CPPE AND IFAD’s PROJECT CYCLE

1. CPPE AND IFAD’s PROJECT CYCLE P. Kolsteren and P. Lefèvre

2. Objective of this presentation • Illustrate how CPPE can help answering some of IFAD’s concerns within the proposed new project cycle

3. Plan of the presentation • What is CPPE • CPPE main features • CPPE and participation • CPPE and flexibility • CPPE and implementation • CPPE and M & E • BSF experiences with CPPE • How can CPPE improve impact • IFAD’s “new project cycle” requirements • What needs to be solved

4. CPPE • Comprehensive • Participatory • Planning • Evaluation Answers the changes in planning paradigms from “ centralised planning” to reaching a consensus between actors or pluralistic planning

5. Main features of CPPE • An approach not a method • participation : all actors in planning and evaluation, different stakeholders • global : respect of context • flexibility • implementation-oriented • use of specific “models” to reach the above characteristics

6. CPPE and participation • Full participation = participate in the decision and not contribute. From identification of the problem with diagnosis to selection of interventions, planning and project evaluation • All actors have an equal place • sponsors • responsibles • implementers / field staff • beneficiaries • Why participation ? • increases comprehension of the problem and the needs • improves the operations (one knows what has to be done and why) • improves information flux and motivation • Participation = need for specific instruments • workshops • models

7. CPPE and flexibility • Improves the planning - evaluation cycle, models are the same, regular revisions • Accent on the steps and its objectives • models are instruments, not the aim • other instruments are possible • No juxtaposition with a method • results can be translated in any framework (Logframe) • first thinking together, filling forms comes later • Changes can be made in the steps

8. CPPE and implementation • Accent on processes (quality, efficiency) and outputs • Are we doing a good job ? • Are we obtaining the results we are responsible for ? • Explanations and corrections ? • Justification of outcomes • Integrated and continuous evaluation

9. CPPE and monitoring and evaluation • Built in evaluation. Monitoring, evaluation and replanning become continuous • Formulation of evaluation questions by all stakeholders to improve the identification of qualitative and quantitative (indicators) information • Definite place for qualitative information • Identification of “confounding factors” • Explain why results are not obtained

10. BSF experiences with the CPPE • Very high degree of acceptability • enthusiasm, motivation • satisfaction, willingness to collaborate • Participation is guaranteed • Workshop format with actors, integration of experts and use of instruments • Formative: accent on approach = logic and objectives of steps. Capacity building. • Good insight in the activities, the objectives • Efficiency • Operational • Formulation of recommendations and feedback • Identification of data • Quality of the questions (50% operational) • Quality of the answers

11. How can CPPE improveimpact ? • Through stakeholder participation • Integrated and continuous evaluation • Implementation-oriented • Planning and evaluation become a cycle

12. IFAD’s “new project cycle” requirements • Longer implementation periods • Flexible design • Better M& E • More participation • Local ownership • Partnership building • Cost-centre approach • Recasting PDT • Unified design

13. IFAD’s “new project cycle” requirements • Longer implementation periods • Flexible design  CPPE • Better M& E  LF + CPPE • More participation  CPPE • Local ownership  CPPE • Partnership building  LF + CPPE • Cost-centre approach • Recasting PDT • Unified design  LF + CPPE

14. What needs to be solved • CPPE for which projects ? • When ? • How to integrate/translate CPPE outputs in the Logframe ? • Links to AWPB ? • Use by Program Development and Implementation Partnership ?

15. Possible solutions for integration