Chapter Two:

Project Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

A monitoring and evaluation plan is a guide that explains the goals and objectives of an M&E
strategy and its key elements. In simple words, an M&E plan is like a roadmap that describes
how you will monitor and evaluate your program, as well as how you intend to use evaluation
results for project improvement and decision making. An M&E plan helps to define, implement,
track and improve a monitoring and evaluation strategy within a particular project or a group of
projects; it includes all the steps, elements and activities that need to happen from the project
planning phase until the project reaches its goal and creates the intended impact.

The plan outlines the key evaluation questions and the detailed monitoring questions that help
answer the evaluation questions. This allows you to identify the information you need to collect,
and how you can collect it. Depending on the detail of the M&E plan, you can identify the
people responsible for different tasks, as well as timelines. The plan should be able to be picked
up by anyone involved in the project at any time and be clear as to what is happening in terms of
monitoring and evaluation.

Comprehensive planning document for all monitoring and evaluation activities within a program.
the key M&E questions to be addressed: what indicators will be collected, how, how often, from
where, and why; baseline values, targets, and assumptions; how data are going to be analyzed
/interpreted; and how/how often report will be developed and distributed.

M&E planning should begin during or immediately after the project design stage. Early planning
will inform the project design and allow for sufficient time to arrange for resources and
personnel prior to project implementation. M&E planning should also involve those using the
M&E system. Involvement of project staff and key stakeholders ensures feasibility,
understanding, and ownership of the M&E system.

Typically, the components of an M&E plan are:

 Establishing goals and objectives
 Setting the specific M&E questions
 Determining the activities to be implemented
 The methods and designs to be used for monitoring and evaluation

1|Page
  The data to be collected
 The specific tools for data collection
 The required resources
 The responsible parties to implement specific components of the plan
 The expected results
 The proposed timeline
Essential Elements of a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
A sound project M&E system requires six main components which together help to ensure that
M&E is relevant to the project, within the capacity of the project management organisation,

(1) Clear statements of measurable objectives for the project and its components.

Projects are designed to contribute to long-term sectoral development goals, but at the level of
project purpose their outcomes should be quite specific and complete. Thus, for example, an
irrigation project may be designed to further the sectoral goals of increased agricultural
productivity, farm incomes and rural employment, but have a project purpose of providing an
increased and more reliable irrigation supply through rehabilitation or modernisation of an
irrigation system. Objectives at the level of project purpose should be specific to the project
interventions, realistic in the timeframe for their implementation and measurable for evaluation.

(2) A structured set of indicators covering: inputs, process, outputs, outcomes, impact, and
exogenous factors.

Indicators provide the qualitative and quantitative detail necessary to monitor and evaluate
progress and achievements at all levels of the project hierarchy. The ability to define an
indicator, and agree with partners and stakeholders a target and the timing for its achievement, is
a demonstration that project objectives are clearly stated, and are understood and supported.

The logical framework approach provides an effective structure for planning M&E by defining a
hierarchy of objectives for which indicators are required (2.1). Classifying project objectives
according to their level highlights that management will need to develop systems to provide
information (data collection systems) at all levels, from basic accounting through to statistics of
project impact. Ultimately constructing good indicators will be an iterative process.

2|Page
Table 2.1 A logical structure for project monitoring and evaluation indicators

Logic Indicators Indicators

Goal Impact Long-term statistical evidence

Purpo Outcom Social and economic surveys of project effects and

se es
outcomes.
Exogenous
Plus leading indicators giving management advance
indicators
warnings from beneficiary perceptions, responses to the
project and other measures of performance.
Outpu Outp Management observation, records, and internal reporting
ts ut

Activiti Process Task management of processes.

es
Financial accounts.
Management records of progress.
Procurement processes
Inpu Inp Financial accounts.
ts ut
Management records of inventories and usage.

Input indicators are quantified and time-bound statements of the resources financed by the
project, and are usually monitored by routine accounting and management records. They are
mainly used by managers closest to implementation, and are consulted frequently (daily or
weekly). They are often left out of discussions of project monitoring, though they are part of
essential management information. An accounting system is needed to track expenditures and
provide data on costs for analysis of the cost effectiveness and efficiency of project processes
and the production of outputs.
Process indicators monitor the activities completed during implementation, and are often
specified as milestones or completion of sub-contracted tasks, as set out in time-scaled work
schedules. One of the best process indicators is often to closely monitor the project's
procurement processes. Every output depends on the procurement of goods, works or services
and the process has well defined steps that can be used to monitor progress by each package of
activities.

3|Page
Output indicators monitor the production of goods and delivery of services by the project. They
are often evaluated and reported with the use of performance measures based on cost or
operational ratios. For example: kilometres of all-weather highway completed by a given date;
percentage of farmers attending a crop demonstration site before fertiliser top-dressing; number
of teachers trained in textbook use; cost per kilometre of road construction; crop yield per
hectare.

The indicators for inputs, activities and outputs, and the systems used for data collection,
recording and reporting are sometimes collectively referred to as the project physical and
financial monitoring system, or management information system (MIS). The core of an M&E
system and an essential part of good management practice, it can also be referred to as
‘implementation monitoring’.

Outcome indicators are specific to a project’s purpose and the logical chain of cause and effect
that underlies its design. Often achievement of outcomes will depend at least in part on the
actions of beneficiaries in responding to project outputs, and indicators will depend on data
collected from beneficiaries, eg change in crop yields or cropping pattern, and investment by
farmers in land management improvements. It will usually be important for project management
to try to gain early indications of project performance in achieving outcomes through the use of
leading indicators of outcomes. These may often be obtained by surveying beneficiaries’
perceptions of project outputs and services

Impact indicators usually refer to medium or long-term developmental change to which the
project is expected to contribute. Dealing with the effects of project outcomes on beneficiaries,
measures of change often involve statistics concerning economic or social welfare, collected
either from existing regional or sectoral statistics or through relatively demanding surveys of
beneficiaries.

Exogenous indicators are those that cover factors outside the control of the project but which
might affect its outcome, including risks (parameters identified during project design that might
compromise project benefits) and the performance of the sector in which the project operates.
Use of logical framework analysis for project design will guide the identification of exogenous
indicators to match the key assumptions made about necessary external conditions at each level

4|Page
of the logical hierarchy. This need to monitor both the project and its wider environment calls for
additional data collection capacity and places an additional burden on a project's M&E
programme.

(3) Data collection mechanisms capable of recording progress over time, including
baselines and a means to compare progress and achievements against targets.

Within project M&E systems there will be a need to collect information of the baseline situation
and for measurement of change over time for the indicators selected. It is vital to think about the
sources of data, the reliability of that information and the costs and responsibilities.

Data sources for indicators can be primary or secondary. Primary data are collected directly by
the project team or agency concerned, whilst secondary data have been collected by other
organisations for purposes not specific to the project concerned.

Use of secondary rather than primary data has both advantages and disadvantages. On the
positive side its use can be more cost-effective, and for many project situations it may simply be
too costly to collect detailed primary data when this would require a large and costly household
survey, or alternative data collection method of comparable cost. On the negative side, secondary
data may have limitations if the purpose for which it was collected does not match well with the
purpose intended for project M&E.

Potential problems with secondary data can arise in a number of ways. For example:
incomplete coverage of the specific project area
inability to disaggregate the data to match the boundaries of the project area or sub-areas
inability to disaggregate the data to match the project affected population or sub-groups
inconsistencies in data collection in surveys implemented in different areas, by different
teams or in different time periods (eg interviewing of household members in one survey
and only household heads in another, or use of crop cut measurements for yield in one
survey and farmer estimates in another)
Inaccuracies arising from inappropriate choice of measurement and collection methods
or inadequate training and supervision of data collection staff Problems such as these
may, when severe, invalidate any comparison intended to reveal and measure change in
project outcomes and impact.

5|Page
(4) Where applicable, building on data collection with an evaluation framework and
methodology capable of establishing causation (attribution).

There are a range of possible users for the results of monitoring and evaluation of development
projects. These include primary stakeholders, the project management organisation, government
agencies, other implementing partners, and donors. Clear feedback mechanisms are important if
the purposes of M&E are to be achieved. Providing the right information in the right place and
right form to be used by the right person in decision-making is the ultimate aim.

A good flow of information is also closely linked to the development of accountability within the
project, sector, government, and donor. In many countries, information on projects and
programmes is poor and difficult to access, and the mechanisms for feedback are weak or
nonexistent. The highest payoffs to evaluation arise at the policy and programme level, but
project-level evaluation offers an easier and less sensitive starting point in many instances.
Information from monitoring and evaluation can be used to demonstrate accountability and to
promote knowledge transfers and adaptive learning in government agencies and other
organisations.

5. The uses of the information and the feedback mechanisms need to be structured and
scheduled according to the needs of managers and other partners and stakeholders. For
example:

 Project management will need to monitor expenditure and progress against schedules,
weekly and at least monthly.
 Outputs are unlikely to be measurable at less than three-monthly intervals, and some
may need much longer.
 Consultations with beneficiaries, or surveys of their satisfaction with project services,
should be timed to supply information to use in planning project activities.
 The time period for reporting may vary with the level of management: for example,
monthly at district level, quarterly at regional or state level.
 Some flows of information need to be timed to fit into national budget planning
activities.
 Annual funding may depend on the results from previous work.

6|Page
  Periodic mid-term and terminal reviews provide milestones by which information has to
be ready.
 Processes of project identification, preparation and appraisal should show evidence of
having made use of the lessons of evaluations of similar projects or programmes.

From the start of the project, a communication strategy needs to be developed that will address
the following questions:
Who will receive what information?
In what format?
When?
Who will prepare the information?
Who will deliver the information?

Information should be reported concisely, be relevant to the user and be timed to improve key
decision-making events. Four means of communication may be used and will reinforce each
other: detailed written information (reports), written executive summaries, and oral and visual
presentations.

(6) Sustainable organisational arrangements for data collection, management, analysis and
reporting.
In terms of organisational arrangements there is no single correct way to build a project M&E
system. Projects vary in their characteristics and requirements, and countries and organisations
are at different stages of development with respect to good public management practices in
general, and M&E in particular. It is also important to recognise that M&E systems are
continuous works in progress that must be flexible and adaptable to changing needs and
circumstances.
Logical framework analysis indicates that project management will need to develop systems to
provide information at all levels, from basic operational inventories and accounting through to
generation of statistics about outcomes and impact. Building on the concept of a structured set of
indicators, 2.2.2 shows the typical nature and location of responsibility for M&E components at
each level.

7|Page
The right hand column of 2.2 should be regarded only as an illustrative guide to be adapted as
necessary. Certainly inputs, activities and their outputs are within the control of project
management and can be monitored and evaluated through internal record-keeping and progress
reporting, analysis of this information, and management review. Generally, management will
want to integrate monitoring with other systems such as financial accounting and computerised
project management, and development of such comprehensive management information systems
should be supported in the project design.

In contrast, the achievement of project outcomes normally depends on how project beneficiaries
respond to the goods and services delivered by the project. Compiling evidence for leading
indicators of their response and the benefits they derive requires consultation, research and data
collection skills that may be beyond the capacity of the project management organisation, but if
so, must be carried out in close partnership with it. Then because outcome and impact evaluation
will only be measurable towards the end of implementation, or in later years, and because it also
requires higher levels of research and analytical skills and objectivity, it may often be better done
by a separate agency, independent from implementation.

Table 2.1 Organization of project monitoring and evaluation

Objectives Indicators M&E components Responsibility for M&E

Goal Impact Long term statistical evidence of project

impact National or sectoral agencies
Exogenous indicators for risk factors and/or independent specialists
and unanticipated wider environmental
and social impacts
Purpose Outcomes Socioeconomic surveys Project management and/or
M&E of leading indicators independent specialists
Diagnostic studies
Outputs Outputs
MIS for physical and financial Project staff
Activities Process monitoring

Inputs Input

8|Page
 Monitoring Evaluation

Inputs Activities /process Out puts Outcomes Impacts

Available Action Tangible goods or

Results likely to Final
resources, taken/work services the
be achieved when programme
including performed to programme
beneficiaries use goals, typically
budget and staff transform inputs produces or
outputs achieved in the
into outputs delivers long-term

Implementation Results

Fig 2.1. Results chain

Functions of Monitoring and Evaluation plan

In defining the term monitoring, one needs to be exposed to a number of concepts associated
therewith. Monitoring is the continuous assessment of a programme or project in relation to the
agreed implementation schedule. It is also a good management tool which should, if used
properly, provide continuous feedback on the project implementation as well assist in the
identification of potential successes and constraints to facilitate timely decisions. Unfortunately,
in many projects, the role of this is barely understood and therefore negatively impacts on the
projects. Monitoring is not only concerned with the transformation of inputs into outputs, but can
also take the following forms:

 Guides implementation of program M&E

 Enhances coordination, standardization
 States how program will measure achievements
 Accountability
 Documents stakeholder consensus
 Transparency & responsibility

9|Page
  Helps achieve program results
 Ensures good use of data
 Preserves institutional memory
 A living document, adjusted for program modification

Standards for Project Monitoring and Evaluation plan

What are M&E Standards?
A standard is a document which provides, inter alia, requirements, rules, and guidelines, for a
process, product or service. These requirements are sometimes complemented by a description
of the process, products or services. Standards are the result of a consensus and are approved by a
recognized body and aim at achieving the optimum degree of order in a given context

M&E Standards define the key elements and expected level of performance for conducting
Design, Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). Secondly, the Standards address the
organizational environment in which M&E takes place. Taken together seeks to improve the
quality of M&E that is undertaken by its staff and partners in order to have a positive impact
on program quality and learning.. These standards reflect key characteristics of high quality
programs and agency culture that promote better learning and strengthen accountability to stakeholders.
Agency-wide M&E systems inform decisions at the field level regarding progress and success of
projects and programs and inform agency-level investment decisions on agency direction, policies and
operations. These are critical elements of a “high performing, dynamic learning organization.”
How are the M&E Standards used?
M&E Standards Support Tool, is designed to support the work of staff in assessing the quality
of their own systems and taking the steps needed to improve. The Tool is composed of: 1) a
series of questions to guide discussion on adherence to the standards; 2) a list of key entry
points for use of the M&E Standards; and 3) a list of resources that support this work. The
process of using the M&E Standards Support Tool may be as important as any of the
Standards themselves.

Standards do not prescribe the use of particular monitoring or evaluation theories or methods.
Practitioners should identify methods and approaches appropriate for the sector and nature of the
program. However, the Standards do reflect a departmental preference for timely, robust data to be
made available to managers to help inform program decisions. Additionally, all Design and M&E
products and processes should be as simple, fit for purpose and cost-effective as possible whilst

10 | P a g e
 meeting these Standards.

Complexities of Project Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Complexity refers to situations where there is a lack both of strong expertise and of agreement on what needs
to be done. Situations can be technically complicated, when there is agreement on what needs to be done but
the technical expertise is lacking, or socially complicated, when there is strong technical expertise available
but no agreement on what the approach should be. Complex situations are both technically and socially
complicated. Complexity can be thought of as a continuum, as shown in Figure 1, with simple,
straightforward interventions in stable, well-defined environments being at one end of that continuum, and
chaos at the other. A situation may be complex as a result of the intervention, the environment, or both.
Complex monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems are designed to support the work of entire
organisations, or large programmes of work involving multiple implementing partners. There
are many differences between complex and project M&E systems. M&E processes that work
well within small, time-bound projects often do not work, or work differently, across larger
programmes of work.

Implement range types of initiative from straightforward, time-bound projects at one end of the
scale to large, multi-sector, multi-country, programmes of work at the other. In the middle of
this spectrum lie projects or programmes which are carried out in difficult or uncertain settings,
or are executed over multiple phases; programmes which are implemented through many
partners and/or are run by consortiums, coalitions or networks; and entire programmes of which
work in a single sector or location. And there are many other possible combinations.

All these different initiatives are expected to have functioning monitoring and evaluation
(M&E) systems. However, the nature of those systems differs according to the complexity of
the initiative. As shown in the diagram below, complex M&E systems can be used throughout
the spectrum of complexity, but are most appropriate at the complex end. Project M&E systems,
on the other hand, are more applicable in straightforward, time-bound projects, and are most
appropriate at the simple end of the spectrum.

Multi-phase Large, multi-country,

Project11M&E
| P a systems
ge Programmes of programmes multi
are most appropriate at CSOs that operate implemented sector ,programmes
the ‘simple’ end of the in a single location through of work
or single sector multiple
 Programmes run
by consortiums,
coalitions or
networks

12 | P a g e