Limitations and Unanticipated Benefits of the Revised Evaluation Methodology Sample Clauses

Limitations and Unanticipated Benefits of the Revised Evaluation Methodology. As noted earlier, as a result of the security situation in the Northern states, field visits were curtailed and limited to two of the three states originally intended to be visited. While it is unlikely that confidence and validity were adversely affected by not visiting the third state, the overall evaluation would certainly have been stronger and more complete had the team been able to include Kano in the itinerary as originally planned. Due to delays necessitated by the security situation, only five days could be spent in the field rather than ten as originally planned. Thus only eight facilities were visited instead of 14-16 as originally envisioned. By bringing officials from the three SMOHs and LGAs, as well as field staff from the ACCESS/MCHIP Project into Abuja for interviews with the Abuja-based Evaluation Team member, more time was available for discussion and the amount of information and project-based experience shared ended up being much greater than would have been achieved through shorter courtesy visits carried out in the course of a field visit. This wealth of field level feedback provided a rich addition to the facility and community-based activity feedback received by the second Evaluation Team member during field visits. The Evaluation Team feels that the sample selection of facilities was sufficiently representative and that sufficient information and data was collected to ensure an informed and valid final evaluation of the ACCESS/MCHIP Project. FINDINGS Most of the indicators tracked in USAID/Nigeria’s annual PMPs have been met or exceeded for the ACCESS/MCHIP Project. Achievement measured by these indicators will be discussed in the appropriate sections below, within the context of the other numerous achievements and shortcomings not necessarily captured by the PMP and AR indicators.