REPORT ON THE SEMINAR “BUILDING CAPACITY FOR DECENTRALISED M&E SYSTEMS IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN” Lima, 19 - 20 June, 2007
The Programme for Strengthening Regional Capacity for Monitoring and Evaluation of IFAD-Supported Rural Poverty-Alleviation Projects in Latin America and the Caribbean (PREVAL – Phase 3), supported by IFAD’s Latin America and the Caribbean Division, hosted a Seminar from 19 – 20 June 2007 in Lima, Peru. The event was attended by some 25 professionals, from IFAD project managers and M&E unit heads to PREVAL consultants and strategic partners. 1 The purpose was to discuss the most significant findings of an external evaluation recently conducted on PREVAL 2 and find out their views on the assets, challenges and sustainability of PREVAL in future years, as shown by the following objectives: (a) Assemble PREVAL and IFAD stakeholders and strategic partners in Latin America and the Caribbean to discuss the most significant findings of an external evaluation on PREVAL 3; and (b) Identify the main challenges to be addressed in the area of local capacity-building in M&E; develop an in-depth understanding of the key elements to be contained in a first draft for a new PREVAL proposal, taking into consideration the global environment, organisational assets and existing gaps in order to have an impactoriented management approach in place, one that encourages innovation and learning amongst multiple stakeholders, particularly rural and local organisations. The programme devoted the first day to an in-depth discussion of the results, assets and challenges facing PREVAL by staging a plenary discussion and dividing participants into work groups; whereas the second day focused on the development of proposals for the future, building on a Concept Note developed by IFAD’s Latin America Division. Please find below a summary of the conclusions of the discussion with participants to the seminar.
1 2
See Annex 1 for a list of participants to the PREVAL Seminar held in Lima on 19-20 June, 2007. The evaluation was conducted by Octavio Damiani from September 2006 to February 2007.
2
1. OVERVIEW OF RESULTS ACHIEVED BY PREVAL The Seminar started with a presentation by the PREVAL Coordinator, who presented the results achieved by the Programme until June 2007 as well as a number of reflections on success and failure factors in M&E, and lessons learned. 3 Then, Paolo Silveri, IFAD Operations Manager, presented the most significant findings from the PREVAL evaluation, highlighting the Programme’s strengths and weaknesses and making recommendations for its continuation. A plenary discussion was initiated immediately following Mr Silveri’s presentation, where the following insights were collected from participants: 1.1 PREVAL is a well-known brand. The PREVAL Programme has a registered, well-recognised trademark and should not loose this identity, which it has earned through 10 years of work in the region. The evaluation shows that with limited financial and human resources a widespread reach and good performance have been achieved. If the Programme ceases to exist, it will create a void in monitoring and evaluation, as there is no similar programme / organisation operating in the region. To address this issue, participants suggested the following solutions: (a) The Programme should continue to operate with IFAD funding, and additionally secure financial contributions from potential partners, as well as creating their own income from providing services to third parties, all this within the framework of a long-term proposal, and not only a three-year one. The proposal includes supporting not only IFAD cofunded projects but also governments and projects run by other international aid agencies. (b) For IFAD projects, it was suggested that reasonable budgets for M&E should be built in from their development and drafting phases, and that these funds should be used to engage technical assistance and training from PREVAL. 4 1.2 PREVAL is a knowledge-creation platform. The Programme has been a transfer belt for knowledge on monitoring and evaluation, and this experience should be shared with different stakeholders, through dissemination of good practice and policy influencing at local government, government agency and even private sector levels (more specifically, vis-à-vis mining companies). The following ideas were suggested to address this:
3
See Annex 2, “PREVAL Logical Framework by Results” This suggestion was made a result of a recent experience where problems were faced by projects when trying to hire regional consultants directly, and also when trying to transfer resources to PREVAL as the Programme has no legal identity status of its own. 4
3
(a) Document the experience of M&E systems that have proven to be useful to inform decision making and project management. (b) Promote M&E systems to improve learning as well as the use and communication of results and therefore strengthen organisational management (simultaneously involving grassroots organisations, communities, project technical teams, and governments). 1.3 M&E is the focus of PREVAL’s work. PREVAL should continue being a benchmark in M&E issues, as acting as a specialist network has its advantages, and expand its lines of action by taking into consideration the following elements: (a) Support the development of results- but also process-oriented M&E systems, since the latter encourage reflection, learning and the need to adjust to specific users and needs. (b) Encourage the harmonisation of methods for measuring indicators relating to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). (c) Disseminate methodologies so that communities are equipped to conduct M&E themselves. The challenge should be to integrate M&E between communities, projects, and government agencies. (d) Continue to match the supply (consultants) and demand (projects and governments) for technical services in M&E, as there is a lack of common approaches regarding what is M&E, what capacities need to be built, what are the outputs to be expected and the role of the external agent as a facilitator, adviser and trainer. 1.3 Looking to the future It was suggested that IFAD’s Latin America Division define what their strategy towards regional programmes is and assess the feasibility of their operation in the region, beyond funding issues. In this respect, IFAD should clarify whether or not these programmes should have their own legal status, whether they should be registered with the public registers of the country where they are based or whether a different mechanism or platform should be used to secure their sustainability beyond IFAD’s financial support. In this sense, participants highlighted the need to clarify the legal status of a programme of regional and global scope such as PREVAL, one that is able to summon a wide range of stakeholders. 5
5
This capacity is a result of IFAD’s specific relationship with PREVAL, which makes it easier to summon universities, international aid agencies, NGOs, and public institutions, something which could have hardly been possible to achieve without this international backing.
4
2. WHAT ARE THE ASSETS AND CHALLENGES FACING PREVAL? To address this question, participants were divided into three work groups comprising IFAD co-funded project managers and M&E unit heads, as well as PREVAL consultants and strategic partners. The views expressed by the different groups are consolidated below: 2.1 Major Assets (a) Developing partnerships with strategic partners and operating, functional networks in monitoring and evaluation with different allies working in rural development. Potential partners include IFAD co-funded projects and partner organisations with whom PREVAL has been working in a coordinated manner, including the Andean Change Project run by CIP-CIAT/CGIAR, ASOCAM, Rio Plus-GTZ, amongst others. (b) Putting a data base in place, with knowledge and information on issues facing M&E, including a virtual library on M&E and a resource centre unique in its kind, as well as an M&E toolkit. (c) Developing a methodological proposal for the development of M&E systems that are flexible and adjusted to the needs of different stakeholders. (d) Building capacity in M&E (consultants, project officials, and governments) and, through this, creating a supply of M&E resources; as well as matching the demand and supply of specialist M&E services for rural development. (e) Achieving a global positioning in M&E; being a pioneering, innovating network; enjoying credibility and recognition; being a technical benchmark for consultation both for IFAD-supported projects and other stakeholders; being a knowledge promoter and driver in M&E. 2.1 Major Challenges (f) Focusing on capacity building for local governments based on M&E instruments and approaches, and engaging in advocacy with regard to public policy and with corporate groups and civil society, so that M&E will be valued as an investment and M&E systems are put in place. (g) Promoting South-South learning exchanges as well as more interaction and dialogue between different local and regional stakeholders, so that grassroots organisations are able to conduct M&E themselves. (h) Accrediting experts, professionals and grassroots organisations in M&E. (i) Re-launching the organisation with a long-term perspective, by expanding the Programme’s capacity to link up with other stakeholders in rural development and matching IFAD and government demands with the needs of projects and grassroots organisations. (j) Encouraging exchanges between potential future allies, to leverage financial resources. For example, IFAD could fund a minimum cost base and the remaining difference could be covered through services provided to respond to the market demand. (k) Clearly defining the programme’s institutional and organisational structure. What would PREVAL’s internal structure look like with IFAD’s funding and
5
our own association with other key actors? Should legal advice be sought so that PREVAL may continue to operate from Peru, and should advice also be sought from IFAD headquarters in Rome to find the legal options that will enable a programme such as PREVAL to operate, taking into consideration the new international context? (l) Achieving financial and organisational sustainability without losing its own identity as a programme devoted to building capacity in M&E; this can be achieved by providing services to third parties, accompanying the processes and management of IFAD co-funded projects and those of other international aid organisations, and creating memberships that will allow the network to secure resources. (m) More engagement and partnerships with different stakeholders interested in M&E issues for rural development. (n) Strengthening knowledge and communication management, by harmonising ongoing approaches and disseminating and communicating the conceptual outputs, results and learnings developed as a result of the Programme’s experience.
3. CONTRIBUTIONS TO A NEW PROPOSAL (Concept Note) The second day started with a presentation by Raul Hopkins, Regional Economist from IFAD’s Latin America and the Caribbean Division, who introduced the Concept Note for a new programme proposal in the region: “Building Capacity in Local Decentralised M&E Systems”. He also presented the proposal’s key hypotheses, objectives, outputs, reach and potential institutions benefiting from IFAD’s grant. Following his presentation, participants were divided into three work groups to suggest activities for each of the three objectives contained in the Concept Note. In general terms, the work groups suggested defining an overall aim: to strengthen a regional knowledge-management platform in Monitoring and Evaluation for rural development that is oriented towards learning and the impact of interventions. They also pointed out that the new proposal should be considered as a centre for competence, for excellence in PMES, for capacity building and the dissemination of methodologies and tools to ensure greater impact from interventions.
3.1 Contributions to the objective “Strengthen M&E systems” The proposal should consider three inter-related levels: grassroots organisations, project technical teams, and government institutions linked to the projects (including IFAD advisers and consultants). These systems should in turn focus on the M&E of processes that encourage learning, and in the results of managing for decision making. The following activities were suggested:
6
(a) Capacity building for facilitators in M&E for the three inter-related levels suggested and their potential certification and/or accreditation; (b) Create suitable M&E methodologies, tools and instruments for the three levels mentioned above, while prioritising grassroots organisations so that they will build in M&E in their daily practice; (c) Technical assistance for institutionalising M&E systems rather than restricting M&E activities to documentation and/or reporting only; (d) Work on the harmonisation and refining of baseline studies; (e) Unify criteria and standards for M&E, as well as methodologies and instruments for participatory evaluation and self-evaluation.
3.2 Contributions to the objective “Strengthen the regional platform” A regional platform bringing together the different stakeholders of social, and particularly rural, development, promoting regional round tables where the best results of projects run by the countries in the region are shown. Promoting the harmonisation of macro-regional indicators as well as indicators relating to the MDGs, RIMS iand others that may be of interest to governments, projects, and grassroots organisations. The following activities are proposed: (a) Create alliances with strategic partners that are able to co-finance Programme activities; (b) Develop an inspiring proposal to bring in potential partners and secure financial resources; (c) Create sub-regional hubs to start off a wider scope of work in the region. The idea is to gradually delegate technical support and training to national-level professionals and institutions in a rapid manner. (d) Take stock of institutions working in M&E, as well as national M&E networks, and facilitation and social management associations, to have information in place on available resources at a regional level.
3.3 Contributions to the objective on “Innovating Methodologies” Make the best possible use of communication technologies currently available, to increase the involvement of grassroots organisations and project technicians. Decentralise local M&E systems, particularly amongst grassroots organisations and rural communities. The following activities are proposed: (a) Create mechanisms for promoting contests, where grassroots organisations present their M&E systems and innovating proposals obtain recognition; (b) Promote direct communication between different stakeholders (grassroots organisations, project teams, and government agencies) through workshops, round tables, and learning routes.