EPAG SERVICE PROVIDERS’ MONITORING & EVALUATION POINT OF VIEW AGI WORKSHOP @ MOGD

1. EPAG SERVICE PROVIDERS’ MONITORING & EVALUATION POINT OF VIEW AGI WORKSHOP @ MOGD Monrovia-Liberia AUGUST 29, 2012

2. INTRODUCTION The success of the Economic Empowerment of Adolescent Girls and Young Women Project in Liberia centered on the quality of training provided to the adolescent girls and young women participants. Two service providers delivered business development services training; ARC(CESP & NAEAL) & IRC(CAP & EDUCARE), and two providers delivered job skills training (CEP & LEED). Both types of training incorporated life skills training. over nine project sites in Montserrado and Margibi counties, so it was essential to monitor the quality of the training offered.

3. PFMU Quality Monitors PICT/ MoGD World Bank, Partners Service Providers IE Firm IMPAC; Civil Society Internal & External Monitoring

4. MOGD / QUALITY M&E Team

5. Principles of quality monitoring In order to provide an objective assessment of the activities of the service providers, the monitoring team put in place the following qualities to guide the monitor: • Be professional and impartial (standard approach for all site visits / service) • Be frequent but random (unannounced training sessions visits to uncover the true situation in the sites) 

6. Principles of quality monitoring cont. • Be conducted by different monitors each time (monitoring visit in pairs but not the same classroom consecutively & twice over the entire 6 months) • Promote cordial relationship (polite to service providers and trainees but did not, however, bias the data collection in any way) • Incorporate the feedback of trainees: (reporting any case of misconduct SEA or issues with the training)

7. Procedure for quality monitoring • completing a checklist based on their observations of classroom activities • choosing 2 girls randomly to interview privately for approximately ten minutes • scoring from the checklists • submitting the reports • communicating (MoGD/PICT) to SPs to make known the specific findings and requesting remedial actions to address the gaps

8. Procedure for quality monitoring cont. • Including in monthly progress report (SPs) actions taken to address the issue, and progress made, • Persisting problems cited the service provider to further discussions with the MoGD These were guidelines that served as instruments to inspire the service providers to strive for excellence in the quality of service delivery.

9. PICT/ MoGD Service Providers Implementing Partners Internal Monitoring

10. What prepared SPs for Internal M&E and to support the M&E Unit? 1. M&E Capacity Building for SPs & IPs to ensure a thorough understanding of the instruments and how to administer the monitoring process.

11. 2. SPs’ & IPs’ involvement in developing M&E tools such as Trainees’ Attendance Logs, Business Monitoring Forms,etc. that facilitated its standardization among SPs and enhanced ownership.

12. Other tools that were proposed or drafted by the M&E team (for example, survey tools)were shared with SPs & IPs to review for gaps, missing values and any incomplete item. This helped the SPs to furthermore give orientation to site supervisors, trainers, trainee mobilizers in facilitating data collection for internal and external monitoring purpose.

13. Results of the joint effort The application of instruments / tools arouse strong partnership and collaboration between the service providers and the MoGD by promoting a participatory approach to tracking progress towards the achievement of expected project results.

14. This awareness and common understanding prepared the service providers to ensure that the project indicators were well established and maintained at the training sites.

15. Prior misunderstandings? • EPAG Police Unit, EPAG Press Unit, Technical Unit • Performance improvement • Capacity building support • Quality Enforcement

16. PHASE III (Placement & Support) • An important distinguishing feature of the EPAG project was the deliberate effort to support the trainees as they made the transition from the classroom to the “real world.” • The key reporting feature for Phase Three was the “business/employment reports” submitted by the SPs.

17. PHASE III (Placement & Support) cont. This required; • Data Collection, Data Management & Comparability (IPs vs SPs vs MoGD); double entries for accuracy, reliability and transparency. • Strategy for verifying field reports and providing field-back, which was highly important because it determined how well each SP met the WIP indicators.

18. PHASE III (Placement & Support) cont. During Phase Three, the responsibility for monitoring was assumed by the service providers, with oversight from the PICT. • 1) placing the trainees in jobs / internships and establishing or improving trainees’ existing businesses, • 2) regularly monitoring the performance of the girls. • 3) submiting to the PICT detailed information on trainees who have been placed on jobs / internships and into businesses for verification.

19. Challenges • Tracking business development skills trainees who are engaged in mobile business. • Getting the permission of employers to allow verification teams on their premises to conduct the fact-finding.

20. Actions • Directly calling the target girls to set appointments & assembling in group in a particular location. • Made appointments with employers on the team’s behalf.

21. Lesson Learned • Unannounced monitoring visits helped SPs create and maintain high quality learning environment; any issues discovered during the monitoring visits were brought to SPs’ attention. • Effective communication as one of the tools in M&E gears to project successful accomplishment.

22. THANK YOU PLENTY YOUR PRESENTER, EUGENE L. BELETO Senior Program Manager ARC-International Email: ebeleto@arcliberia.org or beletol@yahoo.com Cell #: +231886828790