Types of a monitoring and evaluation system

Several types of M&E systems exist and have been developed by donor agencies for use by programme and donor partners to ensure programmes and interventions are executed as planned towards achieving the programme objectives. Developing M&E systems will depend on several factors including the focus, need and expectation of the programme or project being implemented. It is averred that there is lack of a universal M&E model; hence systems are tailored to suit the type, complexity and size of the programme, institutional setup, managerial responsibility, the reporting requirement and the frame conditions of the project or programme (Gudda, 2011). Kusek and Rist (2004) identify two main types of M&E systems which are presented in the logic flow (Figure 3.1). These categories are recognized as implementation-based M&E systems and the results-based M&E systems and are explained below.

Implementation-focused M&E system

Traditionally, M&E are conducted to address compliance issues; thus to address the ‘Did they do it?’ question (Kusek & Rist, 2004) and ‘Was the project delivered on time?’, ‘Did the project exceed the planned budget?’ and ‘Was the project of the right and approved quality? From Figure 3.4, the implementation of M&E is focused on how well the project or programme is being executed. Unfortunately, this approach to M&E provides little information to stakeholders and the M&E team on the understanding of how the project achieved success or failure. The data collected during the implementation-focused M&E covers the inputs that have been provided, activities being undertaken and the output as seen. Also, M&E reports capturing the provision and utilization of the project inputs and the production output.

Results-based M&E system

The results-based M&E system is a work-in-progress system that is used by project and programme implementers to track progress and validate the impact of the project or programme. Greater focus is on the achieved outcome and impact of the project to the beneficiary community or end users. To develop and maintain an effective results-based M&E system, the need for continuous commitment of time, efforts and resources is important (Kusek & Rist, 2004). Also, political, organizational and technical barriers need to be overcome to ensure the system works effectively to deliver successful projects. According to Kusek and Rist (2004), some international initiatives have been introduced to force governments and donor partners to adopt systems which are geared towards result achievement. An example is the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Additionally,

Figure 3A Flow chart of the M&E system.

Source: Researcher

for instance, the schools tinder trees and emergency intervention programme by the government of Ghana require being monitored and evaluated to ascertain whether the initiative is making any difference and having an impact on the end users compared to the initial situation before the project was undertaken. It is therefore important to develop a results-based M&E at the organizational level (MMDAs) to measure and monitor the achievement of infrastructural development initiated by the government, donor organizations, NGOs and even internally generated funded projects.

Criteria for assessing the quality of a monitoring and evaluation system

The need to have a standard measure of an M&E system for construction project delivery is significant (Tengan, Aigbavboa & Oke, 2018). The literature on the criteria for determining a suitable M&E system has, however, not established one single accepted standard for evaluating the quality of M&E systems. However, the quality and success of an M&E system are linked to the quality of the M&E indicators that have been formulated (Sharma, 2010). The International Fund for

Agricultural Development (IFAD) (2002) outlines four broad criteria for assessing the quality of a project monitoring and evaluation system, namely utility, feasibility, propriety and accuracy. The M&E system must be useful and helpful to serve the practical information needs for which it is developed. Feasibility concerns the methods, sequences, timing and processing procedures proposed being realistic, prudent and cost-effective, while in terms of propriety, the M&E activities will be conducted legally, ethically and with due regard to the wellbeing of those affected by its results. Finally, the system will generate data to be analyzed to inform the decision for improvement. The exactness of such data is necessary for reliable decision making (Chaplowe, 2008).