VIII. Implementability assessment of the major recommendations Implementability Assessment of Recommendations of MTE SN Key Recommendations Urgency by when Implementability Relevance 1 MED Service Model Improvement Immediate before the next years ME creation cycle begins Commissioning (ideally by MoI, through MEDEP support) a consultancy support through a well designed ToR is needed, which is quite manageable by MEDEP; however the TOR should be developed engaging all national level partners. Very high as the model needs to be improved to link the MEs with value chain system through the model for better economic benefits. 2 Shift focus from Delivery to Institutionalization short term by 2016 Needs a management decision and common agreement between and DFAT-UNDP-MoI. Alternative measures need to take for intensive work on 'Institutionalization' with improve quality of support, if this decision is not taken up. May need some structural changes within the project management; a detail assessment of such will be required as soon as possible. Very high as MEDEP needs to focus on 'Institutionalization' to create significant impact within MEDPA implementation process and the MEDEP management is more comfortable in direct service delivery, and lack appropriate skill mix required for a higher level input on 'Institutionalization' facilitation role. Implementation and facilitation roles cannot go together effectively. 3 Work on Institutionalization of Capacity Development Plan short term by 2016 Manageable with external consultancy and facilitation support. Design the TOR and hire a consultancy firm with high level of expertise. Very high as the 'institutionalization' of Capacity Development approach within MEDPA is one area that needs significant improvement in culture where MEDPA custodians feel that Capacity Building is 'MEDEPs' role. 4 Support MOI on new MED strategy and 14th Periodic Plan of GoN Urgent ASAP It is manageable through the CTA team which is now already at MoI. Very high for the sustainability and renewed GoN commitment of MEDPA at policy and planning level. This will allow MoI in a more systematic and comfortable position in taking MEDEP in an up-scaled manner from next FY onward.
Appendix- A: Data Tables Table 1 Progress against key output indicators Component 1 Indicator Progress up to end 2014 2015 Target/ Milestone Achieved in 2015 Cumulative progress up to end 2015 Cumulative Target for end of project Government of Nepal delivers MEDPA sustainably (Component 1) Annual central Government resources for micro enterprise development (million NRs) 782 At least 200 mln 230 mln 1012 mln Total annual resources other than MEDPA’s leveraged in MEDF at DDC level (million NRS) 14.7 At 8 mln from DDC and VDCs 14.38 mln 29.08 mln Number of DEDSPs developed 33 8 7 40 75 Number of DDCs having MEDF for micro enterprise development 15 40 37 53 75 Number of VDCs having separate budget for micro enterprise development 157 50 142 299 budget of VDCs for micro enterprise development (million NRS) 12.7 32 mln (estimated) 35.25 mln 47.95 Number of VEDPs developed 85 52 27 112 Number of MEDEP graduated districts 0 15 8 8 38 The existing micro-enterprise unit (MEU) at the MOI is upgraded to micro-enterprise section (MED Section) MEU in MoI MED Section established Not yet MED Section established and functional GoN’ higher level coordinating mechanisms are in place 1 Steering Committee (SC) 1 Committee (IC) Joint Reviews 2 meetings of SC 3 meetings of IC One planned 1 Mtg (in 2014) No mtgs held No annual reviews held One done Table 2 Progress against key output indicators component 2
Indicator Progress up to end 2014 2015 Target/ Milestone Progress up to end 2015 Cumulative progress up to end 2015 Cumulative Target for end of project Promoting the use of evidence for pro-ME policy (Component 2) MED policy related meetings at national and local level None Quarterly meetings by DMEGAs and NMEFEN Quarterly meetings by DMEGAs and NMEFEN Policies, Acts and Regulations guidelines developed to replicate MEDEP model under MEDPA 10 5 5 20 Capturing wider range change (mass impact) Non 5 (Sectoral Commodities) 5 5 Table 3 Progress against key output indicators component 4 Indicator Progress up to end 2014 2015 Target/ Milestone Achieved in 2015 Cumulative progress up to end 2015 Cumulative target for end of project Micro Enterprise Development service providers deliver MED sustainably (Component 4) Development of New Course Revised Existing Curriculum on MED through CTEVT N/A N/A N/A 2 5 MED Knowledge Management Centre in Place 0 0 0 0 1 No of EDF certified for MED 629 (includes previous phases) 200 138 767 1,205 Number of MEDSPs eligible for MEDPA Model Implementation (each year) 206 192 251 N/A 225
social group disaggregated) Table 6 Table Progress on main outcome indicators Indicator Progress up to end 2014 2015 Target/ Milestone Progress in 2015 Cumulative progress up to end 2015 Cumulative Target for end of project Vulnerable groups have improved access to economic opportunities and adequate social protection (UNDAF Outcome) Jobs created attributable to micro entrepreneurship development (including means both direct and indirect, GESI disaggregated) N/A N/A N/A 38,053 75,000 Number of graduation /resilient MEs GESI disaggregation N/A N/A N/A N/A 20,000 (revised target still to be approved) Number of ME created by MEDPA, MEDEP and Local Bodies 20,725 (9,061 MEDEP, 11,664 MEDPA) 11,802 5,320, MEDPA 6,482, Local 12,070 (5,423 MEDEP, 6,139 MEDPA, 32,795 73,000, 30,000 for MEDEP, 32,000 MEDPA, 11,000
January 2016 Briefing of Evaluators: Briefing of consultant with /CSIDB/DCSI and Donor on expectations and working arrangements, sharing of documents/data, contact details, etc. with the consultant 2nd& 3rd week of January 2016 Draft Inception Report submission and presentation (which should include a proposed detailed evaluation design) 3rd week of January 2016 Finalizing the inception report (including the evaluation design, evaluation questions as per OECD DAC evaluation criteria) 4th week of January 2016 Field work Meetings, Interviews, FGDs, data analysis ,visits to selected project sites 2nd and 3rd week of February 2016 Preparation of report 4th week of February 2016 Submission of draft report to Programme Board End of February 2016 Stakeholders meeting for presentation of the draft report and review of the draft report (for quality assurance) 1st week of March 2016 Finalizing the evaluation reports 2nd week of March 2016
What progress has been made in enabling potential and existing entrepreneurs to access MED services? Progress in increasing access to MED services (including finance)? Number of MEs who used various services, under MEDEP and MEDPA, NMEFEN, DMEGA, Financial Service Providers, Cooperatives Number of new Districts where services have become available Analysis of MIS data and progress reports FGDs and interviews with stakeholders MIS Project reports Field notes of MTE team Which MED services? Current portfolio of services Has it been reviewed and revised as planned, on the of a study? What services are actually being accessed (compared to the “official” portfolio)? Review of project documents, strategies and official guidelines on ‘official’ portfolio of MED services Interviews with various types of service providers FGDs with target groups MIS Manuals on services Report on review of services Is quality and inclusivity of the services (including finance) being maintained under MEDEP? % users from various vulnerable groups (GESI indicators) Start-up rates Survival rates Sales/profits User satisfaction Analysis of MIS Data Review of Progress Reports and independent reports (if any) Interviews with project staff, service providers FGDs with target groups MIS data Progress reports reports MTE field notes Is quality and inclusivity of services (including finance) being maintained under MEDPA? % from various vulnerable groups (GESI indicators) Start-up rates Survival rates Sales/profits User satisfaction Analysis of MIS Data Review of Progress Reports and independent Assessment/study reports (if any) Interviews with project staff, service providers FGDs with target groups MIS Progress reports reports (if any) Notes of MTE team from consultative meetings with MEDPA stakeholders
What is the quality and inclusivity of services NMEFEN, DMEGA Numbers of users % users from various vulnerable groups (GESI indicators) User satisfaction Analysis of MIS data Review of Annual Progress Reports, and reports (if any) Interviews with project staff, service providers FDGs with target groups (existing entrepreneurs) MIS Annual Progress Reports, and reports (if any) Notes from consultative meetings To what extent have services contributed to impact? Views of MEs FGDs with target groups Review of studies/assessment reports (if any) Field notes reports Are legislation and guidelines for MED in place and being used? Are they documented and approved? Are staffs aware of them? Are they being applied? MED Policy MED Guidelines Interviews with project staff, MOI management and other staff including MEDPA MOI Officials MOI documents Project reports Presentations project Are capable HR, institutional structure, policy, procedures, financial and procurement processes, budget allocations in Are required Human Resources put in place? Are provisions for HR capacity development in place? And implemented? Have MEDEP processes/approaches been built into the MEDPA Operational Guideline to provide surety to quality and inclusive Have the guidelines been approved and are they the basis of MEDPA? Is MEDPA successfully managing subcontracting? Has a Cash Transfer assurance mechanism that meets HACT quality % of trained on/ experience in MED Job descriptions in place Performance reviews in Subcontracting procedures developed and approved % of service providers contracted through these procedures Size and adequacy of budget allocations – comparison of GoN allocation with current MEDEP spend Analysis of previous Institutional Assessment report/s Institutional assessment workshop to be conducted by Evaluation Team Review of MEDPA Operational Guidelines Interviews with MEDPA officials (DSCI and CSIDB at Central level, regional level and district level) Project and MOI records, reports MOI documentation Institutional assessment reports Financial records MOI and MEDEP
standards been developed and implemented? Is the M&E framework providing sufficient and useful information? Has the project put in place is the MIS in place and functioning? Does it meet key DCED standard principles in an efficient manner? Is capacity to maintain and use it in What is the quality of the information? Is the information being used for programme management and improvement at different levels, accountability and learning? Effectiveness of M&E and project MIS Usefulness of MIS GESI in M&E and MIS Views of stakeholders involved Review of MIS Project reports Presentation by project staff Interviews with those involved in data collection, processing, analysis at MEDEP, MOI and elsewhere Interviews with management at MEDEP, MOI and other potential users (including in Districts) Interviews with UNDP and DFAT M&E Guidelines MIS manual GESI Guidelines/ strategy and project interventions Progress Reports M&E and MIS What is the effectiveness of partnership arrangements of and MEDPA with other institutions such as Local Government, Local Development Fund, Department of Cottage Industries, Chamber of Commerce, etc. in developing a sustainable system for MED. Are partnership arrangements documented? What do the different partners contribute? What are their objectives and results? Effectiveness of partnerships Collaboration with local government bodies Partnerships with other relevant MED organisations and programmes Views on effectiveness of those stakeholders involved Project presentations Interviews with MEDEP, MEDPA and partners Consultation meetings with relevant stakeholders Project reports Partnership agreements Field notes (consultations) Is the pooling of funds for MED functioning (progress in establishing a Micro Enterprise Development Fund) Is MEDF established? And operational? Number of DDCs and other players participating in the Fund Size of the Fund over time compared to requirements Expenditure over time Satisfaction of DDCs, DEDC with procedures and benefits Presentation project staff Interviews project staff Consultation with DEDC members Interviews DDCs, DEDCs Project reports MOI records (or of other holder of the Fund) Component 1. Government of Nepal delivers MEDPA sustainably
Is MOI/MEDPA gradually taking over responsibility for management of MED delivery in the Districts as planned? Is the graduation of MEDEP to MEDPA progressing as planned? What are ate reasons for slow progress (if any)? How can the graduation process be speeded up? Number of Districts that “graduated” from MEDEP to MEDPA compared to plan Number and functionality of DEDCs and VEDCs Compare access to services and impact before and after (as under goal and access level) Interviews with project staff Interviews MOI/MEDPA MOI and records MIS To what extent have the above contributed to effective, quality and inclusive MED services being accessed? Management and other staff causal explanations (i.e. answers linking building the system with access to services) Interviews with MOI, DSCI, officials Interviews with project stakeholders Project reports Interview notes Is MOI effectively coordinating other PSD programmes? Number of coordination meetings Actions taken after meetings Satisfaction of other programmes Interviews with MOI, DSCI, CSIDB officials Interviews with project stakeholders Interviews with programmes Project staff presentation and interviews MOI records Meeting minutes Is MOI building additional support for MEDPA? GoN longer-term plans in MED Actions undertaken to build support Donors express interest in supporting MEDPA Interviews with MOI, DSCI and CSIDB Consultative meetings with DFAT and UNDP GoN policies, plans Is a staff incentive scheme in place? Has a plan been developed and approved? % staff who have received incentives Staff turnover trends Staff satisfaction Interviews with staff Project reports MOI documentation MOI records Are MOI and District level institutions able to deliver MEDPA without MEDEP support? Are required structures, capacities and mechanisms in and functioning? Number of Districts were MEDPA is being implemented without technical and financial support from MEDEP Views of those involved Project staff interviews Interviews with MOI Interviews with DDCs, DEDCs Project reports
Have more policies, regulations or guidelines been developed that are based on recommendations made in studies and advocacy? How the findings and recommendations from research and policy dialogue are implemented? Number of research reports, advocacy briefs, advocacy initiatives Number of policies, regulations, guidelines that reflect these Interviews at MOI Interviews with DDCs, DEDCs Project staff presentations and interviews Project reports Research reports, briefs Policy etc. documents Are more dialogue mechanisms in place, of what kind? Number of workshops, meetings, platforms that constitute public-private dialogue Interviews at MOI, DDCs and NMEFEN, DMEGA Project reports, staff presentations MIS Do more research institutions have the capacity to conduct quality ME related research? Quality of the studies Satisfaction of commissioners and institutions Interviews with those who commissioned and used the research, with research institution directors Project Reports Are budget allocations sufficient to fund research? Will this continue? Allocations for research at different levels in GoN Interviews at MOI, other potential commissioners, research institutions GoN Budget/s Is demand for ME research increasing? Are more research institutions planning to offer ME research services? Views of those involved Interviews at MOI, other potential commissioners, research institutions Project Reports Are more government bodies planning to engage in dialogue? Number of dialogue mechanisms established or planned after those supported by MEDEP Interviews with project Interviews with NMEFEN, Interviews with DDCs, DEDCs Project Reports MoUs/LOIs (if any) How have MEDEP activities and funding contributed to the achievements? What activities, interventions has MEDEP carried out? What funding has it provided? What partnerships have been developed, how, why? Project targets vs. achievements Component wise achievements Document reviews Interviews with staff and with partners Consultative meetings with DFAT and UNDP Project progress reports Presentations made by staff
Was this as planned, timely? Does this constitute a move from implementation to facilitation? What have been the challenges and causes of over or achievement? How can the challenges be overcome? Consideration of assumptions, influencing factors, unintended effects in Theory of Change Views of those concerned Consultative meetings with project stakeholders at central, regional and district level ToC workshop All interviews Component 3. Micro Enterprise Association deliver sustainable services to members such as access to markets, finance, technology and advocacy How has the project contributed towards creating and strengthening MEs groups and associations for effective MED services? Are NMEFEN, DMEGA increasingly offering services? How effective are the Associations? Service portfolio Number of Districts where services are being offered Number of staff involved What is done to promote the services? Project staff presentations and interviews NMEFEN, DMEGA records Interviews with NMEFEN, DMEGA FGDs with MEs MIS Project records on training, reports Are the services offered of good quality and inclusive % of staff experienced in/trained on MED Inclusiveness of staff involved (GESI indicators) Interviews with NMEFEN, individual service providers NMEFEN and DMEGA records Are NMEFEN, DMEGA increasingly undertaking quality advocacy initiatives? Number of advocacy initiatives, total and by District % that is based on research and/or consultations with members % that has resulted in improved regulation, procedures, budget allocations Interviews with NMEFEN, DMEGA Interviews at National and District level with participants in dialogue MIS Interviews with project staff NMEFEN, DMEGA records Are services commercially viable and independent of technical support? % of cost-recovery Technical support provided Increase in demand Interviews with NMEFEN, MIS Interviews with project staff NMEFEN, records
Is capacity sustainable? % turnover of providing services Interviews with NMEFEN, DMEGA NMEFEN, DMEGA records Is expansion of service delivery to more Districts planned and are resources available? Is expected to play a role? NMEFEN, DMEGA plans Future budget allocations Project staff interviews Interviews with NMEFEN, DMEGA Documented plans and budgets How have MEDEP activities and funding contributed to the achievements? What activities, interventions has MEDEP carried out? What funding has it provided? What partnerships have been developed, how, why? Was this as planned, timely? Does this constitute a move from implementation to facilitation? Project targets vs. achievements Document reviews Interviews with staff and with partners Consultative meetings with DFAT and UNDP Project progress reports Presentations made by What have been the challenges and causes of over or under achievement? How can the challenges be overcome? Consideration of assumptions, influencing factors, unintended effects in Theory of Change of those concerned Consultative meetings with project stakeholders at central, regional and district level ToC workshop All interviews Component 4 Micro enterprise development service providers deliver MED sustainably How effective the MEDSPs are in delivering MED services? Has the number of active MEDSPs increased as expected? Number of MEDSPs accessing funds Number of MEDSPs delivering services Number of Districts in which they are being delivered Project records (MIS?) Project reports Project staff presentation, interviews NEDC records Interviews NEDC
Has training for EDFs been developed and become operational in 5 locations? Has a new curriculum been developed? Number and level of courses run Number of institutions running them Number of EDFs trained Number ESPs certified Project records (MIS?) Project reports Project staff presentation, interviews records Interviews CTEVT Interviews training institutions Has the number of active EDFs increased as planned? Number of EDFs employed and by whom Interviews with EDFs (in districts) Interviews with MEDEP/MEDPA officials Interviews with MEDSPs Project records (MIS?) Project reports Project staff presentation, interviews Can EDF training be expected to continue? Number of courses planned Budget allocations, sources of funding Demand for training of those involved Interviews training institutions, Interviews DDCs, CTEVT, training institutions documentation Can service delivery by MEDSPs be expected to continue? turnover rates demands on staff (staff involved in non-MEDPA activities) Service delivery planned Budget allocations, other sources of funding of those involved Interviews MEDSPs, EDFs, NEDC Interviews DDCs, DEDCs Project staff interviews Project reports Are MEDSPs and EDFs increasing in number and delivering services in an increasing number of Districts, with limited project technical and financial support? (Is Expected number of MEDSP and EDFs delivering services in 3 years ‘ time Expected number of Districts Interviews NEDC Interviews DDCs, DEDCs MIS based forecasts? Project staff interviews
crowding in taking Or planning to do so? Budget allocations and other sources of funds How have activities and funding contributed to the achievements? What activities, interventions has MEDEP carried out? What funding has it provided? What partnerships have been developed, how, why? Was this as planned, timely? Does this constitute a move from implementation to facilitation? Project targets vs. achievements Document reviews Interviews with and with partners Consultative meetings with DFAT and UNDP Project progress reports Presentations made by staff What have been the challenges and causes of over or under achievement? How can the challenges be overcome? Consideration of assumptions, influencing factors, unintended effects in Theory of Change Views of those concerned Consultative meetings with project stakeholders at central, regional and district level ToC workshop All interviews Component 5 Improving access to finance for micro enterprises Has the project contributed towards developing a functional portfolio of Financial Services for effective MED? Are more financial service providers (banks, MFIs - FSPs) offering appropriate products to MEs? Number of FSPs that target MEs Number of FSPs with products designed for MEs Number of Districts in which they are offered Interviews FSPs Project records (MIS?) Progress reports Project presentation, interviews Are more Credit and Savings Cooperatives offering appropriate products to MEs? Number of cooperatives taking savings and providing loans Number of Districts in loans are offered Interviews cooperatives Project records (MIS?) Project reports Project staff presentation, interviews Is insurance being offered to MEs and through what mechanism? Number and kind of insurance products on offer Number of insurers involved Interviews DMEGAs, and other players Project records (MIS?) Project reports Project staff presentation, interviews
How do MEs learn about insurance and access services? How are FSPs loans and cooperatives savings and loans performing? Portfolio at risk or at risk rates Current recovery rates Interviews with cooperatives and other FSPs Project records (MIS?) Project reports FSPs and cooperatives records and/or interviews Are FSPs, cooperatives planning to continue ME operations? Is more loan capital being raised or allocated? FSP and cooperatives views Interviews with cooperatives and other FSPs Project records (MIS?) Project reports FSPs and cooperatives documented and/or interviews Are FSPs targeting MEs and cooperatives increasing in number and delivering services in an increasing number of Districts, with limited project technical and financial support? (Is crowding in taking place?) Or planning to do so? Expected number of FSPs and cooperatives delivering services in 3 years ‘ time Expected number of Districts Budget allocations and other sources of funds Interviews FSPs Interviews DMEGAs Interviews DDCs, DEDCs MIS based forecasts? Project staff interviews If not, who will be driving this in the system the project is facilitating? Project vision of future market system for ME financial services Project interviews Project strategy or vision statement (?) Project staff presentation How have MEDEP activities and funding contributed to the achievements? What activities, interventions has MEDEP carried out? What funding has it provided? What partnerships have been developed, how, why? Was this as planned, timely? Does this constitute a move from implementation to facilitation? Project target vs. achievements Review of project documents, reports Interviews with staff and with partners Project progress reports Presentations made by staff