Monitoring System of Starbucks
Monitoring and Evaluation Systems
Monitoring consists of everyday assessment of activities and projects, while evaluation entails the routine assessment of attained undertakings. Monitoring oversees the amount of work done while evaluation oversees the impact of the work done yet. There are number of audiences to be tapped upon for information regarding monitoring and evaluating post disaster projects such as:
Agencies
Funders
Government
Public
Afflicted community
In case of post disaster projects, monitoring and evaluation is twofold complicated due to occurrences like:
Project designs made in a hurry
Baselines are often overlooked
The relevant data is unavailable
Yet, competent monitoring and evaluation can enhance a project's viability and motivate the stakeholders; they can assist in understanding the international public about reconstruction, knowledge which is short in supply. For normal circumstances, many tools and resources are present for monitoring and evaluation (Safer Homes, Stronger Communities: A Handbook for Reconstructing after Natural Disasters, 2010)
Governments have their policies on monitoring and evaluation (M&E), some induce them to disclose information with respect to projects developed from public funds. Nongovernment organizations and international financial institutions (IFI's) have M&E rules in place. But, there isn't a policy which governs a project's reporting by an agency to a government / project beneficiaries. Monitoring is a bit of a grey area where efficiencies do collaborate but enticements aren't appealing. Government needs to develop protocols for gathering of information and reporting data about post disaster which will solidify gathering, consolidation and analysis at the domestic scale. Rules must be effected in place for minimizing parameters for M&E in case of projects and facilitate disclosing results. With such rules and regulations in effect, the government can keep tab on all project costs and progress on current projects (Safer Homes, Stronger Communities: A Handbook for Reconstructing after Natural Disasters, 2010)
Monitoring System and Indicators
Indicators are an important part of M&E (monitoring and evaluation) system. For instance on the national scale, an indicators can give the experts and policy makers to logically reach a sound decision on how to respond to AIDS epidemic. On the international scale, synchronized indicator sets UNGASS and the UNGASS Addendum: Additional Recommended Indicators) assist the transnational agencies and organizations to take plausible action against epidemics that decides the usage of funds and M&E professionals. The resources are allocated and planning is done accordingly. M&E professionals have a diverse array of tools at their disposal. Indicators are handy tools which can be quite useful, but if misused, they can waste considerable amount of resources and data obtained can be useless as well. Indicators should be qualitative and competent. Indicators should provide useful and practical data. They need to be sound technically. Their usage must be easy, practical and feasible. Apart from that, they should have a stellar record of performance (Rugg, 2010).
Indicators are employed for furnishing information on:
Achievement
Performance
Accountability
Those three elements are the foundation of monitoring and evaluation. Apart from that, indicator furnishes data on which strategic action can be taken for instance managing AIDS epidemic. It's not possible to address an epidemic in the absence of indicators and prepare a response. The indicators should be of top notch quality for obtaining viable information and being able to pool concrete data from a certain location (Rugg, 2010).
Essentially, an indicator points out that something / value is true. It verifies the presence or an indication of a value / condition / situation. In case of monitoring and evaluation, the indicator is just a quantitative metric which furnishes information with respect to performance monitoring, calculating achievements and establishing accountability. It's useful to realize that quantitative metric signifies data on worth of any project / activity / programme (Rugg, 2010).
Literature Review
Features of competent indicators
A competent indicator must be lucid and brief. It must be aimed on providing data on a singular issue at hand depending upon usage, furnishing information which would outline a definite line of attack. Competent indicators are also tasked with gathering concrete and credible information. In essence, competent indicators must measure and measure correctly their denoted quantity. In any case otherwise, the indicator's data may have least / no value if it doesn't serve its purpose. There are number of aspects to look in case of an indicator, but these three must be kept in mind as they affect the reality of the data: (Rugg, 2010)
(1) Validity: The degree to which a quantity is correctly measured / thought of being measured
(2) Reliability: The uniformity of the data gathered multiple times by the same method and under similar conditions.
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now