Donor-accountability demands have increased the importance of indicator-based Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) for official development assistance (ODA). This unremitting pressure for aid- recipient countries to produce indicators and for donors to judge the success of aid exclusively by indicators is well documented by development scholars and practitioners. The research for this dissertation examined how this pressure reffered to as "indicatorism" influenced and was influenced by the implementation of donor development aid. The donor-funded Kenya Education Sector Support Program (KESSP) served as a case study to address this issue. It investigated the factors that formed "indicatorism" for KESSP; the actual production of indicators for KESSP; the influence of the politics of development aid on M & E; and whether Geographic Information (GI) served as an alternative to indicators in the M & E process. The case study used an archival review of KESSP documentation, detailed observation of KESSP project sites, focus group discussions with KESSP stakeholders at four field sites in Kenya, interviews with donor and government officials, an analysis of KESSP indicators, and an analysis of KESSP's school mapping project (SMP). Through an examination of the historical context preceding KESSP, this dissertation concluded that a sequence of policies fostered a culture of "indicatorism". Donor policies that included structural adjustment and those that promoted global development targets have encouraged both donors and recipient governments to unrelentingly use indicators to judge aid. Within Kenya performance-contracting policies have reinforced this emphasis on indicators. An investigation of how KESSP's indicators were produced revealed that pressures to inflate indicators corrupted KESSP's M & E system. There was strong evidence that national administrative data systems produced exaggerated indicators. However, there was no evidence to suggest that local implementers over-counted core educational statistics intended to produce indicators for KESSP. An investigation of the politics that surrounded KESSP showed that political relations shaped the findings of indicator-based M & E reporting. When relations were strong at the beginning of KESSP, M & E reporting was used to show the success of KESSP. As these relations deteriorated M & E reporting reflected the rifts between donors and the Kenyan government. However, even after donors suspended aid, indicators still framed the discourse about KESSP and free primary education in Kenya. An examination of the use of GI for KESSP's M & E demonstrated that despite its planned use as an integral part of KESSP's M & E, GI was not used to evaluate KESSP. Mapping data about KESSP could have exposed the government to a degree of transparency beyond what reporting aggregate national indicators provided. There are, of course, other explanations why GI was not used. For instance, the rapid creation of new administrative districts could have also made its use infeasible. The absence of transparency in the M & E process could very well be a symptom of the culture of "indicatorism", but this lack of transparency also makes it difficult to rule out alternative explanations about KESSP and its M & E process.

In South Africa, democracy has brought transformative improvement in the system of governance. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) implemented in the post-apartheid era, has raised the status of the lowest sphere of government, by granting these authorities delegated responsibilities. This sphere of governance is known as local government (municipal government) and in the present context developmental local government is both democratically elected and decentralized. The restructuring of local governance requires municipalities to serve the communities within their areas of jurisdiction. This has brought capacity challenges for the municipalities. They are charged with delivering acceptable standards of services to the residents. The current lack of deliverance is evident in the widespread protests, with community members showing their dissatisfaction with sub-standard service delivery and backlogs. Furthermore, municipalities are required to formulate their own by-laws improve the lives of community members, and to implement their legislative mandates satisfactorily. In order for the municipalities to perform more effectively, a transformative model is necessary. The quality of services currently delivered at municipal level must be reviewed. Monitoring and evaluation are the key elements of assessment which must be undertaken. The rationale behind this monitoring and evaluation is to make the system of governance more effective through an even-handed assessment of policies, programmes, projects, strategies, performance of personnel, and the organization as a whole. For the purpose of this study, the researcher explored the challenges regarding monitoring and evaluation and its impact on sustainable development in Sedibeng District Municipality utilizing the quantitative research approach. A model is proposed for improvement called as Monitoring and Evaluation for Sustainable Development (MESD). / PhD (Public Management and Governance), North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2014

In South Africa, democracy has brought transformative improvement in the system of governance. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) implemented in the post-apartheid era, has raised the status of the lowest sphere of government, by granting these authorities delegated responsibilities. This sphere of governance is known as local government (municipal government) and in the present context developmental local government is both democratically elected and decentralized. The restructuring of local governance requires municipalities to serve the communities within their areas of jurisdiction. This has brought capacity challenges for the municipalities. They are charged with delivering acceptable standards of services to the residents. The current lack of deliverance is evident in the widespread protests, with community members showing their dissatisfaction with sub-standard service delivery and backlogs. Furthermore, municipalities are required to formulate their own by-laws improve the lives of community members, and to implement their legislative mandates satisfactorily. In order for the municipalities to perform more effectively, a transformative model is necessary. The quality of services currently delivered at municipal level must be reviewed. Monitoring and evaluation are the key elements of assessment which must be undertaken. The rationale behind this monitoring and evaluation is to make the system of governance more effective through an even-handed assessment of policies, programmes, projects, strategies, performance of personnel, and the organization as a whole. For the purpose of this study, the researcher explored the challenges regarding monitoring and evaluation and its impact on sustainable development in Sedibeng District Municipality utilizing the quantitative research approach. A model is proposed for improvement called as Monitoring and Evaluation for Sustainable Development (MESD). / PhD (Public Management and Governance), North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2014

Magister Public Health - MPH / Over the years major changes have occurred in the focus, approach and application of monitoring and evaluation systems as a result of increased levels of emphasis towards achieving results (outcomes) as opposed to activities and outputs. As the focus of management changes from activities to results, so too has the focal point of M&E shifted from the traditional M&E system of progress monitoring that only deals with assessing inputs and implementation processes, to a results-based M&E system that emphasizes the need to assess the contributions of intervention to development outcomes. Nowadays funders, stakeholders and donor agencies want to see the difference that development initiatives make in the livelihood of project beneficiaries.Results-based M&E systems are essential components of most organisational structures responsible for development services and this is very fundamental as it provides vital information and empowers policy makers to take better informed decisions. The foundation of an M&E system is the very first step which is in essence called a ‘readiness assessment’. Such an assessment must be conducted before the actual establishment of an M&E system. Just as a building must begin with a foundation, constructing an M&E system must also begin with the establishment of a readiness assessment. Without this assessment and an understanding of the preparedness and commitment of the organisation, establishing an M&E system may be fraught with difficulties and failure.The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) of the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Programme of Ikamva Labantu has always been in the form of a reporting-type check list. The Centre is in a process of establishing an effective M&E system. The problem being investigated in this study is whether Ikamva Labantu has achieved a sufficient level of readiness to establish a results-based monitoring and evaluation system. However, the study shall also highlight crucial aspect of PM&E and RBM&E that will have to be taken into consideration with the establishment of the actual M&E system.With the use of the qualitative research method, the aim of this study is to analyse and assess the readiness assessment phase for establishing a monitoring and evaluation system in the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Programmes of Ikamva Labantu Centre, Khayelitsha.

Grenada is 1 of 15 developing countries in Caribbean Community known as CARICOM. The infrastructure capital projects in these developing countries are plagued with an array of issues: unethical practices, inadequate supervision, lack of transparency and accountability, inadequate monitoring and evaluation, cost overruns, and inefficiencies. In the 1980s and 1990s, the International Monitory Fund and World Bank introduced a balanced scorecard engineered under the structural adjustment program, but it was unable to improve infrastructure project efficiencies. This qualitative case study sought to understand the role of management key performance indicators (KPIs) on public sector infrastructure capital project efficiency on the island of Grenada. An institutional assessment and development framework and a classical management theoretical framework methodology were used to explore the effects of management KPIs on public sector infrastructure capital projects efficiencies in developing countries. The research incorporated a constructivist philosophy that underpins the evaluation and perception of the government, the National Water and Sewerage Authority (NAWASA), project teams, systems, and stakeholders. A purposive sampling strategy with elements of snowballing was used to obtain 12 representative participants for interviews, and a systematic approach of transcribing, coding, and thematic analysis was done. Findings indicate inadequacies in the BSC performance measure system on infrastructure projects, which justifies the use of comprehensive management KPIs. Positive social change implications of this study include recommendations for comprehensive management KPIs and policies to improve public sector infrastructure project efficiency in Grenada.