Cross-cutting M&E functions in MENARID

1. Cross-cutting M&E functions in MENARID MENARID Knowledge Exchange workshop 24th to 28th of March, Hammamet, Tunisia

2. Whatis the MENARID cross-cutting M&E functions about? • To build-up a system that will provide : • reliable information on the implementation of program; • facilitate analysis of projects performance; • improve M&E practices. • To identify a core set of indicatorscommon to INRM projects • Twosteps: • 1. To harmonize M&E tools • 2. Aligned M&E approaches & processes

3. 1. To harmonize M&E tools: putting in place the requirements for a Results BasedManagement system for INRM projects • Definition of RBM => Roberto • Proposing a set of performance and impact indicators, measurement and monitoring methodology, and means of verification; • Designing a Results Based Budgeting (RBB) system for INRM projects: • Wokringtowardsachievingresults and not onlytwoards the delivery of outputs

4. 1. To harmonize M&E tools: putting in place the requirements for a Results BasedManagement system for INRM projects • Results-based budgeting (RBB)is a planning and strategic management tool. It is actually a sub- set of “results-based management” (RBM). The process is the following: • Projects formulate budgets around a set of pre-defined objectives and expected accomplishments, and • Expected accomplishments justify the resource requirements which are derived from and linked to outputs required to achieve such accomplishments, and • Actual performance in achieving expected accomplishments is measured by indicators of achievement. • Source: (UN Guide to RBB (Version 1.1), Office of Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts, 23 October 1998, Glossary.)

5. 1. To harmonize M&E tools: putting in place the requirements for a Results BasedManagement system for INRM projects • Common outcomes after Rabat workshop: • Outcome 1 : Institutional issues improved. • Increased capacity of local and national institutions involved in MENARID; • Increased local/regional legal action to promote INRM; • Increase engagement of institutions (cross-sector coordination); • Improve regulations and enforcement. • Increased financing for INRM • Improve regulations and enforcement • Outcome 2: socio-economic situation of local communities improved • Improve infrastructure • Increased organization of population affected • Improved livelihoods (health, income, education, job, gender, youth) • Access to natural and financial resources • Access to information • Increased efficiency and sustainability • Improved food security Outputs Outputs

6. 1. To harmonize M&E tools: putting in place the requirements for a Results BasedManagement system for INRM projects • Common outcomes after Rabat workshop: • Outcome 3: INRM impact positively the environment • Diversification • Restored lands • Sustainable intensification • Increased used of good practices • Sustainable water management • Increased protection of biodiversity • Resilience of crop/livestock • Decreased pollution • Increased vegetation cover • Decreased fire risk • Increased Carbon sequestration • Increased new technologies (solar, etc) Outputs

7. Outcome 1 : Institutional issues improved - Indicators • Proportion of project staff who stay in their institutions beyond project period to achieve sustainability. • Proportion of cooperating agencies that participate in project implementation, and that continue to do so in order to achieve sustainability. • Number of NR planning and coordination entities working cross-sectorally at national, provincial and local levels. • Increase in local and national capacity for INRM monitoring and evaluation of the techniques (number of monitoring reports per given period). • Proportion of private sector entities involved in project related partnerships. • Number of local and national institutions that engaged additional INRM into planning and framework after project implementation. • Number of educational entities (schools, universities) involved in the INRM project; • Number of extension services involved in the INRM project. • Corporate/Management strategy for long-term sustainability of the INRM project; • Number of similar organization/partners who replicate/adopt the INRM techniques. • Institutional agreements on NR use. • Proportion of targeted people accessing to financial incentives for INRM • Amount of private financing for promoting INRM; • Increased public financing for promoting INRM; • Developed and negotiated strategy for Long-term financial support of INRM implementation at local and national levels. • Adoption of appropriate financial mechanisms in the project areas. • Capacity to auto-finance activities • NR accessible within the project area, and that are not of private domain; • Proportion of people that are concerned by the local legislation

8. Outcome 2: Socio-economic situation of local communities improved - Indicators • Proportion of awareness of non-INRM issues and of the INRM project in the area • Proportion of INRM practices adoption by target group (soil management techniques, diseases control techniques, water efficient techniques). • Proportion of target group people trained to implement INRM; • Area associated with INRM • Proportion of the area with increasing in INRM production outcomes (e.g., agricultural yields); • Number of Community Based activities (collaborative/participative management entities) implemented in the INRM project ; • Proportion of women into these community based activities; • Proportion of women who actively contribute to planning and management processes for INRM. • Proportion of target group people associated with an INRM community-based management entities; • Proportion of project participants who are living below the locally poverty line. • KM and KS activities/training that take place. • Sustainable informational tool for Knowledge generation and dissemination. • Number of training activities about INRM that take place, and number of trained people; • Increasing awareness amongst projects about gender issues when dealing with INRM. • Number of market-based (financial), non-monetary and trade-off assessments of the loss of ecosystem services across the area. • Number of women’s organization systematically engaged in dialogue on INRM; • Number of women systematically consultant for policy-making decisions to represent their interests. • Number of Payments for Ecosystem Services schemes established or formerly planned that bring benefits for local livelihoods through INRM; • Evolution of stakeholders’ income from NR after project implementation; • Evolution of women’s income in the project; • Percentage increase in value added for local products. • Behavioral indicators

9. Outcome 3: INRM impact positively the environment - Indicators • Area of NR (Land, watersheds, rangelands, and others) managed through IRNM demonstrations/up-scaling, over each project site, and across the different agro-ecosystems • Proportion of women adopting INRM; • Reduction of NR degradation (increase in Net Primary Productivity, or Rain Use Efficiency) • Area covered with IRNM practices; • Climate change mitigation impact (GIS data) • Rate of carbon sequestration in soils and vegetation across the project; • Area of renovated NR since project implementation. • Increase in NR coverage amongst the area (reforestation, decrease in urbanization) • Quantity of production from NR over the project area (net primary productivity) • GIS data (vegetation index, surface temperatures).

10. 2. Aligned M&E approaches & processes: Engaging the project stakeholders in designing the RBM and M&E system => Next workshop!