Chapter 3 introduces the Logical Framework Approach (LFA), explaining its role in project design with a simple project example. It explains how sustainability / quality factors can influence a project’s chances for success, and indicates the range of Where to tools that are available to take account of these factors. It also explains how you can find what? use the logframe matrix to develop objective-oriented Activity and Resource Schedules. Chapter 4 describes how to use the Logical Framework Approach to improve the quality of project documents and project design. Chapter 5 provides additional details about issues raised in chapters 2 and 3, with a special focus on important implementation aspects.
It also provides a glossary and bibliographic references (Internet links).
1. 2. Target Groups The handbook is addressed to all persons who want more detailed information about planning, management and evaluation of projects and programmes funded by the European Commission’s external aid programmes. Thus, it will be useful for those who attended PCM seminars and workshops run by EuropeAid’s Evaluation Unit, and others, both inside and outside the Commission, who want to become more familiar with PCM and the Logical Framework Approach to deepen their understanding of PCM and of its application. 1. 3. How to Use the Handbook? Each chapter has a brief introduction at the beginning.
Those who have gone through the training should use the handbook as a reference to have a better insight of the issues raised. Target groups 1 Both documents are available in English, French http://europa. eu. int/comm/europeaid/evaluation/methods/pcm. htm. and Spanish under 1 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook The following sections may be most relevant for particular types of target groups: Group / Interest Persons interested in an overview on PCM in EC’s external aid What is most relevant for me? Persons interested in details about the Logical Framework Approach Persons involved in managing and monitoring projects in the field – TA, Delegation staff, ministries Persons n charge of planning, implementing and monitoring feasibility studies – EC staff, consultants Persons in charge of planning or implementing evaluation studies Chapter 2. 3. & 5. 4 2. 7, 5. 3, 5. 4 2. 5 2. 8 PCM follows an evolutionary approach. Comments on contents and case studies are welcome, and should be addressed to EuropeAid’s Evaluation Unit (H/6).
The Term Paper on Socioeconomic Status Chapter Person People
Christina Emmett Annotated Argument Monmouth University Table of Contents The Bell Curve Chapter 1 - "Cognitive Class and Education, 1900-19901) It is not just the case that more people are going to college, but that the brighter students are the ones attending. 2) Admission became more related to I. Q. than in the past.3) There is a small part of the population that are expected to fill positions ...
2 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. PROJECT CYCLE MANAGEMENT: AN OVERVIEW Throughout this handbook the word “project” refers both to a “project” – a group of activities to produce a Project Purpose in a fixed time frame – and a “programme” – a series of projects whose objectives together contribute to a common Overall Objective, at sector, country or even multi-country level. 2. 1.
The Project Cycle and Key PCM Principles The way in which projects are planned and carried out follows a sequence beginning with an agreed strategy, which leads to an idea for a specific action, oriented towards achieving a set of objectives, which then is formulated, implemented, and evaluated with a view to improving the strategy and further action. The project cycle Structured & provides a structure to ensure that stakeholders are consulted and relevant informainformed decition is available, so that informed decisions can be made at key stages in the life of sion-making a project. Figure 1: The Project Cycle The generic project cycle within EC external aid programmes has six phases. In practice, the duration and importance of each phase may vary for different projects. However, within all EC programmes the cycle shares three common themes: 1. Key decisions, information requirements and responsibilities are defined at each phase. 2.
The Business plan on Project planning and evaluation
Before anyone is going to do something, there is nothing as sensible as planning. A plan as we know is something thought about and chalked out in advance before the real action takes place and is actually a recipe for success. But then, the word ‘plan’ does not need much of a definition. It has been used so much that it has become quite hackneyed. So, we all know what it means, but how ...
The phases in the cycle are progressive – each phase needs to be completed for the next to be tackled with success. 3. New programming draws on evaluation to build experience as part of the institutional learning process. Aid co-operation and partnership programmes with non-member states involve often complex processes that require the active support of many parties. PCM reflects the decision-making and implementation process; the methodology applied for planning, managing, evaluating projects is the Logical Framework Approach. PCM helps ensuring that the stakeholders support the decisions, and that decisions are based on relevant and sufficient information. a Figure 2: Merging PCM and Logframe Approach
Merging PCM and Logframe Approach Project Cycle Management Defines different phases in the project life with well-defined management activities and decision making procedures Logframe Approach A methodology for planning, managing and evaluating programmes and projects, using tools to enhance participation and transparency and to improve orientation towards objectives Project management methods and tools The decision making and implementation process defined by the organisation Project Cycle Management Logframe Approach 3 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook What does PCM aim at? How to achieve? PCM tries to ensure that: 1. rojects respect and contribute to overarching policy objectives of the EC such as respect of human rights, poverty alleviation and to cross-cutting issues such as gender equality, protection of the environment (relevance to and compatibility with theses issues in the broad sense); 2. projects are relevant to an agreed strategy and to the real problems of target groups / beneficiaries; 3. projects are feasible, meaning that objectives can be realistically achieved within the constraints of the operating environment and the capabilities of the implementing agencies; 4. benefits generated by projects are sustainable. For that purpose, PCM 1. uses the Logical Framework Approach to analyse the problems, work out suitable solutions – i. e. roject design, and successfully implement them. 2. requires the production of good-quality key document(s) in each phase, to ensure structured and well-informed decision-making (integrated approach).
The Essay on Project Life Cycle
Project Life Cycle There are several stages in the life cycle of a project: project selection, planning, execution, and termination. The first phase, project selection, will vary among firms. Each project must be evaluated to determine which is the best use of corporate funds. Each will have different risks, benefits, and costs, making the selection very difficult. The final decision should be ...
3. requires consulting and involving key stakeholders as much as possible. 4. puts emphasis on a clear formulation and focus on one Project Purpose, in terms of sustainable benefits for the intended target group(s).
5. incorporates key quality issues into the design from the beginning. The focus of EC co-operation will be more and more on sector programmes, i. e. supporting a specific sector through the support to the sector policy, its development, if required, and its implementation.
Both the phases of the cycle and the basic principle apply to sector programmes. Chapter 5. 1 provides more details about the sector programme cycle. The following figure shows the major decisions to be taken and documents to be produced during the life of a project. Figure 3: The Project Cycle: Main Documents and Decisions The Project Cycle: Major Documents and Decisions Country Strategy Paper Decision how to use results in future programming Evaluation study Priority areas, sectors, timetable PrePrefeasibility study Project Identification Sheet Decision which options to study further Feasibility study Decision whether to draw up a formal financing proposal Draft Financing Proposal
Decision to continue as planned or to reorient project (midterm evaluation) Progress and Monitoring Reports Decision about the need for extension Financing Agreement a Financing Proposal Decision to fund 4 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 2. The Basic Format or Structure of Project and Programme Documents A basic ‘format’ is applied for all documents to be produced during the project cycle. It follows the core logic of the Logical Framework Approach. 1. Summary 2. Background: Overall EC and Government policy objectives, and links with the Commission’s country programme or strategy, commitment of Government to overarching policy objectives of the EC such as respect of human rights 3. Sectoral and problem analysis, including stakeholder analysis and their potentials 4.
Project / programme description, objectives, and the strategy to attain them ? Including lessons from past experience, and linkage with other donors’ activities ? Description of the intervention (objectives, and strategy to reach them, including Project Purpose, Results and Activities and main Indicators) 5. Assumptions, Risks 6. Implementation arrangements ? Physical and non-physical means ? Organisation and implementation procedures ? Timetable (work plan) ? Estimated cost and financing plan ? Special conditions and accompanying measures by Government / partners ? Monitoring and Evaluation 7. Quality factors ? Participation and ownership by beneficiaries ? Policy support ?
The Term Paper on Teradyne Jaguar Project
Background Teradyne Teradyne is a 45 year old corporation specialized in testing equipment for transistors and other electrical components of the semiconductor industry. The company was founded in 1960 by two MIT graduates with a vision to bring a line of reliable, fast testing equipment to the industry. As the complexity and volume of components manufactured by their customers increased, so did ...
Appropriate technology ? Socio-cultural aspects ? Gender equality ? Environmental protection ? Institutional and management capacities ? Financial and economic viability Annex: Logframe (completed or outline, depending on the phase) Figure 4: The Integrated Approach The Integrated Approach Linked objectives National / sectoral objectives NEAP NIP + Budget Budget Budget Salaries Allowances Vehicle Op. Office Tel/Fax Seeds Fertiliser 5000 1250 3750 750 400 850 2300 5500 1750 4250 750 400 1100 3100 5500 1750 4250 750 400 1100 3100 5500 1750 4250 750 400 1100 3100 Standardised documentation Feasibility studies Financing proposals Basic Format 1. Summary 2. Background 3.
Sectoral and problem analysis 4. Project/programme description 5. Assumptions, risks and flexibility 6. Implementation arrangements 7. Quality factors Annex: Logframe Logframe Progress reports Evaluation reports Results-based work plans and budgets Workplan Workplan Workplan 5 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook PCM and procedures The following chapters provide an overview on the different phases of the project cycle. Details about procedures and overall responsibilities between the DGs involved in a phase can be found in the Interservice Agreement concluded between the DG External Relations, DG Development and EuropeAid Co-operation Office2.
They are not repeated in this handbook. 2. 3. Programming 2. 3. 1. Introduction Programming is multi-annual and indicative. The work is coordinated by Commission services with contributions from partner country authorities. The output is an agreed multi-annual Indicative Programme. It constitutes the “Order For Service” (OFS) sent formally from DG RELEX/DEV to EuropeAid. Any review thereof needs to be adopted. During the Programming phase, the situation at national and sectoral level is analysed to identify problems, constraints and opportunities which co-operation could address. This involves a review of socio-economic indicators, and of national and Setting pridonor priorities.
The Term Paper on Six Years Countries Development World
Minister Wieczorek-Zeus plays a very important role in the relationship that the World Bank enjoys with Germany. I am delighted to have had the opportunity to meet with her again. We have had, and continue to have, a deep and long-standing association, in which we both share common perspectives, and in which her department and my colleagues in the Bank work effectively together in our common fight ...
The purpose is to identify the main objectives and sectoral priorities orities for co-operation, and thus to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which projects can be identified and prepared. For each of these priorities, strategies that take account of the lessons of past experience will be formulated. “Guidelines for the Implementation of the Common Framework for Country Strategy Papers” explaining the process in detail are available on the Internet3. Overall procedures and responsibilities for programming are described in the Interservice Agreement. 2. 3. 2. The Programming Process: An Overview The multi-annual programming documents, as defined by the different regulations, are a part of the strategic framework vis-a-vis a partner country/region.
Furthermore, the standard Framework for Country Strategy Papers, which applies to EDF, ALA and MED programming documents will also be applied progressively to all other countries receiving financial assistance from the EC. Therefore, both programming and implementation are (respectively will be) managed on the basis of a single, logically coherent documentation, the Country Strategy Paper (CSP).
A CSP should be drafted on the basis of discussions with the partner country ensuring sufficient ownership to facilitate a successful implementation. In this context, policy dialogue should be encouraged and should lead, if possible, to mutual understanding and consensus. A CSP shall contain a series of key elements and keep the following structure: 1. A description of the EC co-operation objectives. 2.
The policy objectives of the partner country. 3. An analysis of the political, economic and social situation, including the sustainability of current policies and medium-term challenges. 4. An overview of past and ongoing EC co-operation (lessons and experience), information on programmes of EU Member States and other donors. 5. The EC response strategy, identifying a strictly limited number of intervention sectors that is complementary to interventions by other donors. 2 3 http://europa. eu. int/comm/external_relations/reform/document/intser_06_01. pdf http://europa. eu. int/comm/development/lex/en/sec2000_1049_0_en. htm#menu 6 European Commission – EuropeAid
The Term Paper on Regional Policy Regions Development Union
What Are The Implications Of Membership Of The European Union On Regional Development In The UK Large-scale disparities in prosperity between British regions first became a subject of concern for policy makers in the late 1920 s (McCallum 1979). Since that time regional development strategies have been an integral part of government policy, though the weighting they have been afforded has varied ...
Project Cycle Management Handbook 6. Once the response strategy is defined, it must be translated into a National Indicative Programme (NIP).
This may be an integral part of the overall CSP document. The NIP is a management tool covering a period of several years (from 3 – 5 years depending on the applicable Regulation/Agreement).
It identifies and defines the appropriate measures and actions for attaining the objectives laid down. The National Indicative Programme should fully derive from and be consistent with the preceding analysis. Each of these points is further developed in the “Guidelines for implementation of the Common Framework for Country Strategy Papers”4.
The order of the components should not be altered and in total, the document should be 15 to 25 pages, without annexes. The indicative programme shall specify: • Global objectives: Programming documents set out the strategic choices for EC co-operation, on the basis of the EU’s and the country’s priorities, making possible the setting of priorities within and across sectors and by instrument; • Financial envelopes for each co-operation area including, where appropriate, the indicative timing and size of each instalment of the Community contributions; • Specific objectives and expected results for each co-operation area including key domains for onditionalities and main performance and a limited number of What needs to key outcome indicators (for a definition, see table below).
These indicators must be specified? relate to developments that are measurable in the short/medium term. If there is a PRSP process (Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper) under way, the indicators must correspond to those developed in that framework; • How crosscutting issues are taken into consideration (gender, environment, etc. ); • Programmes to be implemented in pursuit of these objectives and intended beneficiaries and the type of assistance to be provided (e. g. macroeconomic support, technical assistance, training, investment, supply of equipment, etc).
Furthermore, project ideas may be formulated and general criteria for their realisation defined (such as geographical area, most suitable partners, suitable duration of projects)5. The whole programming process reflects major elements of the Logical Framework Approach, and shows that the approach is also valuable for setting co-operation objectives at country or regional level. 4 5 See http://europa. eu. int/comm/development/lex/en/sec2000_1049_0_en. htm#menu For ACP countries, there is a legal obligation to give the NIP an operational content (Annex IV to the Cotonou Agreement).
To the extent possible, concrete operations for which preparations are at a sufficiently advanced stage to warrant funding in the short and/or medium term shall therefore be included in the NIP.
As the Cotonou Agreement prescribes rolling programming, NIPs for ACP countries should also include a projection of tentative, but nevertheless identifiable, proposals for follow-up in the subsequent years. 7 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook Table 1: Development Indicators and their Use within EC Development Indicators As a major step towards concerted international action for development, the OECD, the United Nations and the World Bank have agreed to focus on a series of key goals in partnership with developing countries. These goals have been endorsed by major international conferences. A system for tracking progress has also been agreed.
A core set of indicators will be used – at a global level – to monitor performance and adjust development strategies as required. Within the EC, such kinds of development indicators are especially used in the framework of CSP and sector programmes. As for EC activities, the use of indicators meets three distinct and complementary needs, each requiring the monitoring of a separate set of indicators: 1. Measure the performance of the country’s development policies in terms of economic growth, increasing standard of living and poverty reduction in the short, medium and long term. 2. Measure the performance of sectoral development policies. 3. Monitor the implementation and impact of EC assistance.
As for all other types of indicators, it is imperative to consider the degree of measurability of the indicators as a key criterion when selecting which indicators to follow. Therefore, when defining each indicator, it is essential to pay attention to the time and cost necessary to collect the data, and the frequency with which these data could be obtained. In terms of development policy, the following terminology is applied for indicators: They measure the financial, administrative and regulatory resources provided by the Government and donors. It is necessary to establish a link between the resources used and the results achieved in order to assess the efficiency of the actions carried out. E. g. Share of the budget devoted to education expenditure, abolition of compulsory school uniforms They measure the immediate and concrete consequences of the measures taken and resources used: E. g. : Number of schools built, number of teachers trained They measure the short-term results at the level of beneficiaries. The term ‘results indicators’ is used as well. E. g. : School enrolment, percentage of girls among the children entering in first year of primary school They measure the long-term consequences of the outcomes. They measure the general objectives in terms of national development and poverty reduction. E. g. : Literacy rates Input Indicators Output Indicators Outcome Indicators Impact Indicators
Except for the term “Input indicators” which is usually not used as such within the Logical Framework Approach (LFA), this terminology complies with the LFA: • Output indicators would be located at the level of Activities, as they are direct consequences of Activities implemented, • Outcome indicators correspond to indicators at the level of the Results in a Logical Framework, • Impact indicators are measures at the level of the Purpose and the Overall Objectives (one could distinguish between initial and long-term impact).
2. 3. 3. Fundamental Principles of Programming The following principles shall motivate and inform all aspects of programming: 1.
Poverty focus: EC development policy shall be centred on the objective to reduce and, eventually, to eradicate poverty6 while taking into consideration other 6 Overall Statement by the Commission and the Council on the European Community’s Development policy, adopted by the Development Council on 10 November 2000. 8 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook objectives set out in Article 177 of the Treaty as well as in the regulations and international agreements for each geographical region. 2. Policy mix: Strategy and programming documents must be comprehensive and account for all EC policies, resources and instruments (the EC ‘policy mix’), that are applied in a partner country (as trade policy, fisheries policy and Common Foreign and Security Policy).
3.
Country ownership: The starting points for the preparation of strategies and programming are the EU/EC’s co-operation objectives and the country’s own policy agenda. For countries that are involved in the World Bank initiative on the establishment of Poverty Reduction Strategies, it is assumed that the starting point will be the PRSP process. 4. Work sharing and complementarity: Every effort must be made to maximise information sharing and ensure complementarity with the efforts of the government (and civil society partners), Member States’ interventions, and activities of multilateral agencies. 5. Comprehensive country analysis: The approach to programming must be integrated and consider the political, economic, trade, social, cultural and environmental aspects of development. 6.
Concentration of efforts on a limited number of areas: Six priority areas for EC co-operation are identified in the Overall Policy Statement: trade and development; regional integration, macroeconomic policies including support to the social sectors, transport, food security/rural development and institutional capacity building. 7. Cross-cutting and overarching policy issues: At every stage of execution of the activities previously reviewed, a number of such concerns have to be considered: the promotion of human rights, equality between men and women, the environmental dimension, etc. ).
Also conflict prevention and crisis management require systematic attention. 8.
Other key aspects of EC development policy: In addition to the areas of concentration and cross-cutting concerns, the statement recalls the importance of (i) accelerated action targeting the communicable disease situation (such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis), (ii) information and communications technologies and (iii) supporting research in developing countries. 9. Wherever possible, the focus on individual projects should gradually be replaced by a sector programme or policy-based approach; providing support to coherent national policies in each sector or co-operation area. 10. Feedback: Lessons of past experience and results of relevant evaluations shall systematically be taken into account and be fed back into the programming process. 11. Focus on outcomes: The programming, implementation and review process shall include systematic use of a few key outcome indicators, designed to show and measure the impact of the EC resources committed. 12.
Open partnership: The co-operation partnership shall be extended to civil society, private sector and local authorities, which in many cases should be associated with the policy dialogue and the implementation of projects. 9 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 3. 4. Checking the Quality of an Indicative Programme The following questions may provide guidance when checking the quality of an Indicative Programme: • Are the objectives of the indicative programme clear and unambiguous? Do they cover aspects of good governance, poverty alleviation, environmental protection and gender equality? • Are the sectoral objectives clearly linked to the objectives of the indicative programme? • Are the objectives clearly defined? Are the indicators appropriate? What are the assumptions and risks underlying the objectives? How critical to the programme’s success are they and how likely is it that they will be achieved? • Have the goals and objectives been clearly understood and accepted by all relevant partner country institutions? 2. 4. Identification 2. 4. 1. Introduction During the Identification phase, and within the framework established by the Country Strategy Paper, the stress is on analysis of relevance of project ideas, which includes an analysis of the stakeholders and of the likely target groups and beneficiaries (who they are: women and men from different socio-economic groups; assessment of their potentials, etc.
and of the situation, including an analysis of the problems they face, and the identification of options to address these problems. Sectoral, thematic or “pre-feasibility” studies may be carried out (including consultations with stakeholders) to help identify, select or investigate specific ideas, and to define what further studies may be needed to formulate a project or action. The outcome is a decision on whether or not the option(s) developed should be further studied in detail. Overall responsibility for Identification is with EuropeAid who initiates missions, studies and related preparatory work (including consultations with others donors and potential co-financing) in order to define the activities (projects, programmes, sectoral support, etc. ) to be financed.
A priority list is established by DG DEV/RELEX indicating which projects should be appraised immediately for a rapid start of implementation, in the following year and so on. 2. 4. 2. Expected Outcomes of Identification The expected outcomes of Identification are: • Where required, a pre-feasibility study analysing a given situation, suggesting different options to address this situation and suggesting the one(s) to be further studied during appraisal to ensure these ideas are feasible. • A Project Identification Sheet based, if possible, on the pre-feasibility study, and ? examining the coherence between the project / programme proposed and the objectives defined in the CSP/NIP, ? ndicating relevant experience to be taken into account, ? determining the subsequent steps. • A decision taken by the EC and the partner country ? to appraise the suggested option(s) in detail (priority list), ? to reject the project. Identifying ideas and further steps 10 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook In terms of Logical Framework, the pre-feasibility study should establish a rough project description covering basically the Intervention Logic and the Assumptions. This means that it should go through the Analysis Stage and parts of the Planning Stage of the LFA, establishing Stakeholder Analysis, Problem Analysis, Analysis of Objectives, Strategy Analysis.
In most cases, it will be sufficient to roughly elaborate the Intervention Logic and the Assumptions for the preferred option, as well as give indications for possible Indicators, especially at the level of the Project Purpose and the Results. So the outcome would look as follows: Figure 5: The Logframe: What should be Outlined at the End of Identification The Logframe: What should be Outlined at the End of Identification Intervention Logic Overall Objectives Project Purpose Results Activities Means Cost Pre-conditions Objectively Verifiable Indicators Sources of Verification Assumptions In addition, the pre-feasibility study should provide a first draft for an implementation Schedule.
Such a schedule should outline the timing for the major elements of further preparation and implementation. In cases where no pre-feasibility study is made, the Implementation Schedule should be prepared by the task manager. In both cases it will accompany the Project Identification Sheet and thus serve for decision by DG DEV/RELEX about the further timing of appraisal and implementation. It should regularly be updated by the task manager. During implementation, the project managers are responsible for updating the schedule and to submit it as part of the progress reports. 2. 4. 3. Major Tasks At the level of an individual project, Identification will usually involve the following major tasks: 1.
Organising consultations with other donors throughout the phase. 2. Drafting TOR for the pre-feasibility study (Standard TOR are available on the Intranet of EuropeAid – working tools), based on: • the Overall Objectives of co-operation with the concerned partner country, • background information about the country, sector, region concerned, including overall sector strategies or sector support programmes, • discussions with stakeholders likely to be concerned by the project, • experience in the country in the same or comparable sectors or regions, 11 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook • lessons learnt through evaluation of similar projects7. 3.
Drafting tender documents for the pre-feasibility study according to the existing procedures and selecting contractor according to existing procedures. 4. Briefing contractor and parties involved and monitoring pre-feasibility study mission. 5. Ensuring quality of outcome (reports) and feedback to parties involved, including assessment and improvement of the project ideas and decision whether or not further action is justified. If so, defining issues for a feasibility study and drawing up terms of reference. 6. Drafting the Project Identification Sheet and submitting it for priority listing. A typical pre-feasibility study mission would last several weeks in the partner country, followed by a shorter period outside this country.
This mission is one of the most important stages in the planning of new projects. During the mission the study team must work closely with the potential beneficiaries and target groups. The key focus for the mission is: 1. To consult with proposed beneficiaries and target groups to assess their strengths and weaknesses and to check their likely commitment to a project. This consultation will take the form of individual and group meetings both with the potential partner institutions and the beneficiaries / target groups. It is recommended to hold a diagnosis workshop to run through the Analysis and parts of the Planning Phase of the LFA as described above. . To ensure that potential project options are coherently defined with a logical analysis of problems, achievable objectives linked to (sub-)sector objectives and the objectives in the indicative programme as well as to the overarching policy objectives. 3. To define the Overall Objectives, Project Purpose and Results which are expected from project activities for the preferred option. 4. To identify assumptions on which the project would be based. 5. To identify those factors which will influence the project’s sustainability and the likely partner’s arrangements for the post-project period. 6. To provide a first estimate of means and cost. 7.
To identify those aspects of the project where further analysis and planning work will be required in order to ensure feasibility of the intervention, finalize planning and draft the financing proposal. 8. To ensure that the project has an appropriate size, taking into account the capacity of the likely partner institution and target groups. 2. 4. 4. Project Identification Criteria When assessing the quality of project ideas at the end of the Identification phase (i. e. the pre-feasibility study report), it should mainly be ensured that these ideas are likely to be relevant and that they are as well likely to be feasible (most steps of the sustainability check will take place during Appraisal).
The following questions and assessment criteria should provide guidance for this check: 7
The PCM training programme offers a tool for assessing first project ideas and for drafting TOR for a feasibility studies. This Guide for Assessment of Project Proposals, which is intended for in-depth analysis of project proposals prior to the appraisal phase can be downloaded from the Intranet of EuropeAid – working tools. The Guide contains instructions that provide a framework for analysing the coherence and comprehensiveness of a project proposal. The project design is deconstructed and reconstructed, in order to identify the gaps and inconsistencies, and thereby to identify questions for inclusion in the terms of reference for a feasibility study. 12 European Commission – EuropeAid
Project Cycle Management Handbook Table 2: Quality Criteria for Assessment of Project Ideas Question 1. 1. 1 Relevance Are the project objectives in line with the overarching policy objectives of strengthening good governance, human rights and the rule of law, and poverty alleviation? Are the major stakeholders of the project clearly identified and described? Outline project objectives are compatible with the overarching policy objectives; they fully respect them in the approach and seek to contribute to their achievement. The proposal indicates which of them are most relevant and how they are linked to the project objectives. Quality assessment criterion 1. 2
The stakeholders likely to be most important for the project have been consulted; and target groups and other beneficiaries have been identified. They have expressed their interest and expectations, the role they are willing to play, the resources and capacities they may provide, also in a gender-differentiated way. The other stakeholders have expressed general support for the likely objectives of the project. Conclusions are drawn on how the project could deal with the groups (alternatives are shown).
1. 3 Are the beneficiaries (tar- Their socio-economic roles and positions, geographical location, organget groups and final bene- isational set-up, resource endowment, etc. re described in detail. ficiaries) clearly identified? Educational/skills level, management capacities and their specific potentials are also described in detail, especially for the target groups, providing a gender breakdown, where appropriate. The analysis addresses options how the project could take advantage of and support skills, potentials, etc. of the target groups. Are the problems of target groups and final beneficiaries sufficiently described? Is the problem analysis sufficiently comprehensive? They are described in detail, including information on the specific problems faced by the target groups (including sub-groups) and the final beneficiaries.
Problem description of possible project partners show their specific problems and relate them to the problems of the target groups. The causes of the problems of target groups / final beneficiaries have been researched, and the problem analysis gives a clear indication of how these problems are related (cause – effect).
1. 5 1. 6 1. 7 Do the outlined Overall The proposals outlines Objectives explain why the • which longer term benefit the final beneficiaries find in the project, project is important for • how the project fits within the sectoral policies of the Government sectoral development and and the sectoral objectives stated in the Indicative Programme, society? Country Strategy Paper, etc. and • how the project fits within the overarching policy objectives of the EC. Does the Project Purpose The Project Purpose describes a direct benefit to be derived from the express a direct benefit for project by the target groups at the end of the project as a consequence the target groups? of achieving the Results. Does the EcoFin (Financial and Economic) Analysis provide adequate information on the questions raised above? The EcoFin Analysis provides data on the possible incremental net benefit of the beneficiaries as well as on the contribution to the achievement of national and EU policy priorities, if possible for various project alternatives. 1. 8 1. 9 13
European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. Feasibility 2. 1 Will the Project Purpose Previous experience (in other projects or regions) has shown a strong contribute to the Overall causal relationship between the Project Purpose and Overall ObjecObjectives (if the Assump- tives. tions hold true)? Are Results products of the implementation of Activities? Will the Project Purpose be achieved if the Results are attained? Can the Results and Purpose realistically be achieved with the Means suggested (first estimate)? Have important external factors been identified? Is the probability of realisation of the Assumptions acceptable?
Will the suggested project partners and implementing agencies be able to implement the project? All Results are a consequence of undertaking the related Activities. 2. 2 2. 3 There is evidence that there is a direct and logical link between the Results and the Purpose in terms of means-ends relationship, i. e. the achievement of the Results will remove the main problems underlying the Project Purpose. Indicators for Results and Purpose are ‘specific’ and are at least partly described with measurable quantities, time frame, target group, location and quality. There is also evidence that Indicators of the Results and Purpose are realistic given the time frame set for the project.
Given the experience in the country and sector, and based on the analysis of objectives, major external factors have been identified at the relevant levels in the logframe. For each Assumption, some evidence is provided that the probability of realisation is acceptable. The potential partners have actively participated in the identification phase and have relevant implementing experience. If they do not have this experience outline capacity building measures are already suggested to enhance implementation capacity. 2. 4 2. 5 2. 6 2. 7 2. 8 Does the EcoFin Analysis Efficiency is assessed roughly according to the EcoFin guidelines. provide adequate informa- Relevant alternatives were analysed. The impact of main risks was astion on the questions sessed. raised above?
Only if each criterion is met fully or at least fairly, it is recommendable to continue with the appraisal of the project. Otherwise, • satisfactory clarification of the issue under consideration should be sought, i. e. complementary information should be gathered from concerned parties, or • additional studies may be launched, etc. before deciding to continue with the appraisal of the project by drafting TOR for the feasibility study – or • the project idea should be completely rejected. 2. 5. Appraisal 2. 5. 1. Introduction During the Appraisal phase, EuropeAid launches any preparatory studies as may be required and manages their technical, contractual and financial aspects.
Relevant project ideas are developed into project plans. The particular stress should be on feasibility and sustainability / quality of the suggested intervention. Beneficiaries and other stakeholders participate in the detailed specification of the project idea that is then assessed for its feasibility (whether it is likely to succeed) and sustainability (whether it is likely to generate long-term benefits).
Again, checks need to ensure that cross-cutting issues and overarching policy objectives are adequately considered in the project design and objectives. A detailed Logical Framework with Indicators, and Implementation, Activity and Resource Schedules, should be produced.
Defining details of the project 14 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook What is ex ante evaluation? On the basis of these assessments, a decision is made on whether or not to draw up a formal financing proposal and seek funding for the project. The term “ex ante” evaluation is now frequently used for “Appraisal” or “Feasibility Study”. While Appraisal refers to studies during the preparatory phases of the project cycle (pre-feasibility or feasibility studies), “evaluation” as such concerns the assessment of an ongoing or completed project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results (see section 2. ): “Ex ante evaluation is a process that supports the preparation of proposals for new or renewed Community actions. Its purpose is to gather information and carry out analyses that help to define objectives, to ensure that these objectives can be met, that the instruments used are costeffective and that reliable later evaluation will be possible. (…)”8 2. 5. 2. Expected Outcomes of Appraisal The expected outcomes of Appraisal are: • A feasibility study establishing whether the proposed project identified in the prefeasibility study is relevant, feasible and likely to be sustainable, and detailing the technical, economic and financial, institutional and management, environmental and socio-cultural and operational aspects of the project.
The purpose of the feasibility study will be to provide the decision-makers in the Government and the European Commission with sufficient information to justify acceptance, modification or rejection of the proposed project for further financing and implementation. • A decision taken by the EC and the partner country ? to prepare a financing proposal based on the study ? to reject the project ? to further study certain aspects, if not yet clarified in a satisfactory manner In terms of Logical Framework, the feasibility study should establish a detailed project description covering all aspects of the logframe. In addition, an outline of an Activity Schedule and a Resource Schedule should as well be prepared for the project. Also, the preparation of a first draft financing proposal forms part of the appraisal.
Figure 6: The Logframe: What Should Be Defined at the End of Appraisal The Logframe: What Should be Defined at the End of Appraisal Intervention Logic Overall Objectives Project Purpose Results Activities Means Cost Pre-conditions Objectively Verifiable Indicators Sources of Verification Assumptions Outline of Activity and Resource schedule 8 From the DG Budget’s guide “Ex Ante” Evaluation: A Guide for Preparing Proposals for Expenditure Programmes. For further details please refer to the site http://europa. eu. int/comm/budget/evaluation/pdf/ex_ante_guide_en. pdf. 15 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook Planning workshops – An opportunity to enhance ownership 2. 5. 3.
Major Tasks For an individual project Appraisal will usually involve tasks comparable to those of the Identification phase. The drafting of the TOR for the feasibility study (Standard TOR are available the EuropeAid Intranet homepage, working tools – PCM, will be based on • the decision made concerning which option to study in-depth, • the pre-feasibility study report, taking into account the suggestions made there, • lessons learnt through evaluation of similar projects. Equally, the project design has to be assessed and improved, and a decision to be taken as to whether or not to proceed with the preparation of a financing proposal. A typical feasibility study mission will last several weeks. The key focus for the mission will be: 1.
To verify the relevance of the proposed project in addressing the existing problems, suggested in or in addition to the options studied in the pre-feasibility study. This means to check the validity of the logframe outline as it was developed during the identification phase, and running in detail through the steps of the Planning Phase. 2. To ensure that the project objectives are in line with the objectives in the indicative programme, the overarching policy objectives of the EC and linked to the (sub-) sector objectives. 3. To assess in detail the feasibility of the proposed project and to prepare / finalise a logical framework planning matrix. 4.
To assess in detail the potential sustainability of the project results after project completion, based on consideration of the quality factors. 5. To prepare an Implementation Schedule, an outline for Activity and Resource Schedules and the institutional structure for implementation stipulating the responsibilities of various bodies, project timing/phasing, estimated cost per budget item. 6. To draft design specifications, if required. 7. To prepare a draft Financing Proposal. 8. To provide recommendations for the next steps and any further actions necessary to secure project financing and implementation and, possibly, the tender documents for the selection of consultancy services. Holding a planning orkshop towards the end of the mission (and focusing on final agreement on Overall Objectives, Results, Activities, Indicators, the outline of Activity and Resource Schedules and implementation arrangements) is strongly recommended. This will help improving ownership by the target groups / beneficiaries9. 2. 5. 4. Project Appraisal Criteria When assessing the quality of project design at the end of the appraisal phase, it Applying should be ensured that the project is relevant, feasible and likely to be sustainable. quality cri- The following questions and assessment criteria should provide guidance for this teria check: Standard TOR for the Moderation of a Logical Framework Planning Workshop are available on the Intranet site of EuropeAid (working tools – PCM).
9 16 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook
Table 3: Quality Criteria for Assessment of a Detailed Project Design (or Draft Financing Proposal) 1. 1. 1 Question Relevance Are the project objectives in line with the overarching policy objectives of strengthening good governance, human rights and the rule of law, and poverty alleviation? Are the major stakeholders of the project clearly identified and described? Quality assessment criterion The project objectives are compatible with these objectives they fully respect them in the approach and seek to contribute to their achievement. The proposal states clearly which of them are most relevant and how they are linked to the project objectives. 1. 2 1. 3 Are the beneficiaries (target groups and final beneficiaries) clearly identified? 1. 5
Are the problems of target groups and final beneficiaries sufficiently described? Is the problem analysis sufficiently comprehensive? Do Overall Objectives explain why the project is important for sectoral development and society? 1. 6 1. 7 Does the Project Purpose express a direct benefit for the target groups? 1. 9 Does the EcoFin (Financial and Economic) Analysis provide sufficient information on the questions raised above? 2. Feasibility 2. 1 Will the Project Purpose contribute to the Overall Objectives (if the Assumptions hold true)? 2. 2 Are Results products of the implementation of Activities? 2. 3 Will the Project Purpose be achieved if all Results are attained? 1. 8
The most important stakeholders for the project identified during identification have been confirmed and consulted; and the target groups and other beneficiaries are clearly identified, have confirmed their interest and expectations, the role they are willing to play, the resources and capacities they will provide, also in a gender differentiated way. The other stakeholders have confirmed their general support for the objectives of the project. Clear conclusions are drawn on how the project intends to deal with the groups. Their socio-economic roles and positions, geographical location, organisational set-up, resource endowment, etc. are described in detail.
Educational/skills level, management capacities and their specific potentials are also described in detail, especially for the target groups, providing a gender breakdown where appropriate. The analysis shows clearly how the project will take advantage of and support skills, potentials, etc. of the target groups. No major changes occur compared to the pre-feasibility study. They are described in detail, including information on the specific problems faced by the target groups (including sub-groups) and the final beneficiaries. Problem description of project partners show their specific problems and relate them clearly to the problems of the target groups.
The causes of the problems of target groups / final beneficiaries have been researched, and the problem analysis gives a clear indication of how these problems are related (cause – effect).
The proposals clearly indicates • which longer term benefit the final beneficiaries find in the project, • how the project fits within the sectoral policies of the Government and the sectoral objectives stated in the Indicative Programme, Country Strategy Paper, etc. , and • how the project fits within the overarching policy objectives of the EC The Project Purpose describes a direct benefit to be derived from the project by the target groups at the end of the project as a consequence of achieving the Results.
The EcoFin Analysis has been performed according to the EcoFin guidelines and provides extensive data on the incremental net benefit of the beneficiaries as well as on the contribution to the achievement of national and EU policy priorities Previous experience (in other projects or regions) has shown a strong causal relationship between the Project Purpose and Overall Objectives. All Results are a consequence of undertaking the related Activities. There is clear evidence that there is a direct and logical link between the Results and the Purpose in terms of means-ends relationship, i. e. the achievement of the Results will remove the main problems underlying the Project Purpose. 7 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 4 Question Are the Means sufficiently justified by quantified objectives? 2. 5 2. 6 2. 7 2. 8 3. 3. 1 3. 2 3. 3 3. 4 3. 5 3. 6 3. 7 3. 8 Quality assessment criterion Indicators for Results and Purpose are ‘specific’ and are described with measurable quantities, time frame, target group, location and quality, if possible. There is also confirmation of evidence that Indicators of the Results and Purpose are realistic given the time frame set for the project. Have important external fac- External factors and accompanying measures have been comprehensively tors been identified? dentified at the relevant levels in the logframe. Is the probability of realisaFor each Assumption, supporting evidence is provided that the probability of tion of the Assumptions ac- realisation is acceptable. ceptable? Will the project partners and Responsibilities and procedures have been clearly established, the partners implementing agencies be have actively participated in the appraisal phase, there is clear evidence that able to implement the prothey have relevant implementing experience and most of the capacity to ject? cope with the tasks of the project. If not: sufficient capacity building measures are foreseen to enhance implementation capacity.
Does the EcoFin Analysis Efficiency analysis was carried out according to the EcoFin guidelines. provide sufficient information Relevant alternatives were analysed in detail. Appropriate sensitivity tests on the questions raised were carried out. above? Sustainability Will there be adequate own- Target groups and beneficiaries took the initiative to promote the initial idea, ership of the project by the they have been active participants in all phases of the planning process, and target groups / beneficiaries? major decisions have been validated by them or their representatives. They agreed and committed themselves to achieve the objectives of the project.
Will the relevant authorities Relevant authorities have demonstrated support to projects of this type have a supportive policy dur- through the adaptation of rules, regulations and policies, and the commiting implementation and after ment of significant resources. project completion? Is the technology approach Various alternatives have been examined, and in the selection the different appropriate for the local con- needs of the target groups and beneficiaries (men and women), local condiditions? tions and capacities (technical, financial, etc. ) have been taken into account. Will the ecological environThe appropriate level of Environment Assessment has been carried out (Enment be preserved during vironmental Integration Form), and all necessary recommendations are inteand after the project? grated in project design.
This means that an environment management plan which specifies the environmental (mitigating) measures to be undertaken should be in place, as well as a plan for monitoring the environmental situation of the project and for taking further environmental action should the mitigating measures prove insufficient. Will all beneficiaries have Socio-cultural norms and attitudes have been analysed for all major subadequate access to benefits groups of beneficiaries, and details are provided how these norms and attiand products during and after tudes will be taken into account in the project to ensure a more equitable the project? distribution of access and benefits. Will the project contribute to Sufficient measures are built into the project to ensure that it will meet the gender equality? needs and interests of both women and men and will lead to sustained and equitable access by women and men to the services and infrastructures.
Will the implementing agen- The implementing agencies have demonstrated a strong interest in continucies be able to provide follow- ing to deliver Results post-project, adequate institution-building measures up after the project? have been built into the project to enable them to do so, and evidence exists that the required resources (human and financial) will be available. Does the EcoFin Analysis The EcoFin Analysis was carried out according to the EcoFin Guidelines. provide sufficient information The Financial Analysis of the main stakeholders shows in detail that the proon the questions raised ject is sustainable both during and after the project. The Economic Analysis above? provides clear evidence that the project is sustainable internationally. 18 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 6. Financing 2. 6. 1.
Introduction The financing proposal is completed and considered by the appropriate committee; and a decision is taken whether or not to fund the project. A formal agreement with the partner Government or another entity is then signed by both including essential financing implementation arrangements. Based on the previous studies and subsequent discussions, a final version of the Financing Proposal needs to be drafted and assessed / examined during the Financing phase by EuropeAid with regard to a set of quality criteria, and agreed by DG RELEX/DEV. Subsequently, Financing Proposals are examined by the competent authority (committee), and a decision is taken on whether or not to fund the project.
The EC and the partner country or another entity will then agree upon the modalities of implementation and formalise these in a legal document which sets out the arrangements by which the project will be funded and implemented. 2. 6. 2. Major Tasks and Expected Outcomes of Financing The major tasks have already been mentioned above. The drafting of the final version of the Financing Proposal will include specification of accompanying measures to facilitate project implementation, if not yet done. A format for FP is outlined below. The expected outcomes of Financing are: • A final version of the Financing Proposal in the defined format which should cover all aspects of the logframe • A decision taken by the EC and the partner country: ? to submit the financing proposal to the competent authority, ? to redesign or reject the project. A signed financing agreement or memorandum signed by the EC and the partner country, including the Technical and Administrative Provisions for implementation. 2. 6. 3. Project Financing Criteria When assessing the quality of project design before submission of the FP to the Applying competent authority, a further check should be made to ensure that the project is quality cri- relevant, feasible and sustainable. To check this, the same questions as in Chapteria ter 2. 5. 4 should be used. 19 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook Table 4: Format for a Financing Proposal10 A 1. SUMMARY RELEVANCE Consistency with global objectives 1. 1 Overarching EC aid policy objectives and priorities 1. 2 Objectives of the relevant Indicative Programme (national, regional) 1. Link with annual country review Sectoral analysis 2. 1 Features of the sector concerned 2. 2 Status of national/regional policy Analysis of the situation 6. 1 Stakeholder analysis (including target groups, beneficiaries, other stakeholders) 6. 2 Problems to be addressed at the level of the target groups / beneficiaries Origins and preparation of the project FEASIBILITY Project description 5. 1 Overall Objectives including Indicators and Sources of Verification 5. 2 Project Purpose including Indicators and Sources of Verification 5. 3 Results including Indicators and Sources of Verification and related Activities Project analysis and environment 6. Lessons from past experience 6. 2 Linkage with other operations, complementarity and sectoral co-ordination between donors 6. 3 Results of economic and cross-sectoral appraisals 6. 4 Risks and Assumptions (related to implementation) Project implementation 7. 1 Physical and non-physical means 7. 2 Organisational and implementation procedures 7. 3 Technology used 7. 4 Timetable, cost and financing plan 7. 5 Special conditions and accompanying measures to be taken by the Government 7. 6 Monitoring arrangements 7. 7 Evaluations/audits SUSTAINABILITY / QUALITY Measures ensuring sustainability /quality 8. 1 Participation and ownership by beneficiaries 8. 2 Policy support 8. Appropriate technology 8. 4 Socio-cultural aspects 8. 5 Gender equality 8. 6 Environmental protection 8. 7 Institutional and management capacities 8. 8 Economic and financial viability ANNEXES 9. 1 Logical Framework (compulsory) 9. 2 Stakeholder analysis, problem and objectives analysis (compulsory) 9. 3 Implementation Schedule and Overall Activity Schedule (compulsory) 9. 4 Environmental Integration Form (compulsory) 9. 5 Gender Integration Form (compulsory) 9. 6 Economic and Financial Analysis (compulsory) 9. 7 Details about co-ordination meetings with other donors, especially Member States (optional) 9. 8 Others (to be specified) 2. 3. 4. B 5 6. 7 C 8 D 10
At the moment, this format is different for the different co-operation instruments of EC external co-operation. When preparing FPs, task managers should follow the officially approved structure. 20 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 7. Implementation, Including Monitoring and Reporting 2. 7. 1. Introduction Once a project has been planned and financial support been secured, implementation can start. The agreed resources are used to achieve the Project Purpose and to contribute to the wider, Overall Objectives. This usually involves contracts for studies, technical assistance, works or supplies. Progress is assessed (= monitoring) to enable adjustment to changing circumstances.
The Interservice Agreement specifies overall distribution of responsibilities for Implementation. As a general rule, EuropeAid is responsible for all aspects of implementation, including, inter alia, procurement, contractual and financial management, monitoring, audits, etc. , and provides DG RELEX/DEV with regular feedback on the basis of regularly-prepared monitoring reports. 2. 7. 2. Expected Outcomes of Implementation The expected outcomes of Implementation are: • A successful project meeting its Purpose and contributing to its Overall Objectives. • Evidence that means allocated have been used in an efficient, effective and transparent way. 2. 7. 3.
Major Tasks to Be Managed at EC Level/Partner Country Level For a task manager, be it in a delegation or in HQ, or at the level of the partner country, Implementation usually involves the following major tasks: 1. Preparing the tender documents for service, works and supply contracts, including TOR for technical assistance (contractor), if required11. 2. Monitoring of implementation, suggesting corrective measures if required to support assurance of the quality of the outcome of the project 3. Supporting timeliness of means, where relevant, and facilitating communication and information flow between and feedback to parties involved 4. Manage evaluations and audits, if required 5.
Ensuring successful decision-making process concerning whether or not to pursue the objectives of the project in a further phase (and to launch further preparatory action) or to abandon the objectives of the project The following chapters mainly focus on points 2 and 3. Mid-term and final evaluations are important elements of implementation. While the first may have a relatively direct impact on the project orientation (or re-orientation), the impact of the latter will become more important for subsequent programming or identification. Such evaluation exercises should not be mixed up with monitoring exercises. Details about Evaluation are provided in Chapter 2. 8. Detailed tender procedures exist for each co-operation instrument of the EC.
Projects are either implemented by independent contractors (for TACIS, this is general) or by the identified implementing agencies, with support of technical assistance. 11 21 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook 2. 7. 4. Implementation and Monitoring at Project Level: An Overview Usually, projects and programmes are implemented over several years. Project management is responsible for implementation, the latter generally being composed of the following periods: 1. Inception period 2. Main implementation period 3. Final period Throughout the implementation of the project and depending on the modalities foreseen in the contract/financing agreements, three major principles apply: 1. Planning and re-planning.
The initially prepared Implementation Schedule, logframe and Activity and Resource Schedules are regularly reviewed, refined, and updated accordingly. Implementa2. Monitoring. Project management has the task of establishing sufficient controls tion: A learnover the project to ensure that it stays on track towards the achievement of its ing process objectives. This is done by monitoring (internal) which is the systematic and continuous collection, analysis and use of information for management control and decision-making. Implementation is a continuous learning process where experience gathered is analysed and fed back into planning and updated implementation approaches.
Figure 7: Implementation: A Learning Process Implementation: A Learning Process Re-planning Decision making Monitoring Implementation Implementation 3. Reporting. Project management/implementing agency must provide reports on progress. The aim of these reports is to provide sufficiently detailed information to check the state of advance of the project in light of its objectives, the hoped for Results and the Activities to be carried out. These reports cover also details of budget implementation, and include the details of the future budgetary provisions for the following reporting period. Progress reports are most likely to be submitted on a quarterly basis.
These principles are reflected in the approach to documentation to be followed during implementation. 22 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook Table 5: Approach to Documentation During Implementation Inception period Inception report Quarterly progress reports year 1 Main implementation period Annual progress report year 1 Quarterly progress reports year 2 Annual progress report year 2 … Final period Final report Including: Updated Logical Framework Updated Logical Framework Updated Logical Framework Updated Logical Framework Updated Logical Framework Updated Logical Framework & justification of changes Updated Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Updated Overall Resource Schedule …
Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Overall Resource Schedule Annual Work Plan = Annual Activity Schedule year 1 Annual Resource Schedule year 1 Updated Implementation Schedule Updated Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Updated Overall Resource Schedule Annual Work Plan = Annual Activity Schedule year 1 Annual Resource Schedule year 1 Updated Implementation Schedule Updated Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Updated Overall Resource Schedule Annual Work Plan = Annual Activity Schedule year 2 Annual Resource Schedule year 2 Updated Implementation Schedule Updated Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Updated Overall Resource Schedule Annual Work Plan = Annual Activity Schedule year 2 Annual Resource Schedule year 2 Updated Implementation Schedule
Updated Overall Work Plan = Overall Activity Schedule Updated Overall Resource Schedule Annual Work Plan = Annual Activity Schedule year 3 Annual Resource Schedule year 3 Updated Implementation Schedule … Final Implementation Schedule Details about each implementation period and outlines for Overall and Annual Work Plans are provided in Chapter 5. 3. As for overall implementation, the Implementation Schedule is an important tool12: It is an administrative planning and monitoring document covering administrative milestones and sequencing from the preparatory phases to project completion and evaluation. It provides an idea on how these milestones are met, and whether delays occur. During Implementation, this can indicate the need for re-planning, given the fact that e. g. he remaining period may not be sufficient to undertake certain works, studies, etc. As all other planning documents, the Implementation Schedule has to be updated by the project management, and should be included in the progress reports. Conclusions with regard to deviations should be made there. While work plans are objective-oriented and include resource scheduling related to these objectives, the Implementation Schedule emphasizes resource categories that may require budgetary commitments and / or tendering, as well as other administrative milestones like reporting that may also lead to disbursements. 12 The table provides a suggested best practice template, which is not yet used as stan- dard. 23
European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook Table 6: Example of an Implementation Schedule Implemen tation Sch edu le (for 4 year project) Date of first preparation: dd/mm/yy 02. 01. 00 Project number: Project Preparation Commitment Date Financing Agreement signed Pre-feasibility Study Feasibility Study TA Supplies Construction W orks Staff Training Reports Evaluations Project c ompletion Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** Original planning* Implement. /planning** * Original planning of first draft implementation schedule (date: dd/mm/yy) ** Implemenation status to date as per dd/mm/y y and c urrent planning for remaining period Codes: Original planning: I Q Q I Last date of modification: Project Title: Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 dd/mm/yy 01. 07. 03 Post Project J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M AM J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D X X xxx xxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx A Q Q Q Q A Q Q A Q Q Q Q A Q Q A Q F F xxx xxx
Tender duration planned Contract duration planned Report submission planned: 1 Inception Report 2 Quarterly Report 3 Annual Report 4 Final Report xxxxxxxx Present implementation status and planning for remaining period: Tender realised/planned for remaining period Contracts realised/planned for remaining period Report submitted/submission planned for remaining period: 1 Inception Report 2 Quarterly Report 3 Annual Report 4 Final Report Possible extension I Q A F I Q A F 24 European Commission – EuropeAid Project Cycle Management Handbook What to monitor? 2. 7. 4. 1. What is Monitoring? Project monitoring is an integral part of day-to-day management.
It provides information by which management can identify and solve implementation problems, and assess progress. The Logical Framework, the implementation Schedule and the Activity and Resource Schedules provide the basis. The following basic issues need to be regularly monitored: • Which Activities are underway and what progress has been made (e. g. at weekly intervals)? • At what rate are means being used and cost incurred in relation to progress in implementation (e. g. monthly)? • Are the desired Results being achieved (e. g. quarterly update)? (efficiency) • To what extent are these Results furthering the Project Purpose (e. g. half-yearly analysis)? (effectiveness) • What changes in the project environment occur?
Do the Assumptions hold true? Project management checks how the objectives are met, and analyses the changes in the project environment including key stakeholder groups, local strategies and policies. If progress falls short, corrective action has to be taken. Details of any action have to be included in the next progress report. 2. 7. 4. 2. Reporting on Progress During the inception period of a project, mechanisms for communication have to be established to ensure that the necessary information is generated and utilized in a timely and effective manner. In this context: • Progress review meetings are useful to review progress against the plan.
This may be also an opportunity for written reports to be presented and discussed, or simply for a rapid oral assessment of current issues and problems. • Project progress reports provide periodic summaries of project progress incorporating key information from the physical and financial indicators included in the logframe, Activity Schedule and Resource Schedule. Progress reports are to be written in a standard format allowing for comparison between reports over time. The purpose of progress reports is to provide updates on achievements against indicators and milestones, using the following framework: Data about intended achievements, is compared with ? Data on actual achievements, to identify… ? significant deviations from plan, as a basis for… ? identification of problems and
