enumerators is one of the most important activities that will take place duringthe conduct of the survey to guarantee good data quality. After discussion and negotiation withMWRI and the M&E team, the following approach was agreed upon.The Water Communication Unit, MWRI will bring his own enumerators and supervisors. Thetraining will be organized as follows:i. Sessions will be given about objectives, survey design and methodology, and questioningtechniques, preparing enumerators to gather questionnaire information (one day).ii. Trainees will apply their training by conducting trial interviews, under the supervision of thetrainers (One day).A tentative schedule is shown below.DateFirst DaySecond DayTime9:00- 10:0010:00-11:0011:00-12:3012:30-13:0013:00- 15:009:00-12:0013:30-15:00SubjectIntroduction- Survey objectives, Survey Design and Methodology,sample , field work organization, quality controlHow to fill different types of questionsHow to fill out the questionnaire using visual aidsLunch BreakMock InterviewField practice (pre test)Discussion of Field practiceThe training sessions will start within two weeks.3-2 Data collectionEnumerators and supervisors in each District will work as one team and the supervisor will organizethe team work to conduct the data collection. In addition, the supervisor will be responsible forcollecting and reviewing the questionnaires for completeness and consistency, and will make spotchecks to be sure that the correct sample was selected. Data collection will start in May and will referto the period 1 May 2008 through 30 April 2009. The numbers of field coordinators (Contractor’semployees) should be two in each directorate. These coordinators should be assigned principalresponsibility for correct sample selection, and questionnaire completeness, accuracy, andconsistency.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 20

It is expected to complete the data collection in each District within at most ten days. Accordingly, itis expected to complete data collection for the eight directorates by May 28, 2009.4. Data processing and AnalysisCompleted questionnaires will be collected regularly from the Districts by the survey consultant andbrought to the office in Cairo for registration. Office editors will review the questionnaires forconsistency and completeness, in order to resolve any problem before data entry.After verification and correction in the field, the supplementary coding prior to data entry will beconducted, then after the coding process is completed, the questionnaires will be entered on microcomputersusing ISSA (Integrated System for Survey Analysis) or CSPro (Census and SurveyProcessing System) or an equivalent package. Verification will be conducted for 100% ofquestionnaires for accuracy. After data entry is completed, data editing will include the checking ofrange, structure and a selected set of checks for internal consistency. All errors detected during theediting procedure will be corrected. Once all errors have been corrected, the frequency for allvariables will be prepared.5. ReportingThe survey contractor will prepare a report documenting the administration of the field survey andnoting features of the process which worked well and those which need improvement, and makecomprehensive recommendations for improving the conduct of future rounds of the survey. Thereport will contain an annex of tables consolidating the data collected, broken out as agreed with theproject. Processed data from the survey will be used by the IWRM II, together with data from othersources, in preparing M&E reports based on the M&E Plan for the Project.PERFORMANCE MONITORING PLAN 21


24 2.4 Information flyers or brochure oncapacity building opportunities forMWRI staff by IWRM IIU.S. Agency for International Development1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20523Tel: (202) 712-0000Fax: (202) 216-3524www.usaid.govPublic Awareness & Communication Plan 1

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines