Methodologies of monitoring and

evaluating capacity development

Makoto Kato
Japan
kato@oecc.or.jp

1
UNFCCC Expert Workshop on Monitoring and Evaluating
Capacity-Building in Developing Countries
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 6-7 November, 2008
Outline
Defining Capacity, and Capacity Development

Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and
Evaluating Capacity Development

Comparison? M&E at national level?

Uniqueness of Capacity Development in
Climate Change area
2
Defining Capacity, and Capacity
Development
Capacity:
Developing countries ability to cope with
challenges by their own organization and
actions.
Capacity development:
Process in which such capacity is being
strengthened and sustained at individual,
institutional, and society levels as a whole.

3
Source: JICA 2006
Capacity at different levels
(Capacity Development must be comprehensive)
Individual Level
Institutional Level
Society Level
Source: JICA 2006
4
Administrators
Capacity
Enhancement
Strengthened
Management of Waste
Control Authority
Consensus in Burden
sharing by different
stakeholders
New Waste Segregation
Rules
Policy Goals toward
Waste Reduction
Awareness raised about
Waste Reduction
Different Approaches to Capacity Development
(Capacity Development should be country-driven and sustainable)
Existing Capacity Existing Capacity
External Input
(Incl. Knowledge
Sharing)
External
Capital Transfer
Level of Capacity necessary to cope with challenges
Approach A:
Transfer of capacity from external player
(Filling a Gap with external capital transfer)
Approach B:
Developing capacity with external
facilitation(building capacity under the
ownership of host countries/communities)
Source: JICA 2006
5
Not
Sustainable
More
Sustainable
Key Drivers of Capacity Development
Ownership
Enabling Environment
Incentives
Leadership
Knowledge
6
7
Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and
Evaluating Capacity-Building (1)
Plan
Implementation
Evaluation
Identification
Formulation
Preparation
Implementation /
Monitoring
Evaluation
Flow of M&E
Conceptual Figure of Project Cycle Management(PCM)
8
Where indicators are used:
Format of Project Design Matrix PDM
Narrative Summary

Indicators

Means of
Verification

Important
Assumption

Overall Goal









Project Objective









Outputs









Activities


Inputs

Pre-conditions

Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and
Evaluating Capacity-Building (2)
Vertical
Logical
Relationship
- - -
















Cause
Effect
How Overalls Goals/project objectives and Indicators are made?
Problem Tree
Core Problem
Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and
Evaluating Capacity-Building (3)
















Expected Situations
Feasibility
Means
Ends
Core Objective
Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and
Evaluating Capacity-Building (3)
How Overalls Goals/project objectives and Indicators are made?
Objective Tree
Methodologies and Tools for Monitoring and Evaluating
Capacity-Building
Evaluation is heavily dependent on Target Setting
(based on capacity assessment)
Target in different levels: Overall Goal, Objectives of Efforts
(eg. Policy/Programme/Project objectives)
Indicators are useful only if/when they are elaborated
with means of verification, important assumption and pre-
condition (used in PDM)
M&E are properly done by Project Owners (and
contracted external evaluators)
11
Can we compare?
Same type Projects in 2 different countries
12
Country A
Country B
Project X Project Y
Development
Priority
Governance
Structure
Existing Capacity
Other attributes
(eg, Size)
Development
Priority
Governance
Structure
Existing Capacity
Other attributes
(eg, Size)
Comparison is only useful for drawing lessons from Good Practices
(Simple replication does not happen)
Can we compare?
Same type Projects in the same country
13
Country C
Project Q
Project P
Development
Priority
Governance
Structure
Existing Capacity
Other attributes
(eg, Size)
(Internal Factors)
Willingness of Stakeholders
Entry point of Efforts etc.
(Internal Factors)
Willingness of Stakeholders
Entry point of Efforts etc.
Easier to compare the two, since the external factors are the same or similar.
But still internal factors of projects should be taken into account.
Can we compare? M&E at National Level
Accuracy of Comparison (Evaluation)
Project level>Programme level>Policy level>
Regional/International Network
(At higher level, quantified indicators may omit useful qualified
information)
Methods of M&E
We use the same M&E methods(some variety), but indicators are
more tailor-made
Pre-condition of Defining Indicators
Capacity Assessment (jointly done by D-ing+D-ed countries) is
crucial
Assessment(BAU) Monitoring(Indicators) Evaluation
(Indicators) must be coherent, and reflect a specific context.

14
Narrative Summary

Indicators

Means of
Verification

Important
Assumption

Overall Goal









Project Objective









Outputs









Activities


Inputs

Pre-conditions

-
-
Uniqueness of Capacity Development in
Climate Change area
15
This Area is already decided by
2/CP7.
Fill in one of the 15 scopes
e.g. (promotion of) CDM

-
Entry points of such efforts are different by host countries. Host countries
chose such entry point, jointly with our Agencies.
Conclusion from our practice
A single methodology (with variation) for M&E is used.
Indicators are used and functions in specific context (within
PDM), and simple aggregation of evaluation results is strictly
avoided.
Indicators are useful to interpret lessons from Good Practices.
Evaluation at larger level employs more qualitative/narrative
way.
Entry points of efforts are different by countries, and it affects
selection of indicators.
For climate change, we approach both from Overall Goal and
from the bottom side of PDM( and it still works).

16