Strengthening of the Monitoring and
Evaluation system
for FTPP/FTTP in FAO /SEC
1
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
Key Issues
• Revised Programmatic and Regional Approach for implementation
of FTPP/FTFP II
• Results Based Management
• More robust Monitoring and Evaluation System
• Roles and responsibilities / Participatory approach in M&E
2
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
Revised Programmatic and Regional Approach for
implementation of FTPP/FTFP II
• FAO SEC will move from country based project approach to region
based program approach
• More emphasis will be given on alignment with SDGs, sustainable
development and climate resilience
• Regional Context analysis and Situation analysis on a country level
will be conducted
• Participatory approach will be ensured with involvement of all
stakeholders especially on the National Level:
Donor, FAO HQ, FAO SEC, FAO country Officers, Recipient
Governments, Local NGOs, Beneficiaries, etc.
• Revised Operational Framework will be used
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
3
RBM Life Cycle
Setting the
goals for the
FTTP/FTFP
program
Managing
and using
the
evaluation
Implementat
ion and
using the
monitoring
Participatio
n of FAO,
Donor,
Recipient
Countries
Defining
the RBM
framework
Planning
for the
M&E
4
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
Key RBM principles
• Accountability
Recipient Governments, FAO SEC, FAO Country Offices,
Implementing partners on a country level, etc.
• National Ownership
National Governments as a prime recipients of assistance will
lead the processes on a national level
• Inclusiveness and Participation
All stakeholders will be involved starting from local
communities to National governments and FAO SEC.
Government focal points will be appointed and will facilitate
the Project Steering Committees
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
5
Rationale for a robust M&E system
• Improve management of FTTP/FTFP program to ensure optimum
use of funds and other resources;
• Learn from experience so as to improve the relevance, methods
and outcomes of program;
• Strengthen the capacity of recipient government agencies;
• Meet the requirements of donors to see whether their resources
are being used effectively, efficiently and for agreed upon
objectives;
• Provide information to enhance advocacy for policies,
programmes and resources,. that contribute to sustainable
development.
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
6
Monitoring and Evaluation System and linkages
The Program Strategy
(what will be achieved and how it will be achieved)
Basis
for
Continual refinement
The M&E
System
Basis
for
Developing the M&E
System
Detailed
Operational Plan
Gathering and
Managing Information
implementation
Reflecting Critically to
Improve Action
Project Outputs,
Outcomes and
Impacts
7
Communicating and
Reporting Results
Improvements through M&E
Action points for implementation of the M&E
system
• Identification of key elements to monitor and evaluate at all
levels;
• Identification of SMART indicators:
• Impact/Outcome level (i.e. 5 priority areas for FTPP and 9 priority areas
for FTFP
• Output level
• Based on the Results Matrix develop an M&E Framework
together with action plans for data collection and analysis,
communicating and reporting findings.
8
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
Key elements of M&E Framework
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Expected Results (Outcomes & Outputs)
Indicators (with Baselines & Indicative Targets)
Source of Information /Data Collection methods
Time / Schedule and Frequency
Responsibilities
Means of Verification: Data Source and Type
Resources
December 2015
FTPP/FTFP Workshop, Bishkek,
Kyrgyzstan
9
Monitoring
Evaluation
Frequency
Regular (e.g. monthly, quarterly)
Episodic, mid-term, final
Main action
Oversight
Assessment
Basic purpose
Improve efficiency and adjust work plan
Improve effectiveness, impact
and future programming
Focus
Inputs, outputs, process outcomes, work
plans
Effectiveness, relevance, impact,
cost effectiveness, sustainability
Information
sources
Field observations, progress reports,
rapid assessment, routine statistics
Same, plus surveys and studies
Undertaken by
Managers, FAORs, AFAORs, SEC program
specialists, technical officers, government
officials (ministry focal points)
Same plus external evaluators.
10
Reporting to
FAORs, SEC, Governments, Donor
FAORs, SEC, Donor, Governments
Roles and Responsibilities
• Government of Turkey, Directors of Departments- Overall
Coordination of the Program and Evaluation
• Program Steering Committee – Program Level Management
• Technical Review Committee – Technical guidance and project
design
• Program Management Unit – Support to Program Management
• FAOR/AFAORs – National Program Management and
Coordination/Monitoring
• National Program Coordinators- Direct implementation and
monitoring of the Programs
• National Governments Focal Points- National Coordination of the
Programs/Monitoring
11
Implementation modality
• The Programs will be developed on a regional level and will have a
long term impact for the whole region
Key Players: Government of Turkey(Heads of relevant departments),
SEC Program Management Unit, SEC Technical Officers, FAORs,
National Governments
• Implementation and Monitoring of the program will be done on
the National level by FAO country offices in cooperation with
National Governments
Key Players: National Governments(Focal points), FAORs, AFAORs,
Project Managers.
12
Thank you
Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO)
Sub-regional Office for Central Asia (FAOSEC)
http://www.fao.org/europe/en/