The concepts of monitoring and evaluation are usually approached together as a function of project management. It provides a real perspective upon the stages of the financed project in order to make all the adjustments necessary in the project implementation process. The Purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which Impact of Monitoring and Evaluation Integration on Completion of Road Projects: A Case of Douala In Cameroon and use the findings to come up with recommendations/measures to strengthen use of M&E in implementation of road projects. The study adopted a descriptive research design. The target population for the study was the County Staff in the Planning section, treasury budget office, County assembly oversight committee, Contractors and stakeholders/ beneficiary of the projects. The study therefore targeted a population of 332 respondents. Thus, purposive sampling was used to select 99 respondents as the sample size of the study. The target population for this study was (3) County assembly Public works/Roads and Housing committee members, (11) County Staff in the Planning section budget office county treasury, (73) Contractors and (12) Beneficiary of the projects. Numerical data collected using questionnaires was coded, entered and analyzed with help of a computer Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 21 software programme. Data was collected analyzed and interpreted based on the identified independent and dependent variables. Correlation regression was used to analyse and interpret the data where the study used Spearson‟s correlation to relate the variables. This was to establish if there is a correlation between dependent variable Completion of Road Projects against Independent variable integration of M&E in Road projects. This was to establish the extent to which timeliness, cost effectiveness and quality of integrating M&E influences completion of Roads Projects. The study found that Independence is attained when M & E it is carried out by firms and persons free of the control of those responsible for the design and implementation of the development intervention M=3.946 (SD=0.8996), It found that Most of the Monitoring and evaluation budget can be obviously delineated within the overall project costing to give the monitoring and evaluation function the due recognition it plays in project running M=4.354 (SD=0.8996). From the study most respondents indicated that Monitoring gives information on where a policy, program, or project is at any given time (and over time) relative to respective targets and outcomes M=4.344 (SD=0.8693),the study showed that that most respondents indicated that Political, economic and cultural issues are three important indicators related to failures of road projects' performance in the Country M=4.042 (SD=0.917). Based on the results there was a relationship between integrating Monitoring and Evaluation and on performance of Roads Projects in Cameroon: A Case of Douala from the data coefficient of determination (R2 of 72) was obtained meaning there is a strong relationship between integrating Monitoring and Evaluation and on performance of Roads Projects in Cameroon.

1.1 Background of the Study
The concepts of monitoring and evaluation are usually approached together, as a function of project management, which provides a real perspective upon the stage of the financed project, in order to make all the adjustments necessary in the project implementation process. Monitoring is an ongoing function that employs the systematic collection of data related to specified indicators in Public projects. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is described as a process that assists project managers in improving performance and achieving results. The goal of M&E is to improve current and future management of outputs, outcomes and impact (United Nations Development Programme, 2002). Williams (2000) asserts that monitoring provides management and the main stakeholders of a development intervention with indications of the extent of progress and achievement of expected results and progress with respect to the use of allocated funds. According to Ballard et al., (2010), monitoring and evaluation is a process that helps program implementers make informed decisions regarding program operations, service delivery and program effectiveness, using objective evidence.

Project monitoring is the process where the construction resources of same project are managed through the best methods and techniques so that the client does not suffer the losses when carrying out the project activities. According to Barnes, the main problem that accounts for poor cost management by traditional methods is flaws in cost estimates and cost control process, inadequate information modeling, and lack of integration of cost management and production management system .Project monitoring is considered to be a managerial process, which aims to generate information to support decision-making and to stimulate cost reduction, value improvement and continuous improvement in the organization. Cost monitoring is understood as being composed of two main processes: cost estimating processes and cost planning and control processes. The objective of cost estimating process is to estimate the cost of products and processes involved in production. This requires a thorough understanding of the design, contracts and production in order to properly model the consumption of resources by transformation and flow (non-value adding) activities. The aim of the cost control sub-process is to monitor actual cost performance and identify improvement opportunities, which must be dealt by corrective actions.

According to Zubair Ahmed Memon, (2010), An integrated simulation model, named DCM (Digitalizing the Construction Monitoring) is developed to integrate digital images of construction scene with AutoCAD drawings and it resolves the existing project progress reporting problems. The DCM model improve the decision-making and productivity of construction activity Effective cost monitoring and controlling has received much attention in the construction industry due to excessive cost escalation and woeful profit margin of some contractors. The life cycle of construction projects comprise of different phases including planning initiation, procurement contract award and contract management phase. Government construction client panel bench-marking study carried out in 1999 in UK shows that three quarter of the 66 projects studies on the central government construction project exceeded 50% of their contract price. It is usually seen in construction sector cost and time management is given more importance.

The developed countries like the United States of America, Germany and Britain, have however given hope that something can still be done to reduce the severity of the problem and this has only been through research and development. According to National Highways Authority of India (NHAI, 2013), 15 kilometres per day of new highways (pavement) is being added to the Indian national network. This came out as a result of increased research and use of Information Technology for better monitoring and tracking of works and the man power. Kampala Northern By-Pass highway in Uganda on the other hand was constructed at a rate of 0.01km per day with time and cost overruns of 83% and 46% respectively. A report from MoWT (2011) indicates that one kilometre of flexible pavement road in Uganda cost up to US dollars 570,692/= which can construct a similar road in concrete yet the later has a longer life. It is therefore important to identify the specific significant factors affecting project performance in Uganda and deal with. Reduced pavement road project performance affects governments, consultants, contractors, suppliers and the overall economic and social transformation subsequently affecting national and global development.

Monitoring and Evaluation has been a key performance management tool for planning, decision making and economic policy management. Mackay, 2007 asserts that most governments in the world are working towards entrenching Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) in their economic governance system. As cited by Kibua and Mwabu2, the District Focus for Rural Development (DFRD) policy did not succeed because of the absence of an appropriate legal framework to facilitate decision making and to mobilize resources. Evidence from literature point out that in Sub-Saharan Africa substantial M&E achievements on the ground are rare (Casley and Kumar3; Chen4; UNICEF5; UNDP6). Furthermore, Nyandemo and Kongere, Nduati argue that the M&E of decentralized development in Cameroon was not systematic, failed to adopt the M&E requirements and the information generated was not timely and accurate. This points out that all real variables that influence and determine the implementation of M&E framework may not have been identified by these policy measures.

The major phase in the evolution of M&E in Cameroon was the introduction of the Cameroon Vision 2030 in 2008, which replaced the Economic recovery Strategy (ERS) as the country’s development blueprint. Vision 2030 became the principle driver of development in Cameroon and therefore the basis for National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (NIMES) When in 2008, Cameroon Vision 2030 as the national developmental policy replaced ERS; NIMES was re-oriented to M&E of the implementation of the Vision. According to Republic of Cameroon, (2012), the M&E responsibility was at this time, however, divided between Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate (MED) and a new tailor made body, within the then, Ministry of Planning responsible for flagship programs and projects in Cameroon Vision 2030. The Cameroon Vision 2030 Board and its Secretariat were created for that purpose. NIMES was designed to have a three tier institutional relationship for generating M&E information. At the national level is MED, that provides leadership and coordinates the system by ensuring that two vital sources of M&E information, namely Annual Progress Reports (APRs) on the Medium Term Plan (MTP) of Vision 2030 and Annual Public Expenditure Review (PER) are ably and timely produced. At ministerial level are the Central Project Planning and Monitoring Units (CPPMUs). The CPPMUs produce Ministerial Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Reports (MAMERs), and Ministerial Public Expenditure Reviews (MPERs) which are synthesized into the APR and PER respectively. At sub-national level, the District Development Officers, supervised by the Provincial Directors of Planning, were meant to produce the District Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Reports, (GoK, 2012).

According to Republic of Cameroon (2012) the budget process takes into account the PER which is complemented by the work that goes into preparation of Ministerial Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Reports that subsequently become Annual Progress Reports on the implementation of Vision 2030 from the NIMES system. As one of the flagship products of Cameroon„s M&E information, the Public Expenditure Review is an analysis, which covers vital factors as macroeconomic performance, spending trends, and implications for each of Cameroon„s socioeconomic and governance sectors. More recently the PER has begun to benchmark Cameroon’s economic management against selected peer middle income countries that the country aspires to emulate.

Additionally, with the new devolved structures of county governments and the rising fiscal devolution with respect to development policies, programs and projects in Cameroon, there is dire need therefore for an effective national wide M&E framework in Cameroon. As revealed in this study, achieving an effective national wide M&E system in Cameroon has been a key target of the government for a long period of time. Most government programs have had to run into problems due to reasons that would have been averted had there been proper M&E carried out during implementation. This has continued to affect not only the level of services performance in Cameroon but also the feedback and intervention mechanisms optimally required to counter wastage of available scarce resources (Musomba). Therefore, monitoring provides the background for reducing schedule and cost overruns (Crawford & Bryce, 2003), while ensuring that required quality standards are achieved in project implementation. At the same time, evaluation can be perceived as an instrument for helping planners and project developers to assess to what extent the projects have achieved the objectives set forth in the project documents (Field & Keller, 1997).

1.2 Statement of the Problem
Monitoring and evaluation are regarded as core tools for enhancing the quality of project management, taking into account that in short and medium run managing complex projects will involve corresponding strategies from the financial point of view, which are supposed to respect the criteria of effectiveness, sustainability and durability (Dobrea et al., 2010). Monitoring activity supports both project managers and staff in the process of understanding whether the projects are progressing on schedule or meet their objectives, inputs, activities and deadlines (Solomon & Young, 2007). M&E serving the very necessary purpose of accountability, for reasons mentioned above, it also meant to promote the “learning organization”. This would be at the level of M&E use, and comes about when results are presented. The assumption is that organisations would become more open and self-reflective when faced with evaluative information, but it is not necessarily the case as operationalising learning is not easy, given the complex array of protocols and management culture which must be negotiated (Preskill and Russ-Eft, 2005). It has been shown that whilst it is implicit that M&E should lead to learning and reflection, this may not be the case and the way in which organisations integrate information may be complex, and not as causal as suggested in classic M&E project or programme management terms.

A study in South Africa (Hanson et al., 2003) reveals that conflict, poor workmanship, lack of a proper M & E system and incompetence of contractors are among the factors affecting project performance. According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA, 2006), there is no exception in Palestine as many local construction projects report poor performance due to: unavailability of materials; excessive amendments of design and drawings; poor coordination among participants, ineffective monitoring and feedback, and lack of project leadership skills and regional conflicts. Monitoring and Evaluation system therefore provides the necessary feedback for economic development and policy interventions. This area has not received the much needed attention. In order to accurately and timely track the development progress made in Cameroon and the 47 counties in particular, there is need for an integrated national wide M&E system. The absence of this framework limits effective public service delivery thus constraining the acceleration of economic development in Cameroon and therefore impacts negatively on the overall welfare of the citizens. The factors influencing the implementation of M&E of development projects in Cameroon therefore need to be timely established to guide the implementation of M&E function and policy development in Cameroon. Most studies done in Cameroon including Nyabuto, (2012), Rogito, (2013) and Mogaka, (2014) focuses on specific projects or specific districts and therefore makes it difficult to generalize the results on the entire country. Equally, these studies do not look at a wider cross section of projects being funded by different institutions and this study attempts to fill the gap.

1.3 Purpose of the Study
The study sought to establish how Monitoring and Evaluation integration Influences the completion of Roads Projects in Cameroon: A Case of Douala. In this study, project completion, was considered as the overall result of a project in terms of its impact, value to beneficiaries, implementation effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability.

1.4 Research Objectives
The study was guided by the following objectives:

i. To assess the extent to which timeliness in M&E integration influences completion of road projects

ii. To establish how cost effectiveness of M&E integration influences completion of road projects

iii. To determine how quality in M&E integration influences completion of road projects

1.5 Research Questions
The study answered the following questions:

i. To what extent does timeliness of M&E integration influences Completion of road Projects in Cameroon?

ii. To what extent does cost effectiveness of M&E integration of influences roads Projects in Cameroon?

iii. How quality of M&E integration influences completion of road Projects in Cameroon?

1.6 Significance of the Study
The study will be of significance to Public Institutions by contributing to a better understanding and knowledge of strengthening monitoring and evaluation systems. Public Institutions may use the study to provide a framework for strengthening existing monitoring and evaluation systems. The study will be of benefit to researchers and scholars who may use its findings as a reference and to enrich M &E literature.

1.7 Limitations of the Study
The limitation of the study was the cost that was incurred due to the vastness of the area which will required significant amount of time to collect adequate data, which the study has no control over. To overcome the limitation, the researcher contracted a research assistant. This ensured that the target population will be reached.

1.8 Delimitations of the Study
The study was carried out in Douala. The study only looked at the performance of Roads projects in Douala, Douala has five sub-counties, The researcher dwelled on the projects initiated in the year 2013 to 2015 in the three sub-counties.

1.9 Assumptions of the Study
The study was conducted under the assumption that the respondents are available and also that they will give honest responses. This study assumed that respondents have a good understanding of the Factors Influencing Performance of Monitoring and Evaluation of Roads Projects in Cameroon: A Case of County Government of Douala

For more Environmental Planning Projects Click here
Item Type: Project Material  |  Size: 65 pages  |  Chapters: 1-5
Format: MS Word   Delivery: Within 30Mins.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Select Your Department

Featured Post

Reporting and discussing your findings

This page deals with the central part of the thesis, where you present the data that forms the basis of your investigation, shaped by the...