Cross-cutting M&E functions in MENARID MENARID Knowledge Exchange workshop 24th to 28th of March, Hammamet, Tunisia 1

Cross-cutting M&E functions in MENARID

MENARID Knowledge Exchange workshop24th to 28th of March, Hammamet, Tunisia

1

What is the MENARID cross-cutting M&E functions about?

• To build-up a system that will provide :• reliable information on the implementation of program;• facilitate analysis of projects performance;• improve M&E practices.

• To identify a core set of indicators common to INRM projects

• Two steps:

• 1. To harmonize M&E tools

• 2. Aligned M&E approaches & processes 2

1. To harmonize M&E tools: putting in place the requirements for a Results Based Management system for INRM projects

• Definition of RBM => Roberto

• Proposing a set of performance and impact indicators, measurement and monitoring methodology, and means of verification;

• Designing a Results Based Budgeting (RBB) system for INRM projects:• Wokring towards achieving results and not only twoards the

delivery of outputs

3


• Results-based budgeting (RBB) is a planning and strategic management tool. It is actually a sub- set of “results-based management” (RBM). The process is the following:

1. Projects formulate budgets around a set of pre-defined objectives and expected accomplishments, and

2. Expected accomplishments justify the resource requirements which are derived from and linked to outputs required to achieve such accomplishments, and

3. Actual performance in achieving expected accomplishments is measured by indicators of achievement.

• Source: (UN Guide to RBB (Version 1.1), Office of Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts, 23 October 1998, Glossary.)

4


• Common outcomes after Rabat workshop:• Outcome 1 : Institutional issues improved.

• Increased capacity of local and national institutions involved in MENARID; • Increased local/regional legal action to promote INRM;• Increase engagement of institutions (cross-sector coordination); • Improve regulations and enforcement.• Increased financing for INRM • Improve regulations and enforcement

• Outcome 2: socio-economic situation of local communities improved• Improve infrastructure • Increased organization of population affected • Improved livelihoods (health, income, education, job, gender, youth) • Access to natural and financial resources • Access to information • Increased efficiency and sustainability • Improved food security

5

Out

puts

Out

puts


• Common outcomes after Rabat workshop:• Outcome 3: INRM impact positively the environment

• Diversification • Restored lands • Sustainable intensification • Increased used of good practices • Sustainable water management • Increased protection of biodiversity • Resilience of crop/livestock • Decreased pollution • Increased vegetation cover • Decreased fire risk • Increased Carbon sequestration • Increased new technologies (solar, etc)

6

Out

puts

Outcome 1 : Institutional issues improved - Indicators1. Proportion of project staff who stay in their institutions beyond project period to achieve sustainability.2. Proportion of cooperating agencies that participate in project implementation, and that continue to do

so in order to achieve sustainability. 3. Number of NR planning and coordination entities working cross-sectorally at national, provincial and

local levels.4. Increase in local and national capacity for INRM monitoring and evaluation of the techniques (number

of monitoring reports per given period).5. Proportion of private sector entities involved in project related partnerships.6. Number of local and national institutions that engaged additional INRM into planning and framework

after project implementation.7. Number of educational entities (schools, universities) involved in the INRM project;8. Number of extension services involved in the INRM project.9. Corporate/Management strategy for long-term sustainability of the INRM project;10. Number of similar organization/partners who replicate/adopt the INRM techniques. 11. Institutional agreements on NR use.12. Proportion of targeted people accessing to financial incentives for INRM13. Amount of private financing for promoting INRM;14. Increased public financing for promoting INRM;15. Developed and negotiated strategy for Long-term financial support of INRM implementation at local

and national levels.16. Adoption of appropriate financial mechanisms in the project areas.17. Capacity to auto-finance activities18. NR accessible within the project area, and that are not of private domain;19. Proportion of people that are concerned by the local legislation

7

Outcome 2: Socio-economic situation of local communities improved - Indicators

1. Proportion of awareness of non-INRM issues and of the INRM project in the area2. Proportion of INRM practices adoption by target group (soil management techniques, diseases control

techniques, water efficient techniques).3. Proportion of target group people trained to implement INRM;4. Area associated with INRM5. Proportion of the area with increasing in INRM production outcomes (e.g., agricultural yields);6. Number of Community Based activities (collaborative/participative management entities) implemented in the

INRM project ;7. Proportion of women into these community based activities;8. Proportion of women who actively contribute to planning and management processes for INRM.9. Proportion of target group people associated with an INRM community-based management entities;10. Proportion of project participants who are living below the locally poverty line.11. KM and KS activities/training that take place.12. Sustainable informational tool for Knowledge generation and dissemination.13. Number of training activities about INRM that take place, and number of trained people;14. Increasing awareness amongst projects about gender issues when dealing with INRM.15. Number of market-based (financial), non-monetary and trade-off assessments of the loss of ecosystem

services across the area.16. Number of women’s organization systematically engaged in dialogue on INRM;17. Number of women systematically consultant for policy-making decisions to represent their interests.18. Number of Payments for Ecosystem Services schemes established or formerly planned that bring benefits for

local livelihoods through INRM;19. Evolution of stakeholders’ income from NR after project implementation;20. Evolution of women’s income in the project;21. Percentage increase in value added for local products.22. Behavioral indicators

8

Outcome 3: INRM impact positively the environment - Indicators

1. Area of NR (Land, watersheds, rangelands, and others) managed through IRNM demonstrations/up-scaling, over each project site, and across the different agro-ecosystems

2. Proportion of women adopting INRM;3. Reduction of NR degradation (increase in Net Primary Productivity, or

Rain Use Efficiency)4. Area covered with IRNM practices;5. Climate change mitigation impact (GIS data)6. Rate of carbon sequestration in soils and vegetation across the project;7. Area of renovated NR since project implementation. 8. Increase in NR coverage amongst the area (reforestation, decrease in

urbanization)9. Quantity of production from NR over the project area (net primary

productivity)10. GIS data (vegetation index, surface temperatures).

9

2. Aligned M&E approaches & processes: Engaging the project stakeholders in designing the RBM and M&E system

=> Next workshop!

10

Documents

Cross-cutting M&E functions in MENARID MENARID Knowledge Exchange workshop 24th to 28th of March, Hammamet, Tunisia 1