ABSTRACT

The PCC has recently been witnessing an upsurge in income-generating projects as way of ensuring financial sustainability and practical spiritualism. One way to enhancing the performance of these projects has been through the use of control measures such as monitoring and evaluation processes. The main objective of this study is to assess the effects of monitoring and evaluation processes on project execution in the PCC. The theory of change, theory of efficiency and agency theory were used to establish the link between monitoring and evaluation processes, effectiveness of their conduct, and project performance assuming that all other factors are kept constant. The study adopted the descriptive survey research design. Data was obtained from the various Departments / Services, Institutions and Archives Office of the PCC, through questionnaires, source documents, interviews, and observations. Data analysis was by narrative, and simple statistical methods. It was found that M&E processes are conducted by both the PCC Management (supported by 83/175 respondents), and Project Management team/contractors (72/175 respondents). Good M&E approaches and tools are used; including Results-Based (61/175 respondents), Participatory Approach (52/175 respondents), Regular Supervision (50/175 respondents), and ISs (107/175 respondents). 83/175 of the respondents indicated that there is periodic reporting of project activities and budget utilization.  However, it was also found that comprehensive M&E systems with elaborate plan to guide the control team is lacking. Similarly, 78.9% respondents said no funds are provided for M&E processes. 48% of respondents agreed that projects encounter delays and budget overruns but 52% said that the quality of products / services is good. The projects are said to be relevant and useful, and 68.6% respondents confirmed that beneficiaries are satisfied with the products/services. It was deduced that all other factors kept constant, execution of PCC projects would be more successful if monitoring and evaluation processes were more effective. The following recommendations were made among others: award of project management contracts to professionals with M&E expertise; the setting up of a comprehensive M&E system with an elaborate plan for every project, budgetary allocations and disbursement for M&E processes, and training of M&E.

Keywords: Monitoring, Evaluation, Project Execution, Project Performance, Descriptive Survey Research Design, Results-based Method, Participatory Approach.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION       

1.1 Background to the Study

The number of projects and programs in Sub-Sahara Africa (SSA) has been rising continuously throughout the post-independence era as a way to foster economic and social development in these countries. However, according to (Rondinelli, 1976), despite more than a quarter of a century of intense experience with project management investment, international funding institutions and ministries of developing countries still report serious problems in project execution.  More than forty years on, African countries South of the Sahara are still grappling with the same problems. With the advent of globalization, organisations all over the world are faced with growing internal and external demands for continuous improvements in project management to enhance performance and remain competitive (Kusek and Rist, 2004). Whether these demands call for greater accountability and transparency in exchange for foreign aid or real results, organisations must be increasingly responsive to stakeholder demand to demonstrate tangible results (Khan, 2001). Such tangible results are only attainable through efficient and effective project implementation.

Although there are a good number of success stories about project implementation in SSA, the number of poorly executed, failed or abandoned projects still remains a cause for concern. For instance, several studies are known to have documented failure of African infrastructure firms to meet the defined project objectives in terms of time, budget and functionality (Ochungo and Odinga, 2019). The result of this has been delays, abandonment or disillusionment on the part of the investors. Based on literature review method, Ochungo and Odinga (2019) identify lack of human resource capacity or technical skills in project management as a main reason for the dismal performance in construction project delivery in Africa. Ikejemba et al (2017) argue that lack of clear definition of sustainability in terms of project implementation is one reason why project implementation fails in SSA. In a report on implementation of rural electrification projects in Nine countries (Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Gabon, South Africa, Tanzania, Mozambique, Ethiopia and Malawi), they also advance political agenda; biased award of contracts; lack stakeholder involvement; poor planning and implementation and lack of maintenance plan as reasons for failure. In a related study, Morardet et al (2005), singled out poor planning and implementation as one of the main reasons for failure of agricultural water development and management projects in SSA.

Development projects always contain uncertainties and risks that may defy the best of planning and project preparation, (Kakonge, 2015). A review of implementation of the Bura Irrigation Scheme (BIS) in Kenya, and the Onchocerciasis (River Blindness) program in eleven West African countries including Cameroon reveals some of the factors contributing to project risk and uncertainty in SSA and why such projects succeeded or failed. According to Harrin (2012), most project designers assume that a “one-size-fits-all” approach will work, especially for externally funded projects, and therefore adopt generalisation in project design. To this, Marcel D’Costa points out that most projects are designed in the office, bearing no relation to the reality on the ground and are therefore out of context (Harrin, 2012). The lack of adequate research to generate the reliable data needed to make informed decision and the dismissal of local experience has contributed to failure of project implementation in SSA. According to Horta (1994), the World Bank project managers of BIS knew of early technical reports that the soils were not suitable for irrigation in the area but ignored them. According to Hyden (2013), during designing of most of these projects, donors feel that carrying out academic research would take long and might produce unwanted, unnecessary information. However, time and cost of research notwithstanding, there are no short-cuts or easy fixes that will unlock the risks and uncertainties in project design and implementation (Kakonge, 2015). Some project designers focus more attention on economic rates of return to the exclusion of everything else such that they even tend to ignore the sociocultural aspects of projects in Africa. Given that most projects in SSA are externally funded, the project designers and implementers are compelled to focus on the outcomes that the sponsors want. However, given the challenges that many of these countries face, project designers and planners should always consult target communities prior to writing their projects so as to be able to adapt the projects to home-based African values and realities. Quoting Ika, Harrin (2012) recommends that to avoid bias, externally funded project designers should adopt flexible methods and take into consideration local circumstances, an approach which contributed to the success of the West African River Blindness project (1974 – 2002). Harrin also highlights dishonesty as the most important factor for project failure in SSA, especially the hiding of true facts and false reporting. According to Horta (1994), despite knowing that the soils were not suitable for irrigation, the World Bank staff hid the truth from the Board to allow BIS to be approved. Again, in this cavalier approach to project design and implementation, it did not matter to the officers until after the BIS in Kenya failed. Political pressure / agenda and over ambitious project design are also contributing factors to failure of project implementation in SSA. However, sometimes politics can also have a positive impact on project design and implementation. This is the case with the West African River Blindness project where political pressure played a critical role in the eradication of Onchocerciasis in eleven West African countries including Cameroon. According to Akande (2003) and WHO (2003), the River Blindness program (1974 – 2002), sponsored by WHO, with the collaboration of 32 organisations including the World Bank, UNDP and FAO was probably the most successful program in the history of institutional cooperation in SSA with exemplary support of the nine out of eleven participating countries in both cash and in kind contributions. Despite political differences between some of these countries at the time (and civil war in Sierra Leon and Liberia), the fight against river blindness is said to have united them until the end.

The experience of World Bank funded Social Action Programmes / Social Funds (SAPs/SFs) in SSA also gives an insight on the intricacies of project implementation in the SSA countries. The programmes were aimed at poverty alleviation in developing countries in general and in SSA in particular in response to the economic crisis of the 1980s. These programs, designed to operate in short to medium term alongside economic reforms, were targeted at the poor and vulnerable groups facing sharp deterioration in living conditions as a result of austerity measures taken by the various countries at the time. Based on data gathered from project documents, task managers of the projects, and findings made by the authors during field visits; Marc et al (1995) reviewed the implementation performance of twelve SAPs/SFs programs in SSA in a document titled “Design and Implementation in SSA of Social Action Funds / Social Funds”. The review shows that in general terms, the program did not succeed and the projects in the various countries were plagued with numerous and diverse implementation problems. Interestingly, the principal problems encountered were similar in most of the countries: lack of technical knowhow; lack of autonomy due excessive government control or political pressure; delay or lack of counterpart funds; non-involvement of NGOs/communities; lack of institutional capacity, decision and disbursement delays; lack of proper accountability; lack or non-respect of systematic selection procedures for loan and contract eligibility (favouritism or bias in the award of loans and contracts). However, some of the problems were country specific. For example, political instability impacted implementation in Chad and Somalia; over-ambitious project design led to failure in Ghana; lack of equipment, transport and late payment of salaries affected the programme in Uganda; there was poor planning for sustainability of micro-projects in Zambia; Cameroon government’s failure to respect its commitments led to cancellation of the programme in 1994. Despite these implementation problems, it will be inappropriate to say that the SAPs / SFs programs (which had different names in different countries) in SSA were a total failure given that some components of the program succeeded in a few countries.

Cameroon being a SSA country suffers from similar issues of project implementation as those discussed above. The SAPs/SFs programme was implemented in Cameroon as the Social Dimension of Adjustment Project (SDAP). It was designed as part of the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) to support in the implementation of poverty alleviation strategy. A National Employment fund (FNE) was created alongside SDAP to generate employment. However, lack of autonomy and failure of Cameroon to honour its counterpart fund commitments, coupled with serious liquidity problems led to cancellation of the project in 1994 (Marc et al, 1995)

The case of Cameroon Biodiversity Conservation and Management Project also illustrates the problem of project implementation in Cameroon. Sponsored by World Bank, the project was designed to consolidate and upgrade the management of protected areas with high global priority for biodiversity conservation. Implementation involved ten international NGOs and a Central Coordination Unit (CNC) from the then Ministry of Environment and Forests. The project suffered implementation failure due to lack of coordination capacity; excessive government control; absence of national strategy; poor communication and coordination among implementing NGOs and government; limited stakeholder involvement in project designing (which was done by consultant NGOs); lack of government commitment to community forestry and higher support for extractive exploitation than conservation as per the Project Implementation Review of the Global Environment Facility in 1997.

According World Bank (2016), the Agricultural Competitiveness project (2010 – 2016) and the Community Development Programme Support Project II (2009 – 2015) sponsored by the Islamic Development Agency (IDA) were both successful. The earlier project was intended to boost the country’s agricultural productivity through provision of rural infrastructure facilities and investing in value chains for rice and maize cultivation, as well as production of broiler meat and pork. The latter programme was intended to improve delivery of priority basic services in targeted communities and support the ongoing decentralization process. The 2015 Country Strategy and Program Evaluation of projects/programs sponsored by the African Development Bank (ADB) in the period 2004 – 2013 sheds more light on the situation of project implementation in Cameroon. The work was done by the Independent Development Evaluation (IDE) – ADB and according to the report, only 7 of the 25 projects had been completed. In rating implementation of the projects; Relevance of the Bank’s Interventions was said to be satisfactory. Effectiveness of implementation was moderately satisfactory with tangible results in the project area of infrastructure. Efficiency of implementation was rated as moderately unsatisfactory due to generic problems and specific implementation difficulties. Delay factors were sighted as being weak capacity of project implementation units and service providers, compensation problems, provision of counterpart funds, and delay in award of government contracts. Sustainability was said to be moderately likely for infrastructure projects.

According to Kakonge (2015), major evaluations of African projects indicate that to address the risk and uncertainties in projects and programmes, there is need for well-funded regular monitoring and evaluation, and research, supported by a strong network in which successes and failures can be shared and lessons learned be used to guide the design and implementation of future projects / programmes. Projects need to be designed so as to allow flexibility and adjustments when needed, provided the changes have the concurrence of all stakeholders (Akande, 2003; WHO, 2003). African governments and institutions need to collaborate with universities, scientists and development partners to make sure that research activities and baseline studies are concretely done and incorporated into project design and implementation.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

With the pressure of increasing demand for performant projects, there is need for continuous improvement in project management. According to PMI (1994), project management involves application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities in order to meet or exceed stakeholder needs and expectations. While most of the literature reviewed adopts the basic project management processes of initiation, planning, execution, monitoring and control, and closing proposed by PMI in PMBOK (2013), there also seem to be common view that the techniques, tools, and methods required for managing projects can be diverse depending on the type of project, the specific objectives, resources, stakeholders and the environment. For most scholars and practitioners, project management should involve one or a combination of project management techniques/tools such as the work breakdown structure (WBS), program evaluation and review technique (PERT), critical path method (CPM), and Gantt Chart (PMI, 2000). These techniques generally assist in planning, scheduling monitoring and controlling project activities. Although the use of structured project management methodologies increases the chances of achieving the expected results, it is not a guarantee that the project objectives will be met. Despite the adoption of project management standards and project management methodologies, many projects worldwide still fall short of meeting the expected requirements. According to PMBOK, standard is a guide rather than a specific methodology. Every project is unique and poses its unique challenges depending on the industry, size, location, nature, complexity, politics, environment etc. Some researchers tend to support the general project management theory which combines both the task and organisational perspectives proposed by Anderson (Morris, 2003; Shenhar and Dvir, 1996), while other scholars suggest the creation of different project management theories and standards based on the different perspectives. Whatever perspective, management standards or methodologies are used, project management must include control tools such as monitoring and evaluation. Today, monitoring and evaluation systems have increasingly become a required management tool to show performance with demand by stakeholders for accountability and transparency through the application of monitoring and evaluation by NGOs and other institutions including governments. However, World Bank (2006) reveals institutional and individual gap for monitoring and evaluation capacity. Many countries do not have the demand for monitoring and evaluation processes. Those that have it have not been able to develop a comprehensive and systematic monitoring and evaluation system. According to Njama (2015), an elaborate and effective monitoring and evaluation system is a necessary requirement for projects and programs to be successful and meet set goals and objectives. In the absence of effective monitoring and evaluation, it would be difficult to know whether intended results are being achieved as planned, what corrective action may be needed to ensure delivery of intended results and whether initiatives are making positive contributions toward human development (World Bank, 2011).

Despite growing knowledge that effective monitoring and evaluation are major contributors to project success, there is still project failure in Cameroon in general, and the PCC in particular. Project management in Cameroon like in all SSA, is plagued with multiple challenges which result in poor project execution, failure, and even abandonment. Many construction & rehabilitation projects in Cameroon are at a snail-pace, surpassing deadlines, uncompleted or abandoned (Mbonteh, 2018). Issues tied to execution of projects are also known to have contributed to the disqualification of Cameroon as host of the 2019 AFCON by CAF in 2018. According to the Project Control Office, and Office of the Health Services (2020), some projects of the PCC have either encountered unbearable delays or suspension. The case of Commercial Complex Bamenda, a project that was designed with the objective of transforming PRESCRAFT and mainly for income generation was cited as one of the projects that were suspended. Another project that was suspended is the Integration of HIV/AIDS program into the National School Curriculum. Reasons for the delays and suspension of some of these projects are said to range from incompetence of contractors, financial constraints, the South West / North West Crisis etc. This research seeks to find out how M&E processes are carried out, and how they affect project execution in the PCC and to provide recommendations on how the two could be improved for better project performance.

1.3. Research Questions

 Main Question:

What are the effects of Monitoring and Evaluation processes on project execution in the PCC?

Specific Questions:

1. What are the methods and tools used in conducting monitoring and evaluation processes to ensure effective project execution?
2. What is the effectiveness of monitoring and evaluation processes with respect to PCC project success?

1.4. Objectives of The Study

Main Objective:

To assess the effects of monitoring and evaluation processes on project execution in the PCC

Specific Objectives:

1. To identify the methods and tools used in conducting monitoring and evaluation processes to ensure effective project execution
2. To assess the effectiveness of monitoring and evaluation processes with respect to PCC project success

1.5. Hypothesis

H₀₁: A combination of methods and tools are used for monitoring and evaluation of PCC projects to ensure effective execution.

H₀₂: Monitoring and evaluation processes are not fully effective in PCC project execution.

1.6. Significance of the Research

This work is expected to benefit NGOs, business enterprises, government institutions, project managers, as well as donor agencies in different ways.

To NGOs such as the PCC; this study will help to better understand the need for comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system with elaborate plan, and effective application of the same in project management to enhance project performance.

To researchers; it will add to the very scarce resource documents on monitoring and evaluation in the PCC in particular and Cameroon in general and will trigger further research work on areas that have not been fully exploited.

To policy makers: it will inform formulation of corporate / state policy with respect to project monitoring and control, and for future interventions.

1.7. Organisation of the Study

This study was prompted by the upsurge of projects and the need to enhance project performance through effective monitoring and evaluation processes. The research work begins with a scope of project execution in post-colonial sub Saharan Africa including Cameroon as elaborated in Chapter One. The background literature to justify monitoring and evaluation as vital control tools for efficient and effective execution of projects is given in Chapter 2 captioned Literature Review.  Chapter 3 elaborates among other things, the data used in this research, how it was obtained and how it has been analysed with respect to research objectives. Under Presentation and Discussions in Chapter 4, the results of this research findings have been elucidated with all thoroughness while the summary, conclusion and recommendations based on the findings have been presented in Chapter 5. The work closes with a list of references and appendices.