National Monitoring And Evaluation Policy

Author : Liya Woldemichael Woldesilassie
Publisher :
ISBN 13 :
Total Pages : pages
Book Rating : 4.:/5 (917 download)

DOWNLOAD NOW!

Download or read book Ethiopian National Monitoring and Evaluation System in the Era of Aid Reform written by Liya Woldemichael Woldesilassie and published by . This book was released on 2014 with total page pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: Executive SummaryEffective decision making is often facilitated by a strong monitoring and evaluation system that provides relevant, reliable and up to date information. A strong monitoring and evaluation system is also a foundation for better policies and programs; it facilitates the development of evidence-based policies and development programs. However, this can be achieved only when the evidence generated is policy-relevant and focuses on the national priorities of a country. To ensure the generation of such policy-relevant evidence, the monitoring and evaluation system has to be led and owned by the country. When this is achieved, the country can control all the processes: the development of monitoring and evaluation plan and policy, data collection and analysis methods, and mechanisms for information dissemination and use. The aid reform, which has significantly affected the way development aid is managed by donors and recipient countries, is well elaborated by the different international commitments, including the 2005 Paris Declaration, the 2008 Accra Agenda for Action, and the 2011 Bussan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation. All these international commitments are built around five principles: country ownership, harmonization, alignment, result-orientation and accountability. These five principles have direct implication on the monitoring and evaluation system of recipient countries. According to these principles, recipient countries should own and lead their own national monitoring and evaluation systems. Donors and international organizations should also rely on the existing country-led monitoring and evaluation system and should support sustainable national monitoring and evaluation capacity development. This study focused on identifying the contributions of the aid reform agenda for the national monitoring and evaluation system of recipient countries with special focus on the Ethiopian national monitoring and evaluation system. It compared the progress made by the monitoring and evaluation system of the Ethiopian national Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) between the period 2000/01 and 2014/15. This study looked into the strengths and weaknesses of the national monitoring and evaluation system in Ethiopia, compared the status of the national monitoring and evaluation system during the different PRSPs, and analyzed the progress the system made over time in line with the new aid reform agenda. A framework that was developed based on the existing literature was used for this analysis. This framework tried to link the three levels of capacity development (the individual, the organization, and the system), with the five principles of the new aid reform agenda, and the different components of an effective national monitoring and evaluation system.I used a qualitative research design that mainly involved document review. I supplemented this with key informant interviews using checklists developed based on the theoretical framework. The interviewees represented the government, civil society, donors and the private sector. I also utilized a scoring system that was developed and validated by other authors to compare the monitoring and evaluation system of the three PRSPs. I found out that Ethiopia has institutionalized monitoring and evaluation as part of the requirement of the PRSP processes. However, the national monitoring and evaluation system has shown limited improvement across the three PRSPs. The progresses are observed in only the areas of prioritization of indicators, participation of non-governmental actors, and dissemination and use of information generated from the national monitoring and evaluation system.All the PRSPs did not have any clearly shown monitoring and evaluation policy, even if all of them have a policy matrix that shows the indicators to be monitored. The country has an organizational unit that is overseeing the welfare monitoring system. However, this unit was not strong enough and was understaffed and now, it is replaced by the newly established planning and monitoring and evaluation commission with new structure and additional staff. Based on the results, one can safely conclude that there was no significant change over time and this shows the lower attention given to the national monitoring and evaluation system. The monitoring and evaluation system improved in its organization, involvement of non-government actors, and in the efforts that are undertaken to use the information generated from the M [ E system. This improvement is more visible in the thrid PRSP. However, efforts should be directed at improving the way indicators are selected (including criteria for selection, prioritization, and inclusion of outcome and impact level indicators), identification of capacity gaps and planning of capacity building activities, and ensuring the impartiality of the M & E system so that all stakeholders benefit from the impartial feedback they get from the M & E system. These areas did not show any improvement across the three PRSPs.That does not mean that there was no contribution of the aid reform agenda over time. It has been shown that the aid reform agenda has contributed to the improvement of the monitoring and evaluation system of the PRSPs. The country owns the national monitoring system. It is forcing different donors to align their plans, procedures and systems with that of the country. However, harmonization and mutual accountability are still a challenge. This could be because of the capacity limitations of the country at the individual, organizational and systems level as identified in this study. The other contribution of the aid reform agenda to the monitoring and evaluation system of Ethiopia is that the country is moving toward developing a results-based monitoring and evaluation framework. It is recommended, based on this study, that a further detailed diagnostics of the national M & E system of the country be done using primary data gathered through other methodologies] that the government of Ethiopia has to strengthen its ownership role and work hard to strengthen the alignment while, at the same time, work to improve harmonization and mutual accountability by facilitating dialogue among donors and development partners; that the new proposal and action to move to the use of a results-based monitoring and evaluation framework be strengthened so that it is implemented in the next PRSP; and that the capacity of the monitoring and evaluation system at the individual, organization, and systems level be strengthened. Appropriate capacity building plan based on a comprehensive gap analysis should be in place. Donors should participate in capacity building as per their commitments in the aid reform movement.