JICA-NEDA JOINT
EVALUATION
EVALUATION THEORY, APPROACHES
AND PRACTICES IN THE PHILIPPINES
1st M&E Network Forum
7-8 November 2011
Crown Plaza Manila Galleria,
Ortigas Avenue, Ortigas Center
How findings are utilized
Use of
Findings
Target
Major Activities
Lessons learned and recommendations compiled into
databases
Comprehensive analysis of findings
JICA
Listing utilized lessons learned in ex-ante evaluation
Reflecting lessons learned from evaluation in
implementation policies
Feedback
Evaluation training
Joint evaluation
Recipient
Feedback seminars
Governments
Inviting comments on findings from ex-post evaluation
Accountability
People in
Japan
and in the
recipient
country
Distribution of reports
Publicizing evaluation findings on the website
www.jica.go.jp/english/operations/evaluation/index
Public seminars on evaluation findings
Policy Environment

Managing for Development Results
 Strengthening
internal mechanisms (national
strategic planning, public expenditure
management, results-based M&E systems,
etc.)

Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness
JICA Initiatives for M&E
BASIC PRINCIPLE: NEEDS-DRIVEN
 Thailand: JICA expert on M&E
 Indonesia: Joint Evaluation MOU in 2006
 India: TA on sector-wide reporting system
 Peru: Aid memoire of joint evaluation with
implementing agencies
 Nepal: TA on TOT on monitoring
development projects
Challenges for the Philippines

Weak feedback loop: ex-post to ex-ante
evaluation

Limited capacity and resources for M&E
Joint Evaluation

MOU signed in May 2006 between NEDA
and JBIC (now JICA)

OBJECTIVES:
 Effective
and efficient project implementation
 Effective and efficient implementation of
overall development operations
 Institutional improvement through
harmonization of evaluation mechanism
Joint Evaluation

APPROACH: Institutional capacity
development alongside improvement of
evaluation and feedback mechanism

ACTIVITIES:
 Introduction
to the JICA Evaluation System
 Actual/Hands-on Ex-post Evaluation (OJT)
 Feedback
 Enhancement of the Action Plan for M&E
Delineation of Roles
Activities
Target Timing
NEDA
Executing
Agencies
Team of
Evaluators
JICA
Agree on Evaluation Framework
Dec – Jan
JS
-
JL
P
Draft Questionnaire
Dec - Jan
JS
-
JL
-
Review/finalize Questionnaire
Jan
JS
-
JL
-
Kick-off Meeting
Jan
JS
P
JL
P
Data collection (on-site survey)
Feb - Jun
JS
P
JL
-
Draw up Tabular Form (Summary) Mar - Jun
JS
P
JL
-
Discuss Evaluation Findings
Apr - Jun
JS
P
JL
P
Finalizing Tabular Form
Jun
JS
P
JL
-
Draft Evaluation Reports
Jul
JS
P
JL
-
Consult with NEDA on
Preliminary Findings
Jan - Aug
JS
P
JL
-
Final Feedback Meeting
Aug
JS
-
JL
P
Finalizing Evaluation Reports
Sep
JS
P
JL
P
Projects for Joint Evaluation
2006-2007
 Nationwide Air Navigation Facilities Modernization Project III/DOTC
 Philippine-Japan Friendship Highway Rehabilitation Project Phase I
and II/DPWH
 Maritime Safety Improvement Project
2007-2008
 Metro Manila Interchange Construction Project Phase IV/ DPWH
 Pinatubo Hazard Urgent Mitigation Project I/ DPWH
 Special Economic Zones Environment Management Project/ PEZA
2008-2009
 Fisheries Resource Management Project/DA-BFAR
 Metro Manila Strategic Mass Rail Transit Development (Line 2)
Projects I, II, III/DOTC-LRTA
Projects for Joint Evaluation
2009-2010
 Lower Agusan Development Project/DPWH and NIA
 Rural Road Network Development, Phase II/DPWH
2010-2011
 Metro Manila Flood Control Project – West Mangahan
Floodway/DPWH
 Cordillera Road Implementation Project/DPWH
2011-2012
 Pampanga Delta Development Project (Irrigation)/NIA
 Batangas Port Development Project Phase II/DPWH
Case Study: Cordillera Road
Improvement Project (CRIP)

In general, the CRIP is one strategy for physical
integration of CAR; as the RDP 2008-2010 also
mentions, the target of paving national roads
within CAR, is from 34 to 40 percent. Therefore,
DPWH should consider other CAR roads for
improvement to further enhance mobility in the
region (road network context).
LESSONS

Ensure due diligence in Detailed Engineering to
avoid circumstances that delay project
implementation (i.e., final road alignment should
have been established during DE stage, hence,
NPC’s opposition to utilize Ambuklao dam crest
and spillway could have been recognized in
advance).

Consider increasing the national standard of
laborer per km ratio for road projects in
mountainous areas.
Case Study: Cordillera Road
Improvement Project (CRIP)
Rating:
B
Satisfactory
Relevance
Effectiveness (including Impact)
Efficiency
Sustainability
3
3
2
2
Rating Flowchart
3
Relevance 2
1
Effective
Impact
Effective
Impact
3
2
1
3
2
1
3
Efficiency 2
1
3
Efficiency 2
1
3
Efficiency 2
1
Sustainable
3
2
1
Sustainable
3
2
1
Sustainable
Sustainable
3
2
1
3
2
1
A
Highly
Satisfactory
B
Satisfactory
C
Moderately
Satisfactory
D
Unsatisfactory
Lessons Learned (Project-Level)
Need for
 Realistic planning and budgeting
 Mechanism to address cost and time
overrun
 Sustainable O&M arrangements
 Stronger commitment of LGUs and other
stakeholders
Lessons Learned (System-Wide)
Need for
 Proper archiving of project documents
 Baseline indicators
 Resource allocation for evaluation
 Stronger cooperation from implementing
agencies
 Improvements in the rating system
 Joint evaluation with other development
partners
 Continuous capacity building
Future Directions
Continued utilization and improvements
 Policy implications

(End)