MONITORING THE CHAP Matrix

1
MONITORING THE CHAP(Matrix)
The Consolidated Appeal Process
2
Monitoring the CHAP Defined

• A process to
• 1) continuously assess the progress of
  implementation of the CHAP (humanitarian
  context, goals, sectors and objectives), with a
  view to revision if necessary, and
• 2) regularly review the effectiveness of the
  humanitarian action and related delivery systems

3
Why Monitor?

• To report or inform on the situation
• Promotes accountability and transparency
• Allows adjustments to the CHAP
• Advises decision-makers
• Checks adherence to agreed policies and plans
• Supports evaluation

4
What to Monitor

• The chosen scenario to see if critical
  assumptions and risks remain accurate
• Adherence to agreed humanitarian principles
• Progress against agreed goals and objectives
• Changes in the condition of beneficiaries and
  affected populations

5
Setting Up the System

• A good monitoring system
• Generates timely and useful information
• Uses country-specific indicators that give a
  clear picture
• Includes sound straightforward analysis
• is inter-agency owned and operated
• is practical, non-intrusive, and cost effective
• Involves and builds local capacities
• Derives from existing monitoring systems
• Promotes corrective action
• Results in regular reporting

6
Key Indicators for a Successful Monitoring System

• Information is timely and useful
• Information is recorded and analyzed in an
  accurate, logical, consistent and transparent
  manner
• Specifically examines vulnerable groups
• Involves and consults with beneficiaries
• Results in regular reporting on impact and
  contextual changes

7
Key Monitoring System Indicators

• System promotes information flow and dialogue
  among key stakeholders
• Provides information on the effectiveness of
  meeting target group needs
• Supports evaluation of programme impact and
  conformity with agreed standards
• (indicators developed by the SPHERE Project)

8
Monitoring Schedules

• Frequency varies by
• rate of change in the emergency
• extent to which assistance programmes are
  transparent
• volume of assistance
• risk of inappropriate use of assistance
• phase of the emergency
• Should be both regular and random and need to be
  pre-agreed

9
The Monitoring System is Only as Good As

• The clarity of the objectives
• The extent to which movement on the indicators
  reflects progress on the objectives
• The extent to which the indicators are observable
  and measurable
• The commitment of stakeholders to the monitoring
  process
• Adequate security and access

10
Steps in Strategic Monitoring

• Form a strategic monitoring group or make use of
  existing groups (e.g. inter-agency sectoral
  working groups)
• Identify existing monitoring systems
• Project the outcomes of strategic monitoring
• Determine what is to be monitored
• Define roles within the monitoring team
• Establish a reporting schedule
• Collect, analyze, display and disseminate
  findings
• Review corrective actions resulting from
  monitoring

11
Sources of Information

• A cross-section of the affected population
• Local and national authorities
• Donors
• Agency staff
• Sub-contractors
• Regular agency monitoring reports

12
Forms of the StrategicMonitoring Group

• A sub-group of the UN Country Team
• A Donor panel
• Outside consultants
• Representatives of agencies working within a
  given programmatic or geographical sector
• A combination of the above

13
Monitoring Working Group

• No more than 10 persons
• Established at the beginning of the process
• Strong interpersonal and analytical skills
• Experienced with qualitative and quantitative
  data gathering and analysis
• Culturally and gender sensitive with expertise on
  cross-cutting issues
• Familiarity with day to day operations

14
Barriers to Effective Monitoring

• Lack of commitment by stakeholders
• Insufficient financial and/or human resources
• Failure to timely report
• Inadequately formed objectives/indicators
• Too ambitious a monitoring system
• Lack of inter-agency approach
• Security and access problems

15
Monitoring Reports

• The CHAP contains the plan that indicates what
  will be monitored and how
• Reporting should be regular if even to say no
  changes needed
• When monitoring reveals a need to change the
  strategy, the Appeal should be revised
• Announcements of revisions based on monitoring
  are made directly in the web version of the CA
• Monitoring may lead to changes in project
  requirements - and can be performed with a
  revision request
• Should form the basis for the MTR in 2001.

16
Mid-year Review?

• For 2001 CAP cycle the official MTR will be
  revisited
• but .
• Donors and other stakeholders will still expect
  ongoing reporting and at least an occasional
  snapshot of achievements, failures, and
  corrective actions.
• The requirement for an event at some point in
  the year will necessitate the provision of some
  form of MTR.

17
Monitoring Reports

• Implications of external changes
• Analysis of progress in implementation
• Priority gaps
• Impact of funding
• Prioritised funding needs

18
(No Transcript)