Periodic Review ccm request template
SECTION 5: CURRENT PHASE/IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD PERFORMANCE (PR 3 – NACOSA)
Yüklə 2,41 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- 5.1.1 Programmatic Achievements
- 5.1.2 Grant/SSF Risk Management
- 5.1.3 Grant Performance Rating
Overall progress assessment: Performance of the PR against key programmatic indicators up to end December 2012 is as follows: Table 35: Performance against key programmatic indicators NACOSA
The PR performed consistently well since the start of the grant in August 2010. NACOSA received “A” ratings throughout and their latest rating received for the period ending December 2012 was A1. The diagnostic review of the PR by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) resulted in a fine review with the OIG only making a short list of recommendations. The PR has complied with all the recommendations save for appointing an Internal Auditor. The PR implemented two rounds of recruitment without getting appropriate candidates and will take this up again during the interim period. The plan is to contract an auditing company or individual to perform internal audits on a part-time basis. Under the SSF grant NACOSA had six conditions which have all been met as indicated in the PUDR. The conditions were related to the following matters:
The PR submitted all their PU/DRs on time since the start of the grant. They also published an annual report after Year 1 of their SSF grant, an activity which is not compulsory but which was used to inform many stakeholders about the progress of the grant. The PR’s only real challenge was the Youth programme in KwaZulu-Natal. The PR was dependent on the Youth Ambassadors employed by the KZN Department of the Premier. The implementation of the project was delayed for nearly a year due to administrative challenges within the Department. However, after these were smoothed out the project came back on track and PR was able to reach 80% of the stated target by the cut-off period. The project is set to continue in Phase II with the current activities in the Ugu District to be handed over to the Department. The PR will assist the Department in establishing structure in two or three more districts in the province. For Phase II there will be more regular formal meetings between the role players and a report will be forwarded to the KZN Premier every quarter – the PR with the CCM will ensure that any delays will be dealt with quickly and decisively. NACOSA is a network organization with offices in the provinces where the grant is implemented. The provincial teams consist of a Manager, Programme/M&E Officers, and admin assistant. Strong contact is maintained with sub-recipients through monthly visits and quarterly group meetings. The PMU at Head Office has monthly planning meetings with provincial managers. NACOSA also attends all the provincial AIDS Council meetings and are closely involved with district and sub-district planning processes for HIV and AIDS. NACOSA steers the Joint Primary Health Care Forum, a civil society body giving input on the NDOH PHC Re-engineering strategy. After discussions with the SANAC Secretariat and at the GF CCM one of NACOSA’s SRs will not be funded in Phase II. The QASA-managed People with Disabilities Programme is not one of the narrowed down focus areas for Phase II. The CCM will provide the PRs with a dashboard for regular reporting. NACOSA will report as requested. Please summarize the current challenges in M&E systems and capacity based on any recent assessment undertaken during the current Phase/Implementation Period, and provide an update on status of implementation of M&E systems strengthening recommendations supported through Global Fund grant/SSFs and other partners during the current Phase/Implementation Period. Please also comment on the expenditures on M&E (variances, if any) against approved funding under the Global Fund grant/SSF during the current Phase/Implementation Period. Summary of current M&E systems and capacity challenges: The PR’s M&E plan was developed at the beginning of the original grant cycle (August 2010) and has been updated regularly. NACOSA’s M&E system is detailed in the M&E Plan. It is currently based on Phase I deliverables and will be adjusted according to approved Phase II indicators and targets. It currently includes:
NACOSA implemented its M&E work plan for Phase I as envisaged. Changes were suggested to improve during Phase I and NACOSA’s M&E work plan has been revised and updated accordingly. The last update was submitted to the GF on 15 November 2012. This plan will be adjusted on approval of the extended period for Phase I and again for the Phase II period when agreement has been reached with the CCM Secretariat on all indicators and definitions. SR Preparation and M&E Capacity Assessment NACOSA implements its programmes through national SRs and provincial SR’s in the coastal provinces – Western Cape, Eastern Cape, KZN, Northern Cape as well as in the Free State Province. M&E and Finance Officers at provincial level conduct monthly on-site visits to SR’s to:
Officers complete a contact sheet after every visit with notes on matters that need further attention. This practice will continue into Phase II. The M&E Systems Strengthening (MESS) Tool was used successfully by the PR during Phase I. It comprised of two checklists corresponding to two assessment areas:
To prepare existing SR’s who will continue delivering programme interventions under the PR for Phase II, as well as any new SR’s the PR will facilitate another MESS Workshop(s) in Quarter 1. These workshops will ensure that all SRs agree on the indicators and data collection methods and data flow. The content of the MESS workshops will focus on the following:
The national and provincial SRs will be divided according to their Service Delivery Areas (SDAs) to discuss the tool questions. Each participating SR in Phase II will participate in the development of target reach plans and performance framework based on the specific indicators they are responsible for under the guidance of the PR’s M&E Unit. Each SR’s M&E capacity will again be assessed and recommendations will be made for revising/strengthening M&E Plans, developing SOPs for M&E, and formalizing quality assurance procedures. For new SRs, the PR’s assessment tool has been modified to include a scoring system and will be used as a measurement tool for baseline, mid-point, and final evaluation of NACOSA’s capacity building programme; it now includes programme-specific questions in addition to the organisational capacity questions found on the initial assessment tool. Beyond the initial M&E capacity assessment, each SRs M&E system is reviewed as part of the quarterly (SR) or monthly (PSR) OSDV visit conducted by NACOSA M&E Manager and Programme Officers. Plans are made to address any challenges and recommendations are documented and followed up. The individuals responsible for developing, maintaining and managing the PR’s M&E system are primarily the M&E Manager and Programme Director with input from the Executive Director, Programme Officers and all NACOSA Managers and staff. Data Collection, Reporting Tools & Standard Operation Procedures NACOSA collects data from all SRs on a monthly basis using standardised tools that include quantitative (number for each indicator) and qualitative (narrative explaining deviation, plan of action, challenges and successes) data. For national SRs, NACOSA collects the total number for each indicator (output and process) for the preceding month. This data is verified during quarterly OSDV visits where source documents are checked and total number achieved by the SR is revised as needed based on what is verified. For provincial SRs, NACOSA collects individual data and supporting documents for output indicators for the preceding month. This data is verified during monthly OSDV visits by Programme Officers where source documents are checked and total number achieved by the SR is revised as needed based on what is verified. Data collection tools at national and provincial SR level are not standardized across all implementers, however all data collection tools must contain the necessary fields to ensure the data captured provides evidence needed to meet indicator definitions e.g. if the indicator definition states a person received an HIV test and knows their results then source documents must show the person received and HIV test and knows their results. Reporting tools from SRs to NACOSA are standardized but tailored for the indicators relevant to each SR. The PR will have new Service Delivery Areas and indicators for Phase II, some of which will be shared by SRs. The PR will ensure that there is an improved shared understanding of the entire M&E system and data flow. NACOSA has developed SOPs for various internal M&E functions it performs including a manual for NACOSA Programme Officers which outlines M&E requirements for the GFR9 grant programme. There are also detailed instructions on each tool used by NACOSA and its SRs that provide guidance on how to complete the tool and an SOP for PSR reporting to NACOSA. All the information above will be adjusted according to differences between Phase I and Phase II.
For provincial SRs, a data quality error log is kept for electronic monthly reports submitted to NACOSA. This provides a record of the timeliness, completeness, correctness and reliability of the data reported as well as any data issues identified and actions taken by the NACOSA and by the PSR to resolve the issue. Data quality assessments are performed by NACOSA as part of the OSDV visits. SR (and their SSRs) and PSRs are also required to have internal data quality assurance processes before data is reported to NACOSA/GFR9 which must be detailed in their M&E Plan. Data quality is examined and documented during OSDVs including scrutinizing source documents for completeness, accuracy and to ensure the data reported meets the indicator definition. Any source documents that do not meet these requirements are not counted/ reported to the Global Fund. Recommendations are made for improving data quality or SR/PSRs and follow up is conducted to ensure recommendations are being implemented. Based on an OIG recommendation the PR also ensures data and service quality assurance by observing activities being implemented through field visits – SSRs of SRs are also visited through announced and unannounced visits. NACOSA observes how data is collected in the field as well as the content of the intervention and makes recommendations for improvements on both. M&E Expenditure The PR’s biggest under spend (± 25%) in the grant up to end Dec 2012 was on M&E for the following reasons:
Major grant/SSF management risks and issues: NACOSA attended a Risk Management Training Session by the GF from 10-13 September 2012. An organisational Risk Management “Heat Map” and Plan with prevention and mitigation actions for the following four areas was subsequently developed and submitted to the Global Fund:
NACOSA will report on progress with the Heat Plan through its periodic PUDR reports which will also be submitted to the CCM. NACOSA will also conduct a risk management workshop with all new SRs for Phase II using the same framework and process. An M&E challenge experienced by the PR during Phase I was the lack of a national M&E reporting system to which the PR could report to. The risk in this regard was that important role players were not informed about SR activities and progress in their field of operation. A huge step forward was the recent finalization of a national M&E Framework with indicators and targets linked to the NSP 2012-2016. The Framework is not operational yet but will hopefully develop a coherent system enabling PRs to fully align their M&E systems and indicators and to ensure that all the activities are taken up in national systems. The SANAC M&E team will be a close partner of the PR in future. The PR identified various programmatic knowledge and organizational management risks at SR level during Phase I. One example was the lack of strong strategic guidance and leadership from management boards. The PR plans a number of capacity building courses and cluster mentoring sessions including for management boards of organizations. It was also found that SRs concentrate on reaching targets and focus too little on programme quality and staff performance assessments. The PR provided standard operating procedures (SOPS) where possible and many national SRs refined their existing SOPS but the use and review of SOPS on a regular basis is lacking. The PR’s contracted mentoring plans are a step in the direction of compelling SRs to work with their operational challenges. The PR conducted programme evaluations on its OVC, Sex Worker, SRHR Youth groups, GBV Court and PWD programmes. Many recommendations flowed from these evaluations and will be discussed in Section 6 under the relevant programmes. Except for the PWD programme the recommendations will be reviewed with PRs and will be implemented during Phase II. The only High Risk that was identified by the PR was Inadequate CCM Governance and Oversight. NACOSA is happy to report that a new CCM has been elected in South Africa and that the first meeting took place on 22 November 2012. The second meeting took place on 17 January 2013 during which the themes for the Phase II proposal were approved. The new structuring and management of the CCM is a huge improvement on previous processes and the oversight risk is diminished through the current development of a reporting dashboard for PRs. As for any NGO, one of NACOSA’s major risks is sustainability. The OIG suggested that NACOSA develop a comprehensive sustainability strategy, which was been done over the past 6 months within the organization together with assistance from consultants. NACOSA has become an accredited service provider and aims to establish a training academy in 2013. The academy will be an income generating vehicle for NACOSA and we aim to offer accredited training in many qualifications, certificates, skills programmes etc. for child and youth care workers, community health workers, community home-based caregivers, HCT counsellors, managers, board members, administrators, etc. Part of the strategy is to erect a physical training center that will form the training base while satellite trainings will be done across the country. The centre will also house economical accommodation for residential courses and we aim to attract learners from the SADC region too. NACOSA has included an amount of $1m in this grant’s budget towards the infrastructure. The GF Secretariat encouraged NACOSA’s vision and it has been discussed and approved at the GF CCM Meeting on the 17 January 2013 as well. NACOSA’s strategy and business plan are available at request.
Grant Performance Rating for the current Phase (Phase 1/RCC Phase 1)
Yüklə 2,41 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||