M E_Plan_-_version_of_7-1-14_(approved)_(final).pdf

Millennium Challenge Account Namibia

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Revision 6: 1 July 2014 Approved by MCC: 9 July 2014

Approved by MCA‐N Board: 11 July 2014

Table of Contents

Page

1. Overview

2. Summary of Programme, Projects, and Objectives

2.1 Description of Compact

2.3 Expected Impact

2.4 Economic Analysis

2.5 Programme Beneficiaries

3. Monitoring Component

3.1 Monitoring Strategy

3.2 Indicator Documentation, Baselines and Targets

3.3 Data Quality Reviews

3.4 Standard Reporting Requirements

3.5 Linking Disbursement to Performance

4. Evaluation Component

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Education Project

4.3 Tourism Project

4.4 Agriculture Project

5. Surveys

6. Disaggregation by Sex

7. Vulnerable Groups

8. Modifying the M&E Plan

9. Assumptions and Risks

10. Implementation and Management of M&E

Annexes:

1. Indicator Information

2. Indicator Targets

3. Summary of Modifications to Indicators, Baselines, and Targets

4. Detailed Programme Logic

5. Map of MCA‐N Intervention Areas

Abbreviations

CBRLM Community‐Based Rangeland and Livestock Management

CDSGF Conservancy Development Support Grant Fund

CDSS Conservancy Development Support Services

CoEs former Colleges of Education, now University of Namibia campuses

COSDEC Community Skills Development Centre

COSDEF COSDEC Foundation

CPD Continuous Professional Development

CLB Communal Land Board

CLS Communal Land Support

CS Conservancy Support

DNEA Directorate of National Examinations and Assessments, Ministry of Education

DoT Directorate of Tourism and Gaming, Ministry of Environment and Tourism

DVS Directorate of Veterinary Services, Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry

EMIS Education Management Information System

ENP Etosha National Park

ERR Economic Rate of Return

ESA Environment and Social Assessment

ETSIP Education and Training Sector Improvement Programme

GA Grazing Area

GIS Geographic Information System

GRN Government of the Republic of Namibia

HAMU HIV/AIDS Management Unit, Ministry of Education

INP Indigenous Natural Product

INP‐IF INP Innovation Fund

IP Implementing Partner

IPMS Integrated Programme Management System

IPTT Indigenous Plants Task Team

ITT Indicator Tracking Table

JV Joint Venture

LMEF Livestock Market Efficiency Fund

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MAWF Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry

MCA‐N Millennium Challenge Account Namibia

MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation

MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism

MIS Management Information System

MLR Ministry of Lands and Resettlement

MoE Ministry of Education

MRLGHRD Ministry of Local and Regional Government, Housing and Rural Development

NACSO Namibia Association of Community‐Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) Support

Organizations

NA North American

NADM North America Destination Marketing

NamLITS Namibia Livestock Identification and Traceability System

NCAs Northern Communal Areas

NCHE National Council for Higher Education

NDP National Development Plan

NGO Non‐Governmental Organisation

NHIES Namibia Household Income and Expenditure Survey

NLFS Namibia Labour Force Survey

NSA Namibia Statistics Agency

NSFAF National Student Financial Assistance Fund

NTA Namibia Training Authority

NTB Namibia Tourism Board

NTF National Training Fund

RIAs Rangeland Intervention Areas

PIA Programme Implementation Agreement

PoN Polytechnic of Namibia

PPO Producer and Processor Organisations

Q‐camps Quarantine Camps

QDRP Quarterly Disbursement Request Package

RSRC Regional Study and Resource Centre

SCMU Supply Chain Management Unit, Ministry of Education

SME Small and Medium Enterprise

SVO State Veterinary Office

TA Traditional Authority

TEIs Tertiary Education Institutions

UNAM University of Namibia

VTC Vocational Training Centre

VTP Vocational Training Provider

WASH Water and Sanitation Health

1 | P a g e

1. Overview

Millennium Challenge Account Namibia (MCA‐N) is committed to delivering on the promises made to the nation in the Compact signed between the governments of Namibia and the

United States. As such, measuring and tracking achievements and the impact that the

Compact is having on beneficiaries (the most important group of people to consider in the implementation of the Programme) is of great importance. Therefore, this M&E Plan has been developed by MCA‐N to serve as a tool to plan and manage the process of monitoring, evaluating, and reporting progress towards achieving Namibia’s Compact results. It is used in conjunction with other reporting and management tools such as work plans, procurement plans, and financial plans.

The M&E Plan serves the following functions:

Explains in detail how and what will be a) monitored for the various Projects and

Activities to determine whether they are on track to achieving their intended results and b) evaluated to estimate the impact and determine cost effectiveness and sustainability of projects and activities.

Includes all indicators that must be reported to MCC and other stakeholders and the targets they are reported against.

Serves as a guide for programme implementation and management and a communication tool that allows MCA‐N and other stakeholders to understand the

Compact’s objectives, the targets the Programme must achieve, and progress made towards those objectives and targets as implementation proceeds.

Provides data and information to support decisions about programme adjustments.

The M&E Plan is considered a binding document, and failure to comply with its stipulations could result in suspension of disbursements. It may be modified or amended as necessary only with the approval of MCC and the MCA‐N Board.

2. Summary of Programme, Projects, and Objectives

2.1 Description of Compact

The primary goal of the Compact is to reduce poverty in Namibia through economic growth, focusing on three key sectors that make up the three Projects: Education, Tourism, and

Agriculture. The three Project‐level objectives are as follows:

1. Education Project: To alleviate workforce quality constraints to private sector‐led growth by enhancing the equity and effectiveness of basic, vocational, and tertiary education.

2. Tourism Project: To grow the Namibian tourism industry by improving tourism management and increasing awareness of Namibia as a tourist destination.

Page | 2

3. Agriculture Project: To improve rural livelihoods by enhancing the sustainable use of resources (the rangeland, livestock, and indigenous natural products) and increasing land tenure security.

The Projects are described below, and the Programme Logic in Annex 4 provides a graphical depiction of the expected chain of events for each sub‐activity while the map in Annex 5 portrays the geographic locations of MCA‐N’s interventions across the country.

The Education Project will improve the quality of education and training and access for under‐served groups, enhancing the quality of the country’s labour force and increasing employment opportunities for young people. The activities and sub‐activities of this project are:

1. Improving the quality of general education

a. Construction and/or rehabilitation of 47 schools – This sub‐activity involves the construction, rehabilitation, and/or equipping of facilities at up to 47 schools located across the country. The goal of the intervention is to improve the learning and teaching environment and maximize the ability of learners to develop academically and thus perform at a higher level – ultimately enhancing their chances in life as they pursue further education/training and become contributing citizens.

b. Policy, operational and administrative support to the education sector, including but not limited to Continuing Professional Development (CPD)1, through which some support will be provided that cuts across the education sector (e.g., HIV/AIDS training) or that encompasses one or more Education

Project sub‐activities (e.g., facilities management training and textbook management training) – Through this sub‐activity, support is provided to the

CPD unit of the University of Namibia (UNAM) to upgrade educators’ skills and competencies. The main goal is to improve teaching effectiveness and learner performance. Also, technical support for improving the national standardized testing system, as well as facilities management and Water and Sanitation

Health (WASH) activities, will be provided.

c. Equipment for Colleges of Education (CoEs)2 – This sub‐activity involves the provision of science and Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) equipment to UNAM’s CoEs. The action is aimed at facilitating higher student achievement in the related subjects, leading to improved outcomes not only in learning but also in later teaching.

1 Through a new, semi‐autonomous structure of Continuous Professional Development (CPD), the Education Project will help facilitate the development and delivery of specific training programs for teachers, teacher educators, and educational managers (principals, advisory teachers, inspectors of education etc.). MCA‐N has four or more CPD program activities scheduled including textbook management and utilization, HIV/AIDS teacher training, facilities maintenance, National Standardized Achievement Test deficiency training, and other training for managers in a decentralized environment.

2 The CoEs were incorporated into UNAM via a September 2009 Cabinet decision, effective 2010.

Page | 3

2. Expanding vocational and skills training

a. Technical assistance to establish a National Training Fund (NTF) – MCA‐N’s intervention under this sub‐activity supports the Namibia Training Authority

(NTA) in the creation and operationalization of a levy collection system to fund high priority vocational education and skills training.

b. Construction and upgrading of 9 Community Skills and Development Centres

(COSDECs), donation of 2 COSDEC mobile units, and training of Community Skills

Development Foundation (COSDEF) Management Support Unit staff – MCA‐N is assisting in the construction of 4 new and upgrading of 5 existing COSDECs as well as the construction of an Arts and Crafts Centre. In addition, COSDEC and

Foundation leadership receive support in strategic planning, budgeting, finance, community skills assessment and performance management, all of which are aimed at helping ensure that COSDECs and the training that they offer are more responsive to the needs of their communities and of the local and national economy.

c. Competitive grants for high‐priority vocational training programmes – Until the

NTF levy is operational, MCA‐N is financing training in high‐demand skill areas.

Like the rest of the sub‐activities under the “Expanding vocational and skills training” activity, this action is aimed at expanding the availability of high‐ priority skills training and related opportunities and increasing the number of people benefiting from vocational training in terms of better employment prospects and increased income.

3. Improving access to and management of textbooks

a. Textbook baseline study – This study was conducted to collect detailed information on textbooks and related indicators in the Namibian general education system and to ascertain the exact level of textbooks presence for each Namibian school for English, Mathematics and Science. Its findings were used to inform the follow‐on activities (see b. and c. below).

b. Procurement and distribution of English, Mathematics, and Science textbooks –

As its name suggests, this sub‐activity involves the purchase and supply of textbooks to schools around the country. The effort is aimed at reducing gaps in the current provision of books, and increasing efficiency in textbook delivery by refining the curriculum and improving the procurement process, including the creation of the Supply Chain Management Unit (SCMU) to oversee the entire textbook process, establishing a per capita capitation allotment formula to determine yearly textbook need, ring fencing the textbook budget, developing a textbook management information system as well as textbook usage and management processes and training.

c. Textbook management policy and training (with training included under CPD) –

This sub‐activity builds the capacity of educators in how to manage and utilize

Page | 4 learning support materials, specifically textbooks. This will help ensure the appropriate use of such materials for maximum learning potential.

4. Construction and management of Regional Study and Resource Centres (RSRCs)

a. Construction of 3 RSRCs – MCA‐N is constructing the first 3 of what will eventually be 13 large resource centres (one in each of Namibia’s 13 regions) that provide a wealth of documentation, information resources, training materials and programs, as well as study facilities to local residents, providing them with a nearby, well‐stocked resource for advancing their knowledge. The vision is of centres that extend beyond the traditional role of public libraries and enhance efforts to develop Namibian society, including supporting civic, educational and entrepreneurial information needs.

b. Technical assistance and training to RSRC staff – This support provides guidance in developing the RSRCs into key components of a regionally administered and community focused library system. It will also help implement a national

Integrated Library Management System, which will digitize many aspects of library service.

5. Expanding and improving access to tertiary finance

a. This activity involves the provision of technical assistance to develop a strategy for expanding and improving access to tertiary finance by providing a policy and operational framework for the effective and efficient deployment of a tertiary education finance policy and providing an implementation strategy for MCA‐N supported technical assistance to the National Council for Higher Education

(NCHE) and the National Student Financial Assistance Fund (NSFAF).

6. Provision of cross‐Project support

a. HIV/AIDS management strengthening to the Ministry of Education’s HIV/AIDS

Management Unit (HAMU) – This action is aimed at supporting HAMU to improve the mainstreaming, coordination capacity and effectiveness of HIV and

AIDS responses in the education sector at national and regional levels.

The Tourism Project will improve the management and infrastructure of Etosha National

Park (ENP), enhance the marketing of Namibian tourism and, develop the capacity of communal conservancies to attract investments in ecotourism and increase their revenue.

The activities and sub‐activities of this project are:

1. Improved management of and infrastructure for ENP

a. Policy reform and technical assistance to support improved management of ENP

– This sub‐activity aims to improve the management capacity of ENP through the provision of technical assistance in support of improved management and a study of tourism carrying capacity and potential tourism investments in and around ENP.

Page | 5

b. Infrastructure investments in management centres and staff housing – The

MCA‐N Programme is supporting the construction of management centres and staff housing in ENP. The goal of this intervention is to improve work conditions and thus attract and retain high quality staff to apply their skills in the Park.

c. Provision of road maintenance and game translocation equipment – As its name suggests, the support provided under this sub‐activity includes the provision of road maintenance and game translocation equipment, which enables ENP staff to improve the tourist experience not only in the Park but also in conservancies receiving game species from the Park.

2. Marketing Namibia as a tourist destination

a. Destination marketing to the North American market – The objective of the

MCA‐funded North America Destination Marketing (NADM) sub‐activity is to grow the Namibian tourism industry by carrying out an innovative, trade‐ focused marketing campaign to increase both arrivals from the North American

(NA) market and the number of NA tourism businesses that offer tours and packages to Namibia. The support involves working closely with the Namibia

Tourism Board (NTB) and industry stakeholders to develop and market itineraries that showcase tourism products and services offered by communal conservancies, joint ventures (JV), and locally developed and managed experiences throughout Namibia; build capacity among communities and JV projects to reach NA operators; and conduct a public relations and marketing campaign to increase recognition and awareness of Namibia’s offerings.

b. Development and marketing of local and regional tourism routes – As its name suggests, this sub‐activity is an effort to develop local and regional tourism routes in Namibia. Its overall aim is to improve the country’s offerings to international (and domestic) travellers and thus enhance its appeal to potential tourists, thereby increasing rural communities’ prospects of improving their livelihoods through tourism enterprise.

c. Interactive website development – Like the other sub‐activities under this activity (see a. and b. above), this sub‐activity is aimed at increasing the number of tourist arrivals to Namibia by raising the country’s profile (i.e., awareness of

Namibia as a tourism destination) in target markets. The specific objective of the online marketing campaign is to assist the NTB and its staff to carry out a global online marketing plan for an initial period of two years to build awareness of the value and effectiveness of online marketing techniques.

Concurrent capacity‐building helps enable NTB and industry to carry related efforts forward after the Programme ends.

3. Ecotourism development in conservancies

a. Needs assessment of conservancies – The needs assessment (and the related update review) evaluated the needs of conservancies in terms of the training and technical assistance modules that each conservancy should receive as part

Page | 6 of the follow‐on support (see b. below). The information was gathered through a series of consultations with individual conservancies, the Ministry of the

Environment and Tourism (MET), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and private sector tourism operators.

b. Technical assistance and capacity building for conservancies – This sub‐activity is aims to strengthen the capacity of conservancies to protect their natural resources, attract investment, and achieve financial sustainability so that households in communal conservancies can improve their livelihoods. Based on individual conservancy needs and demands, the support provides a range of technical assistance services and grant funding to 31 target conservancies across the country. Such assistance and funding will help mitigate existing barriers to tourism enterprise investment and contribute towards the financial sustainability of conservancies. In addition, formerly disadvantaged Namibian communities in selected conservancies will be empowered by having their participation in potentially lucrative tourism enterprises facilitated through grant funding (see c. below) to promote JV and other tourism enterprises.

c. Grant funds for conservancies for joint‐venture enterprises – The Conservancy

Development Support Grant Fund (CDSGF) supports conservancies in their efforts to develop small tourism enterprises, limit human wildlife conflict, enter into JV agreements with the private sector and market their tourism product offerings, all with the goal of enabling them to capture a greater share of the revenue generated by tourism. Together these activities are aimed at increasing income and creating job opportunities, whilst preserving the natural resources that serve as the base for the tourism industry.

The Agriculture Project will support investments aimed at achieving a sustainable increase in the economic performance of the agricultural sector. The activities and sub‐activities of this project are:

1. Improved land access and management

a. Communal land support (CLS) – The overall objectives of the CLS sub‐activity are

(1) to empower residents and land holders at the village/local level to actively participate in the use and management of their land resources in the Northern

Communal Areas (NCAs); and (2) to improve the administration and management of communal lands. The actions under this sub‐activity include, among others, a comprehensive public awareness and outreach campaign to educate the public regarding their land rights, the streamlining of administrative procedures, a systematic verification and registration process that will result in the formalization of land rights in the NCAs, and capacity building for Communal

Land Boards (CLBs) and other land administration institutions, namely

Traditional Authorities (TAs) and staff of the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement

(MLR).

b. Community‐based rangeland and livestock management (CBRLM) – MCA‐N support under this sub‐activity aims to improve communal farmers’ livestock

Page | 7 quality and value by supporting training in community‐based management of rangeland resources, herd management, and farm enterprise management skills, including specific outreach to women in small ruminant production and marketing, among participating communities. In addition, these communities are eligible to receive rangeland management infrastructure (e.g. water points, auction facilities, genetic material, etc.) to support their efforts.

2. Provision of support to the livestock sector

a. Construction of State Veterinary Offices (SVOs) and upgrading of quarantine camps (q‐camps) – The MCA‐N Programme is supporting the construction of 5

SVOs in underserved parts of the country and 2 quarantine camps in Caprivi

Region. The new SVOs (and their related staff housing that aimed at improving working conditions for SVO personnel) aim to bring veterinary services closer to farmers and thus contribute to improved animal health, while the q‐camps are designed to reduce losses due to quarantine inefficiencies and also contribute to improved animal health.

b. Livestock traceability system – In partnership with the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF), this activity aims to support the universal tagging of cattle in the NCAs and the establishment of a national traceability system for livestock management. This will help Namibia to better understand and control disease outbreaks and meet the food safety requirements of local and international markets.

c. Livestock Market Efficiency Fund (LMEF) – The LMEF invests in improvements that foster greater efficiencies in livestock marketing as well as in efforts to understand livestock health and diversify market opportunities for farmers in the NCAs. Along with the traceability system for livestock management (see b.

above), a key LMEF grant is aimed at placing Namibia’s NCAs firmly on the path towards recognition as Foot and Mouth Disease and Contagious Bovine

Pleuropneumonia “disease‐free” by the World Organization for Animal Health.

3. Development of indigenous natural products (INPs)

a. Support to Producer and Processor Organisations (PPOs) – Under this sub‐ activity, PPO management and harvesters are provided with training to improve harvesting practices and advance their operational and business capacity, thus contributing to the activity’s overall goal to increase the volume, quality and value addition of INPs.

b. Provision of the INP Innovation Fund (INP‐IF) – The INP‐IF supports research, testing and application of new innovations and services critical to the INP industry’s immediate, short‐term and long‐term competitiveness.

c. Delivery of Market Information – This sub‐activity aims to improve market information to PPOs, provide capacity building for the Indigenous Plant Task

Team (IPTT) and supports implementation plans to ensure the protection of indigenous knowledge.

Page | 8

2.2 Programme Logic

The below Programme Logic Diagram summarizes the Namibia Programme’s goals, Project‐ level objectives, and activity‐level outcomes of interest.

Short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes Compact goal

• Enhanced learning and cognitive development at

MCA‐N‐targeted schools

• Increased access to quality vocational and skills training

• Reduced gaps in the current provision of books, and increased efficiency in textbook procurement and delivery

• Increased use of information for formal education, informal learning, business, and research

• Expanded and improved access to tertiary finance

• Strengthen HIV/AIDS prevention and management in the sector

• Improved management efficiency of ENP

• Increased international awareness of Namibia as a tourist destination

• Improved management of and increased income to communal conservancies

• Improved land tenure security and efficiency of land tenure administration

• Increased community adoption of sustainable rangeland management, animal husbandry, and marketing techniques and methodologies

• Established systems for disease control, improved livestock quality, and better market access

• Improved production of and market access for

INPs

MCA‐N COMPACT LOGIC

Poverty reduction through economic growth

Education

Project

Tourism

Project

Note: The outcomes and goal indicators are informed by Vision 2030 and NDP3 and are in line with NDP4, and they reflect the expectation that MCA Namibia Programme will contribute to the goals of Vision 2030. However, the MCA Namibia Programme is not of sufficient scale or scope to independently achieve these goals.

Agriculture

Project

Increased competence of the

Namibian workforce, improved tourism management and awareness of

Namibia as a tourist destination, and increased productivity of agricultural and non‐ agricultural enterprises in rural areas.

Programme

Objective Compact Goal

Poverty reduction through economic growth, as measured by the following indicators:

• Poverty rate

• Unemployment rate

• Median household income

A detailed, sub‐activity‐level Programme Logic (that includes all indicators being used to track progress) is provided in Annex 4.

2.3 Expected Impact

Overall, the US$304.5 million invested through the MCA‐N Programme is expected to generate US$335.8 million in increased income and benefits over the life of the investment3.

At the end of the 5‐year Compact, the poverty rate is expected to decrease by almost 8 percentage points, from 27.6% to 20%. Median household income is expected to increase by 27%, from N$43,520 to N$55,269, while the unemployment rate is expected to decrease from 51.2%4 to 33.6% (based on the Namibia Labour Force Survey). These Goal‐level indicators are national‐level indicators that are informed by the National Development Plans

This is the net present value of the benefits over the time indicated in the table in section 2.4 using a discount rate of 10%.

4 Note that data quality concerns were registered about this unemployment rate (see Additional Information column on p. 1 of Annex 1) and subsequent improvements made in methodology;

therefore, any changes in the rate may not be directly comparable.

Page | 9

(specifically NDP3 and NDP4) towards Vision 2030 and are used because the MCA‐N

Programme is anticipated to contribute to the broader efforts of the Government of the

Republic of Namibia (GRN).

2.4 Economic Analysis

The economic impact of the MCA‐N Programme’s activities was estimated through economic rate of return (ERR) calculations, using a cost‐benefit analysis. The ERRs attempt to quantify the increase in incomes that will be generated by the activity. The Namibia Compact’s ERRs were initially calculated by MCC prior to approval of the Programme and are currently being updated. The updated ERRs will appear in the next iteration of the M&E Plan to provide some context about the long‐term impacts that are expected from the Programme.

In the meantime, the original ERRs are still included below for context since they contributed to early decisions related to the Compact. It should be noted that they are only estimates, and any ex‐post analysis on the same activity may produce a different result due to improved data, costs or benefits that may not have been included in the initial analysis, and programme adjustments during implementation. It should also be noted that in some cases, an ERR is not calculated for an activity/sub‐activity due to lack of available data.

Project Activity (Sub‐

Activity)

ERR

(initial)

ERR

(updated)

Time

Horizon

(Years)

Key Benefits (per updated ERR)

Reason for ERR change

EDUCATION Improving the

Quality of

General

Education (47

Schools)

13.7% 9% 20 • Increased employment income

• Reduced costs to the education sector due to lower repetition and failure rates

• Added benefits of textbooks

• Including the cost of proportion of textbooks in activity costs

• Updated student numbers

Improving

Access to and

Management of Textbooks

114% 109% 10 • Efficiency gains via reduced distribution and procurement costs

• Delete effect on student outcomes, which is now accounted for in the Improving the

Quality of General

Education ERR

Expanding

Vocational and Skills

Training

(Construction of COSDECs)

44% 20% 30 • Increased income of participants

• Adjusted timeline of benefits so trainees begin enrolling in year 5 and benefits begin to accrue in year 6

Page | 10

ERR

(initial)

ERR

(updated)

Time

Horizon

(Years)

Key Benefits (per updated ERR)

Reason for ERR change

• Extended earnings benefits from 20 years to 30 years

Expanding

Vocational and Skills

Training

(Establishmen t of NTF)

22.2%

4.7% 30 • Reduced costs of provision of training

• Increased income of participants

• ERR previously calculated in combination with

VTGF sub‐activity;

now separately calculated

• MCC Costs changed to NAD from USD

• Extended income benefits from 20 to

30 years

Expanding

Vocational and Skills

Training

(VTGF)

21% 30 • Increased income of participants

• ERR previously calculated in combination with

Establishment of

NTF sub‐activity;

now separately calculated

Expanding and

Improving

Access to

Tertiary

Finance

21.1% 21.1% 20 • Increased number of graduates of tertiary education n/a

TOURISM Ecotourism

Development in

Conservancies

7% 14.2% 20 • Increased income to conservancies and to conservancy members

• Profits to joint‐ venture partners

• Tax revenues to the Namibian government

• Increased

• Adjusted cost‐ benefit analysis figures, notably the figures for expected revenues and operating costs as well as the rate of potential self‐sufficiency

5 This figure should be considered tentative; key parameters need to be verified and the model needs to be peer reviewed.

Page | 11

ERR

(initial)

ERR

(updated)

Time

Horizon

(Years)

Key Benefits (per updated ERR)

Reason for ERR change numbers of wildlife

Improved

Management of ENP

11% 11% 2 • Increased tourism visits and value added to the

Namibian economy, increased income/ receipts to ENP n/a

Tourism

Marketing

17.8% 17.8% 6 • Increased tourism arrivals

• Value added from overseas tourists n/a

AGRICULTURE Land Access and

Management and Livestock

Support

8.7% update not yet final

20 • Efficiency gains in marketing

• Improved land tenure security for communal farmers

• Policy adjustment for communal land to better protect the rights of women and other vulnerable groups

• Improved animal health

• Reduced expected losses of livestock due to severe weather tbd

INPs 2.9% 11% 20 • Expanded supply and more value‐ added by primary producers

• Increased market access for primary producers

• Increased price of INPs due to certification and marketing

• Added new benefit streams for product lines not previously modelled

Page | 12

2.5 Programme Beneficiaries

Based on MCC staff estimates, the MCA‐N Programme is expected to reach more than 1 million beneficiaries over 20 years. The approach for determining the number of beneficiaries for a given activity depends on the type of investment. Below are the key investment categories, according to MCC’s Beneficiary Analysis guidelines:

National or Regional Investments, including large‐scale infrastructure projects that are expected to affect a geographical section of the economy such that all citizens in that area beneficiaries.

Broad‐Based Investments, including other large‐scale investments whose beneficiaries are typically counted as users of the new or improved public systems.

Targeted Projects, including all other activities that benefit specific individuals and households, such as projects that focus on agricultural development or land tenure formalization. For such projects, beneficiaries include all members of the households that experience higher incomes.

The Beneficiary Analysis guidelines define beneficiaries as individuals who experience an income gain due to the investment. Below is a summary of estimated beneficiaries for the programme, broken down by project.

Project Estimated Beneficiaries

Education 1,063,413

Tourism 168,661

Agriculture 750,220

Note: These Project counts, estimated by MCC, do not account for potential overlap of beneficiaries between projects, and so should not be added together and taken as a beneficiary estimate for the entire MCA‐N

Programme.

3. Monitoring Component

3.1 Monitoring Strategy

In order to track progress and performance through all phases of implementation, indicators at multiples levels are included: Process, Output, Outcome, and Goal (see Annex 1). These indicators and targets were jointly established by MCC and MCA‐N. To monitor progress toward the achievement of the outcomes and impact expected from the programme, MCA‐

N tracks performance against indicators and targets (the expected result and timeframe for achieving it) covering the Programme’s activities (see Annex 2).

Each of these indicator types, and their typical progression, is defined as the following:

Page | 13

Indicator Type Definition Example

Process Activities undertaken and milestones achieved Contract signed

Output Products and services produced # of farmers trained

Outcome

Immediate and higher order effects of outputs on beneficiaries

# of farmers adopting new technology

Change in farmer income

Change in crop yield

Goal Tracks impact on economic growth and poverty reduction Poverty Rate

3.2 Indicator Documentation, Baselines and Targets

Detailed information on indicators, including definitions, timing and frequency of reporting, units, level, classification, source, and responsible parties for reporting, has been compiled in

Annex 1.

Every indicator must have a baseline, which should ideally be established prior to the start of the corresponding activity. All indicators also must have annual targets whenever appropriate. It should also be noted that even if the frequency of an indicator’s target is annual, reporting on that indicator may be more frequent, to provide up‐to‐date information on progress; in many cases, the indicator will be reported on quarterly. Targets for process milestone and output indicators typically come from project work plans, though they are not derived from these exclusively. Targets for outcome and goal indicators are largely derived from quantitative analysis and/or expert input. The baselines and targets for each indicator are compiled in Annex 2.

In addition to the notes provided in the indicator tables, please note the following:

Additional indicators (and their related baselines, targets, and other documentation) may be added in subsequent revisions of the M&E Plan.

Some indicators tracking achievements related to the Tourism Project’s ENP activity have not been included, but it should be noted that maintenance and game translocation equipment valued at US$2,900,000 were delivered to ENP by 1

September 2010, and a new staffing structure for ENP was approved in July 2011.

Some indicators tracking impacts related to the CBRLM sub‐activity have not been included but MCA‐N plans to work with the data collection teams, the evaluators, and the relevant experts to devise suitable indicators and related targets.

All the indicators are also reflected in the detailed Programme Logic in Annex 4.

Page | 14

3.3 Data Quality Reviews

Ensuring that all data collected from implementers, surveys, GRN agencies or other sources is reliable, accurate, and consistent is critical in order to use the data for decision‐making, drawing conclusions about programme outcomes and impacts, and conducting final evaluations of activities.

MCA‐N has hired a Data Quality Review Consultant to conduct regular data quality reviews on all data, including ex‐ante and ex‐post reviews of all surveys and all indicators in the monitoring component. Data quality reviews address the following (among others):

The prerequisites of data quality (i.e., legal framework, resources, relevance, and quality management)

Assurances of integrity

Methodological soundness (e.g., concepts and definitions, approaches/study design, and sampling methodologies)

Validity, reliability, timeliness, and precision of all data (including data collection instruments and procedures, data entry and storage, and data analysis)

Serviceability (i.e., periodicity and dissemination standards, consistency, and revision policies and practices)

“Bi‐annual” data quality reviews on the indicators in the M&E Plan and the data reported against them took place in Compact Years 1, 2, and 4. In addition, a review of government data sources that are contributing to monitoring and evaluation and of the data collection plans that activity implementers took place in Year 1 and the first half of Year 2. Support is being provided to selected data producers to assist them in following up on recommendations arising from these reviews; the DQR team will also support certain data producers with their reporting for the all‐important Indicator Tracking Table that reports on the completed Quarter 19. Detailed ex‐ante and ex‐post reviews of all of the baseline and selected follow‐on rounds of surveys to examine survey design and quality and to review and assist with cleaning of the datasets have also taken place.

The results of all data quality reviews are thoroughly documented, including the methodology used to conduct them, all major findings and issues, and recommendations for addressing any concerns or problems identified. The final versions of the data quality reports always address all input from MCA‐N and MCC. Further, MCA‐N’s plans for follow‐ up, including which recommendations will be implemented, are documented for submission to MCC.

MCA‐N has ensured that any recommendations accepted as part of the final approval of each data quality report are implemented and/or otherwise addressed. In cases where recommendations must be addressed by an implementer, government agency, or other entity, MCA‐N followed up to help ensure that they are carried out, and continues to provide selective technical support to assist with their implementation.

Page | 15

3.4 Standard Reporting Requirements

MCA‐N reports quarterly on indicators and targets in the M&E Plan using the Indicator

Tracking Table (ITT). An ITT is submitted every quarter as part of the Quarterly

Disbursement Request Package (QDRP). Individual indicators are reported on within each

ITT according to the frequency outlined in this document’s Annex 1. Some additional information on M&E is also provided in the Narrative Report that is part of the QDRP.

The full set of requirements for quarterly reporting is outlined in MCC’s Guidance on

Quarterly MCA Disbursement Request and Reporting Package. MCA‐N follows the most current version of these guidelines when reporting each quarter.

The latest version of the ITT is posted on the MCA‐N website and quarterly status reports based thereon are available on MCC’s website.

MCA‐N’s M&E and Public Outreach units use the progress reported in the ITT – as well as other achievements tracked outside of the ITT – as a basis for results‐reporting.

3.5 Linking Disbursement to Performance

According to the Program Implementation Agreement (PIA) between MCC and GRN (through the National Planning Commission), there must be “satisfactory progress on the M&E Plan for the Programme, relevant Project or Project Activity and substantial compliance with the requirements of such M&E Plan” (PIA, p. 16) prior to each disbursement of programme funding. In the event that substantial compliance is not achieved, disbursements could be held up until the requirement is met.

4. Evaluation Component

4.1 Introduction

Although programme monitoring is an integral part of tracking programme results, it is not sufficient to measure higher‐level impacts on income and well‐being of beneficiaries, or to glean lessons learned from implementation that can be applied to future interventions.

Consequently, evaluations of projects and activities, either individually or in sensible combinations, are important to provide deeper measurement of results.

The methodology for each evaluation carried out should be tailored to what is feasible for the activity under examination, but also should strive to use the most rigorous method possible within that activity’s particular implementation context. In particular, it is important, when feasible, to conduct impact evaluations that employ a rigorous approach to estimate a counterfactual – that is, what would have happened in the absence of the project or activity. Measuring results experienced by beneficiaries against a counterfactual scenario (usually a comparison group of statistically similar individuals) allows the net impact to be calculated quantitatively, and prevents overestimates of results, since individuals who are not beneficiaries of MCA‐N activities may still see improvements in their living situation due to other factors.

Page | 16

Below is a graphic presentation of how impact evaluations employ a comparison against a counterfactual to determine the net impact attributable to the activity.

The below table summarizes the planned evaluation approach for each activity/sub‐ activity and the timeline for when results are expected.

Project Activity (Sub‐Activity) Evaluation Approach When Results Are

Expected

EDUCATION Improving the quality of general education (includes 47 schools, CPD, and textbooks)

Performance December 2015

Expanding Vocational and Skills Training Impact December 2016

Construction and management of RSRCs Performance December 2016

TOURISM Ecotourism Development in

Conservancies (joint evaluation with INPs)

Performance September 2014

Improved Management of ENP Performance December 2015

Tourism Marketing Performance December 2015

AGRICULTURE Land Access and Management (CLS) Performance December 2015

Land Access and Management (CBRLM) Impact June 2016

Livestock Support Performance September 2014

Development of INPs (joint evaluation with Conservancy Support)

Performance September 2014

Beneficiaries (with activity)

Comparison (without activity)

Key Variable:

Income

Year 1 Y2 Y3 Y4 ProgrammePeriod

True Impact = B ‐ C

A

B

C

Impact ≠ B ‐ A

Why It Is Important To Measure An Activity’s Results Against A Counterfactual

Time

Note how the income of the Comparison group increases (though not as much) despite not participating in the activity.

Page | 17

Detailed descriptions of the evaluation concepts to date for each Project and activity/sub‐ activity follow below. In addition to the specific questions for each, all of them will look at differences in impact between men and women and relevant age and income groups as feasible and relevant, and will also assess lessons learned from implementation that can be applied to similar activities in the future.

4.2 Education Project

General Education Evaluation (Rehabilitation and Construction of 47 Schools; CPD; Access to and Management of Textbooks)

Given that the 47 school sites have been chosen based on needs, and the sample is therefore non‐random, and the textbook activity has a national scope, targeting basically the country’s entire population of learners, evaluation methodologies that are dependent on a rigorously‐defined counterfactual are not possible. However, it is planned to triangulate quantitative and qualitative methods for this evaluation, with the specific evaluation approach to be determined with the help of the independent evaluation firm.

In addition to assessing whether the package of general education and textbook interventions contribute to learner achievement at the 47 schools, other preliminary research questions include:

Do improved school facilities translate into an improved learning environment and lead to increases in learner achievement?6

Does improved teacher housing attract higher quality teachers? How has a change in teacher qualifications, if any, contributed to learner achievement?

To what extent does CPD contribute to a higher quality education workforce?

Does a more efficient textbook management system increase learners’ access to textbooks and, in turn, increase in learner achievement? Does a more efficient textbook procurement and management lead to cost savings?

Expanding Vocational and Skills Training

The vocational education grants facility will have a rigorous evaluation that compares those who are randomly selected to participate in one of the training grant programs with a comparison group of those who are not randomly selected. This methodology should be feasible because it is anticipated that there will be more applicants for training grant slots than available spaces and that has generally been the case thus far. The same evaluator will also evaluate the other two vocational and skills training activities: NTF Levy and COSDECs.

The specific methodologies are outlined in the evaluation design report along with a refined set of evaluation questions. However, some of the key questions are highlighted here:

Ideally, the evaluation would measure whether improved facilities increase learner achievement, which, in turn, spawns higher earning over time. However, given the five‐year timeframe of the programme, it will not be possible to measure impacts over a longer time horizon. As a result, quality of learning and learner performance may serve as a proxy for eventual increase in income.

Page | 18

Competitive Grants for High‐Priority Vocational Skills Training (i.e., the Vocational Training

Grants Fund (VTGF))

Was the VTGF implemented as planned? How were the VTGF grants managed?

What were beneficiaries’ perceptions of the VTGF grants?

To what extent did those offered the opportunity of training through the VTGF receive more training relative to non‐VTGF‐funded, qualified applicants?

How did employers hire VTGF graduates, and what were their perceptions of the graduates? To what extent did the VTGF improve employment outcomes for VTGF‐ funded trainees relative to non‐VTGF‐funded, qualified applicants?

To what extent did VTGF‐funded trainees have higher earnings and income relative to non‐funded, qualified applicants? To what extent did increased earnings result from increased wages while employed, versus increased employment?

Did the effects of the training funded by the VTGF vary by trainee characteristics?

What key characteristics or practices of training providers were associated with stronger impacts on employment and earnings?

Were the RPL and employer‐provided training pilots implemented as planned? To what extent did employers’ and employees’ perceptions change after employee certification?

Establishment of Namibia Training Fund (NTF)

Was the establishment of the NTF levy collection, distribution, and reporting system implemented as planned?

How is the NTF levy collection and distribution system operating in practice compared to the specifications outlined in the regulatory framework?

What are the stakeholder perceptions of sustainability of the NTF levy collection and distribution system?

Construction and Upgrading of Community Skills Development Centres (COSDECs) and

COSDECs Management Training

Were the COSDEC Sub‐Activities implemented as planned?

To what extent did the COSDEC Sub‐Activities increase the availability of training?

How did COSDEC training affect the employment outcomes of trainees?

How did COSDEC training affect the earnings and income of trainees?

How were the new and renovated COSDECs managed?

Page | 19

Tertiary Finance

The Tertiary Finance component is has undergone significant programme design work during the early Compact period. Appropriate monitoring indicators are still under development.

This activity will not undergo an independent evaluation given that the time required to measure relevant outcomes, like income, and the resources that would be required to do so are not justified by the activity budget. However, a number of intermediate outcomes can be tracked with monitoring data. These might include the measure of expanded access to tertiary education (e.g., enrolment), institutional efficiencies of tertiary education institutions (TEIs) (e.g., loan recovery rates), and if possible, more equitable access to tertiary education financing (e.g., proportion of students below the poverty line accessing

National Student Financial Assistance Fund products).

RSRCs

This activity is not a strong candidate for an impact evaluation, as there are not appropriate facilities to serve as a counterfactual. However, independent evaluators will be hired to design and implement a performance evaluation that uses a range of methods and data sources to assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of the RSRC activity in achieving outputs and educational‐, economic‐, and community development‐ related outcomes. Evaluation questions include, among others, the following:

Was the Activity implemented according to plan, and within budget and schedule?

To what extent does the Activity reach intended and unintended participants? How accessible are the facilities and services?

For what purpose do different groups of people use the RSRCs? To what extent do the RSRCs meet different needs? What broader impact do the RSRCs have beyond immediate users?

How effective is leadership in promoting and achieving the vision of the RSRCs?

How functional and sustainable are the RSRCs?

Cross‐Project Support (Support to HAMU)

This activity is not currently scheduled to be independently evaluated given its relative small size, difficultly in identifying related outcomes that would be feasible to measure, and limited potential to provide cost‐effective learning opportunities.

4.3 Tourism Project

Conservancy Development Support Services and the Conservancy Development Support

Grants Fund

The Conservancy Support (CS) activity is focused on 31 conservancies (i.e., about 40% of the

76 conservancies…