Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1696586050109.pdf (Vanuatu)
Government of the Republic of Vanuatu Monitoring and Evaluation Policy Prepared by: Monitoring and Evaluation Unit, Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination Prime Minister’s Office March, 2018 Acknowledgements The Government of Vanuatu extends its deepest appreciation to the many individuals, institutions, departments, and organisations who provided valuable perspectives, ideas and support through the process to develop this National Monitoring & Evaluation Policy.
Specifically the input provided by ministries, local government authorities, and the Vanuatu National Statistics Office has been extremely valuable.

The Government further extends its gratitude to both UNDP and Governance for Growth and the Australian government for continued support in the development of this policy.
This policy has been developed over a two year consultative and review process with key stake holders and serves as the principle guidance on how the Government of Vanuatu defines and seeks to develop the way in which we develop and use Monitoring & Evaluation in order to ensure that national priority goals are met through Vanuatu 2030: The People’s Plan, the country’s national sustainable development plan.
The drafting of this plan and the supporting background context reports was undertaken by multiple authors, and was coordination by the Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination.

All contributions and support received are gratefully acknowledged and warmly appreciated.

This policy was produced by the Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination.
Republic of Vanuatu Port Vila, March 2018 Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................................................. ii 1.

Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.

Purpose ............................................................................................................................................... 2 3.
Principles ............................................................................................................................................. 3 4.

Policy Statement ................................................................................................................................. 4 5.

Definitions and Terms ......................................................................................................................... 4 6.
Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................................... 6 6.1 Monitoring and Evaluation Unit.................................................................................................... 6 6.2 Vanuatu National Statistics Office ................................................................................................ 8 6.3 Line Ministries ............................................................................................................................... 9 6.4 Ministry of Finance and Economic Management ......................................................................... 9 6.5 Parliament ................................................................................................................................... 10 6.6 Commercial Government Business Enterprises and Statutory Bodies ....................................... 10 6.7 Aid Coordination ......................................................................................................................... 10 6.8 Provincial Government ............................................................................................................... 11 6.9 M&E Sectoral Committees .......................................................................................................... 11 7.
Capacity Building ............................................................................................................................... 12 7.1 M&E Unit ..................................................................................................................................... 12 7.2 Ministries .................................................................................................................................... 12 Annex 1: Other M&E Definitions .......................................................................................................... 14 Annex 2: CGBEs and Statutory Bodies .................................................................................................. 15 Annex 3: Planning and Monitoring Cycle .............................................................................................. 16 i Abbreviations and Acronyms ADR CGBE COM DCO Annual Development Report Commercial Government Business Enterprise Council of Ministers Development Committee of Officials DSPPAC Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination FMIS M&E MEP MIS NGO NPF NSDP NSDS PMO SA SAC SDGs SMR Financial Management Information System Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and Evaluation Policy Management Information System Non-Governmental Organisation National Planning Framework National Sustainable Development Plan (Vanuatu 2030) National Strategy for the Development of Statistics Prime Minister’s Office Senior Policy Analyst Statistics Advisory Council Sustainable Development Goals Six-Monthly Report VNSO Vanuatu National Statistics Office ii Foreword On behalf of the people and government of Vanuatu, I am delighted to present to you The National Monitoring & Evaluation Policy.
This plan will serve to establish common structures and standards for effective monitoring and evaluation to improve efficiency, effectiveness and resilience of service delivery.

Monitoring and Evaluation greatly assists the government in terms of providing useful information, insight and more importantly providing performance feedback on government policies and programs.
It also provides insights regarding major constraints affecting the implementation of government programs, policies and projects, and well-functioning monitoring and evaluation processes can help the government move towards better results-based management and policy making and ultimately to better development outcomes.

Furthermore, Monitoring and Evaluation is inherent in the process of tracking progress of the Sustainable Development Goals, which the Government of Vanuatu has committed to do.
The National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy emphasises monitoring and evaluation within the broader Government management accountability framework.

It clarifies the roles and responsibilities of government ministries, agencies, Commercial Government Business Enterprises and statutory bodies in undertaking monitoring, evaluation and reporting.
I would like to sincerely thank all of the people who have contributed to producing the National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy and the government is looking forward to ensuring that all government monitoring and evaluation activities will be developed using its guidance and mechanisms in the years to come.

Hon.

Charlot Salwai Tabimasmas Prime Minister 1 1.


Background Over the years the Vanuatu government has implemented several national development initiatives including the Comprehensive Reform Program (CRP) in 1997, the Priorities Action Agenda (PAA) in 2006, and Planning Long Acting Short (PLAS) in 2009 and currently the Vanuatu 2030 National Sustainable Development Plan (NSDP) 2016-2030.
Further to these policy initiatives, major programs and projects were also executed to address the country’s development needs.

However, the capacity of government to understand and learn from the impacts of these programs has been mixed and in some cases, unknown.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) greatly assists the government in terms of providing useful information, insight and more importantly providing performance feedback on government policies and programs.
M&E provides insights regarding major constraints affecting the implementation of government programs, policies and projects, and a well-functioning M&E process can help the government move towards better results-based management and policy making and ultimately to better development outcomes.

Furthermore, M&E is inherent in the process of tracking progress of the SDGs, which the Government of Vanuatu has committed to do.
M&E is the tool used by the government to evaluate performance and identify the factors contributing to service delivery outcomes under all government programs and policies including Vanuatu 2030, the National Sustainable Development Plan for 2016-2030, and the Monitoring and Evaluation Policy (MEP) aligns with the NSDP results-based M&E framework.

The MEP is applicable throughout government entities on the national, provincial and local levels.
It is complemented by the Risk Informed Planning, Budgeting and Monitoring Guidelines for Sub- National Government (Instruction No.

001/2016/DLA/MOIA) which was produced by the Department of Local Authorities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in 2016.

This mechanism is designed to enable the flow of information from communities and area councils, to provinces and ultimately to the national government.

2.

Purpose The Government recognises the importance of having the MEP in place.
As such the purpose of the Monitoring and Evaluation Policy is as follows: To establish common structures and standards for effective monitoring and evaluation to improve efficiency, effectiveness and resilience of service delivery Furthermore, the MEP is linked to the government’s overall strategic policy framework through Vanuatu 2030, the National Sustainable Development Plan for 2016 – 2030, and Goal Society 6: Strong and Effective Institutions, which aims to achieve: A dynamic public sector with good governance principles and strong institutions delivering the support and services expected by all citizens of Vanuatu Contained within the Society 6 Goal of Vanuatu 2030 is the Policy Objective SOC 6.9 to: Strengthen research, data and statistics for accountability and decision-making The scope of the MEP is to set out the importance of following good-quality M&E practices throughout the government, and the key aspects of effective M&E.
The MEP stresses the importance of data collection and sharing; who is responsible for using that information; how best to collect information and report on the progress at local and ministry levels, the implementation of the NSDP, development 2 projects and of Council of Ministers (COM) decisions including cross cutting issues such as gender, social inclusion, climate, environment and disaster risks.

The MEP addresses three critical areas for effective M&E implementation throughout the Government: 1.
Principles of the M&E Policy 2.

Definitions of M&E terms, the roles, responsibilities and mandates across government regarding M&E and reporting 3.

The capacity building activities necessary for effective M&E This MEP emphasises monitoring and evaluation within the broader Government management accountability framework.
The MEP clarifies the roles and responsibilities of government ministries, agencies, Commercial Government Business Enterprises (CGBEs) and statutory bodies in undertaking monitoring, evaluation and reporting.

It also clarifies the role of the M&E Unit of the Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination (DSPPAC) as the focal point for M&E within the government.

3.
3.

Principles The MEP is based on the following principles1 M&E is Development Oriented  Variables reflecting institutional performance and service delivery are analysed and reviewed, links are identified and responsive strategies are formulated.

 The possible impacts of M&E interventions are considered and reflected upon in plans and their actual outcomes are tracked and analysed systematically and consistently, specifically with regard to the NSDP and other planning tools that focus on Development.
M&E is undertaken ethically and with integrity  Processes ensure the responsible use of personal and sensitive information M&E is utilisation oriented  M&E products meet knowledge and strategic needs regarding identification of outcomes, impacts, effectiveness and efficiency M&E is methodologically sound  Common indicators and data collection methods are used throughout government where possible to improve data quality and allow trend analysis  Findings are clearly based on systematic evidence and analysis M&E is operationally effective  As an integrated component of public management, M&E is routine and standardised 1 Adapted from Policy Framework for Government Wide Monitoring and Evaluation RSA 2007 3 4.
Policy Statement The government recognises the importance of Monitoring and Evaluation practice, and has developed this National Monitoring and Evaluation Policy to set out the commitment of the government, spearheaded by the Ministry for the Prime Minister: To promote accountability for the achievement of policies and program objectives through the assessment of results and effectiveness at different levels; To promote knowledge sharing and learning from results within and among ministries and departments, as a basis for decision making on policies, strategies, program management, and projects in order to improve efficiency, effectiveness and resilience of service delivery; To establish common structures, standards and requirements for effective Monitoring and Evaluation and a government wide M&E system that aligns reporting on all government programmes including the reporting on the implementation of Vanuatu 2030, the National Sustainable Development Plan.
This includes and is not limited to; all Government Ministries, all Local authorities, Government statutory bodies, and the Commercial Government Business Enterprises.
To this extent, legislative amendments will be made where necessary to harness and effect the requirements of this policy; To have well-resourced M&E capabilities responsible for the Monitoring, Evaluations of all government policies, programs and national research, and to build capacity of M&E officers across government and all its agencies.
The government takes into account here the limitations of the existing capacity within the M&E Unit and the positioning within DSPPAC; To ensure that all information gathered through the M&E of government programs, policies and projects complies with sound ethics that considers all sensitivities and respects culture of Vanuatu; To ensure standard definitions and contextual usage of key M&E terms, as referenced in the policy document.

5.
5.

Definitions and Terms Understanding M&E related definitions and terms so that all government agencies and stakeholders are aware of what is expected throughout the M&E process and the type of information to be collected and reported upon is critical to successful M&E.

The foundation of this awareness is understanding that Monitoring and Evaluation provide the Government with two distinct, but complimentary tools.

Figure 1 below provides an overview of both Monitoring and Evaluation.
Figure 1: Complementary Roles of Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation* Monitoring Clarifies objectives Links activities and resources to objectives Translates objectives into performance indicators and targets Collects data on these indicators, compares actual results with targets Reports progress and provides alerts with regard to problems Evaluation Analyses why intended results were or were not achieved Assesses specific contributions of activities to results Examines implementation process Examines unintended results lessons, Provides significant accomplishment or program potential, and offers recommendations for improvement highlights *2004 World Bank The MEP defines Monitoring and Evaluation as follows: 4 Monitoring: Monitoring is the process of gathering information about actual practice and performance and ensuring that what is planned to happen is actually happening.
It is a systematic collection and analysis of information as a project/program progresses.

It is aim at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of a project/program or organisation.

It is based on targets set and activities planned during the planning phases of work.

It helps to keep the work on track, and can let management know when things are going wrong.
It enables you to determine whether the resources you have available are sufficient and are being well used, whether the capacity you have is sufficient and appropriate, and whether you are doing what you planned to do.

Evaluation: Evaluation is about checking on the effectiveness of the process, task or outcome.

It is about making judgments on the information found from monitoring.

Its purpose is to make improvements.


It is the comparison of actual project/program impacts against the agreed strategic plans and objectives.

It looks at what you set out to do, at what you have accomplished, and how you accomplished it.

Additional M&E terms are defined as follows2 Baseline: Establishes current status relative to the outcome trying to be achieved.

The baseline is the first measurement of an indicator Impact: Quality and quantity of long-term results generated by programme outputs.
“Reduced incidence of diseases, as a result of participation in the immunisation program” Indicators: A unit of measurement that specifies what is to be measured along a scale or dimension but does not necessarily indicate direction or change.
Indicators are a qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging performance and results Inputs: Resources that are put into the project, such as staff, funding and technical resources Milestone: A well-defined point used to measure progress toward achieving a target, output, outcome or impact (interim target) Outputs: The quantity, quality, and timeliness of the products goods or services that are the result of an activity/project/programme “Number of families participating in livelihood programmes”.
Output indicators measure the immediate results of project or programme activities and tell us if activities are happening as planned.

Outcomes: Intermediate results generated by programme outputs.

Correspond to any change in behaviour as a result of programme.

“% supported families who experience an increase in household income” Outcome indicators measure the intermediate changes as a result of the project or programme activities.
These outcomes are expected to lead, in combination, to the final impact that is planned.

Outputs: The quantity, quality, and timeliness of the products goods or services that are the result of an activity/project/programme “Number of families participating in livelihood programmes”.

Output indicators measure the immediate results of project or programme activities and tell us if activities are happening as planned.
Results Based Framework: A results-based M&E system aligns with annual plans and other work plans, focuses on achieving outcomes, and manages to each indicator 2 OECD 2002.

Glossary of Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management (used as guideline for definitions) 5 Target: “…a specified objective that indicates the number, timing and location of that which is to be realised” Targets specify a particular value that an indicator should reach by a specific date in the future.
Targets should also be SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) Further M&E definitions are to be found in Annex 1.

6.

Roles and Responsibilities The MEP seeks to improve M&E within and across government in coordination with the National Planning Framework (NPF).

The success of government M&E is therefore dependent upon close cooperation and collaboration between various agencies and individuals.
As such, the sharing of information, data and experiences within the government is encouraged.
The implementation of the MEP requires the following standards to be maintained at all levels of Government: Structure: Structured requirements for reporting results, including legislation, regulations, and international development requirements Identification of Efficiency and Effectiveness: Standard process for evaluating efficiency and effectiveness of implementation included with outcome evaluation and cost evaluation of policies/programmes Defined Roles and Responsibilities: Clear roles and responsibilities and formal organisational and political lines of authority Credible Information: Performance information is transparent and made available to all key stakeholders Accountability: No part of the government is to be exempt from accountability to stakeholders.
Accountability means that problems are acknowledged and addressed.

Commitment to Capacity: Commit of continuing financial resources to the upkeep and management of results-based M&E.

Technical skills in data collection and analysis are maintained as part of the system’s sustainability.
Managerial skills in strategic goal setting and organizational development are developed and maintained and data collection and retrieval systems are kept current Incentive: Success is acknowledged and rewarded, problems are addressed, messengers are not punished, organisational learning is valued, and budget savings are shared.

For effective monitoring and evaluation processes it is necessary that the whole of government is involved in the M&E process, with responsibility starting at the top.
As such, it is important to elaborate the roles and responsibilities of key individuals and agencies related to the M&E process.

The following section sets out roles and responsibilities for various agencies, however it is not exhaustive and it is acknowledged that M&E should take place which may not be specifically outlined below.

Indeed, it should be stressed that this policy seeks to reaffirm that everyone, to some extent, should integrate M&E into their work practices.
6.1 Monitoring and Evaluation Unit The Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination (DSPPAC), is the technical office under the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), and aims to facilitate, implement and monitor the vision of the government and to provide strategic leadership for cross-sectoral policies or programmes, both government and donor.
6 The mandate of the Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination comes under the Government Act, particularly Section 5 which details the leadership role of the Prime Minister.
The Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (M&E) comes under sections 5(a), 5(b) and 5(e) as follows: The Prime Minister will have principal responsibility for: (a) Strategic policy-planning and significant administrative decisions; (b) Coordinating the activities of Government; … (e) Overseeing the implementation of Government policy beginning with the implementation of the CRP; As part of this mandate, the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit at DSPPAC works closely with government agencies to advocate and advise on the implementation of effective M&E practices, and in this respect is the focal-point for M&E within the government.
Specifically, the M&E Unit has four main areas of undertakings: 1.

Monitoring: through the coordination of monitoring and reporting of the implementation progress of the NSDP; Council of Ministers decisions, implementation of large development projects and the budget narrative.

As such it is responsible for producing three important reports; A) Annual Development Report (ADR): reports on the progress made over the previous year towards the targets of the NSDP as stated in the accompanying M&E Framework.
This is produced during the first quarter of the year and should be used by decision makers to inform government programming decisions to achieve the national targets in ‘Vanuatu 2030’.

B) Six-Monthly Report (SMR): reports on the implementation of COM decisions and of large development projects.

C) Annual Performance Report: compilation report from the annual reports of each ministry on performance against the service targets as contained in the budget narratives, Volume 3 of the annual budget.
This can be used to compare the effectiveness of departments in delivering outputs against their budgets.

2.

Evaluation: Assess on a five-yearly basis the outcomes of the NSDP objectives to-date and produce intermediate NSDP outcome evaluation reports.

An overall impact evaluation report will be produced at the end of the current NSDP in 2030.

3.

Policy Audit: Independent evaluation of the relevance of a public policy taking into account the cost and benefits.
It can be done before during and after a policy implementation.

4.

National research: Setting of the research priorities and guidance for research into development processes and outcomes, and providing coordination and alignment of research proposals to government programming.

The M&E Unit and the appropriate DSPPAC Senior Policy Analyst (SA) coordinate government-wide M&E activities.
M&E Working Groups, one for each ministry, are to be established comprised of the line ministry M&E Focal Point Officer, the SA responsible for the line ministry from DSPPAC and an officer from the M&E Unit.
These Working Groups are tasked with: 7  Identifying current and emerging barriers within ministry plans relating to policy or project implementation with the objective of providing sound and timely advice for remedial measures;  Ensuring policy consistency and identifying indicators to be used to monitor and evaluate implementation of ministry plans in line with the NSDP and other related sector plans;  Maintaining and promoting the exchange of data and information between line ministers and departments, and with DSPPAC;  Meeting regularly to review progress of the implementation of relevant areas of the NSDP, COM decisions, development projects, and NPP’s.
When requested, the M&E unit prepares additional reports on monitoring for the consideration of Ministers at the Council of Ministers (COM).

6.2 Vanuatu National Statistics Office The Vanuatu National Statistics Office (VNSO) is responsible for collecting, compiling and publishing official statistics, as well giving advice and direction to different agencies on the collection and storage of data which could be used for M&E purposes.
In particular the advice of VNSO, as the focal point for statistics within the government, should be sought when developing an M&E framework which involves the creation of new indicators and the collection of data to ensure that best practice is followed.

In this respect, VNSO are not the only government agency responsible for the collection of data.
The Vanuatu National Statistics Office mission is critical to monitoring and evaluation through their responsibilities for collecting data, analysing data and disseminating this information to stakeholders.

VNSO links together data producers and data users so that monitoring and evaluation is informed with the most recent data and information.

The mission of the VNSO is: To coordinate, produce and disseminate quality and timely statistical information for evidence-based decision making for all.
- Vanuatu NSDS, June 2014 Coordination with VNSO is important regarding the collection of reliable reporting data.

VNSO collects data specific data at timed intervals.

Understanding when data and what data is to be collected is essential for reporting.

The M&E Unit plans to coordinate on an annual basis regarding relevant statistical information with VNSO and all producers of data.
Information for NSDP and SDG reporting as well as information for sub-national reporting will be reviewed and updated as necessary.

8 6.3 Line Ministries Responsibility for M&E must start from the top, and flow down.

Decision-makers and executives in the ministries set the overall direction of their departments, and as such are responsible for setting appropriate targets and objectives for the programs and policies, and for ensuring appropriate M&E practices are in place.
Furthermore, departments are required to develop and state their annual Service Targets in their Budget Narratives, which should be consistent with their annual business plan and be reported against in their annual report.

Ministry Executives, Directors General and Directors, should use M&E findings as part of their oversight of institutional performance and for ensuring that desired outcomes and impacts are being achieved.
Where appropriate, regular reports should also be provided on other the institutions under their control (e.g.

statutory bodies).

Program managers and nominated M&E focal points in ministries are responsible for carrying out M&E within their remit, working with the M&E Unit for advice on establishing and maintaining M&E systems, especially collecting, capturing, verifying and using data and information for decision-making within the ministry.
The ministry focal point officer will act as the contact point for the M&E Unit and assist them with collecting M&E data and information when required, coordinating and arranging meetings at the ministry when necessary, and ensuring that information is submitted in a timely manner on progress of the implementation of government projects, programs and the implementation of COM decisions as part of the Six-Monthly Reporting process.
In performing their role and tasks, the M&E focal point officer will work closely with other program/project officers of the ministry and departments to record and collect data and share information on performance indicators and implementation.
Furthermore, as part of the Annual Development Reporting process, Ministries which have been identified as a data collectors will be responsible for collecting sectoral information for tracking the progress made against each of the indicators in the NSDP M&E Framework and reporting back to the M&E Unit.
6.4 Ministry of Finance and Economic Management The Ministry of Finance and Economic Management (MFEM) monitors expenditure against the national budget, ensuring that the government agencies are spending within their allocated budgets and are using appropriate processes when purchasing goods and services.
MFEM is the lead agency in the annual budget preparations which includes the preparation of the detailed programme budgets as well as the budget narrative which seeks to link the objectives and service targets of ministry programmes to their allocated budget.

Through reporting on these service targets in ministry annual reports, it is possible to draw comparisons of the effectiveness of different programmes.
Ministries are encouraged to integrate their service targets into their annual business planning and reporting.

Furthermore, during the budget cycle, ministries are invited to submit new projects (NPPs) requiring additional funding for the consideration of the Ministerial Budget Committee.
Reporting on the effectiveness of approved projects should be carried out in order to evaluate the effectiveness of these projects against their stated aims and objectives, and to provide decision-makers with information on which they can base decisions in future years.

9 Alignment of M&E principles with the Financial Management Information System (FMIS) should provide for an understanding of how spending maps to performance.
This integrations with FMIS should focus on the cost of results, or the cost of lack of results, which can be done on a programme, activity or project level for a particular budget year.

Reported Ministry spending should be evaluated regularly with regard to their service targets as stated in the Budget Narratives, or project objectives as stated in project profiles.
This promotes coordination between M&E and FMIS with a focus on:  Workplace Performance (Spending regarding outputs, activities)  Cost Performance (Spending regarding impacts, Efficiency, Effectiveness)  Summarising results and spending and relates spending to achievement  Providing indications if costs have been over or underestimated  Providing indications that objectives are being funded in a realistic manner 6.5 Parliament As representatives elected by voters, Government and all its structures are accountable to legislatures.
Legislators must exercise consistent and informed oversight of the bodies accountable to them which can be aided by insights gained from M&E system.

The parliament provides ultimate scrutiny and oversight on the annual budget appropriation during debate in the chamber.

The provision of timely and relevant information on past performance of government agencies against expenditure can enable proper scrutiny and evidence based decision making by parliamentarians.
Oversight on government spending and performance should come from parliamentary select committees, which have the mandate to call administrators and ministers to give account of spending and performance of their ministries or departments.

The Public Service Act requires Ministers to table ministerial Annual Reports in parliament.
6.6 Commercial Government Business Enterprises and Statutory Bodies Commercial Government Business Enterprise (CGBEs) and Statutory Bodies are required to provide reports to their organisation management and the Board of Directors.

The MEP provides the opportunity to align this reporting with overall government reporting.

Annual reports can be made accessible to the M&E Unit at the same time these reports are provided to management and Boards.
This accessibility of information aligns with MEP standards of transparency and government wide information flow.

A list of Vanuatu CGBEs and Statutory Bodies is located in Annex 2.

6.7 Aid Coordination Improving the linkages between recurrent expenditure on government programmes and donor (or joint) expenditure on development programmes is critical to achieving value for money and development outcomes.
Through the effective implementation of the MEP the performance of implementing development programmes and of achieving the desired outcomes will be identified, and future programming can build on successes and learn from shortcomings.

The process of identifying an issue, and developing a project or programme to address that issue before assessing the appropriate or available funding (either donor or recurrent) is crucial to this process.
This will result in reducing the projects being funded by government resources when donor- financing is available.

Furthermore this improves the implementation of national plans strategies by improved alignment of such projects with the priorities of the government, and as such with the national targets and indicators.
10 All donor-funded projects have a ‘sponsoring’ government department with responsibility for ensuring due process is followed for projects and, depending on the specific project, the implementation of the project.

A similar relationship is encouraged with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) where projects relate closely to the objectives and ongoing work programme of the government department.
Projects are tracked using government systems, and require that clear objectives and outcomes are stated in the project profile before being approved.

It is against these objective that regular reporting is completed for project managers and decision-makers.

The M&E Unit tracks the ongoing implementation progress of donor projects as part of the six-monthly reporting (SMR) process by compiling progress reports across all large projects.
A project completion report is required following the end of a project in order to demonstrate whether key outputs for the project were able to be delivered against the project profile and to give an overview project expenditure, or an acquittal of expenditure if the project funding has been delivered through the government’s financial system.
Furthermore, sponsoring departments are encouraged to complete a follow-up evaluation of the project to assess the effectiveness of the project to deliver its expected outcomes, given the outputs and inputs described in the project completion report.

6.8 Provincial Government The Department of Local Authorities (DLA) will work closely with Provinces to ensure that there is a regular information flow from the community level up to the Provinces and then DLA.
DLA will be the repository of sub-national information and is responsible for passing them on to the PMO to prepare policies, strategies and reports.

In order to ensure regular information flow with provincial governments Risk informed Planning Budgeting and Monitoring, Guidelines (Instruction No.

001/2016/DLA/MOIA) which was produced by the Department of Local Authorities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in 2016 will be used.
Activities associated with alignment with provincial government will complement these guidelines.

for Sub-National Government 6.9 M&E Sectoral Committees M&E Sectoral Committees work to coordinate the M&E process.

Ministry focal points will be members of committees as an extension of the M&E Working Groups described earlier.

The committees are based on NSDP Pillars.

The purpose of the committees is to enhance inter-agency information sharing & coordination.
The M&E Sectoral Committee responsibilities are on file with the M&E unit and will be provided to all committee members.

11 7.

Capacity Building Ongoing capacity building is crucial to ensuring the effective implementation of all components of the MEP, including the alignment of M&E with planning and reporting.
Design of national capacity building and awareness programs will reside with the M&E Unit, and ministries or departments planning to undertake M&E training for their staff should consult with the M&E Unit on best practice beforehand.

Programs are to be tailored after assessing information and capacity gaps at the various levels of government.
Capacity building initiatives should ensure that the users of M&E data understand how to integrate M&E functions within their areas of responsibility into planning and implementation, and how to respond to M&E findings.

Furthermore, all managers should be able to assess information collected through the M&E process and use this information as a tool for managerial action and to improve future interventions through the planning process.
Overall capacity building programs focus on: Alignment of ADR with Sector and Corporate Reporting is an initial focus of the capacity building efforts and will align with capacity building regarding the National Planning Framework.

There is also a focus on the Service Target Report as part of the ADR, SDG reporting and the alignment of the ADR with the budget process.
Vertical and horizontal information sharing capacity building to focus on how cross cutting issues can best be understood throughout government.

Sub-national Reporting formats capacity building aligns with NPF planning frameworks and with DLA guidelines 7.1 M&E Unit Capacity building focuses on the Implementation of NSDP M&E Framework.
The two primary areas of focus are 1) alignment of NSDP ADR with sub-national reporting and 2) SDG reporting as required M&E Unit staff have the responsibility to ensure that M&E practices are understood through all levels of Government.

M&E staff, using technical assistance when available will develop the capacity to support training for ministry and agency personnel in planning and reporting over several budget cycles.
Specialist M&E skills are likely to be needed for implementing the M&E policy and to ensure quality.

Completing the five year stock take of the NSDP is critical to monitoring ongoing progress and future planning efforts.

The M&E Unit will develop a sound methodology for this stock take and provide the framework to all managers throughout the various levels of government in order to evaluate the progress towards the NSDP targets.
7.2 Ministries Training of existing or newly recruited staff to focus on both line management and M&E specialists.

Training modalities can include external formal qualifications from higher education institutions as well as customized training designed by the M&E Unit.

Implementation of trainings may be carried out in partnership with the Vanuatu Institute of Public Administration and Management.
Training should be provided to line managers in generic M&E skills so that they can provide training to others in the ministry, and also feel confident in using M&E outcomes in their management roles in order to better inform their decision-making.

12 The alignment of sub-national with national reporting is the primary area of focus.

This design of this linkage is included in the NSDP M&E Framework.

Clarification of the process for line ministries ensures this linkage is completed.
The includes completion of NSDP Reporting Matrix In coordination with the National Planning Framework (NPF), training on the revised format of the business and corporate plans to provide the further alignment of service targets with budgeting at the ministry level.

Furthermore, training should be given in the alignment of planning and budgeting cycle to align with monitoring and evaluation of national policies including COM decisions, NSDP.
Finally, a medium term and long term training program on M&E will be designed as needed following completion of initial short term training program.

Remaining capacity gaps can be identified and relevant capacity building can be designed within M&E Unit and as needed with the assistance of development partners.
13 Annex 1: Other M&E Definitions Accountability: Obligation to demonstrate that work has been conducted and complies with agreed rules and standards to as accurately illustrate results Activity: Actions taken or work performed through which inputs, such as funds, technical assistance and other types of resources are mobilised to produce specific outputs Benchmark: Reference point or standard against which performance or achievements is assessed Effectiveness: Measures the ratio of outputs (or resources used to produce the outputs) per unit of project outcome/impact.
(The number of vaccinations (or cost) per unit decline in morbidity rate (illness prevented) or per unit decline on mortality rate) Efficiency: Measures the ratio of inputs needed per unit of output produced, measuring the extent to which resources are available for and applied to targeted activities (Cost vaccination program/number vaccinated) Formative evaluation: Evaluation intended to improve performance, most often conducted during the implementation phase of programs and projects Logical framework (Log frame): Management tool used to improve the design of interventions, most often at the project level.
It involves identifying strategic elements (inputs, outputs, outcomes, impact) and their causal relationships, indicators, and the assumptions or risks that may influence success and failure Objective: Statement of a desired program result that meets the criteria of being Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely (SMART) Performance monitoring: A continuous process of collecting and analysing data to compare how well a project, program, or policy is being implemented against expected results Program evaluation: Evaluation of a set of projects (ministry programs) that are designed to attain specific global, regional, country, or sector development objectives Project evaluation: Evaluation of an individual project designed to achieve specific objectives within specified resources and implementation schedules, often within the framework of a broader program Results: The output, outcome or impact (intended or unintended, positive and/or negative) of a program or project Summative evaluation: A study conducted at the end of a program/project to determine the extent to which anticipated results are produced Validity: The extent to which the data collection strategies and instruments measure what they purport to measure 14 Annex 2: CGBEs and Statutory Bodies National Tourism Office Utilities Regulatory Authority Vanuatu Broadcasting & Television Corporation Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board Vanuatu Financial Services Commission Vanuatu Telecommunications Regulator Asset Management Unit National Bank of Vanuatu National Housing Corporation Vanuatu Agriculture Development Bank Air Vanuatu (Operations) Limited Airports Vanuatu Limited Members Financial Services Limited (VNPF) Vanuatu Post Limited Reserve Bank of Vanuatu Vanuatu National Provident Fund Ifira Wharf & Stevedoring (1994) Limited Northern Islands Stevedoring Limited Vanuatu Abattoirs Limited Metenesel Estates Limited Vanuatu Livestock Development Ltd Vanuatu Qualifications Authority Vanuatu Sports Commission 15 Annex 3: Planning and Monitoring Cycle Planning, budgeting and M&E is a cyclical process.
Making plans, including both planning and budgeting, is followed by implementation.

Implementation of plans is monitored by stakeholders and results cycle back for evaluation.

Results and progress are used to improve the next planning and budgeting cycle.

16 Department of Strategic Policy, Planning and Aid Coordination Prime Minister’s Office 2017