Partnership Transparency Fund
Conditional Cash Transfer Project (CCTP) Watch
Project Completion Assessment (PCA) by External Evaluator
Questionnaire and Guidelines
A. Key Project Data
1. Name of the CSO
2. Project Title
3. Project Location
4. Grant Amount (in USD)
5. Period of Implementation
6. PTF Project Advisor
7. PCA Author
8. Date of PCA
: Concerned Citizens of Abra for Good Government, Inc (CCAGG)
: The Conditional Cash Transfer Program Watch Project (The
Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program Watch Project)
: 12 municipalities of the Province of Abra, namely:
Boliney, La Paz, Malibcong, Villaviciosa, Bucloc, Tubo, LicuanBaay, Luba, Langiden, Bucay, San Isidro and Danglas (Lacub and
Lagayan had been part of the initial proposal of 14
municipalities, but not however part of final project
implementation)
: 35,500 USD
: From: Date/month/year To: date/month/year
April 1, 2011 to May31, 2012
: Geert van der Linden
: Shomikho Raha
: June 30, 2013
B. Overview
Key problem addressed by the CCTP Watch Project (max. 100 words):
The CCTP Watch Project in Abra Province engages with Philippines’ flagship conditional cash transfer
program (popularly known as 4Ps) designed to reach genuinely poor families in the remote and rural
areas that the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) implements. To ensure the
integrity of the CCT, the key problems that the CCTP Watch project addresses concern challenges in
proper targeting of the beneficiaries to the poorest of the poor, challenges in making sure
beneficiaries receive the full entitled benefits and without delay or leakages and enabling feedback
from the community on the implementation of the 4Ps to the DSWD so that the service delivery
system is improved.
Objectives of the CCTP Watch Project (max. 150 words):
The Conditional Cash Transfer Program Watch Project or the 4Ps Watch Project was implemented
over twelve months (or one year) with two overarching main objectives: (1) the inclusion of the
poorest of the poor as beneficiaries of the program; and (2) to ensure that government (public)
money is not wasted. To achieve this, the Project was designed with five key components that had
the following objectives:
 To know the current status of the CCTP and other DSWD programs in the province
 To develop a monitoring tool of DSWD programs that can be used by simple people



To form community based monitoring teams that would monitor the CCTP and other DSWD
programs in their respective communities
To promote transparency and accountability in governance to the general public
To conduct policy forum / dialogue with the DSWD (provincial, regional, national)
Approaches and strategies used to achieve project objectives (max. 250 words):
To address the primary concerns identified in the implementation of 4Ps, the CCTP Watch Project
takes the approach of community monitoring to safeguard the integrity of the Pantawid Pamilya
program in delivering its intended results. To deliver on this strategy, the CCTP Watch Project was
designed with five components:
1) a Baseline Survey to ensure all eligible beneficiaries are “included” in the “beneficiaries’ list” and
identify those currently in the list to be “excluded”;
2) Developing Monitoring Tools which can be used to validate that conditionality requirements for the
CCT transfer of funds to parents is adequately met;
3)Monitoring cum Formation of community-based monitoring teams that would be implementing the
community feedback tools developed and their capacity-building;
4) Advocacy on good governance using different popular media options, such as radio, newspapers
etc.; and
5) Policy Dialogue with DSWD to ensure that the community feedback on the CCTP reaches the
concerned authorities who are able to then follow up, based on the CCTP Watch Project findings, to
improve the delivery of the CCTP to beneficiaries
The CCTP Watch project also led to learnings that CCAGG and other such CSOs can potentially use for
adopting “best practices” within their social accountability initiatives to improve the delivery of
government programs.
Overall conclusion on CCTP Watch Project (max. 250 words):
The CCTP Watch Project provided for an important initiative of community feedback on the current
functioning of the CCTP or 4Ps flagship social protection scheme in Philippines. The findings from the
different tools used by the CCTP Watch, whether they be baseline survey, regular feedback to
monitoring teams or in capacity-building seminars for parent leaders organized by the project, all
confirmed the positive impact that the 4Ps is having among the poor in Abra. These are further
detailed in this PCA elsewhere, but the results from all 12 municipalities covered suggest that children
are attending school in greater numbers, pregnant mothers visit RHU clinics more frequently,
underweight children are more likely to be identified through the CCTP and their needs addressed, as
well as the empowerment of parents through the monthly Family Development Sessions (FDS)
provide for a unique opportunity to better harness Parent Leaders in co-governance of flagship
government schemes such as the 4Ps in delivering more effective outcomes.
The CCTP Watch Project additionally helped in generating monitoring tools that CCAGG used in
validating the implementation of the 4Ps, which can be useful for other CSOs and developed further by
the DSWD to be used more widely for community monitoring of the 4Ps across the country. The CCTP
Watch project has shown the value of replicating what the CCAGG undertook in the 12 municipalities of
Abra can on a larger scale. In Abra, this can be done in the remaining 15 municipalities, but also
extended to other parts of Northern Luzon and the other regions, with some modifications suiting to the
needs of each province/region. The two most significant contributions of the CCTP Watch project has
been in validating the list of CCT beneficiaries for errors of exclusion or inclusion and in monitoring on
behalf of the community the instances of grievances and types of challenges faced that 4Ps beneficiaries
face.
C. Approach and CCTP Watch Project Design
Overall rating on the relevance and design of the project (as per scoring
4 (CSO
guidelines)
Score)
Please provide a brief narrative for each following question:
1. Were the objectives appropriate to the problem being addressed? (max. 200 words)
3.5 (IEE
Score)
When the CCTP Watch Project proposal was developed, the primary objective was to assess whether
the 4Ps was functional in delivering results for their beneficiaries and the extent of “leakage” or
weaknesses in the targeting of beneficiaries that compromised the program. The problem as
identified by the CCTP Watch project was to use community feedback to inform whether the 4Ps was
fundamentally a credible program and whether it was performing to address the key goals of
improving the education of children, health of pregnant mothers and infants, or the empowerment of
Parent Leaders that it had set out to.
Given the findings now of the CCTP Watch project and the World Bank’s CCT Program Impact
Evaluation (2013), any further project along the lines of CCTP Watch will no longer be primarily
validating the fundamental usefulness of the 4Ps, which is now proven with greater evidence, but
should be more inclined to improving further the existing effectiveness of the 4Ps. In particular, the
CCTP Watch project has highlighted that the specific issue of underpayment or delayed payments to
beneficiaries needs to be given more attention in any such future project objective. The potential to
further the empowerment of the Parent Leaders through the institutional provision under the 4Ps for
monthly FDS should also be enhanced as a project objective in improving co-governance of officials
and citizens in implementation of the 4Ps.
2. Were the components realistic and likely to achieve the objectives? (max. 200 words)
The five project components in the design of the CCTP Watch had an underlying logic that was driving
the need of for each. In reality, the experience of implementing the CCTP Watch project has brought
out that the a key component (#3) within the project of training community-based teams to
undertake the monitoring of the 4Ps across the 14 project-focus municipalities was unrealistic. The
project found that it was hard for community monitoring teams to stay in a barangay for a week and
so perhaps a more realistic initiative would have been to pilot the community-based teams in 4-5
municipalities. Since the challenge to train a team from within the community appeared to take
longer than anticipated in project design, this component of the CCTP Watch project was not
implemented partially to cover a few municipalities, which would have been a useful experiment to
understand the effectiveness of community-based teams. The CCTP Watch project, however, was
able to contribute important results regardless and so future projects may not necessarily need to
load the implementing CSO with the challenging task of building community-based teams to inform
on the functioning of the 4Ps, especially if the project term is of relatively short duration.
The relatively limited timeframe of 12 months made accomplishment of any significant policy
dialogue (Component #5) within the project lifespan a greater challenge for the implementing CSO.
This is an important weakness to be recognized since effective delivery on this component is perhaps
particularly needed for the longer sustainability of such projects.
3. Were there clear and measurable indicators to track project achievements? (max. 250 words)
The CCTP Watch Project proposal did contain a logical framework comprising a set of success
indicators or measures for activities proposed in each of the five project components, as well as the
means for verifying these indicators. These indicators could however have been more specific with
phased milestones developed, as well as the potential risks identified in implementing each of the
primary set of activities under each component.
The final project report from the implementing agency could have been better structured to reflect
progress as defined and based on the success indicators of the logical framework contained in the
initial proposal. This final project report could have additionally further reflected more on the
challenges faced in achieving these, if the risks assumed at project design had been also better
articulated such as the training and use of community-based monitoring teams. The success
indicators for the CCTP Watch project specifically also became hard to differentiate from the success
indicators of the 4Ps more broadly (i.e. better school attendance, more visits to RHU Centers), with
the notable exception of the project’s attributable success in validating lists of beneficiaries to be
further included or excluded from the official lists.
The CCTP Watch project reported on broad success indicators: good attendance and performance of
children in school, children healthier and mothers safer through pregnancy due to regular (monthly)
visits to the RHU Clinic, incidents of malnutrition addressed, part of the cash grants received used for
the provision of other basic needs like food for the whole family, repair/improvements of houses and
facilities, buying medicines, etc.; and as capital for income generating projects like animal raising. The
project further reported that relationships with family members and the community had improved
through the conduct of the Family Development Sessions (FDS) every month. Most of all, the building
of the self-confidence and self-respect of the poor people was singled out as a great achievement of
the program.
4. Were project risks clearly identified and kept within manageable limits? (max. 150 words)
The discussion of project risks was less fully developed in the initial project proposal and their
discussion remains limited in the final project report by the implementing agency. The CCTP Watch
project did nevertheless identify and successfully address the primary risk to the project of weak
cooperation from the government department, the DSWD, and the implementing staff of the 4Ps at
the region, district and municipalities. A Memorandum of Agreement was signed between the
project implementing CSO (CCAGG) and the DSWD, which made possible for the project to access the
four basic documents that the CCTP Watch needed: (i) the beneficiary lists; (ii) the monitoring forms
maintained by the Provincial Link and the Municipal Links; (iii) the lists of students enrolled; and (iv)
the lists of pregnant mothers and their schedule of visits to RCUs. Without such a formal agreement
in place between the DSWD and the CSO, the project would have been at a high risk of not achieving
its aims or able to implement the project activities of validating lists of beneficiaries and community
feedback on existing records of compliance of beneficiaries to the conditionality of cash transfer
within the 4Ps.
The CCTP Watch project faced other risks that are not documented necessarily in appropriate details.
Key among these risks was the challenge faced in identifying and training community members to
participate with their time in teams to monitor the performance of the 4Ps through conducting joint
barangay visits. A further risk was in the technical capacities of staff within the CSO to develop the
necessary community monitoring and feedback tools or their available time to engage with the CCTP
project given their already stretched commitments. Documentation on project experience during
implementation mapped to these risks may have better allowed for course-corrections and
amendments or further technical support, which became less possible as these risks were not initially
explicitly articulated in order to be periodically monitored.
CSO score – score assigned by the CSO through self-assessment
IEE score – score assigned by the independent external evaluator
Scoring guidelines for approach and project design
Rating The Project…
1
targeted a relevant problem unsatisfactorily/ identified an applicable cause-and-effect design
unsatisfactorily
2
targeted a relevant problem partially satisfactorily/ identified an applicable cause-and-effect
design partially satisfactorily
3
targeted a relevant problem satisfactorily/ identified an applicable cause-and-effect design
satisfactorily
4
targeted a relevant problem highly satisfactorily/ identified an applicable cause-and-effect
design highly satisfactorily
5
targeted a relevant problem exceptionally well/ identified an applicable cause-and-effect
design exceptionally well
D. Project Implementation
Overall rating on the efficiency and effectiveness of this project (as per scoring
4 (CSO
3.5 (IEE
guidelines) `
Score)
Score)
Please provide a brief narrative for each following question:
1. Was the project carried out as planned? If not, were these changes explained and justified? (max.
250 words)
The project was mostly implemented as planned and there appear to be few deviations from the
initial proposal, with the key exception of the unforeseen difficulties in forming community-based
monitoring teams that prevented one of the project components developing as anticipated. Instead
of training members of the community, the project teams justified the change to train parent leaders
as a more manageable task. Given the importance put on the creating community based teams in the
project design, the challenges in building them may have been however better documented or these
teams might have been experimented with at least in a few municipalities to make the task
manageable.
One early change was that the Project was implemented in 12 municipalities of Abra Province rather
than the 14 initially named, with two municipalities of Lacub and Lagayan dropped for a combination
of security reasons and CCAGG’s past experience in the area. Even with two fewer municipalities, the
project managed an impressive coverage of 114 barangays, 4,616 family and 16,572 individual
beneficiaries within the project timeframe of a single year, which is an impressive achievement.
There was a delay in holding the public forum for policy dialogue and advocacy which could have been
avoided to ensure maximum relevance of the project results, since significant numbers of the 4Ps
beneficiaries covered by the project “graduate” out of the program in December 2013.
2. Did the project achieve the intended outputs and objectives? (max. 250 words)
The Project substantially achieved the intended outputs and objectives.
In all, 114 barangays were visited through the CCTP Watch project, 53 of these come from the first
batch of municipalities (June-September 2011) while 61 come from the second batch (October 2011September 2012). The 12 municipalities that have been validated under the CCTP Watch Project cover
a total of 16,572 individual beneficiaries, 4,616 households, 8,164 children aged 5-14 enrolled in
schools, 3,940 children aged 0-14 that regularly visit the RHU Clinics and 154 mothers in reproductive
age. The CCAGG validated 4,616 family beneficiaries through the CCTP Watch project which
represents 34.41% of the 13,413 total CCTP beneficiaries in Abra province.
There are four monitoring tools that the CCTP Watch project developed: 1) Monitoring Tool to ensure
inclusion of the poorest of the poor in the list of beneficiaries and exclusion of the non-poorest of the
poor from the list; 2) Monitoring Tool on compliance to the Conditions of the Program: Schooling of
children aged 5-14, Visits to RHU Centers / Clinics of children aged 0-14, Visits to RHU Centers / Clinics of
mothers in reproductive age, and Attendance to Family Development Sessions; 3) Monitoring on Usage
of Cash Transfer; and, finally 4) Monitoring Tool on the Implementation of Self-Employment Assistance
Projects. There were in addition two guides prepared, one for a Community Rapid Rural Appraisal and
another as a Community Organizer’s Guide.
To build the capacity of Parent Leaders to become change agents and development facilitators, the
project organized two seminars attended by 67 parent leaders from 9 municipalities.
To meet the project’s advocacy objectives, the Project Team featured on CCAGG’s weekly radio
program, parent leaders further shared their experiences on this radio program also enabled through
the Project, and articles appeared in print media such as at Abra Today. The Project Team also shared
on CCTP Watch at different workshops. A public platform for dissemination and advocacy was held in
July 2013 that was attended by this independent assessor. This component may have, however,
achieved more through greater interaction with DSWD.
3. If there were any unexpected events that impacted the project, how were these managed? Were
there any ‘red flags’ that should have been heeded? (max. 100 words)
The CCTP Watch project had a significant component on training of community based monitors that
would form teams visiting the barangays to administer the tools developed for community feedback
on the performance of 4Ps implementation. As already noted, during implementation, such training
was found to be more time consuming than anticipated as well as practical challenges became
apparent in such community based teams visiting barangays for the number of days needed to
complete the monitoring and feedback tools. On being faced with these unexpected difficulties in
forming community based teams, the project team chose to instead alter the project strategy to train
and build the capacity of parent leaders instead.
4. Were finances well managed? Were funds spent for the purposes intended? Were administrative
costs and overheads kept within reasonable limits? (max. 150 words)
The project financial reports have shown no significant overspends on any item of expenditure. There
is marginal variance in the estimated and actual costs incurred in transportation, but the project as a
whole was implemented within the allocated budget. All expenditures have been undertaken along
projected line items. The project team have not listed any challenges faced in managing the budget
and in the allocation of costs to the agreed budget during project proposal submission.
Scoring guidelines for project implementation
Rating The Project…
1
was implemented unsatisfactorily regarding outputs created and/or cost-benefit-time
considerations
2
was implemented partially satisfactorily regarding outputs created and/or cost-benefit-time
considerations
3
was implemented satisfactorily regarding outputs created and/or cost-benefit-time
considerations
4
was implemented highly satisfactorily regarding outputs created and/or cost-benefit-time
considerations
5
was implemented exceptionally well regarding outputs created and/or cost-benefit-time
considerations
E. Combined Outcomes, Impact and Sustainability of the CCTP Watch project
Overall rating on the outcome and impact of this project (as per scoring
guidelines)
Overall rating on the sustainability of the project (as per scoring guidelines)
4 (CSO
Score)
4 (CSO
Score )
4 (IEE
Score)
4.5 (IEE
Score)
Please provide a brief narrative for each following question:
1. What did the project accomplish? What were the immediate outcomes of the project? (max. 1000
words)
The key milestone achievements of the CCTP Watch Project are the following:
 Confirmed the list of beneficiaries are very largely accurate in targeting the poor but not
complete in their coverage of the poor within an area –the project suggested approximately



1500 potential beneficiaries for further inclusion based on meeting eligibility criteria and 60
households for exclusion from the official lists
Validated the level of compliance of beneficiaries in meeting the CCTP conditions as
significantly high in most cases
Highlighted specific instances of underpayment to beneficiaries, a broader key challenge that
the 4Ps still faces in its implementation (Only 8 barangays out of 61 barangays (13%) had no
problem with the transfer of the cash grant.)
Highlighted cases of minor grievances and issues faced by parents and beneficiaries whether
with regard to the schools or the RHU clinics during the CCTP Watch monitoring visits
From the Baseline Survey of 6 municipalities (i.e. the Second Batch), for instance, 651 family
beneficiaries were additionally recommended for inclusion in the CCTP list. There are 12 reasons
listed for their inclusion – the chief among these being the identified are landless tenants or are
farmers living in a small hut. The CCTP Watch Project listed 31 families recommended for exclusion
based on the criteria for beneficiaries of the 4Ps program, primarily (14) because they are
permanently employed in government. As of latest reports, 12 government employees that were in
the list of beneficiaries have been delisted as a direct result of the project, which represents a
“leakage” of P840,000.00 based on the assumption that all received the maximum P1,400.00 for 10
months every year for a period of 5 years.
The Project’s first validation report was shared and appreciated by the DSWD Regional Director, with
DSWD personnel further visiting the beneficiaries listed for inclusion by the Project as a follow up
according to feedback from parent leaders. The CCTP Provincial Coordinating Committee also sought a
copy of the Project Report. At the public forum for dissemination of the project’s findings, the provincial
link from the DSWD actively participated in valuing the role of the project in providing community
feedback on aspects of the 4Ps that worked well (changing behaviors of beneficiaries’ households in
sending children to school) while acknowledging weaknesses remaining, such as overworked Municipal
Links that the project highlighted.
The CCTP Watch project identified problems/challenges in the implementation of 4Ps, which include
the following: specific instances of delayed/irregular cash transfer, partial cash grants from P300 to
P800, or instances where beneficiaries had not received any cash transfer. The project also identified
parents who stopped receiving the grant, instances of problems in over the counter cash release,
retroactive payment, or problems related to ATM cards (loss, burning, destroyed, misplaced,
mishandled ATM cards). The project further brought information to the authorities cases of several
barangays not having FDS, or cases of teachers who have waived their privilege as beneficiaries but
with their names still remaining in the list.
An important achievement of the project was in developing community monitoring and feedback
tools that may be used by other CSOs, with minor adjustments to the context if different from Abra
Province. In particular, the Rapid Monitoring Tool that was developed for the CCTP Watch project
enables a quick assessment of the impacts of the CCTP and is useful to identify gaps in
implementation. The results of the survey undertaken through the project was extensive and was not
restricted to the 4Ps alone but also covered other services/programs of the DSWD and other
government agencies.
The project was also successful in reaching very remote areas (e.g. Tamac barangay of Villaviciosa)
that are the primary targeted areas of the 4Ps to assess the challenges in these areas in both
complying with the conditions of 4Ps due to supply-side weaknesses (such as fewer schools and less
accessible RHU clinics) and the difficulties in transferring cash to the beneficiaries in the absence of
ATMs or bank branches in these areas.
During field visits for this assessment, the 4Ps beneficiaries met in focused group discussions valued
the role of the project and the implementing CSO in bringing greater awareness on the 4Ps.
2. Are these outcomes likely to be sustained in the longer term? Why or why not? (max. 250 words)
The CCTP Watch project has brought to the fore the important value added in developing mechanisms
and tools to engage with the community to improve the effectiveness of government programs such
as the 4Ps. The ways of using CSOs to build awareness of the 4Ps, to assist in engaging citizens to
better target beneficiaries and to use them to build the capacity of parent leaders, as piloted through
the CCTP Watch project, are all methods that the DSWD are at different stages of standardizing across
the 4Ps. The tools developed by the implementing CSO, CCAGG, will be particularly useful in this
larger effort that can make these community-based monitoring and feedback tools a more sustainable
outcome beyond the project duration.
The bulk of the project’s findings relate to specific beneficiaries and their grievances or potential
beneficiaries to be included as the 4Ps expands coverage. The DSWD is following up on the lists of
households the project has suggested are eligible to be 4Ps beneficiaries, which would be a longer
term consequence of this project. With regard to the details on the existing beneficiaries, the longterm sustainability of the project is limited given that most of these beneficiaries were part of the first
cohort of 4Ps and are expected to “graduate” out of the program in December 2013. For these
beneficiaries, the project reports that attendance and performance in school have been improving,
with children more motivated to go to school because they now have school supplies and daily
allowance unlike before. Monthly consultations at the RHU clinics and the provision of free vitamins
and medicines to the children beneficiaries have resulted in the decreased incidence of children
getting sick. Malnourished children particularly in Banglolao and Pakiling, Bucay monitored through
the CCTP Watch project have been reported to have gained weight. It is expected that these changes
will be sustained beyond the monitoring facilitated by the project.
The wider awareness on the 4Ps created by the project through radio, print and website will be less
likely to be sustained in the longer-term without additional funding.
3. What long term impact do you see from project on achieving the overall goal of CCTP? (max. 250
words)
The impacts of the 4Ps in the project municipalities have been assisted by the CCTP Watch Project.
The status of compliance to the conditions of the program is found to be excellent in all of the 3 areas:
education (85% attendance in school), health (regular check-up of children and pregnant mothers) and
attendance in Family Development Sessions.
The project identified the specific instances especially regarding amount of cash grants received (many
do not receive the cash grant in full in several months, some even did not receive any cash grant at all,
many received only in some months then it stopped without even knowing the reasons). For many
beneficiaries, the manner that the cash grant is released is also a problem (i.e. over-the-counter release,
delayed release, retroactive payment, no payroll presented to the beneficiaries before the payout). The
use of ATM cards is also a challenge to many (lost, burned, destroyed, stolen cards and the long period
of time for the cards to be replaced). The project noted specific areas for improvement in 4Ps
implementation that could use the support of CSOs, such as for instance in the updating of the lists for
those who have transferred residence and those that have reached the age requirement of 14 years. It
is in these areas of challenge to effective delivery of the CCT that community-based initiatives like the
CCTP Watch project have now proven to have an important role that enhances the integrity of the 4Ps
and through the CSOs building trust with the beneficiaries that can further improve compliance to the
CCT conditions.
The CCTP Watch Project highlighted that another problem area for the 4Ps is in the conduct of regular
FDS. Not all barangays have FDS; some do not even know the meaning of FDS. Through the CCTP
Watch project, the implementing CSO had an instrumental role in generating greater awareness
among the beneficiaries and in assisting in the training of parent leaders to conduct FDS regularly.
4. What lessons can be learned from the implementation of the project? What worked well or
should be avoided in future? Should this project or elements of it be replicated? (max. 500 words)
The CCT Watch Project provided important lessons for further improving the 4Ps, while also validating
the credibility of the program in changing behaviours and lives of the poor that help in their education,
health and their empowerment within society. The large numbers of families for inclusion in the list of
beneficiaries clearly shows that many poor families have not been reached using the DSWD’s National
Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR).
The relatively fewer numbers of Municipal Links (ML) to the numbers of beneficiaries they serve has
been identified through the CCTP Watch project as a key bottleneck related to the effective
implementation of the 4Ps. At present, one ML has 800 caseloads and partly due to the findings of
the project, the ML’s caseloads will be reduced to 500; yet a more efficient system is needed to carry
out all the functions the ML currently is responsible for.
The project has helped in the empowering of parent leaders and their increased ability to manage key
responsibilities (such as ensuring the FDS are held regularly) highlights an important area for future
development and evolution of the 4Ps to better engage with beneficiaries. This is especially needed
as the MLs, currently tasked to oversee the functioning of the FDS, are already overstretched with the
scale of their other tasks.
The supply-side challenges that the effective compliance to 4Ps conditionalities depends on became
apparent from the feedback conducted through this project. Compliance of beneficiaries will depend at
least partially on the existing institutional capacity in remote areas to deliver schooling to the children of
beneficiaries through adequately equipped school infrastructure and health-care to pregnant mothers
and infants by doctors available at easily accessible RHU clinics. The experience of this project suggests
that the supply-side challenges are still to be addressed even as 4Ps is rolling out and covering more
beneficiaries. The success of the 4Ps during such rapid scaling-up will depend equally on such supply-
side efforts as it does on ensuring it reaches the targeted beneficiaries in order for the conditionalities of
the cash transfer to be met by these beneficiaries. Future projects can provide more systematic analysis
of such supply-side weaknesses that compromise the 4Ps.
Based on the evidence from this project, the 4Ps is heralded by beneficiaries as a lifeboat (salva vida)
when they literally have no money for schooling of children or money to purchase the medicines and
immunizations needed within families. Indeed, if the success of the 4Ps is to be further established in
the coming years, there is a powerful case to engage beneficiaries and the wider community as the
CCTP Watch project succeeded in doing to inform better targeting, identify weak links in the
implementation results chain of the 4Ps and build on third-party monitoring initiatives involving CSOs.
Scoring guidelines for outcomes and impact
Rating The Project …
1
had no discernible impact
2
had low impact with little prospect of sustainability
3
had moderate impact with some prospect of sustainability or
had high short term impact but little prospect of sustainability
4
had a moderate impact with good prospects of sustainability or
had major impact short term but may not be sustainable
5
had major impact which is likely to be sustained
Scoring guidelines for sustainability
Rating The Project…
1
cannot or should not be replicated
2
has a few elements that may be replicated; lessons learned can be used in this particular
country setting; is not recommended to be replicated
3
can be replicated, however important stakeholders, goals or processes will have to be aligned
and reconsidered thoroughly
4
can be replicated; major goals, elements and stakeholders are in place and can be easily
engaged in a similar project
5
can be replicated 1:1 in the same sector or a different sector making use of the same
stakeholders
Overall Score Calculation for CCTP Watch Project
Category
Value Raw Score (from Evaluation)
Self-Assessment (CSO score)^
Approach & Project Design
15%
4
Project Implementation
20%
4
Outcomes, Impact & Sustainability
45%
4
Replicability
20%
4
Overall Score
100% 16
Independent External Evaluator
Approach & Project Design
15%
3.5
Weighted Score
.15 x 4 = 0.60
.20 x 4 = 0.80
.45 x 4 = 1.80
.20 x 4 = 0.80
4.00
.15 x 3.5 = 0.525
Project Implementation
Outcomes, Impact & Sustainability
Replicability
Overall Score
^
20%
45%
20%
100%
3.5
4
4.5
15.5
CSO score – score assigned by the CSO through self-assessment
.20 x 3.5 = 0.70
.45 x 4 = 1.80
.20 x 4.5 = 0.90
3.925