Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Monitoring and evaluation programs should be utilized in order to assess the impact of the programs and whether or not objectives are being achieved and if they should be adjusted. The Contractor will input all required information to the USAID/DRC COR on a quarterly basis.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. The Contractor should plan, implement and document a monitoring and evaluation component which will establish the effectiveness of the activity in entomological and epidemiological terms. Although core indicators will be specified in individual task orders, illustrative indicators include the following: • Number of people residing in houses sprayed (people protected by IRS) • Number of people trained in IRS implementation • Number of houses sprayed • Percentage of houses targeted for spraying that were sprayed • Susceptibility of local vectors to candidate insecticides, on at least an annual basis • Determination of quality of IRS and/or insecticide decay on the local substrate • Plan developed for monitoring and managing insecticide resistance
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. Evaluation of the Contractor’ s overall performance in accordance with performance standards/indicators established under task orders and in Section C of this contract shall be conducted jointly by the USAID COTR and the Contracting Officer, and shall form the basis of the Contractor’ s permanent performance record with regard to this contract. The COTR and CO will undertake an evaluation of the Contractor’ s once a year for the length of a Task Order and at the conclusion of each task order. A copy to the Performance Evaluation will be forwarded to USAID/W COTR and IQC CO when issued by a TOCO overseas or USAID/W.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. The Department will provide to the Recipient a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan, developed in consultation with the Recipient, which describes how the Recipient (and where relevant its Research Organisations) will: monitor and evaluate the ongoing performance of the Activity; and assist the Department in its monitoring and evaluation activities in relation to the Activity. The Recipient must implement the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and where relevant ensure compliance by its Research Organisations.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. All the people involved (lecturers, coordinator and students) will assess the work carried out by the trainee.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. 148. The project will follow UNEP standard monitoring, reporting and evaluation processes and procedures. Substantive and financial project reporting requirements are summarized in Appendix 6. Reporting requirements and templates are an integral part of the UNEP legal instrument to be signed by the executing agency and UNEP.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. A settlement agreement in 2006 approved by the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission on March 17, 2006 (Order No. 24,599 in DE 05-157) transferred responsibility for monitoring and evaluation efforts from the Utilities to Commission Staff. Under that agreement, the Commission receives input and advice from the utilities on monitoring and evaluation activities and to also coordinate efforts with the Utilities’ Core programs implementation efforts. In addition, there was also agreement:
(1) to provide utilities with the opportunity to comment on preliminary study findings and results prior to publication, (2) to invite interested parties to attend and provide input at evaluation presentations, (3) to permit utilities, on a case-by-case basis considered in light of study design, costs, schedule and similar issues, to participate in regional monitoring and evaluation studies as well as studies conducted by multi- jurisdictional utilities, and (4) that the Commission would aggressively pursue all available means to protect customer confidential information as permitted by the Right-to-Know Law, RSA 91-A, given that monitoring and evaluation studies frequently require access to such information. (Order No. 24,599, Page 5) For 2011 and 2012, Measurement and Verification (M&V) efforts are funded at approximately five per cent of the annual program budgets. These funds are utilized to support the following activities:
1. Evaluation Planning
2. Measurement and Verification of New Hampshire CORE Energy Efficiency Programs
3. Regional Measurement and Verification Projects
4. Regional Avoided Energy Supply Cost Studies
5. Miscellaneous Research
6. CORE EE Program Tracking and Reporting During 2011-2012, the Utilities have identified a number of evaluation activities planned for or needed in New Hampshire.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. This section will describe which indicators will be monitored, and when they will be measured. It is divided between the VRA (adaptive capacity), the IAS (global environmental benefits) and Adaptation Indicators (quantitative assessments of climate change adaptation). For each section, describe when indicator measurements will be reported – in the first, second, and/or final reporting periods. Note that continued funding will be contingent on M&E reporting. IAS: Indicate which Impact Assessment System (IAS) indicators will be measured by the project – one or more indicators in one or more Global Environmental Benefit focal areas and one or more each of the livelihood and empowerment indicators. Furthermore, indicate how the chosen indicators will be measured, and include a target value – what the project plans to achieve – for each indicator measured. Keep in mind that all projects will be required to submit progress reports to access subsequent disbursements of project funds, and these reports will require measurement of IAS AND VRA indicators. Indicate when these measurements will take place.
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. The population denominator for the NDCSP’s data collection activities will be based on census data which is collected once in 5 years. The current census was done in 2001, and the report has yet to be released. The NDCSP will utilize several different sources of data during Phase II of the project. First, the project will use the DHIS data and regular notification data for routine monitoring, especially for measles, AFP, and neonatal tetanus from clinics and hospitals. The DHIS measures minimum indicators of primary health care services per facility, as well as for the district and province (for example, the number of children vaccinated each month). The routine notification data will estimate information on epidemics such as measles, cholera, neonatal tetanus, and AFP, etc. The project will also use the following IMCI monitoring tools: (a) health facility support checklist, (b) checklist for case management, and (c) caretaker interview form to monitor and supervise the IMCI practices at the clinic level. In addition, the cold chain monitoring tools and temperature checklist developed by the DOH will be used to measure the quality of immunization services at the clinic level. In addition, the project’s Training Coordinator will continue to utilize the data collection tools for the clinic level developed by the NDCSP during Phase I to measure outpatient cases at clinics for various maternal and childhood illnesses, a form to track referral of cases to hospital, and a form to track deliveries, births, and deaths (see Annex 11). Although information available at the community level is not comprehensive, TBAs do collect information on maternal and newborn care (Annex 12), and an orphan register (see Annex 13) exists to enable the community to track the care of orphan children. The project will develop a more comprehensive community based monitoring system that will help track epidemiological and demographic and social welfare data. The tool will be developed based on models already being reviewed by the project, i.e., the HBCVs monitoring report and CHW registers. This tool will be pre-tested and used by trained community workers. The tool will also help the project and DOH to gather complete information at the community level, for example, on the activities carried out by HBCVs. The possible overlapping of data (i.e., “double counting”) can be caused when mothers/families go the clinics for services which are not recorded in the community-based records. This ...
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. It is proposed to closely follow the monitoring and evaluation plan designed for the UNDP/GEF project. The plan proposes to monitor and evaluate activities that measure project progress using quantifiable indicators of project achievements. These indicators will also measure the level of involvement of stakeholders and the performance of the actions undertaken to achieve the project. Activity specific indicators to be used for the KfW project are provided in the project planning matrix (Chapter 6). The project will be monitored and evaluated in close collaboration with the DGO and the Wildlife Division and will follow the guidelines established by UNDP-GEF. The objectives of the M&E may be summarized as follows: • To analyse project progress, impacts and achievements • To assess the relationship between activities planned in the project document and those implemented in the field, using performance indicators • To re-orient the project as needed (adaptive management) • To draw recommendations for future natural resources management transfer of activities to other areas • To allow inter-project evaluations and systematic exchange (with other GEF and KfW projects) • To develop long term M & E processes assessing the success and ecological and socio-economic sustainability of the WMAs and the corridor after project closure. The monitoring and evaluation plan includes monitoring of project progress, ecological monitoring and socio-economic monitoring. The WWF/WB Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool should be used to analyse management effectiveness in the WMA’s (details are provided in Annex 12 of the UNDP/GEF project document). The details of the M&E plan should be elaborated by the International Project Administrator jointly with the DGOs counterparts of the Namtumbo and Tunduru Districts and the CIM expert at the start of his assignment.
