Monitoring Strategy. Depending on the amount of data and information available to develop the TMDL, a certain level of uncertainty is associated with one or more elements of the plan (e.g., estimates of source loadings and assimilative capacity). Although not a required element of a TMDL submittal, a monitoring plan is recommended to address any uncertainties that may exist when the document is prepared and evaluate the extent to which implementation measures are succeeding in attaining water quality standards. A monitoring plan may include the following: » Articulate the monitoring hypothesis and explain how the monitoring plan will test it; » Address the relationships between the monitoring plan and the various components of the TMDL (targets, sources, allocations, etc.); and » Explain any assumptions used.
Monitoring Strategy. Indicator Type Definition Example Nota bena: Though indicators are significantly useful to help track progress, they can almost never tell the whole story about what is to be or has been achieved. For example, some concepts are simply not amenable to being expressed by means of indicators, which are limited by their own unique requirements. Therefore, as detailed in section 4.1, indicator tracking must be supplemented by evaluations in order to gain deeper meaning regarding what has been achieved and why or why not.
Monitoring Strategy. The general approach to be used to monitor activities and results ensuring participation of all stakeholders, especially women and vulnerable groups.
Monitoring Strategy. In order to help track progress and performance through Compact implementation, indicators at multiples levels were included in the during-Compact M&E Plan: Process, Output, Outcome, and Goal. Each of these indicator types, and their typical progression, is defined as the following: Indicator Type Definition Example Process Activities undertaken and milestones achieved Contract signed Output Products and services produced # of farmers trained Outcome Immediate and higher order effects of outputs on beneficiaries Change in beneficiary income Goal Tracks impact on outcomes of the highest order Poverty Rate (Final achievement on during-Compact indicators can be found on the websites of MCA-N (for up to one year following Compact closure), NPC, and MCC. They may also be included as an annex to future versions of this document.) For post-Compact, the indicators to be monitored are mostly at the outcome and goal level (see Annex 1). The indicators were jointly established by MCA-N, NPC, MCA-N’s Implementing Partners (and, where relevant, others in the sector), and MCC. To promote accountability post-Compact, NPC has additionally, in liaison with MCA-N and IPs, set targets where feasible for all the indicators in the Post Compact M&E Plan (see separate document containing these targets) and will work with the Compact’s Implementing Partners to track progress towards those targets. Nota bena: Though indicators are significantly useful to help track progress, they can almost never tell the whole story about what is to be or has been achieved. For example, some concepts are simply not amenable to being expressed by means of indicators, which are limited by their own unique requirements. Therefore, as detailed in section 4.1, indicator tracking must be supplemented by evaluations in order to gain deeper meaning regarding what has been achieved and why or why not.
