User Log In

Subscribe to News Letters

Event Calender

October 2017
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31 1 2 3 4

ASE M&E PLAN (2010 - 2015)

ASE involves the key partners: the community, local government partners and other CSs, in the process of programme formulation, periodic monitoring, review and reflection and evaluation exercises. In order to make sure that the pertinent stakeholders are actively participating and duly playing a role in decision-making and also develop indicators and mechanisms that will help the monitor and evaluation process.

A.  RATIONALE
Resource is always scares. There also exist different strategies to achieve a given goal. Planning therefore helps to make choices among alternative course of action, given the limited resources against defined set of objectives. Like wise, any plan with out M&E is a futile exercise. M&E system should be an integral part of any plan and helps to define and clarify the starting and end points; ensures whether the direction set is walked on and the desired goals are achieved. It is a continuous tracking, assurance and learning processes that will help to improve things and successfully achieve results. Further, it brings knowledge to influence future thinking and action.

This M&E plan is therefore developed and integrated as part of the Strategic Plan (2010 – 2015).

B.  WHY MONITORING AND EVALUATING THE STRATEGIC PLAN?

  1. Ensure synergy - the Strategic Plan should be cascaded into Departments and Program / Projects, and to their Annual Plans & Reports,
  2. Improve performance - ensure relevance, effectiveness, impacts and sustainability of the various functions and pragmatic actions,  
  3. Improve organizational learning - to improve performances of on-going actions and influence informed decision making and planning,
  4. Improve database - generate and document information and workable approaches and practices, and
  5. Improve and ensure compliance - foster transparency and accountability to various stakeholders.

C.    WHAT SHOULD BE MONITORED AND EVALUATED?
A M&E matrix is given by Table.1 below

D.    WHO SHOULD MONITOR AND EVALUATE?

  • The PME Unit is the lead responsible body for designing this M&E Plan and Managing its implementation.
  • The HO Departments and POs should cooperate and actively engage in the design and implementation of the M&E plan

E.    WHEN SHOULD MONITORING AND EVALUATION TO TAKE PLACE?
The Strategic Plan should be evaluated twice in its five years period:

  • Mid term (June 2012)
  • Final year (December 2015).  


F.    HOW SHOULD WE MONITOR AND EVALUATE?

  • The PME Unit should coordinate and manage the participatory planning and review (its implementation) of the strategic plan and this M&E plan
  • The PME unit should monitor and insure that annual plans and reports are in line with the objectives and strategies of the strategic plan
  • The PME unit should coordinate and guide the periodic evaluation of the strategic Plan.
  • A multi-sectoral and multidisciplinary Team from within ASE should be organized and charged with the periodic evaluations
  • The ED should provide all the necessary leadership and resource support to the M&E of the Strategic Plan


Table 1. M&E MATRIX: WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE?
Intervention logic    Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/    Bench mark (2009)    Milestone of Performance    Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions
 Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)      

OBJECTIVE / OUTCOME                           

Goal / Impact: contribute to improved and sustained livelihood of the poor and marginalized social group                             
Objective / outcome:                             
Ensured community led development   

  •  of registered active CBIs                          
  •  of community projects funded & implemented                        

     % of non-ASE sub granted CBI funds                          
                              
Improved HH food security in ASE operational areas    Outcome level:                        
     Reduced average food gap (in months) by target HHs                         
     Reduced % of food aid beneficiaries                         

  • of target HHs graduated from food security program    

                   
Output level:                        
Enhanced production   

  • farmers adopting productivity enhancing technologies (@ Qtl/ha)  (%F)             
  • of HH with access to local seed back (@kg/HH)                      

WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? …………ontd
Intervention logic    Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/    Bench mark (2009)    Milestone of Performance    Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions
            Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)        

  • of technologies promoted and institutionalized by local actors                          
  • of farmers / pastoralists with access to community based animal health services (%F)       

Improved social services   

  • of population with access to potable water supply                          
  • of population with access to improved health services / type of service)               
  • of children with access to alternative basic education (%F)                        
  • of adults with access to alternative basic education / LLB (%F)                        
  • of people with access to local radio education (% F)                          
  • Km of rural access road created / upgraded                       

                              
     Outcome level:                        
Transformed subsistence level of production to commercial 

  • of value chains (VC) successfully institutionalized and sustained % of added values generated by each VC  % share of the added value by upstream chain operator (farmer)                                                      

Output level:                        
Adopted & implemented value chain development policy & guideline by ASE & its partners    
WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? …………ontd
Intervention logic  Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/ Bench mark (2009) Milestone of Performance Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)        

  • of feasible value chain development studied, promoted & implemented (product type)   
  • of smallholders participated in & benefited from the VCs (by gender)                                                  

Reduced the adverse effects of climate change                             
Outcome level: Mainstreamed CC by communities & local government                         

  • CC adaptation technologies / practices promoted                         
  • of HHs developed resilience against CC hazards                              

Output level: Ha area of degraded watershed area enclosed & treated Ha area of SSI developed / upgraded                        

  • ha area treated with agro forestry practices Ha of land treated with organic fertilizer every year (average)                        
  • of seedling out planted every year (@% survival rate)                                                 

Shared proven practices to Government Outcome level:                        
WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? …………ontd
Intervention logic    Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/    Bench mark (2009)    Milestone of Performance    Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)        

  • of successful approaches & practices adopted by target partners & networks (list)           

Output level:  Knowledge management (documentation & communication) policy & guideline adopted & implemented by ASE                          

  • of successful approaches & practices evaluated, documented & shared (list)                   

Ensured gender equality                             
Outcome level: Gender mainstreamed and effective at institution, program and community levels Gender policy & guideline revised & implemented              
                              
Output level:                        
     % of women in ASE economic activities                        
     % Executive women in CBI leadership                          
     % of women in ASE staff                        

Reduced prevalence of HIV/AIDS                             
Outcome level:                        
HIV/AIDS mainstreamed and effective at institution, program and community levels WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? …………ontd
Intervention logic    Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/ Bench mark (2009) Milestone of Performance Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions
Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)        

Output level:  Community based care & support system setup & active                        

  • of PLWHA with access to income generating activities % of reduced HIV prevalence Ensured organizational growth and sustainability                              

Outcome level: ASE becomes increasingly secured, growing and competitive                        
                           
Output level: 

  • Increased # of regions where ASE operates                           
  • Increased # of programs / projects funded                          
  • Increased average annual ASE's budget (Br)                         
  • % HO budget covered by revenue generated from own social enterprises                           
  • % increased  in reserve funds against annual budget                         
  • % of staff with access to capacity dev't training & exposure                         
  • % of staff turn over                           
  • Increased number of vehicles available                          

WHAT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE? …………ontd
Intervention logic    Performance Indicators /Actual or Proxy/    Bench mark (2009)    Milestone of Performance    Means of Verification    Risks / Assumptions
Mid-term Target (Jun., 2012)    Period target (Dec., 2015)        

STRATEGY         

Program approach & design                              
Targeting    

  • of addressed food insecure & enterprise potential rural areas                          
  • of addressed rural towns & urban areas which are under poverty trap                        
  • of addressed remote & less developed regions (out of 5)                          
  • of regional /national programs / projects funded to scale up ASE's competence                        

Mode of program intervention                             
     Community learning & action /CoLA adapted to the different context, applied & effective
     Center of excellence in community learning established & operationally sustainable        
     CBI institutionalized & operate sustainable                        
     Participatory PME promoted and effective                        
     Phasing in & phasing out plan designed & implemented by each program / project - insured sustainability                          

  • of networks in which ASE is active member                        
  • of program / project that co-implemented with local partners - GO, chi, others                          
981903
Copyright © 2017 Agri Service Ethiopia. All Rights Reserved.
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU General Public License.