ABSTRACT

This research had the general objective of assessment of project monitoring and evaluation
practice: the case of Ethiopian national metrology agency infrastructure project. To achieve this
objective descriptive survey was used as a research design and qualitative data were used. Both
primary and secondary data source were used. For the primary data the research used
questionnaire and interview and for the secondary data the research employed document reviews.
The research employed purposive or judgmental sampling technique was employed to selected
projects as well as respondents involved. For this research, 14 respondents involved in this
research the target populations will be all employees of national metrology agency in Monitoring
and Evaluation core process; team leader, M&E experts/officers and plan experts. Triangulation
is also considered as a qualitative research approach for determining validity by combining data
from several sources. The findings from the key questioner, interview and M&E process
document review of NMA project tell that the project. The research found that the monitoring
and evaluation system as well as practices of the organization exercised very poor level. The
other finding is that there not assigned skilled human resource for implementation of monitoring
and evaluation practice. The organization not assigned sufficient budget for monitoring and
evaluation. The study recommends that the organization develop monitoring and evaluation
system, hire skilled personal or provide trainings for the existing technical staff and build
capacity and expertise and mainly establish its own standardized monitoring and evaluation
formats.
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

This chapter covers the background of the study, problem statement, the study objectives,
research questions, significance, the scope, limitations, and Organization of the Study.

1.1. Background of the Study

Governments have many different kinds of tracking systems as part of their management
toolkits. Every government needs the three legged stool of good human resource systems,
financial systems, and accountability systems. But they also need good feedback systems. A
results-based M&E system is essentially a special public management tool governments can use
to measure and evaluate outcomes, and then feed this information back into the ongoing
processes of governing and decision making (World Bank, 2004).

Building an M&E system essentially adds that fourth leg to the governance chair. What typically
has been missing from government systems has been the feedback component with respect to
outcomes and consequences of governmental actions. This is why building an M&E system
gives decision makers an additional public sector management tool (World Bank, 2004).

The study found that monitoring and evaluation is the only project activity that begins with the
project's beginnings and ends with its completion, and that effective monitoring and evaluation
plays a critical role in project implementation when given the necessary attention by the project
implementers/team through adequate resources, technical capacity building, and a favorable
project environment (Tengan, Callistus, Aigbavboa, & Clinton, 2019). Monitoring and
evaluation has been a crucial performance management tool for planning, decision making, and
economic policy management when we look at M&E in the context of (UNICEF, 2006). This
includes deciding whether to improve, refocus, or end the examined intervention or policy. It
could also be decisions involving changes to a company's strategic plans or management
structure.

Top agencies monitoring and evaluation have been created by most countries with supported
legal and regulatory structure that insure monitoring and evaluation on the regular base to give
information and allow for the embrace of new innovative tool for monitoring and evaluation that
support the planning exercise and budgeting process (World Bank, 2010).

Good M&E system is a source of knowledge capital. It enable governments and organizations to
develop a knowledge base of the types of projects, programs, and policies that are successful,
and, more generally, what works, what does not, and why. It can also provide continuous
feedback in the management process of monitoring and evaluating progress toward a given goal
(Kusek & Rist, 2004). According to Hlatshwayo & Govender (2015) monitoring and evaluation
is more than accountability, control measures and assessment of results. Rather, it includes
additional purposes such as learning, program improvement, future planning and augments
capacity.

Several mega public projects in Ethiopia have been informally positioned (sited) as failed
projects like sugar projects, fertilizer factory project, stadium, irrigation dame project, power
plant projects etc. Therefore, those activities require close supervision to ensure that they are
executed right at first hand to eliminate re-work, increased project cost, prolong project duration
and scope change and as such the need to monitor and evaluate projects to achieve the desired
outcome.

Monitoring and Evaluation is one of the factors leading to project success. Project success
seemed to be enhanced among other factors, by constantly monitoring and evaluating the
progress of a project. Monitoring, Evaluating and controlling is relevant in management of
project scope, time, cost, quality, human resources, communication and risks (Kamau &
Mohamed, 2015).

1.2. Statement of the Problem

According to IFAD (2014) and ECPE (2010), monitoring and evaluation are not a culture in
Ethiopia and are not properly practiced during the implementation of governmental sector
projects. There is also an issue in east African countries, such as Ethiopia, of failing in the
middle of monitoring and evaluation due to frustration and failing to take corrective action based
on the findings (Robert Lahey, 2015). Furthermore, (IFC,2008) identified common
misconceptions about monitoring and evaluation, such as that it is difficult, expensive, time and
resource intensive, only occurs at the end of a project, is someone else's responsibility, and
wastes organization resources.

Monitoring and evaluation for government projects every sector is very keys. This is because a
lot of government resource majorly from taxation, are put into such project for the benefit of
country’s development. Countries government should also have an effective monitoring and
evaluation system as part of their management tool for implementing there project to the benefit
of respective countries.

Currently, different infrastructure and construction projects could be initiated to transform social,
political and economic wellbeing of the community in particular area but unable to achieve the
intended objectives and goals; equivalently effective project monitoring and evaluation system
are also required. In absence of proper monitoring and evaluation of these projects it is
challenging to pinpoint if indeed the envisioned outcomes are being achieved as per plan, the
level of remedial action needed to guarantee completion, and determine if the outcomes are
creating a positive influence (UNDP, 2009).

Many projects in developing countries including Ethiopia had a challenge of considerable cost
and time overrun due to lack of adequate monitoring and evaluation(Ermias, 2007), (Fetene,
2008) and (Yenealem Fentahun, 2020). This illustrates that implementing effective monitoring
and evaluation system in projects can allow the business to execute the project within a budgeted
budget and time as per the project plan.

Given the above realities, in a country where resources are scarce; foreign currency is limited;
and imported materials are consumed by projects, the public sectors as well as private
organizations should effectively monitor and evaluate projects. The issues of monitoring and
evaluation may not be easily overcome until projects are monitored and evaluated in such a way
that strategic managers commit to minimizing loss and maximizing efficiency. In general,
monitoring and evaluation improves output and outcome management by encouraging the
allocation of effort and resources in the direction where they will have the greatest impact.

As a result of the aforementioned issue, the researchers will focus on assessing the monitoring
and evaluation of metrology agency infrastructure projects for two major reasons. The first is to
review and analyze present monitoring and evaluation system issues and difficulties, and the
second is to recommend a monitoring and evaluation system that may be used to improve overall
metrology agency program office project performance.

1.3 Research Questions

Based on the above facts, this study answers the following questions.

1. What are the current monitoring and evaluation practice in metrology agency infrastructure
projects?

2. How does M&E budgeting affect project implementation in national metrology agency?

3. What challenges have the organization encountered in the implementation of the M&E
activities?

1.4 Research Objectives

1.4.1 General objective of the study

The general objective this research to assessment of monitoring and evaluation practices of
infrastructure projects in metrology agency office.

1.4.2 Specific objectives of the study

The following are specific objectives of the study:

 To explore the existing monitoring and evaluation practice.

 To assess the effects of M&E budgeting on project implementation in national metrology
agency.
 To assess the overall M&E challenges of the project that affects its performance

1.5 Scope of the Study

The researchers wanted to look at metrology agency infrastructure projects monitoring and
evaluation practices in national metrology agency. Even if the organization has main office and
immense number of projects and geographically diversified in Ethiopia region, this study will
give an emphasis on Addis Ababa city around bole branch office only.
1.6. Significance of the Study

The result of this study will be important for national metrology agency in particular and other
related sector in general. This study helps project managers and staffs of the organization to
know how they are implementing monitoring and evaluation activities and identify the gaps
observed in the process, and take corrective measures based on the findings to improve the
monitoring and evaluation process as required. The first and the most important point here is
that, the planned research will be important for top and middle manager, it can be serve as their
orientation or channel to improve their monitoring and evaluation system within the organization
they are leading.

1.8. Limitation of the Study

The main limitation of this study is unavailability of adequate secondary data (published and
documented data) of monitoring and evaluation on Ethiopian metrology agency infrastructure
projects and no M&E research also on metrology project. The study is limited only to single
development organization and time limitation to cover all the details.

1.9. Organization of the Study

The project work research shall be divided into five chapters in order to provide clarity and
coherence on the discussion. The first chapter deals with introduction, which incorporates,
background of the study, background of the organization, Statement of the problem, research
questions, research objectives, scope of the study, limitation of the study, significance of the
study, and Organization of the Study. The second chapter discusses the relevance of the study in
the existing literature. The third part of the study addresses the methods and procedures used in
the study. The chapter comprises of the presentation of the utilized techniques for data collection
and research methodology. Similarly, it also contains a discussion on the used techniques in data
analysis as well as the tools used to acquire the said data. The fourth chapter is finding and
discussion of the results of the study. With the said data, the chapter seeks to address the
statement of the problem distinguished in the first chapter. The last chapter comprises of three
sections: the summary of the study, conclusions of the study, and the recommendations. This
chapter addresses the problem stated in the first chapter of the study.
 CHAPTER TWO

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The literatures related to the thesis are reviewed in this chapter. Theoretical and empirical
literatures are both described in a way that demonstrates the conceptual structure and relationship
between the dependent and independent variables.

2.2 Theoretical Review

According to IFRCS (2011), monitoring and evaluation contribute to the organization by getting
relevant information from past and current ongoing activities in turn this can be used for project
reorientation and future planning. On the other hand, UNDP (2009) stated that "Without
effective planning, monitoring and evaluation, it would be impossible to judge if work is going
in the right direction, whether progress and success can be claimed, and how future efforts might
be improved”.

According to Janus (2016), although the emphasis of monitoring and evaluation vary, both focus
on measure of achievements. Therefore, in the following literature review section, both
monitoring and evaluation are defined and explained in detail.

Monitoring is described by the Macmillan English dictionary (2007) as monitoring something or

watching someone on a regular basis to see what is going on, while evaluation is defined as
thinking carefully about something before making a decision about its value, significance, or
quality. With this in mind, let us see what other academics have to say about the subject.

Monitoring is the continuous process by which stakeholders receive daily updates on their
progress toward achieving their goals and objectives. Evaluation is a rigorous and independent
evaluation of completed or ongoing activities to see how well they are meeting specified goals
and leading to decision-making (UNDP, 2009). On the other hand, Monitoring is a continuous
method of gathering data mainly for program management, and it usually focuses on operations.
The evaluation process takes a broader, long-term view of the whole program and requires less
programmatic evaluations. It has a proclivity to be preoccupied with outcomes (Janus, 2016).

Both of the above concepts emphasize the importance of monitoring ongoing operations on a
regular basis and evaluating the value of a project based on consistent data and empirical
evidence. As a result, M&E should provide information that is both reliable and useful, allowing
all project stakeholders to incorporate lessons learned into their decision-making processes.

2.2.1. Project

A project is a short-term undertaking with a specified start and end date, as well as a defined
scope and resources. A project, on the other hand, is distinct in that it is not a routine operation,
but rather a complex collection of operations aimed at achieving a specific objective.

A project, according to Tayntor (2010), is a distinct, finite set of multiple activities intended to
achieve a specific purpose that can be distinguished from other activities by its uniqueness.

While repetitive elements may be present in some project deliverables and activities, this
repetition does not alter the basic, specific characteristics of the project work (PMBOK® Guide,
2013). Second, by their very nature, initiatives are time-bound. As a result, a project must have a
beginning and an end date. Even if deadlines are missed, the project must still be completed on
schedule. The third characteristic of a project is its target specificity; in order for a project to be
genuinely a project, the object of the activities to be carried out must be specified. It's also
specific, since the definition contains enough detail to decide if the target was achieved.

2.2.2. Project Management

Project management is the practice of directing a project or it is a critical practice that applies
knowledge of process, skills, tools, deliverables, and techniques to project activities to ensure a
solid path. Although there are parallels between projects and general management, the focus on a
timeline and the transient nature of both the organization and the work being done separates
project management from general management.

Project management is often compared to juggling, with the project manager trying to keep all
facets of the project in the air at the same time. The project constraint triangle is another way to
demonstrate this idea. Three elements usually define and constrain a project: time, money, and
scope. Time is the schedule; resources are people and budget; scope is the functionality to be
delivered (Tayntor, 2010).

The book PMBOK® Guide (2017, p. 10) puts PM as “Project management is the application of
knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements”.

The big picture of PM, as we can see from this simple description, is initiating, preparing,
implementing, managing, and closing a team's work to meet specific targets and meet specific
Performance criteria on time. At each phase of the Log Frame process, project manager applies
all of his or her experience, expertise, resources, and techniques.

2.2.3. Evolution of M& E

It is widely assumed that systematic program assessment began in the United States after WWII,
when the US Federal Government's massive social spending necessitated a more systematic and
thorough analysis of spending. The field of program evaluation arose as a result of this.

However, it was recognized in the 1980s that, while NGOs were given more power to implement
development programs, they were not given enough attention to strengthening their
organizational capacity in monitoring and evaluation, which would have a positive effect on their
long-term sustainability. This shift in thought continued into the new decade, with funders
continuing to provide conventional inputs to NGOs while also directing a portion of their
resources toward enhancing organizational sustainability. The demand for impact statistics has
spawned an increasing number of data collection instruments and metrics, as well as some
experimentation with various methods and measurement tools. M&E became a central part of the
aid reform agenda in the 2000s, as outlined in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and
related improvements in aid modalities, because it can provide transparency and lead to results
oriented growth. African non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were not left out of this call
for transparency. Recent efforts in Africa to establish voluntary NGO accountability systems
have borne fruit, which is a remarkable development in an area not known for its institutional
intensity (Zogo, 2015).
2.2.4. Monitoring

Monitoring is the process of gathering and analyzing data on a regular basis in order to track
progress towards goals and ensure that defined guidelines are being followed. According to
Herzberg B. (2007), it aids in the identification of trends and patterns, the adaptation of policies,
and the informing of project/program management decisions.

Monitoring is an internal project process that provides continuous input on a project, the problem
it is dealing with, and the efficiency with which it is being carried out. It's a continuous process
of collecting data on all facets of the project.

2.2.4.1. Dimensions of Monitoring

Results monitoring: keeps track of the results and consequences. This is where monitoring and
assessment come together to see if the project is on track to achieve its goals (outputs, outcomes,
and impact) and if there are any unintended impacts (positive or negative). A psychosocial
project, for example, might track whether its group activities produce outcomes that contribute to
community resilience and disaster recovery.

Process (activity) monitoring: keeps track of how inputs and resources are used, how tasks are
progressed, and how outputs are delivered. It looks at how tasks are carried out in terms of time
and money. It is often carried out in accordance with compliance monitoring and feeds into the
impact assessment. A water and sanitation project, for example, would keep track of whether or
not targeted households receive septic systems on time.

Compliance monitoring: ensures adherence to donor legislation and planned outcomes, grant
and contract conditions, local governmental regulations and rules, and ethical principles. A
shelter project, for example, would keep track of whether shelters are built to agreed-upon
national and international safety standards.

Context (Situation) monitoring: keeps track of the project's operating environment, particularly
as it relates to established risks and expectations, as well as any unforeseen factors that may
arise. It encompasses the project/program as well as the wider political, institutional, financing,
and policy context. For example, a project in a conflict-prone region should keep an eye on
possible fighting that could hinder project success while also putting project workers and
volunteers in danger.

Beneficiary monitoring: refers how people feel about a project or program. It encompasses
beneficiary satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the project/program, as well as their engagement,
care, resource access, and overall change experience.

Financial monitoring: accounts for costs by input and activity within predefined categories of
expenditure. It is often conducted in conjunction with compliance and process monitoring. It's
frequently done in conjunction with compliance and process control.

2.2.5. Evaluation

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines evaluation as "a
systematic and objective assessment of an ongoing or completed project, program, or policy, its
design, implementation, and results in order to determine the relevance and fulfillment of
objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability."

2.2.5.1. Dimension of Evaluation

I. According to evaluation timing

Formative evaluations: Occur during project/program implementation to improve performance

and assess compliance.

Summative evaluations: Occur at the end of project/program implementation to assess

effectiveness and impact.

Midterm evaluations: Are formative in purpose and occur midway through implementation.

Final evaluations: These are summative in purpose and are conducted (often externally) at the
completion of project/ program implementation to assess how well the project/program achieved
its intended objectives.

Ex-post evaluations: Are conducted sometime after implementation to assess long-term impact
and sustainability.
 II. According to who conducts the evaluation?

Internal or self-evaluations: This type of evaluation is conducted by those responsible for

implementing a project/program. It can be less expensive than external evaluations and help
build staff capacity and ownership.

External or independent evaluations: These types of evaluations are conducted by evaluator(s)

outside of the implementing team, lending it a degree of objectivity and often technical expertise.
These tend to focus on accountability.

Participatory evaluations: These are conducted with the beneficiaries and other key
stakeholders, and can be empowering, building their capacity, ownership and support.

Joint evaluations: These are conducted collaboratively by more than one implementing partner,
and can help build consensus at different levels, credibility and joint support.

III. According to evaluation technicality or methodology

Real-time evaluations (RTEs): These are undertaken during project/ program implementation
to provide immediate feedback for modifications to improve ongoing implementation. Emphasis
is on immediate lesson learning over impact evaluation or accountability.

Meta-evaluations: These are used to assess the evaluation process itself. Some key uses of
meta-evaluations include: take inventory of evaluations to inform the selection of future
evaluations; combine

Thematic evaluations: These focus on one theme, such as gender or environment, typically
across a number of projects, programs or the whole organization.

Cluster/sector evaluations: These focus on a set of related activities, projects or programs,

typically across sites and implemented by multiple organizations.

Impact evaluations: These focus on the effect of a project/program, rather than on its
management and delivery.
2.2.6 The Need for Project Monitoring & Evaluation

Now that the study has encountered the terms project, PM, and M&E, it can move on to the
question of “why is M&E required?” When anyone thinks about this question with a clear
understanding of the words, answers like checking improvement, forcing desired actions, and
transparency come to mind first. According to Mikias (2017), M&E is useful for increasing
transparency and accountability in the management of donor-provided financial services. It also
helps to ensure accuracy, which we achieve by gathering and controlling reliable and timely data.

 M&E results in better transparency and accountability.

 M&E helps organizations catch problems early.
 M&E helps ensure resources are used efficiently.
 M&E helps organizations learn from their mistakes.
 M&E improves decision-making.

2.2.7 Purposes of Monitoring & Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation need not be expensive or complicated, nor do they require specialists
or grand calculations. The complexity and extent of the studies can be adapted to fit the program
needs. The job of the project manager in this process is to point out those areas in need of
monitoring or evaluation.

According to Bamberger (1986), evaluation and monitoring systems can be an effective way to:

 Provide constant feedback on the extent to which the projects are achieving their goals.
 Identify potential problems at an early stage and propose possible solutions.
 Monitor the accessibility of the project to all sectors of the target population.
 Monitor the efficiency with which the different components of the project are being
implemented and suggest improvements.
 Evaluate the extent to which the project is able to achieve its general objectives.
 Provide guidelines for the planning of future projects.
 Influence sector assistance strategy. Relevant analysis from project and policy evaluation
can highlight the outcomes of previous interventions, and the strengths and weaknesses
of their implementation.
  Improve project design. Use of project design tools such as the log frame (logical frame
work) results in systematic selection of indicators for monitoring project performance.
The process of selecting indicators for monitoring is a test of the soundness of project
objectives and can lead to improvements in project design.
 Incorporate views of stakeholders. Awareness is growing that participation by project
beneficiaries in design and implementation brings greater “ownership” of project
objectives and encourages the sustainability of project benefits. Ownership brings
accountability.
 Objectives should be set and indicators selected in consultation with stakeholders, so that
objectives and targets are jointly “owned”. The emergence of recorded benefits early on
helps reinforce ownership, and early warning of emerging problems allows action to be
taken before costs rise.
 Show need for mid-course corrections. A reliable flow of information during
implementation enables managers to keep track of progress and adjust operations to take
account of experience.

Monitoring and evaluation is a management tool that helps to judge if work was going on in the
right direction, whether progress and success could be claimed, and how future efforts might be
improved. It assists an organization to extract, from past and ongoing activities, relevant
information that can subsequently be used as the basis for programmatic fine-tuning,
reorientation and planning.

Monitoring and evaluation takes place at two distinct but closely connected levels. One level
focuses on the outputs, which are the specific products and services that emerge from processing
inputs through program, project and other activities. The other level focuses on the outcomes of
development efforts, which are the changes in development conditions that aim to be achieved
through specific projects and programs.

2.2.8 Monitoring and Evaluation Practices

The following are the best practices associated with monitoring and evaluation, as listed below:
2.2.8.1. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

The project should have a monitoring and evaluation plan and the plan should be prepared as an
integral part of project plan and design (Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of
International Affairs (PASSIA), 2004) and (McCoy, Ngari, &Krumpe, 2005).

All aspects of project planning, including stakeholder participation, benefits mapping, risk
evaluation, and the actual plan, are taken into account in effective project planning. Stakeholder
participation, coordination, and specific roles and responsibilities are the three most Common
factors for project failure. Many development projects have been criticized for being too rigid in
their preparation, and once started, the original project plan is followed even though there is
significant motivation to modify it. As a result, projects should prepare for adaptation by
attempting to do the following: At the higher levels, plan the process as well as the goals.

Identify the forums and processes that will be used to engage stakeholders in project analysis and
adaptation, as well as flexibility to respond to unexpected opportunities. Rather than over
specifying activities and results, focus on specific goals (impacts) and purposes (outcomes);
budget for experimentation and the unexpected. The most important thing to note is that
development interventions are not about words in a plan, but about changes in people's lives,
particularly the intended beneficiaries. It's critical for development managers to concentrate on
the desired effect rather than the planning format's rigidity. Project planning lays the groundwork
for project M&E and it can make a big difference in whether an M&E phase succeeds or fails.

Simply put, effective project preparation is vital to the success of an M&E process, and a
successful M&E process is a critical component of successful projects.

2.2.8.2 Monitoring and Evaluation budget

Monitoring and evaluation activities should be clearly and adequately funded in the project
budget. To offer the monitoring and evaluation role the due recognition it deserves in project
management, a monitoring and evaluation budget should be clearly delineated within the overall
project budget (McCoy et al., 2005). Some scholars suggest that a monitoring and assessment
budget of 5 to 10% of the overall budget is appropriate (Kelly &Magongo, 2004). The aim of
this practice is to come up with enough funds to promote monitoring and evaluation activities,
rather than to prescribe a percentage that is appropriate. A monitoring and evaluation budget
guarantees that operations are completed on time and that monitoring and evaluation are not
handled as an optional extra.

2.2.8.3. Schedule of Monitoring and Evaluation

The project's monitoring and evaluation tasks should be included in the project schedule so that
they get the attention they deserve and aren't left to the project manager's whims (Handmer &
Dovers, 2007) and (McCoy et al., 2005).

2.2.8.4 Individuals for Monitoring and Evaluation Activities

There should also be a person in charge of monitoring and evaluation as a primary role (Kelly &
Magongo, 2004), as well as the selection of various staff for different monitoring and evaluation
tasks such as data collection, analysis, report writing, and distribution of monitoring and
evaluation findings (AusAID, 2006) and (McCoy et al., 2005).

2.2.8.5 Stakeholder Involvement

All stakeholders (beneficiaries, implementation personnel, donors, and broader communities)

must be involved in the project's monitoring and assessment process. The use of a participatory
approach to monitoring and evaluation is seen as an empowerment mechanism for project
beneficiaries and other stakeholders, who are often left out of this process. It's also known as a
show of downward responsibility, or accountability to the beneficiaries. In terms of monitoring
and evaluation, there is a strong focus on upward accountability (Aune, 2000), which establishes
a barrier between the project and other stakeholders. As a result, the mechanism is oriented
toward meeting the donor's demands at the expense of other stakeholders. Beneficiaries'
participation in monitoring and evaluation gives them a sense of control and leads to long-term
sustainability long after the project donor has stopped funding it, as well as increasing the
likelihood that more beneficiaries will use the project's services. Other key neglected
stakeholders are the field staff involved in implementing the project.
2.2.8.6. Inputs in Monitoring and Evaluation

The project's various inputs must be efficiently controlled to ensure that they are used optimally
on project activities to achieve the desired outputs. The following are some of the recommended
practices for controlling each of the inputs defined by the log frame approach:

Financial Resources

Financial resources should be monitored using a project budget, with costs added to project
activities, and a calculation of what has been spent on project activities versus what should have
been spent according to the budget's planned expenditures (Crawford & Bryce, 2003). The
person in charge of project accounts provides this information on expenditures. This comparison
of real and expected expenditures should be performed on a regular basis to ensure that the
project does not go over budget.

Human Resources

Human resources on the project should be assigned to jobs that are appropriate for their
expertise, and if their abilities are insufficient, preparation for the required skills should be
organized. There is a need for regular and intensive onsite support for outfield workers on
projects for staff who are sent out into the field to carry out project tasks on their own (Reijer, P.,
Chalimba,M. &Nakwagala, A.A. 2002).

2.2.8.7 Activities in Monitoring and Evaluation

There are several activities that are extremely critical for the effectiveness of a monitoring and
assessment system, and they are mentioned below.

Project schedule

A project schedule or project timetable is used to monitor the processes or tasks that must be
completed on the project. The actual schedule of activities completed is compared to the
scheduled schedule at regular intervals to decide whether the project is on track or behind
schedule (Crawford & Bryce, 2003).
2.2.8.8 Outputs in Monitoring and Evaluation

It's important to use a combination of qualitative and quantitative metrics to monitor the project's
outputs.

2.2.8.9 Midterm and End of Project Evaluations

For evaluation usually there is midterm and another at end of project implementation, an impact
assessment should be planned after the project has finished deciding what the project's impact
was and what contribution the project made to the achievement of the target (Gyorkos, 2002).

The midterm evaluation and the final evaluation of the project implementation process to assess
how the project fared in terms of input use, carrying out the planned tasks, and level of outputs in
relation to the targeted outputs (Gilliam, Barrington, Davis, Lascon, uhl& Phoenix, 2003). The
short term outcomes can also be evaluated at this point.

2.2.8.10 Capture and Documentation of Lessons Learned

Lessons learned from the implementation should be documented and shared with other
stakeholders, as well as incorporated into future projects. The lessons will include what went
well during implementation as well as what went wrong and why, so that the same errors are
avoided in future projects (Reijer et al., 2002). These lessons should be communicated to the
implementation team. The project's long-term viability should be assessed. It is difficult to assess
sustainability, but the degree of community engagement may indicate whether project activities
can continue after the funding period ends.

2.2.9 Monitoring and Evaluation challenges

It is clear that M&E is difficult, time-consuming, and complex for a developing country to
pursue. It is apparent that challenges faces by developing and developed nations are not exactly
the same in all aspects. “...African countries (Ethiopia subject of the case study) face
considerable challenges in monitoring and reporting. These challenges include data gaps,
insufficient use of official data, and differences in indicator values between national and
international sources” (Dimitri, 2011). According to Dimirt (2011), African countries face
numerous obstacles, the majority of which can be traced to statistical infancy. It was established
that statistical issues were divided into two categories: data gaps and data discrepancies between
national and international data obtained from NGOs.

It is an unavoidable fact that there is a significant data gap in different areas. Dimirt (2011)
identified many differences between national and international sources, including definitional
issues, methodological issues, and a lack of recent data at the international level, a lack of
coordination at the national level, population estimates used at the international level differing
from those used by NSOs, and a lack of transparency in international estimation and modeling
procedures.

Things like the lack of up-to-date national data, societal low knowledge, and culture all played a
significant role. Despite having access to a wealth of Monitoring &Evaluation tools, project
managers still face a number of realistic Monitoring &Evaluation challenges. There might
simply not be enough money, manpower, time, or political will to support all of the Monitoring
&Evaluation activities a project needs to undertake in the real-world sense of implementing
Monitoring &Evaluation (PATH, 2013).

PATH (2013) described a lack of baseline data, a lack of budget, a lack of time available for
evaluation, and a lack of political will to support systematic evaluation as challenges for
monitoring and evaluation, and mentioned realistic field-tested ideas to address them.

Costa (2012) also discussed the difficulty in communicating Monitoring and Evaluation by using
new communication technologies and applications (such as social media, blogs, and video) to
maximize public interest in sharing evaluation facts. In addition to this, nation-wide good
information systems have tremendous support for monitoring their own success in developed
countries as well as others (Mikias, 2017). “The key constraint to successful monitoring and
evaluation capacity development in Sub-Saharan Africa is lack of demand,” Mikias (2017, p. 24)
quoted Schacter (2000) as said. The absence of a strong appraisal culture, which stems from the
absence of performance orientation in the public sector, is at the root of the lack of demand.” To
summarize, Africans have a long-standing issue of not sufficiently involving stakeholders in the
M&E process, a lack of resources (both human and financial), and problematic methods and
tools.
2.2.9.1. Lack of Monitoring and Evaluation Expertise

Several scholars have highlighted the lack of sufficient monitoring and assessment expertise or
capability (Hughes d'ach, 2002). Monitoring and evaluation necessitates specialized skills and
knowledge, such as log frame design, indicator setting (both qualitative and quantitative), and the
design of data collection instruments such as questionnaires and focus group discussion guides.
Other necessary skills include data collection skills such as conducting interviews, conducting
focus group discussion, data

2.2.9.2. Inadequate Financial Resources

Another issue is a lack of sufficient financial support to conduct monitoring and evaluation. Most
organizations lack sufficient funding for their programs, which ensures that the limited resources
available are directed toward project implementation; monitoring and evaluation are viewed as
an unnecessary cost. Due to a lack of funding, companies may not be motivated to hire external
evaluators, and they may not be able to gather all of the required data. It's also possible that they
won't be able to afford computers or other equipment to assist with monitoring and evaluation.

2.2.10 Synthesis of Related studies

In developed countries, the Monitoring and Evaluation System is used more effectively than in
developing countries. The researchers attempted to locate a written document on M&E for a
financial organization project; however, the researchers only found a few researches in the areas
of public organization and capacity building; the researchers was unable to locate research on the
subject the researchers was researching. This is because monitoring and assessment are often
used for NGO task purposes in Ethiopia. As a result, there are no research works available in the
field we are currently researching that could inform us of its current state. In fact, there have
been some investigations into the field of monitoring and evaluation in Ethiopia at various
locations, times, and topics, but not specifically in the area of metrology projects.

As a result, the researchers refer to studies on the topic of monitoring and evaluation of
construction projects for the purposes of this report. These studies will provide insight into how
these construction projects are tracked and assessed, as well as the challenges they face.
During the implementation of M&E programs, various problems are often encountered. Despite
all of the available M&E tools, program managers still face a variety of realistic M&E
challenges. There might simply not be enough money, staff, time, or political will to support all
of the M&E activities a program needs to undertake in the real-world sense of implementing
M&E (PATH, 2013). Peersman (2014) acknowledges that common problems in data collection
and analysis can be traced back to inadequate tool selection and implementation.

Different factors may have varying effects on project monitoring and evaluation results.
Financial resources are critical in deciding the future and progress of M&E systems, according to
Kenneth Gitahi (2015). M&E need a budget separate from the project at hand. Financial capital,
project monitoring and evaluation experience, management engagement, and the participation of
various stakeholders in the M & E framework all affect project monitoring and evaluation
activities (Ermias, 2007).

Financial difficulties, a lack of experience, uncommitted management in the company, and less
stakeholder participation all affect the efficacy of project monitoring and evaluation (Ermias H.,
2007. As a result, the current practices in project monitoring and evaluation in governmental
organization was identified in this report. The difficulties were described and investigated as
well.

2.2.11. Monitoring and evaluation of development projects in Ethiopia

Development sector projects monitoring and evaluation at different stages of projects cycle are
the most crucial function to enhance the quality of project management and ensure the efficiency
and effectiveness of the development intervention made by the government. Ibid has disclosed
that the development sectors projects monitoring and evaluation practice manifested different
features from regime to regime. In Ethiopia conception, the Dergue and Federal Democratic
Redevelopment of Ethiopia (FDRE) regimes development sectors projects monitoring and
evaluation features shall be discussed. During the Dergue regime, the centrally planned
command economy, the Central Planning Commission was responsible for the overall
monitoring and evaluation of development sectors projects activities. Quarterly, bi-annual and
annual progress reports, field inspection interviews and discussions held with development
sectors projects implementers were used as the basic tools of data gathering for projects
monitoring and evaluation (MoFED, 2008). As the Ministry of Finance and Economic
Development indicates, the overall development sectors projects monitoring and evaluation of
the past system had suffered from the following basic limitations. The development sectors
projects monitoring and evaluation system was too rigid, and lack dynamism and project
managers had limited autonomy of decision making. There was also delay of monitoring and
evaluation feedbacks to both managers and implementers. As a result, the projects were incurred
high cost for executing project monitoring and evaluation activities and the outcome evaluation
did not get attention. In the early 1990’s, the responsibility of coordinating and consolidating
development sectors projects monitoring and evaluation was provided to the Ministry of
Planning and Economic Development. During this period, the Ministry had developed the
standard formats that were used for both financial and physical project performance data
collection and communication. Minimal field trip to conduct projects monitoring and evaluation
and poor feedback system were some of the weaknesses of the development sectors projects
monitoring and evaluation system of the period (MoFED, 2008).

MoFED (2008) added that during the early 1990’s, the responsibility of conducting externally
financed projects monitoring and evaluation was given to the Ministry of External Economic
Cooperation. The ministry had no its own projects monitoring and evaluation system and was
relied only on adopting donors driven projects monitoring and evaluation philosophy like field
visit, review meeting and periodic monitoring. And the observed major challenges were: review
meetings were conducted only on annual bases which created long interval to take corrective
measure on time, monitoring activities were dependent only on progress reports that had
obtained from projects implementing sectors and monitoring and evaluation lacked comparative
analysis of what was planned and achieved. Following the decentralization process in the
country, during the Federal Democratic Redevelopment of Ethiopia, development sector projects
monitoring and evaluation system has begun to be conducted at both city and federal levels. As a
result, the planning and program departments both at the Federal Ministry of Finance and
Economic Development and Addis Ababa Bureaus of Finance and Economic Development is
mandated to play a role of coordinating and consolidating projects monitoring and evaluation
(MoFED, 2008). At the federal level, the MoFED has developed standard guidelines and formats
for federal development sectors to conduct development sectors development projects
monitoring and evaluation accordingly. In addition, Proclamation No.41/1993 vested power and
responsibility on the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development to following up and
evaluate the implementation of capital budget, external assistance, loan and Federal subsidies
granted to the regional states.

2.3. Empirical Literature

A study conducted by Mary Sanganyi (2014) conducted a research on the implementation of

monitoring and evaluation in the infrastructure project in public secondary school in Mombasa,
Kenya was used descriptive research design and the research also employed qualitative and
quantitative data analysis approach. The total target populations were used to the study 92. The
sampling technique was used censes and the research instrument that are employed for data
collection was questioner.

The paper concludes that stakeholders were not involved in the monitoring and evaluation
activity of the project. Lack of the stakeholder involvement in the project influences the
monitoring and evaluation. Lack of Financial resource, low human capacity and in appropriate
time allocation influence the negatively influence the project performance.

A study conducted by Kariuki (2014) on the Community Development Projects in Kenya,

analyzed the importance and the challenges of monitoring and evolutions and concluded that
monitoring and evaluation were very important to ensure project accountability and necessary for
ensuring that projects meet the intended rationale. It was found that a poor design of the
monitoring and evaluation hindered the monitoring process which then resulted in difficulty of
achieving project success.

The study conducted by Bido (2014) on the title of the study an assessment of project monitoring
and evaluation practice in Oromia pastoral area development commission at Fentalle and Mieso
district, Ethiopia. The research approach employed in this study is descriptive method as the data
gathered both from respondents and different documents were recorded and described and both
qualitative and quantitative approach were also employed. Both primary and secondary data
source were used in the research. The study was used four method of data collection. These were
questionnaires, key informant interview, focus group discussion and documents reviews.
This study was used stratified sampling technique to group the sampling respondent and
judgmental sampling for individual sample. The finding also indicated that materials and human
resource limitation, unplanned and irregular monitoring and evaluation practice at the districts
level, weak follow up made to completed projects, utilization of administrative records and files
as tools of monitoring and evaluation, lack of evaluation standards and principles, un functioning
of some completed projects, lack of outcomes evaluation were some of the major gaps identified.

The researcher also given the recommendation on the illustrated problems like conduct outcome
evaluation, restructuring human resource during project design for the purpose of future project
planning, avoid competition over project resource and improving monitoring and evaluation
manual by including project evaluation principle and standard.

Temesgen (2004) conducted an assessment of monitoring and evaluation of Oromia Health

Bureau of Hospitals construction projects. This study was guided by the general objective, to
assess the project monitoring and evaluation of Oromia Health Bureau in relation to hospital
construction. The study employed descriptive research approach and the participants were
selected through judgmental sampling. The study includes both qualitative and quantitative data
analysis. The findings of the study showed that there is no organized monitoring and evaluation
plan, lack of well-organized monitoring and evaluation unit for Hospitals construction projects in
the bureau, lack manuals which shows procedure, principle, criteria and standards of monitoring
and evaluation for Hospital construction projects. Generally, the result of the study indicated that
there is weak monitoring and evaluation practice of Hospital construction projects in the Bureau.

Finally, the study recommended that, the Bureau has to organized well-structured monitoring and
evaluation department, prepare monitoring and evaluation guidelines, using systematically
organized planning.
 CHAPTER THREE

3. RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

This chapter explains how the study was carried out. It discusses the study's background of the
organization, research design, target population, sampling technique, data source, data collection
tools and techniques, data analysis, data validity and ethical considerations.

3.2 Background of the Organization.

Historical documents revealed that at the end of the 19th century missionaries who entered in
Ethiopia were taking meteorological observation of Addis Ababa. In addition to this,
meteorological stations were established in 1890 and 1986 at Adamitulu and Gambela
respectively. After that from 1946-1949 some preliminary meteorological tasks were carried out
by government offices for agricultural sector only, especially for locust control.

However, due to the growing demands of meteorological information for safe operations of the
air transport, a unit that handles meteorological activity was also established in the early fifties
under the Civil Aviation Department.

Finally as the other economic and social sectors began to realize the importance of
meteorological services then unit was changed with the responsibility of giving assistance to
non-aviation activities. NMA had its present status. The government of Ethiopia officially
established the National Meteorological Services Agency in December 31, 1980 under
proclamation No 201 0f 1980.

The then NMSA and now called NMA is Ethiopia’s meteorological organization with a mission
of collecting, analyzing and studying the atmosphere, and providing weather forecast and early
warnings on the adverse effects of weather and climate change in Ethiopia. In the weather
analysis and forecast, it provides weather forecasts that have data regarding temperature, rainfall
and weather forecast for 24 hours, for three consecutive days over selected regions and urban
centers. The national forecasts contain weather assessments and forecasts in text description,
maps, and statistical outputs covering the whole country in different time scale. It prepares and
disseminates monthly, seasonal and annual climate bulletins and seasonal and annual hydro-
meteorological bulletins, agro meteorological bulletins and climatological maps.

3.3. Research Design and Approach

The term "research design" refers to a plan and procedures for conducting research that include
anything from general assumptions to specific data collection and analysis methods (Creswell,
2009).

In this study descriptive research design was used for the reason that descriptive research design
helps to present the facts of the problem as they are at the time of the study or the study focused
on describing the existing practices of monitoring and evaluation in national metrology agency
projects.

To make the descriptive method more reliable, qualitative research approach is preferable to gain
the opportunity to ask open ended questions, explore what is going on, and learn more about a
subject of interest, which in this case is the challenges of M&E (Saunders, M., Lewis, P., &
Thornhill, A, 2012). In addition to this, the qualitative research approach allows for a repeatable
and flexible technique.

3.3.1. Target population

Castillo (2009) defines target population as, referring to the entire group of individuals or objects
to which researchers are interested in generalizing the conclusions. For this research, the target
populations will be all employees of national metrology agency in Monitoring and Evaluation
core process; team leader, M&E experts/officers and plan experts. The total number of these
groups of employees in the organization is 14. These people are expected to have knowledge
about M&E system either through career structure and training given or due to the responsibility
and accountability they assumed.

3.3.2. Sampling and Sampling techniques

According to Price (2009), purposive sampling is a form of non-probability sampling in which

decisions concerning the individuals to be included in the sample are taken by the researcher,
based upon a variety of criteria which may include specialist knowledge of the research issue, or
capacity and willingness to participate in the research. Some types of research design necessitate
researchers taking a decision about the individual participants who would be most likely to
contribute appropriate data, both in terms of relevance and depth. Purposive sampling was
preferred in this study, and participants were only identified as project M&E experts and officers,
planners and managers. This method is made use of when the members of the entire population
do not present same performance, or when the sampling size is very small to represent the entire
population efficiently. The sampling technique used for the selection of questionnaire
respondents was purposive sampling technique. Those who are expected to have M&E knowhow
as a whole were selected, and it is because their number is not large as well as to get reliable
result.

3.4. Sources of Data and Collection Instruments

Both primary and secondary data sources were used. The primary data was collected from
questioner participants and respondents to the interview questions. The secondary sources of data
was obtained from quarterly reports, yearly reports, project status review report, project office
strategic documents, and records of minutes, procedure manuals and contractual agreements.
According to Wanjiru (2013), primary data for descriptive type research can be obtained through
observation, direct contact with respondents in one or more forms, personal interviews,
questionnaires, observation methods, and other methods. As a collection method, for this
descriptive type research, primary data was obtained through observation and direct
communication with respondents through personal interviews and questioners. This research
implemented the following data collection processes.

3.4.1. Questionnaires

For the purpose of this study, the researcher has chosen to use personal hand delivery to ensure
that the target sample received and returned the questionnaire. Another advantage of self-
administration method is that the researcher will have a personal contact with the study
population. The administered questionnaires were distributed to development project M&E
experts/officers of national metrology agency from megabit 20 - 30. That means a semi-
structured questionnaire was distributed to the respondents who were M&E experts in the
development sector under discussion. Questionnaire distribution was considered vital for the
survey in order to have a true reflection of the M&E practices of practitioners in the
organization.

3.4.2. Interview

According to Saunders et al. (2009), this study used a semi structured interview with a list of
themes and questions based on the interviewee's responsibility and position. Interviewing also
aids in obtaining privileged information from main respondents (Creswell, 2007). Furthermore,
interviews can cover a broad range of subject areas and are a cost-effective and reliable way to
gather a wide range of data without requiring formal testing. As a result, a program director,
finance and administration, head of monitoring and evaluation and consultant and contractor
project managers were interviewed using set of interview questions.

3.4.3 Document review

Almost all necessary documents related to area of study were reviewed. For empirical analysis,
monthly report, quarter report, semiannual report, and up to yearly reports addressed.

3.5 Methods of Data Analysis and Presentation

Data is analyzed using qualitative techniques of data analysis. The questionnaires were collected
and entered in to a data entry template. In addition, summary tables were also used for describing
data. During the interview process, note was taken (on what????) appropriately. And in order to
make sure all questions were addressed well, the interviewer checked (how??) the questionnaire
once again before finalized the interviews. Every day the notes taken during the interviews were
expanded correctly not to miss necessary information and to check the consistency of data
collection process. The results of the interview questions were also integrated to the responses of
the questionnaires and analyzed accordingly. Finally, conclusions were made based on the
findings of the study and recommendations were forwarded built on the data analyzed.

3.6 Validity and Reliability of the Data

According to Creswell (2009), using several data collection instruments allows the researchers to
merge, improve, and amend some of the flaws, as well as triangulate the data. The use of various
methods or data sources to obtain a comprehensive understanding of phenomena is referred to as
triangulation in qualitative research (Patton, 1999). Triangulation is also considered as a
qualitative research approach for determining validity by combining data from several sources.

Triangulation is used to generate information about the same subjects. Triangulation means
compensating for the use of single data collection methods and a basic study design through the
use of multiple information sources and different methods at the same time. Cross-checking the
self-consistency of secondary data sources such as the project schedule, TOR for M&E, M&E
survey, quarterly reports, semi-annual progress reports, annual reports, trainings performed,
procurement notes, and final Project Document of several sources and years is done as part of the
triangulation process. In addition to this it is cross-checked with the interviewee’s response.

3.7. Ethical Consideration

Ethics in research deals about questions on how we formulate and clarify our research topic,
design our research and gain access, collect data, process and store our data, analyze data and
write up our research findings in a moral and responsible way (Saunders et al., 2009). Ethics is
there to minimize harm and to ensure that the research participants are not subjected to any risk
or exposure due to improper methods of protecting privacy.

Therefore, the researcher was granted permission by the concerned authority of Ethiopian
national metrology agency around bole airport to use all the necessary information required in
conducting this research. Each participant was asked to voluntarily participate in the study. They
were informed about the study and willingly filled the questioner. The responses of each
participant are kept confidentially. Research findings are purely the results of analysis of the
collected data without trimming and cooking. There is no intentional unacknowledged use or
incorporation of any other person’s work in my thesis.
 CHAPTER FOUR

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction

The objective of this chapter is to present the findings and results by analyzing the information
gathered and obtained feedback that were gathered through Questioners, Interview and
secondary data sources from the monitoring and evaluation activities of the metrology agency
infrastructure projects.

Questioners and Interview were the qualitative data collection methods used in this study, as
described in the research design and methodology chapter. In addition to literature review of
several references, the analysis attempted to cross check and verify the results of by reviewing
various documents such as quarterly reports, annual reports, project review reports; project office
strategic documents, records of minutes, procedure manuals, and contractual agreements.

The Ethiopian Government has acknowledged the climate change risk the country faces and has
stated it as a priority issue for the country (NAPA, 2007; and the Growth and Transformational
Plan). The process for national planning and strategy development is in place.

To achieve this goal NMA has planned two projects that has been managed independently in
contractor’s side and treated by a program director in NMA program office side. The
interviewees mentioned the two projects such as office infrastructure project and educational
purpose infrastructure project. From contractual agreements the project start July, 2018 and
ended July, 2022.

4.2 Response Rate

Questionnaire return or completion rate is the proportion of the sample that participated as
intended in all the research procedures. This study targeted 14 respondents, out of whom 14
respondents filled and returned their questionnaire giving a response rate of 100%. The statistical
authors have recommended a response rate of at least 50% to be adequate. The response rate was
therefore deemed adequate for the study.
4.3. Data Analysis of Monitoring and Evaluation System

In this section, the analyzed data for respondents’ thought of the monitoring and evaluation
practice at national metrology agency Project in terms of: M&E system practices, Monitoring
and Evaluation budgeting and the challenges of M&E process were presented her.

4.3.1 Monitoring and Evaluation practices

The practices of different monitoring and evaluation issues by managements, M&E experts,
project team leaders and other experts in metrology agency are presented in the following:

In view of assessing the kinds of monitoring & evaluation practice which have been applied at
Project, the respondents were asked politely to national metrology agency.

From the respondents were asked whether the scope and purpose of monitoring and evaluation is
clear. With regard to this question item 1, the majority of the respondents were no clear on the
concern of scope and purpose of monitoring and evaluation. This implies Monitoring and
evaluation cannot help identify areas where improvement is needed and track progress over time.

As shown in the question no-2, on the issue of has a written monitoring and evaluation plan that
guides project execution for this project, majority respondent ensured that there is no written
monitoring and evaluation plan that guides project execution for project as a project oriented
organization. This implies that the organization not on track, analyze, and report on a project
during the monitoring phase, there’s not transparency. Information is not freely circulated and
available to stakeholders, which gives them more input on the project. A good monitoring system
ensures no one is left in the dark. This transparency leads to better accountability. With
information so available, organizations need to keep everything above board. It’s also much
harder to deceive stakeholders.

For the question no -3, majority of the respondent also of national metrology agency has not
allocate enough time and set schedule for monitoring and evaluation. This implies that
development project monitoring and evaluation tasks were conducted in unplanned and irregular
manner.
For the question no -4, the respondent of the study were also asked the question frequency of
data collection indicated in the plan was one of the M&E practice. Regarding this item the result
of the respondent shown that national metrology agency not employee frequency of data
collection indicated in the plan. But from interview and document review project monitoring and
evaluation was conducted mostly in quarterly and annual bases in a planned manner.

For the question no -5, from the item concerned with capture and documenting the lessons
learned. The lessons learned would include what went right in implementation and what went
wrong and why so that the mistakes are not repeated in the subsequent projects. In this study, the
majority respondents confirmed that there never been documentation of the lessons learned. This
implies that documented lesson learned could not improve the planning of future projects by
incorporating lessons learnt from previous projects to future projects.

The aggregate of the above finding supported that, there is low level of monitoring and
evaluation practice in this organization.

4.3.2 M&E Budgeting in national metrology agency

Globally budgeting in an organization can serve many different functions apart from the purpose
of planning and controlling activities. M&E budgeting can be used for measuring performance
and try to predict the uncertain future in advance (Noland, 2010).

The next study sought to assess the effects of M&E budgeting on project implementation in
national metrology agency.

Six statements were developed to measure the effect of M&E budgeting on project where the
findings as presented in below question which shows that the respondents agreed with the
statements that M&E budgeting affects project in national metrology agency organization.

Specifically; the first statement on the organization provides sufficient funds for M&E, out of 14
respondents sampled in the study 10 disagreed and 4 respondents agreed. This implies that the
statement measured that the organization is providing not sufficient funds for M&E practices.
Provision of a budget for monitoring and evaluation ensures that the monitoring and evaluation
activities take place when they are due. It also ensures that monitoring and evaluation are not
treated as peripheral function.
The second statement measured was there is a separate budget allocation for M&E practices in
this organization of which out of 14 respondents sampled 12 disagreed and 2 respondents agreed.
This implies show that the organization has not separate budget allocation for M&E practices.

The third statement developed was there is independency in the budgetary decisions for the
M&E unit, 12 of the respondents disagreed and 2 respondents agreed. The statement generated
that national metrology agency have not separate budget allocation for M&E practices.

The fourth statement developed was the organization ensures there is timely provision of funds
for M&E budget and out of 14 respondents 3 indicated agree and 11 respondents’ disagreed the
statement.

The fifth statement was funds allocated are used for M&E activities only in this organization and
the response was as follows; 12 stated disagree and 2 respondents agree each. The study implies
in this statement that funds allocated are not used for M&E activities only in national metrology
agency activities properly.

Lastly the statement developed concerning M&E budgeting practice on project implementation
was M&E budget performance, schedule performance and quality performance has led to project
success in our organization and out of 14 respondents sampled 1 indicated strongly disagree and
13 indicated agree.

Most activities and systems of M&E of an organization suffer from budget constraints. The
design and implementation of M&E of a project needs an adequate budget that is needed for data
collection, organization, analysis and formal presentations that encompass all stakeholders. M&E
budgeting can be used for measuring performance and try to predict the uncertain future in
advance. The study also reveals that monitoring and evaluation budgeting ensures there is timely
provision of funds with quality performance that has led to project success in organizations.

The finding implies that M&E budgeting in national metrology agency has a great impact in
project implementation.
4.3.3 The Main Challenges of M&E Activities

The final set of questions that the interviewee asked were to tell the possible challenges that they
had felt the organization has faced so far in relation to its M&E activities listed below.

From question no 1, 10 of the respondents said that inadequate human resources and lack of
training in the M&E department in the organization the main challenge. But 4 said that the
organization has sufficient man power for to perform the activities effectively.

In regard with M&E activities funding/ resources for M&E, 4 of the respondents informed that,
the organization has enough funding for the M&E activities but the rest 10 replied that the
activities have not been performed well because of budget constraint. The study implies in this
statement that funds not allocated are used for M&E activities in NMA.

M&E, not viewed as a priority by senior government officials is a concern of only six respondent
accept but the eight do not said that management treats M&E as a priority for the program’s
intervention.

Regarding technology and system of the organization, three of them reported that collecting,
analyzing and easily and systematically reporting M&E information in the organization is a
challenge. But nine of them said that the organization is well equipped in terms of technology
and system for effective M&E activities.

The M&E implementation strategies of the organization are approved by 14 respondents;

however, the eight of them said that the organization strategy has gaps to implement M&E
activities properly.

Identifying of agreed on priority areas for M&E has been a problem in the organization
according to 14 respondents. But the five of them said that the organization has appropriate
agreed priority areas for M&E.

Capacity building trainings to M&E staff is not given by the organization, which is considered to
be a challenge by 10 respondents. But the rest said that it is not considered to be a challenge even
though the organization has never planned and trained its M&E staff.
Lack of an effective communication strategy to inform changes in development and planning is
one of the major challenges mentioned by the informants. Eight of them said that the
organization lacks to establish effective communication strategy but the rest said this is not a
major challenge in the organization.

Consultants trained in M&E that is available to assist the M&E staff has not been seen as a
challenge by most of them. Only two said that sometimes contracting M&E consultant to oversee
the M&E department of the organization could contribute a lot for effective M&E activities.

4.4 Interview Analysis

The aim to plan for conduct interviews in the methodology section of this study was the need of
clarification for uncovered part of monitoring and evaluation practices as well as to make detail
investigations on M&E practice of NMA. The member of participants were 4 and they are from
vice bureau head, head of core process of M&E, Finance and administration, M&E experts of
national metrology agency and contracture manager. Regarding Interview, Do projects always
start and end at the anticipated time? almost the entire interview participants argued that
development projects could not completed as the set of time and schedule but they provided
different explanations or reasons for the project were not completed with anticipated time.

First interview was conducted with vice of bureau that started his explanation, national
meteorology agency has well developed project management system and work structure while
there were different limitations and challenges to complete development projects within
anticipated time. According to him the key problems and gaps contribute to the projects that did
not start and complete within the anticipated time were:

 Inadequate project monitoring and evaluation practices due to lack of budget and
continuous turnover of human resource.
 Lack of commitments of contractor and professional consultants to supervise and support
the underway development projects.
 Inadequate sense of ownership by owners/sectors offices for the underway development
projects.
 Repeatedly change of project design due to different reasons and,
  There is no strong working network between the project office/team and project
stakeholders.

The second interview was conducted with finance and administration who coordinator the
project finance section. He explained that problems related to the projects that were not
completed within the anticipated time as follows:

 Bid and procurement process

 Problems related to community participation from the inception up to the sustaining the
projects.
 In some area, there are lack of transparency and accountability, this in turn expose
projects for corruption and rent seeking.
 Payment executed to the contractor of the projects could not match with the physical
performance report of the projects.
 Low capacity of M&E experts in the sector offices as well as at organizational level and
they cannot able to monitor such mega projects properly,

In addition, from contracture were conducted interviewed separately. Accordingly, the following
problems identified were identified:

They explained that project is a tool to implement strategic program and attain the objective of
government direction. He further stated that policy, strategy and projects are very integrated
elements that enable to answer the interest of the peoples and to satisfy the beneficiaries. The
project results could not attain the goal it was intended to achieve due to delay, cost overrun,
complain of the development as a result development initiative itself will be a source question.
Furthermore, problems with time for M&E, lack of problems solving methods, capacity of
engineers, short come experienced civil engineers from the market, human capacity, financial
resource (no separate budget) less attention given to M&E (ignorance, corruption, transparency)
and lack of awareness were the major problems identified.

Finally, the interview conducted with head of monitoring and evaluation core process is
presented as follows. What he mentioned here are no fundamental difference responses with
other interviewers. He listed so major problems to be added on what other mentioned, i.e.,
absence separate budget for M&E, lack expertise, lack of commitment, focusing on personal
advantage than citizens, absence of engineer as a bureau to check quality of the project output,
absence of timely measure to correct mistakes, delay in project result in the problem of good
governance.

All the M&E officers inform that, even though all the M&E officers are educated and have no
capacity problem, the organization has never planned to give trainings to its M&E staff to
develop their capacity in the field and learn new methods and systems to handle the M&E
activities easily. They also said that the M&E staff in the project is under staffed to do its routine
coordination among sectors, utilize additional budget out of treasury.

Finally, the interviewer suggested such as, the organization should pay attention to its due
responsibility of M&E, providing training for existing experts; aware the experts about M&E,
hired skilled person, should develop a coherent plan and implement it appropriately.

4.5 Document Review Analysis

The project should have a monitoring and evaluation plan. The plan should be prepared as an
integral part of project plan and design (Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of
International Affairs [PASSIA], 2004 and McCoy, Ngari and Krumpe, 2005). The integration is
for clear identification of project objectives for which performance can be measured.

The study found out that national metrology agency had put in place project monitoring and
evaluation tools like administrative records and files, field visit and observation, questionnaires,
and case studies. The monitoring and evaluation tasks were conducted mostly in quarterly, mid-
terms and annual bases in a planned and regular manner at national metrology level and the
system of monitoring and evaluation was found out so participatory.

With regards to the utilization of monitoring and evaluation results, the study came up with the
fact that the monitoring and evaluation team delivered reports at all level and used the repots to
take appropriate and corrective measures.

The organization has a written a complacence and performance test to make corrective action for
the erroneous responsibility, but it is not appropriately apply on the incorrect matter.
Relevant documents of national metrology agency were explored for the financial and human
resources capacity to conduct M&E of development projects. The findings were discussed next.

Financial

Some scholars suggest that a monitoring and evaluation budget of 5 to 10% of the overall budget
is appropriate (Kelly &Magongo, 2004). The aim of this practice is to come up with enough
funds to promote monitoring and evaluation activities, rather than to prescribe a percentage that
is appropriate. But there is not seen any secondary data that see about monitoring and evaluation
budget.

Human resource review

National metrology agency project hosted 243 total employees that can be categorized as
permanent and contract ones. The permanent employees account for 85 of which was 58 males
and 27 of them was female’s workers. The contract employees accounted for 158 (95 males and
63 females). Information and Monitoring and Evaluation division consisted of 14 employees of
which 9 of them were male and 5 females. As plan indicated around 450 employees required for
this project.

Not only is it necessary to have dedicated and adequate numbers of M&E staff, it is essential for
these staff to have the right skills for the work. Human capacity building should focus on all
levels of the system. M&E capacity building should focus not only on the technical aspects of
M&E, but also address skills in leadership, financial management, facilitation, supervision,
advocacy and communication.

General conditions of M&E systems

The review of relevant document or manual describing monitoring and evaluation tools,
principles, criteria and standards were considered as important as it could yield significant
insight to the study. Researcher has reviewed different relevant documents, policy, manuals and
guidelines in order to do this study. Accordingly, Ethiopian national metrology agency have no
separate plan, separate budget and separate policy & guidelines for implementation of
monitoring and evaluation.
The review of relevant documents that development project monitoring and evaluation was
conducted mostly in quarterly and annual bases in a planned manner. In addition, NMA stated
that they had employed ex-ante, mid-term, terminal, ex-post and impact evaluation techniques
apply. Concerning the presence of designed development project monitoring and evaluation
tools, the NMA has design monitoring and evaluation tools including checklist, questionnaires,
field visit and observation, review of administrative records and files, interview, case studies, etc.

4.6 Discussions

M&E is also a management tool because it generates a large amount of vital information that
allows project administrators to: identify the major problems, constraints and successes
encountered during implementation, through analysis of the data collected; adjust project
activities, plans and budgets according to data generated through the use of M&E tools and
methodologies; provide information for accountability and advocacy to the targeted
communities, and to the government agencies and national and international donors involved.
M&E therefore plays a crucial role in enhancing a project’s success (Rao, et al. 2003) and Olken,
2007).

It highlights the data obtained through the three data collection tools (questionnaires, interviews,
and documents reviews), the following major points of discussions have been identified and
discussed as follows;

The monitoring and evaluation activities of the project should be included in the project schedule
so that they are given the due importance they require, not only done at the whims of the project
manager (Handmer and Dovers, 2007; and McCoy et al., 2005). As study result indicated almost
both projects could not completed within anticipated time and approved budget because of
failure in planning, budget constraints, delay in project document preparation, continuous project
design change and low organization involvement in projects and the project did not achieved its
objectives.

The project budget should provide a clear and adequate provision for monitoring and evaluation
activities (McCoy et al., 2005). Provision of a budget for monitoring and evaluation ensures that
the monitoring and evaluation activities take place when they are due. It also ensures that
monitoring and evaluation are not treated as peripheral function. In this study, majority of the
respondents reported that there is no separate budget allocated to the M&E activities. This
implies monitoring and evaluation is not considered as a big tool for change and also that tells
the system is not implemented as per the theory or as per the baste practice observed somewhere
else.

In this study, efforts were made to find out whether there were gaps observed in the process of
monitoring and evaluation in the specified organization. As a result, the entire respondents
consistently mentioned the existence of gaps like shortage of skilled man power at organization
level and site, competing over project resources as well as unplanned monitoring and evaluation
at project site level.

Accordingly, identified major respondents mentioned problems related to development projects

were not completed within time schedule and approved budget:

 the sector offices did not develop adequate sense of ownership for respective projects;
 the consultant did not monitor and support the projects as required,
 Failure in planning,
 delay in project document preparation and revision of design,
 delay in bid documents preparation and bid evaluation process,
 delays in material supply and lack of construction capacity,
 low capacity of contractor,
 low frequency of M&E under taken by organizational bodies,
 inadequate organizational structure in order to protect correction problems
 CHAPTER FIVE

5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Introduction

This chapter contains three parts. The first part is the summary of major findings, the second part
presents conclusion of the research derived from findings and the third part deals with
recommendation that were made on the basis of the findings.

5.2. Summary

The objective of the study was to establish the assessment of project monitoring and evaluation
practices at national metrology agency. The study was guided by the following research
questions; what are the current monitoring and evaluation practice in metrology agency
infrastructure projects? How does M&E budgeting affect project implementation in national
metrology agency? What are the challenges for monitoring and evaluation of national metrology
agency projects? Research methodology employed for this study is descriptive research method
and both primary and secondary data were used. Additionally, the sampling techniques employed
for this research were purposive sampling technique after categorizing the target population. The
collected data was then analyzed using qualitative approaches by which the data gathered
through questionnaires, document reviews and interview were qualitatively described.

The result of study found out that development project monitoring and evaluation was conducted
mostly in quarterly and annual bases in a planned manner. In addition, NMA workers stated that
they had employed ex-ante, mid-term, terminal, ex-post and impact evaluation.

Concerning the presence of designed development project monitoring and evaluation tools, the
study found out that NMA has designed monitoring and evaluation tools including checklist,
questionnaires, field visit and observation, review of administrative records and files, interview,
case studies, etc.

Notice must be taken of the fact that these findings are specific to this study. They may confirm
or reject findings in similar studies in existing literature. In generalizing the findings of this
study, care must be taken since different organizations may yield different results. Therefore,
these results are expected to truly reflect that of the studied organization only.

For the objective number one: to explore the existing monitoring and evaluation practice.

As study result indicated almost both projects could not completed within anticipated time and
approved budget because of failure in planning, budget constraints, delay in project document
preparation, continuous project design change and low organization involvement in projects and
the project did not achieved its objectives.

NMA hasn’t clear set the scope and purpose of monitoring and evaluation practice. Overall level
of monitoring and evaluation system practices of the project is low.

The study shows that, the major weaknesses of development project monitoring and evaluation
practices were found out. Monitoring and evaluation practices were not allocate enough time and
not set schedule for M&E, lack of capture and documenting the lessons learned M&E practice,
lack of disseminating and reporting the M&E findings;

Objective number two: to assess the effects of M&E budgeting on project implementation
in national metrology agency.

The research findings revealed that the organization does not allocate adequate budget for M&E
unit and even there were M&E activities that could not be performed because of budget
constraint.

Objective number three: to assess the overall M&E challenges of the project that affects its
performance.

 The staff conducting the M&E does not have any prior training provided to them or
what so ever. They conduct the process from previous experience only. There is some
inadequacy of human resource in M&E.
5.2. Conclusion

Ethiopia has formulated different development policies, strategies, programs and projects to
solve basic socio-economic problems of the society. Accordingly, different development projects
have been initiated and implemented in many areas of the country. However, its monitoring and
evaluation practice is not adequately studied. This study aimed that assessing development
project monitoring and evaluation practice in: the case of national metrology agency.

On the effects of M&E budgeting on project implementation in NMA, the findings showed that
M&E budgeting in NMA has a great impact in project implementation. M&E budgeting can be
used for measuring performance and try to predict the uncertain future in advance. The study
also revealed that monitoring and evaluation budgeting ensures there is timely provision of funds
with quality performance that has led to project success in organizations.

The findings on M&E capacity building indicated that capacity building and information
dissemination affects project implementation in NMA. The study showed that capacity building
is a great determinant in project implementation in NMA. it is a social process that builds the
organization's future objectives and has enforced development of organizations projects in NMA.
Capacity building has also led the staff to acquire specific skills and has brought international
development where the contents of the trainings in regard to the effectiveness of successful
implementation of projects in NMA.

Thus, the above mentioned findings were taken as the most important strengths of NMA
depicted in development projects monitoring and evaluation.

The study also revealed that,

 Absence of separate plan for M&E activities.

 Lack of allocate enough time for M&E activities.
 Absence of lesson learned document that improve the project implementation in the
future.
 Lack of qualified and experienced human power and materials limitation.
 Absence of sufficient funds for M&E.
5.3. Recommendation

The study made the following recommendations based on the findings of the study;

Firstly, M&E design & planning practice should be adopted in the organization for it is deemed
as an evaluation progress which is good for management practice. Planning practice in an
organization seeks to establish causality for the situations and trends recorded by monitoring and
evaluation. Organizational managers should use M&E planning practice to make adjustments to
the project because it is the best function of selecting the organization objectives and establishing
the policies, procedures, and programs necessary for achieving the organizational goals.

• Based on finding of this study, lesson learned from development projects implemented
were not documented adequately. An effective Lessons Learned process should prevent the
project from repeating mistakes and repeat the project successes. Therefore, the project should
have documented lesson learned for continuous improvement of project implementation in the
future.

• Sufficient time for preparing conducting M&E and adequate resources should be
assigned to the process.

Secondly, the study revealed that M&E budgeting practice affects project implementation in
NMA organization, therefore there is need to adopt the practice in organization because it is used
for measuring performance in predicting the uncertain for future in advance. M&E budgeting
should be adhered to in organizations for it ensures timely provision of funds with quality
performance that has led to successful project implementation process.

Finally, M&E capacity building should be adhered to as an indicator of project implementation

for it is a great determinant in an organization’s successful project implementation process.
Capacity building practice should be encouraged by the organizational management because
most development organizations are involved in the practice for achieving development goals
and contributing to sustainability in terms of specific skills through planned interventions, such
as technical assistance, training courses and other actions. M&E capacity building is seen as a
social process that builds the organization's future objectives.

 Hired skilled person.

REFERENCE
 I. General issues
1. Source of your major project fund and how much it there budget? ________
2. Starting date of the project
3. Ending date of the project
4. Do this project start and completed as per planned in terms of time and cost?
a. Yes b. no c. partially

If your answer is no ,why?

II. Monitoring and Evaluation

1. What type of Project Monitoring does the firm uses?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________
2. What type of Evaluation does the firm uses?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________

2. Who conducts M&E at a particular project/site?

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
3. What tools and techniques does your organization use to collect data?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________
1. What are the current Monitoring and Evaluation practice in Metrology agency
infrastructure project?
 The scope and purpose of M&E clearly indicated?
 Is there a written M&E plan that guides project execution
 Is there allocate enough time and schedule for M&E?
 Is there frequency of data collection indicated in the plan?
 Disseminating or reporting the M&E findings?
 Capture and documenting the lessons learned M&E practices

2. Does budget assigned for M & E activity?

 The organization has allocated sufficient funds to M&E?
 Is there separate budget allocation for M&E practices in this Organization?

 Is there independency in the budgetary decision for the M&E unit?

 The organization ensures there is timely provision of funds for M&E Budget?
 The funds allocated are used for M&E activities only in this Organization?
 M&E budget performance has led to project success in this organization?

3. What are the challenges for M & E of metrology agency infrastructure projects? In terms
of
 Inadequate human resource capacity/ people who trained in M & E
 Lack of funding/ resources for M & E
 Not viewed as a priority by senior management
 M & E technology/ system to collect analyze and report information easily and
systematically not in place.
 Inappropriate M & E implementation strategies
 Lack of training
 Identification of agreed on priority areas for M & e
 Lack of an effective communication strategy to inform policy development and
planning
 Consultants trained in M & E that are available to assist