LGCDP M&E Framework

LGCDP Sample Surveys do complement the MC/PM assessments and
administrative data in two important ways: First, sample surveys can directly address
the citizens. Second, sample surveys can provide – at least initially – administrative
data from VDCs on a sample basis before the MLD is able to set up a comprehensive
data collection system.
Recommendation:
⇒ conduct a sample survey every 2 years: more often will not add much
value to the information gathered, less often is too late to inform decisionmaking
for LGCDP; include the questions from the LGCDP M&E framework
in all surveys (see Annex 3)
⇒ make use of external quality control for sample surveys; sample
surveys are expensive and methodologically challenging; if the sampling
methodology is not sound (and not perceived as being sound), the
credibility of LGCDP’s entire monitoring system is at stake
⇒ even if more administrative data is collected from DDCs and municipalities,
continue using sample surveys for at least 6 more years to provide quality
control and triangulation to data obtained through administrative
channels
Indicator tracking combines key data from the MC/PM Assessment, the sample
surveys and additional data from the MLD and other external resources. The
indicator data will be updated on a trimesterely basis, since monthly data collection
would be cumbersome without adding much value. Performance indicator tracking
will be done using the indicator tracking sheets described in Annex 2.
Recommendation:
⇒ update indicator tracking sheets described in Annex 2
trimesterely as simple key tool for tracking indicators
The LGCDP programme document does currently not define risks at any level, with
the only exception of fiduciary risks. Before a system can be set up to monitor risks,
these risks need to be clearly defined.
Recommendation:
⇒ clearly define risks for LGCDP at at least two levels (output to
outcome, outcome to purpose) as a first step to monitor risks
23