Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Version 8
14 January 2019
List of acronyms
1
ICT Information Communications Technology
ICTS Information Communications Technology Service
IO Intermediate Outcome
JHS Junior High School
K Kindergarten
KEQ Key Evaluation Questions
LIS Learner Information System
LRMDS/P Learning Resource Management and Development System/Portal
LRN Learner Registration Number
LS Legal Service
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MEA Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment
MOOE Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses
MTB-MLE Mother Tongue Based – Multi lingual Education
MTEP Medium-Term Expenditure Plan
NAT National Achievement Test
NBEP National Basic Education Plan
NCR National Capital Region
NEAP National Educators Academy of the Philippines
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NGO Non-Government Organization
OSEC Office of the Secretary
PIP Public Investment Program
PIR Program Implementation Review
PMIS Program Management Information System
PMS Project Management Service
PPA Program, Project and Activities
PPST Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers
RCTQ Philippine National Research Center for Teacher Quality
RMEA Regional Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment
RMET Regional Monitoring and Evaluation Team
RO Regional Office
RPMS Results-based Performance Management System
SAT Self-Assessment Tool
SBM School-Based Management
2
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SDO Schools Division Office
SHS Senior High School
SIP School Improvement Plan
SMEA School Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment
SMET School Monitoring and Evaluation Team
SPED Special Education
ToC Theory of Change
TRIP Three-Year Rolling Infrastructure Program
3
BASIC EDUCATION MONITORING
AND EVALUATION MANUAL
PREFACE
PURPOSE
The purpose of Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Manual is to promote M&E
for results in a practical and accessible manner. This manual is intended to integrate results-based
M&E in the Department of Education (DepEd). Therefore, this is not intended to be read from cover
to cover; the reader can opt to focus on specific topics of interest and concern.
This M&E Manual is the operationalization of the Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation
Framework (BEMEF) policy and is generally intended to reflect the M&E integration and linkages at
different governance levels. Specifically, this Handbooks seeks to
Simplify M&E systems and processes at the (DepEd) by establishing specific indicators that
an operating unit across governance level should concentrate on;
Establish ownership of specific M&E indicators by DepEd function across governance levels;
and,
Aid M&E efforts and initiatives on a results-based framework in order to comply with
requirements of oversight agencies and other stakeholders.
This Manual does not provide detailed guidance on conducting monitoring and evaluations; this
is provided by specific policies and memoranda issued by DepEd.
INTENDED AUDIENCE
The Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Manual is intended for DepEd personnel
involved in M&E across governance levels; however, it has been designed to be understood by
multiple users as well. Although it has been designed with the Central Office in mind, specific areas
are pertinent to the regional, schools division and school governance levels.
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE..................................................................................................................................6
Purpose........................................................................................................................................6
Intended Audience......................................................................................................................6
RATIONALE............................................................................................................................10
New Planning and Budgetting Environment............................................................................10
Legal Bases.............................................................................................................................13
LINK TO MEDIUM-TERM AND STRATEGIC PLANNING...............................................................15
Plan Formulation.......................................................................................................................15
Strategic Planning.....................................................................................................................16
National Basic Education Plan.....................................................................................................17
Regional Basic Education Plan.....................................................................................................17
Division Education Development Plan........................................................................................17
School Improvement Plan...........................................................................................................18
Investment Planning.................................................................................................................18
Operational Planning.................................................................................................................19
BASIC MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) CONCEPTS.......................................................21
MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES............................................25
Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation Framework..........................................................25
Goal..............................................................................................................................................26
Outcome......................................................................................................................................26
Intermediate outcomes...............................................................................................................26
Enabling Environment.................................................................................................................27
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Principles............................................................................28
TYPES OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)..................................................................30
Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms...................................................................................30
Types of Monitoring and Evaluation..........................................................................................31
MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF BASIC EDUCATION PLANS..........................................36
MONITORING AND EVALUATION TOOLS AND SYSTEMS..........................................................41
Monitoring and Evaluation Tools...............................................................................................41
Information Systems.................................................................................................................41
SCOPE OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)..................................................................45
Basic Education Peformance Indicators....................................................................................45
5
Intermediate Outcome Indicators...............................................................................................45
Enabling Environment Educators...............................................................................................48
Program Indicators......................................................................................................................52
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES BY GOVERNANCE LEVEL........................................................59
Central Office.............................................................................................................................59
Regional office...........................................................................................................................62
Schools Division Office..............................................................................................................64
Schools......................................................................................................................................66
VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LINKAGE PER GOVERNANCE LEVEL..........................................70
What Matters Most in Monitoring and Evaluation System for DepEd?....................................70
Education Value...........................................................................................................................70
Customer Value............................................................................................................................70
Academic Support........................................................................................................................71
Bureacratic Support.....................................................................................................................71
Towards Vertical and Horizontal Alignment in DepEd...............................................................71
Plan and Budget Systems Vertical and Horizontal Integration...................................................73
Vertical and Horizontal integration in Basic Education M&E......................................................76
MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCESSES.........................................................................78
M&E Process..............................................................................................................................78
Established Indicators..................................................................................................................78
Data Collection............................................................................................................................79
Data analysis and synthesis.........................................................................................................81
Communicating M&E Results......................................................................................................84
Data Management.......................................................................................................................85
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................87
ANNEX A: GLOSSARY.............................................................................................................88
ANNEX B: STRATEGIC M&E FRAMEWORK...............................................................................92
ANNEX C: SAMPLE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MODEL VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOGIC.........92
6
RATIONALE
The full implementation of the K to 12 program is a landmark reform that has changed the
landscape of the Philippine Education system and the quality and relevance of its graduates. This
reform and new policies from oversight agencies defining new ways of doing things in government
are grounded on the principle of good governance. Good governance links incentives to
performance and promotes greater transparency and accountability, which are the cornerstones of
public service.
The National Government has instituted strategic reforms to improve the system of planning and
budgeting, and ensure that taxpayers’ money is judiciously and optimally utilized for the common
good. Below are international commitments and national directions, policies, and directives that
influence the planning and budgeting process:
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all United Nations Member States in
2015, provides a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into
the future. At its heart are the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are an urgent call
for action by all countries - developed and developing - in a global partnership. They recognize that
ending poverty and other deprivations must go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health
and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth – all while tackling
climate change and working to preserve our oceans and forests.
In particular, DepEd supports and focuses its efforts toward the attainment of
SDG 4, which is to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote
lifelong learning opportunities for all”.
7
PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 is the current Philippine government’s medium-
term plan anchored on the 10-point Socioeconomic Agenda and is geared towards the attainment
of Ambisyon 2040.
The Annual Cash-Based Appropriations (ACBA) is a budget reform wherein contractual obligations
are incurred and payments to goods delivered and services rendered, inspected, and accepted are
disbursed within the fiscal year. Payments for these should be settled within the fiscal year.
However, projects with an implementation period exceeding twelve (12) months must secure a
multi-year obligation authority (MYOA) before entering into a multi-year contract.
The above internal and external developments favorably affect the education sector, and
complement the current programs and planned innovations of the Department in pushing for a
more programmatic and responsive delivery of programs to its ultimate target group – the learners.
This Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (BEMEF) is integrally linked to the
planning and budget strategy of the Department. In particular, BEMEF shall require the explicit
identification and articulation of indicators and targets for measuring performance in the
development of strategic, medium-term, and operational plans of all DepEd operating units at all
8
governance levels. It intends to complement the planning and budget strategy by setting out the
framework for agency-wide monitoring and evaluation (M&E).
As the DepEd expands its efforts to improve delivery of basic education services, it also introduces
reforms by improving its internal processes and systems towards improved accountability and
transparency to its stakeholders. In this regard, it seeks to strengthen its evidence-based decision-
making. To further support the M&E of programs, projects, and major activities, DepEd restructured
its budgeting process introduced by Department of Budget and Management (DBM) through the
Program Expenditure Classification (PREXC). This improves planning, monitoring and evaluation of
results to provide better programs, projects, and major activities.
9
LEGAL BASES
The Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Manual is a reflection of the Department of
Education’s efforts to support the Philippine Government’s overall direction of a functionally
rationalized system of planning and budgeting for better accomplishment of the intended and
desired results of programs and projects. It is consistent and aligned with the government’s global
development cooperation commitments based on the principles, concepts and methods of
Managing for Development Results and Results-based Management.
POLICY CONTEXT
In terms of policy direction, the context of this Manual is based on the government’s direction to be
more responsive to the gaps between plans, budgets and results-based performance management.
The following provides the Legal Bases for the development of the Basic Education M&E Manual:
Administrative Order (AO) No. 25 was issued by the President of the Philippines in 2012.
This was to support the need for a unified and integrated Results-based Performance
Management System (RbPMS). For this, an inter-agency Task Force was initially created.
This Task Force takes on the harmonization of national government performance
monitoring, information, and reporting systems.
Subsequently, several administrative orders have been issued that support RbPMS.
National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) initiated the integration of the Results
Matrix (RM) with the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016 and PDP 2017-2022.
The Department develops its programs, projects, and major activities primarily to attain the
outcomes as established by defined by Republic Act 10533 or Enhanced Basic Education Act
of 2013.
Supports the government’s efforts of strengthening the M&E system of the government
agencies (NEDA-DBM Joint Memorandum Circular 2015-1, July 15, 2015, National
Evaluation Policy Framework of the Philippines).
This was followed by DBM National Budget Circular No. 565 dated December 2, 2016 (NBC
No. 565 s. 2016) on the Adoption of a Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation Reporting
(RbMER) Policy which aims to strengthen, streamline, and standardize the RbMER system
evidenced by a timely, useful, accurate, and credible reporting of performance information
10
in order to support policy and program improvement, expenditure management, and local
and national decision-making.
As a result, the Department of Education (DepEd) developed the Basic Education Monitoring and
Evaluation Framework (BEMEF) to guide DepEd operating units in the conduct of M&E activities
and assessment of office and individual performance in line with the aforementioned policies. This is
also in line with the establishment of the National Quality Management System (QMS) which aims
to enhance the organization’s capacity and internal systems and processes. This shall strengthen
evidence-based decision-making and policy formulation which shall in turn improve the delivery of
services, as well as the allocation and management of government resources, as well as strengthen
transparency and accountability in the basic education sector.
11
LINK TO MEDIUM-TERM AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
The Goal, Outcome, and Intermediate Outcomes presented in the Planning Framework are the core
of the agency’s aspirations. It is important that all policies, plans, programs, projects and activities
support what the system wants to achieve in the long, medium, and short term. While the
Investment Plans are purposely crafted to deliver the targets in the medium term, all such plans
should prepare the path towards achieving the long-term goal which is articulated in the Ambisyon
Natin 2040.
To effectively deliver and achieve the emerging priorities for the next six (6) years, new planning and
budgeting policies will be instituted to ensure that the formulation of strategic, investment, and
operational plans are aligned and synchronized.
PLAN FORMULATION
Basic education plans shall lay down the goal and outcomes of the Department and serve as the
roadmap in crafting the medium-term and operational plans. This shall direct the planning process
of DepEd operating units across governance levels in delivering basic education supports and
implementation of programs, projects, and activities. Plan formulation consists of three (3) major
phases: (1) Strategic Planning, (2) Investment Planning and (3) Operational Planning, as illustrated
below.
Strategic Planning
One Strategic Plan
Six-Year Plan – Strategic Directions
Investment Planning
One Investment Plan
Six-Year Plan – Major Programs and Corresponding Resources
Operational Planning
First Three-Year Plan (Y1 – Y3)
Programs, Projects, Major Activities
Second Three-Year Plan (Y2 – Y4)
Programs, Projects, Major Activities
Third Three-Year Plan (Y3 – Y5)
Programs, Projects, Major Activities
Fourth Three-Year Plan (Y4 – Y6)
Programs, Projects, Major Activities
Annual Plan 1 Annual Plan 2 Annual Plan 3 Annual Plan 4 Annual Plan 5 Annual Plan 6
Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities
Figure 1.0: Phases of Plan Formulation
The Strategic Plan provides the overall direction, long-term targets, and major strategies to be
12
pursued. Taking off from the Strategic Plan, the Investment Plan provides the policies, programs,
projects, and required resources covering a fixed six-year period for major programs in support of
the strategies identified in the strategic plan. The Operational Plan provides the detailed physical
plan, implementation arrangements, and the corresponding monthly financial and procurement
requirements. The diagram below shows the major elements of each planning phase and the
common elements that ensure the vision and strategic directions are operationalized through the
Investment and Operational plans.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
The strategic plan allows the offices to identify and anticipate the possible risks that would affect
the implementation of the plan. Like other government agencies, DepEd’s Strategic Plan was
formulated at the start of the new administration to strategically support the agenda of the new
President articulated in the Philippine Development Plan (PDP). It is vital that the Strategic Plan be
treated as a “living document” and is widely communicated across all levels to reinforce clarity of
objectives and secure the buy-in of internal stakeholders who are the prime movers of the Plan.
Being a “living document” serves the purpose of incorporating evolving and emerging priorities in
the agency’s overall thrusts and directions. It can also have direct implications on target-setting and
adjustments that must be made to make the Plan attuned with the new priorities.
Before each governance level can prepare its own respective strategic plans, the Executive
Committee, through the assistance of Planning Service, shall come up with the Department’s
strategic directions, based on a thorough analysis of the basic education situation, which shall serve
as the anchor for all strategic plans. This should be able to articulate the strategic priorities of the
present-day administration for the whole basic education sector.
Each governance level will formulate their respective basic education plans that should all lead
towards achieving the common goals of DepEd articulated in the National Basic Education Plan
(NBEP). While each Region, Schools Division, and School should contextualize its plan based on its
actual situation, strategies must all contribute or complement the national directions in terms of
policies, targets, and strategies.
13
Sustainable
Global Development Goals
2030
Ambisyon Natin
2040
Philippine
National Development Plan
2017-2022
National Basic
Education Plan Regional Development
Plan
Regional Regional Basic Education
Plan
Schools
Division Education
Division Development Plan
Office
School
Schools Improvement
Plan
14
The Division Education Development Plan (DEDP) is also six-year plan developed at the Division level
which contains strategies on how assistance to schools and learning centers will be implemented. As
an example, one of the crucial mandates of the SDOs is to manage effective and efficient use of all
resources, including human resources.
Operationally, teacher deployment and appointment of school heads, as well as professional
development, are within the responsibility of the Division. It is now within their mandate to:
1. build the capacities of school heads so that the school heads can provide instructional
supervision and implement school-based management, and
2. ensure that teachers and learning facilitators are better qualified to deliver the curriculum.
The DEDP should be able to influence the education priorities of provincial and city/municipal
development plan. In the current setup, the learning centers for Alternative Learning System (ALS)
are lodged under the Division Office. Thus, planning for learning centers will be part of the DEDP.
Hence, community learning centers managed by DepEd will not formulate their own education
plans.
Prerequisite: School Improvement Plan
INVESTMENT PLANNING
During this stage, policies, programs, and projects including basic education resources to
implement the strategic plan are determined and documented in the form of a written Investment
Plan anchored in the six-year Philippine Development Plan (PDP) of the current administration. This
is where each operating unit at each level of governance commits its stake and contributions in
attaining the objectives of the strategic plan which is anchored both on the long-term and team
visions. This is also where the accountabilities per governance level is determined per program. In
this way, Investment Planning ensures the vertical and horizontal integration of the plans.
The Investment Plan shall be the sole source for the Basic Education Sector’s contribution to the
Public Investment Program of the National Economic and Development Authority, as well as the
RO’s submission to the Regional Development Investment Program, as endorsed by their respective
RDCs. Furthermore, any proposal to and from development partners, NGOs/CSOs, and other
external funding agency should be based on the Investment Plan.
Depending on mandate, each governance level must be able to determine the following in
15
preparing the Investment Plan:
Development and/or enhancements of education policies, and
Programs/projects development and implementation, such as curriculum implementation,
assessment, learning materials development, technical and training assistance,
procurement of services and learning equipment, and provision of school facilities and
infrastructure.
Based on the strategic interventions identified in the strategic plan, each level of governance should
determine the corresponding programs to implement the strategies. A program profile must be
developed for each program in order to elaborate its implementation details, including its logical
framework, target beneficiaries, implementation arrangements, financial breakdowns, among
others. Such details shall serve as the content of the Investment Plan.
All programs under Operations shall have its own Investment Plan, which shall form part of the
overall Investment Plan of the Central Office. For the ROs and SDOs, their Investment Plan should
capture their respective contribution to the Central Office’s to ensure the vertical alignment of the
Investment Plans. They may also add their own soft programs to their Investment Plan as deemed
necessary, provided there is proper justification.
The Investment Plan shall be subject to a mid-term review after the first three (3) years of
implementation. The remaining years of the Investment plan must be adjusted accordingly, based
on the results of the mid-term review.
OPERATIONAL PLANNING
Operational Planning is the process of operationalizing the Strategic and Investment plans. Each
operating unit will conduct two (2) levels of operational planning:
16
Annual Plan
Three-Year Rolling Plan
ANNUAL PLAN
Annual planning includes the process where each operating unit will prepare a detailed
implementation plan of programs and activities for the period of one year and is operationalized
through budget execution documents consisting of the WFP and the PPMP.
The Risk Treatment Plan identified in the TYRP must be reflected in the annual plans, especially if
there are funds needed to address such risks.
For the TYRP, the current year is considered as the baseline year and the next three (3) years will be
planned for through physical and financial targets. All operating units are required to prepare their
TYRP, from which all annual plans will emanate. The TYRP must have a corresponding Risk
Treatment Plan which evaluates the likelihood and possible impact of the risks identified and sets
the respective treatments thereof.
17
BASIC MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) CONCEPTS
Performance The systematic and cyclical process of planning, monitoring, review and
Management evaluation (self-assessment and independent) of projects, programs and
policies with a view to continually improving aid effectiveness (AusAID,
2012).
Monitoring and evaluation are processes that both refer to the measurement of the performance of
an organization, a program, a project, or an individual. These are complementary yet distinct
processes depending on the purpose, focus, and approach used when they are conducted. The
activities involved in monitoring and evaluation are often intertwined, but clear distinctions exist
between the two.
Monitoring explains the efficiency and effectiveness of operations while evaluation provides
information on the benefits achieved. Results of monitoring provide bases for critical management
decisions such as resource allocation or realignment, target setting, remedial/corrective actions or
strategy development. On the other hand, evaluation results provide valuable lessons and insights
that can be used by managers in crafting strategic decisions for the future such as in designing
organizational changes or future programs and/or projects.
Both are integral management tools used for different purposes. Because both follow a similar
process such as identifying performance indicators, data collection, data analysis, among others,
monitoring complements evaluation. Specifically, the monitoring process may generate questions
that can be addressed by evaluation. Also, evaluation draws heavily from data generated through
monitoring, including baseline data, information on the program or project implementation
process, and measurements of results.
For the purpose of the Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation Manual, the Basic Education
Monitoring and Evaluation Framework established the definition of the following terms:
Accountable office any decision-making unit of DepEd at the national, regional, school
18
division, or school levels in charge of providing directives and
determining strategies to achieve agency performance targets.
Annual Plan composed of the a) Work and Financial Plan (WFP) which consists of
the i) Physical Plan, ii) Monthly Obligation Program, and iii) Monthly
Disbursement Program; b) Project Procurement Management Plan
(PPMP) with technical specifications.
Basic Education Plan refers to strategic, medium-term, and operational plans developed by
DepEd operating units across governance levels.
Database structured set of data and information of each DepEd operating unit
gathered from its M&E activities that is easy to access, manage, and
update.
DepEd Operating any DepEd unit across governance levels which provides support
Unit and/or implement programs, projects, and major activities relative to
the delivery of basic education in line with the provisions of R.A. 9155.
Information system an organized system for the collection, organization, storage, and
communication of information
Investment Plan a six-year plan at the Central, Region, and Schools Division levels
describing major programs and projects that will be implemented in
support of the objectives and outcomes identified in the strategic plan.
It spells out the major outputs and inputs needed to implement the
strategic plan. It takes into account the Department’s Medium-Term
Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and requirements for Multi-year
obligation authorities (MYOAs) for capital works and eligible services.
19
M&E system a set of organizational structures, management processes, standards,
strategies, plans, indicators, information systems, reporting lines and
accountability relationships which enables offices across governance
levels to perform their M&E functions effectively.
Operational Plan these plans are comprised of the a) three-year rolling plans (TYRP)
which contains the major outputs the operating unit will deliver for
three succeeding years which are aligned to the Investment Plan, and
b) annual plans which contain the details of how the major outputs
scheduled for that fiscal year will be produced. The latter takes into
account allocated budget from government entities, signed
partnerships, and Multi-year obligation authorities (MYOAs).
Overall Lead the staff with the overall authority, accountability, and responsibility
for the M&E system at each governance level
Process owner the office who will oversee and manage the conduct of the M&E
system per governance level
Responsible office a DepEd operating unit at the national, regional, school division, or
school level in charge of executing tasks or deliverables
Strategic Plan a six-year plan developed at the Central, Regional, and Schools Division
levels which contains the strategic directions and priorities of the
20
incumbent administration for its respective level of governance, and is
based on a thorough analysis of the prevailing basic education
situation. It communicates the results or outcomes the organization
wants to achieve, and the strategies it will adopt to reach those
outcomes.
21
MONITORING AND EVALUATION FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLES
With the results-based orientation of the Basic Education Monitoring and Evaluation Manual, the
BEMEF necessitates DepEd to be more responsive to demands from internal and external
stakeholders for good governance, accountability and transparency, effective and efficient delivery,
and the eventual attainment of its development outcomes.
BEMEF is grounded on the Department’s mandate, vision (long-term and team vision), and mission,
as well as the Philippine Government’s various commitments and targets with respect to basic
education.
It presents what DepEd envisions for the Filipino learners and for the department, as well as the
strategic directions it plans to pursue to achieve this vision. It reflects the Department’s theory of
change; that is, the change that the department wants to achieve in the lives of the Filipino learners
through the provision of basic education.
22
The planning framework highlights the means and ends and linkages
of the DepEd’s various interventions. It is organized on four (4) Levels:
Goal Differentiating
Outcome Impact Evaluation
Intermediate Outcomes from Measurement
Enabling Environment of Performance
Frequency. Impact evaluation tends
to be episodic, while performance
GOAL measurement should be ongoing.
23
This acknowledges that learner-friendly environments are pivotal in the well-being of learners.
It recognizes that attendance to school and learning centers is not sufficient to deliver quality basic
education.
For the manual, the following student measures were identified and established.
Transition Rate
ENABLING ENVIRONMENT
The Enabling Environment refers to the conditions that need to be created in the different levels of
the organization to attract, motivate and make the systems and processes conducive for facilitating
the attainment of learning outcomes.
Improved capacity on participative and inclusive management processes of education leaders and
managers.
It ensures that design and implementation of professional development programs are relevant and
appropriate to the required skills and competencies.
EE 3: People, internal systems and processes serve learners better thru continuous
improvement efforts
Enhanced people's capacity, functional and leadership competencies, internal system and
processes to efficiently and effectively deliver basic education services.
24
Ensured the collaborative engagement with key stakeholders to achieve basic education goals.
This will be delivered through functional mechanisms to make partnership building and linkages
more strategic and aligned to DepEd priorities.
For the handbook, the following system and governance measures were identified as part of the
Enabling Environment indicators:
25
inclusion of various interests of all types of education stakeholders, and overall
institutionalization of evidence-based decision-making in the education sector.
26
TYPES OF MONITORING AND
Essential elements EVALUATION (M&E)
for Results in a
LogFrame
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
MECHANISMS
Indicator Traps
Excessive Complexity
27 Indicators Imprecision
Indicators Overload
Outputs fixation
As previously discussed and presented, BEMEF highlights the organizational logframe of the
Department; hence, the main guide for the conduct of M&E in DepEd. To identify the appropriate
M&E mechanisms, tools, and approaches to use, it is important to have a clear understanding of the
difference between monitoring and evaluation, and the different types of M&E being conducted at
each stage of programs, projects, and major activities implementation.
There is increasing demand for M&E, but effectively integrating results into decision-making
remains a challenge. It is proposed that DepEd and its corresponding operation at all governance
levels continue to value M&E information. An environment of accountability, continuous learning
and results-based may be need for M&E. What may be useful is that, across the governance levels,
individuals and offices share data, learning and knowledge openly, where constituent feedback
about what is necessary and what success looks like is essential to strategy, operations and policy.
The following types of monitoring and evaluation are currently being used by DepEd across
governance levels.
Monitoring, the routine collection and analysis of information to track progress against set plans
and check compliance to established standards, is useful to for DepEd to ascertain trends and
patterns, adapt strategies and inform decisions for project/program management. The figure above
presents key monitoring questions as they relate to the LogFrame’s objectives. It is essential to
focus more on the lower-level objectives – inputs, activities and (to a certain extent) outcomes,
because the outcomes and goal are usually more challenging changes (typically in knowledge,
attitudes and practice/behaviors) to measure, and require a longer time frame and a more focused
assessment provided by evaluations
28
READINESS MONITORING
This is a quality assurance mechanism designed to ensure the availability of all inputs and
requirements necessary to start and sustain an efficient operation. The results of the readiness
monitoring shall be used to identify the needed support of DepEd operating units in the
implementation of the basic education plans.
PROGRESS MONITORING
This is a systematic and objective assessment of an on-going implementation of plans, programs,
projects, and major activities. It aims to steer implementation as efficiently as possible based on
empirical facts determined through verifiable assessment process, systematic observation and
documentation.
Progress monitoring may be done on a weekly, monthly, or quarterly basis depending on the M&E
Plan. This also determines any adjustment of plans and activities needed to achieve the committed
targets.
All DepEd operating units shall conduct progress monitoring of their respective programs,
projects, and major activities. This may require M&E tools for the data collection and concerned
operating unit shall be responsible for developing relevant and appropriate tools to assess the
implementation of its programs, projects, and major activities. Progress monitoring results
immediately inform the program, project, and activity implementers in the necessary adjustments
in their plans so they can achieve their target outputs and outcomes. Results primarily focus on
operational concerns that affect the implementation of programs or projects which may include a
need for additional funding support, adjustments in logistical arrangements, and other-related
concerns.
In DepEd, progress monitoring is done through the use of the system, Program Management
Information System (PMIS). The PMIS is the official source of data on programs, projects and
activities (PPAs) of the Department of Education from planning to implementation. It aims to
support the effective and efficient management of plans and programs; increase transparency of
plans and programs at all levels of governance; provides a platform that encourages a more careful
and systematic preparation of plans and utilization of budget; aids in policy formulation and
decision making; and enforce standards for planning and plan implementation.
While there are various activities that may be conducted in performing progress monitoring, the
Department establishes the conduct of a Program Implementation Review (PIR) as the main
modality to measure the performance of programs, projects, and major activities within and across
the organization.
The PIR is conducted on a quarterly basis and tracks the accomplishments of outputs in terms of
efficiency, effectiveness, quality, and corresponding utilization of the budget. Through this
mechanism, DepEd obtains timely information about the performance of programs, projects, and
major activities and allows it to provide timely response to bottlenecks, constraints, and challenges
affecting the delivery of basic education services.
29
As PIR, the Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment (MEA) is designed to be a periodic monitoring
and evaluation of the progress of Regional Offices (ROs) and Schools Division Offices (SDO) in its
delivery of education services as well as its performance as units within the DepEd system. This
fosters participation of the various functional as well as administrative units of RO and SDOs in all
the M&E processes with the endpoint of obtaining information from the management to make the
decisions on adjusting its work plans. Guidelines for the conduct of RMEAs at the regional level,
DMEA at the SDO level, DsMEA at the district level and SMEA for schools are clearly established
and disseminated accordingly.
Agree on scope of technical assistance the RO will provide the SDOs then to the Schools
that are related to improving access, quality and governance;
Customize policies and programs on increasing access, quality and governance that will
respond to the unique issues and concerns affecting the different divisions and schools
within the region; and.
30
School Division Offices (SDOs) are expected to Divisions’ Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment
(DMEA) prior to the actual conduct of the RMEA.
The Chief of SGOD shall present the DMEA Report and Chief of CID shall present the consolidated
report of SMEA as well as District MEA, which includes all pertinent quantitative information,
education resource reporting, qualitative information (including anecdotal feedback, issues and
lessons learned), as well as recommendations for plan adjustment.
The DMEA includes quarterly report on the CIGPs related to:
Six (6) SBM Domains
District Performance Indicators
District and School Best Practices
Unresolved CIGPs by District and/or School
Progress on PAPs in the District, School and Functional Division/Unit Performance Targets
and Progress
31
SMEA for public schools shall be held in the school campus for the SMET with the participation of
teachers and stakeholders. This focuses on the discussion on curriculum and learning,
administrative and physical facilities concern of the school. Outright resolution of the deliberated
CIGPs is encouraged during SMEA to attain timely adjustments on targets and plans of teachers
related to classroom instruction and school operation.
The quarterly report of the SMEA focuses on the following CIGPs:
• Assessment of Learning
• Curriculum Management
• Desirable Strategies for Effective Teaching-Learning Process Employed by
Teachers
• Learning Delivery
• Learning Outcomes
• Learning Resources
• School Best Practices
• Unresolved CIGPs
Evaluations involve identifying and reflecting upon the effects of what has been done, and judging
their worth. Their findings allow proponents, implementers, clients, partners, donors and other
stakeholders to learn from the experience and improve future interventions. For evaluation, key
32
questions as they relate to the LogFrame’s objectives, tend to concentrate more on how things
have been performed and what difference has been made.
PROCESS EVALUATION
Process evaluation ascertains the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation processes and
systems. This could be conducted at any phase of the plan implementation and could be combined
with other types of monitoring. Through this evaluation, issues and challenges in program, project,
and activity deliveries can be addressed.
RESULTS EVALUATION
This is an M&E approach that focuses on measuring the realization of results. It seeks to assess the
outcomes and changes brought about by program or project interventions. Findings from this type
of evaluation are used as baseline situation for the next planning cycle. Table 1 provides the types of
evaluation that shall be conducted within the agency:
Basic education plans shall lay down the goal and outcomes of the Department and serve as the
roadmap in crafting the medium-term and operational plans. M&E of basic education plans are
essential in determining the extent to which the program, project, and activity goal and outcomes
reflected in the plan are on track and in making any needed adjustments accordingly. It enables
33
informed decision-making regarding operations management and basic education service delivery
and ensures the most effective and efficient use of resources.
34
implementation of any Investment Planning, program reporting.
type of basic education and Operational To utilize information to
plans at any point Planning improve future activities.
identified during
implementation period.
Results Evaluation Achievement of long- Strategic Planning, To document program
term objectives defined Investment Planning, outcome and impact.
in the strategic, and Operational
investment, and Planning
operational plans can be
evaluated.
Given these basic education plans, all DepEd operating units are required to prepare their
corresponding M&E plans to ensure the achievement of the Department’s goal and outcome. Each
type of M&E shall be conducted correspondingly based on each type of basic education plans.
OTHER TYPES
There are other M&E approaches that can be utilized that can further build on DepEd’s existing
M&E practices.
S
ource: Josselin and Le Maux (2017)
Figure 10.0 Types of M&E by Stage
DepEd can conduct M&E in terms of needs, design, inputs and outputs, short and long-term
outcomes.
CONTEXT ANALYSIS
At this stage, M&E gather information and determine needs. For instance, it may evidence a high
rate of school dropout among young people in a given area. Needs can be defined as a desire to
improve current outcomes or to correct them if they do not reach the required standard. While,
policy design is about the definition of a course of action intended to meet the needs.
A program may help teachers, families and learners to help prevent or contain dropout. If the
DepEd planner and officials decide that the consequences on individual and collective outcomes are
35
adequate to justify the design of a program, and if such a program falls within their range of
resources, they can propose that such program can be developed and eventually implemented.
EX-ANTE EVALUATION
Ex-ante evaluation is interested in setting up objectives and solutions to address the needs. This
may look at inputs and outputs. Inputs are in question.
Cost Benefit Analysis. This goes further by considering also the satisfaction derived from the
consumption of public services. All effects of the project are taken into account, including
36
social, economic and environmental consequences. The approaches are thereby different,
but also complementary, as a project that is financially viable is not necessarily
economically relevant and vice versa. In both approaches, discounting can be used to
compare flows occurring at different time periods. The idea is based on the principle that, in
most cases, citizens prefer to receive goods and services now rather than later.
Cost Effectiveness Analysis. Cost effectiveness analysis selects the set of most efficient
strategies by comparing their costs and their outcomes.
Financial Analysis. A financial appraisal examines the projected revenues with the aim of
assessing whether they are sufficient to cover expenditures and to make the investment
sufficiently profitable.
Multi-criteria Decision Analysis. This may be used whenever several outcomes have to be
taken into account but yet cannot be easily expressed in monetary terms. In its simplest
form, the approach aims to construct a composite indicator that encompasses all those
different measurements and allows the stakeholders’ opinions to be accounted for. Weights
are assigned on the different dimensions by the decision-maker.
EX-POST EVALUATION
Ex post evaluation addresses the question of whether the outcome is the result of the intervention
or of some other factors. The true challenge here is to obtain a measure of what would have
happened if the intervention did not take place, the so-called counterfactual.
F IGURE 8.0
Source: Josselin and Le Maux (2017)
Figure 12.0 Ex-Ante Evaluation Techniques
DepEd can use ex post evaluation to look on areas of effectiveness, which emphasizes the extent to
which planned outcomes are achieved as a result of the program. With this in mind, it is essential to
distinguish the short-term outcomes, i.e. the immediate effects on individuals’ status as measured
by a result indicator (e.g., rate of dropout during mandatory school time) from the longer term
outcomes, i.e. the environmental, social and economic changes as measured by impact indicators
(e.g., the impact of dropout on DepEd’s commitments). In practice, ex post evaluation focuses
37
mainly on short-term outcomes, with the aim to measure what has happened as a direct
consequence of the intervention. The analysis also assesses what the main factors behind success or
failure are.&E BY STAG
38
MONITORING AND EVALUATION TOOLS AND SYSTEMS
Tools are used during the conduct of monitoring activities to collect, analyze, and report required
data and information. A range of tools may be used in monitoring of policies, programs, projects,
and major activities. It is essential to ascertain the appropriate tools and approaches in the conduct
of monitoring. Further, it is not realistic to expect that any one monitoring tool or mechanism will
satisfy all data requirements during the conduct of M&E.
Different offices and stakeholders may use different tools or may use the same tools differently. The
development and selection of tools to be used shall be anchored on the objective or purpose for
conducting M&E. Since these tools are primarily used in collecting information, it is important to
identify what type of information will be collected and why these should be collected. These tools
may be classified according to the following purposes:
Data collection and analysis. This entails obtaining and analyzing data and information
about the implementation of programs, projects, and major activities
Validation. This involves checking or verifying whether or not the reported data and
information is accurate
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
39
The current DepEd system generates information on a number of key indicators required for
mandatory reporting on: (1) major final output for reporting to the Department of Budget
Management, (2) a resource matrix and PDP-Education Sector accomplishments for reporting to
the National Economic and Development Authority, and (3) financial information to the
Commission on Audit. In addition, the M&E system is used for (4) providing information to the
DepEd Secretary for Congressional question and answer briefing sessions, (5) SDGs at the
international level, and (6) project progress reports for government and development partners
review. The Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 and associated implementing rules and
regulations require DepEd to report on additional indicators related to SHS. However, no
comprehensive annual statistical bulletin on education is currently published.
Currently, the Department manages several information systems which serve as repository of data
that enable DepEd to easily capture, consolidate, analyze, and prepare agency level performance
reports for planning, resource allocation, policy and program development. The existing
information systems managed by DepEd and their corresponding descriptions are as follows:
40
LEARNER INFORMATION SYSTEM (LIS)
The LIS uses a unique identifier to store information particular to a learner, including name, date of
birth, guardian, and sex. Learner information has been expanded to include school enrollment,
achievement results, and other information. This system will need to be expanded to include non-
DepEd students and will be an essential component of the SHS voucher program’s implementation
and monitoring. The following features are noted:
Registry of Learners
Web-based system, linked with EBEIS, containing the registry of learners which enabled the
establishment of a centralized “Learner Registry”
Uses a Learner Reference Number (LRN), a unique and permanent 12-digit number
assigned to a learner who enters the Philippine basic education system
Through this, the basic learner information is captured, stored, and accessed through a
secured facility to enhance tracking of learners and decision-making at various levels of
DepEd management
41
based lending monitoring is significantly different from project progress monitoring. The features
below are worth considering:
Monitors progress and implementation of programs and projects
Web-based information system that facilitates data collection, storage, analysis and
reporting in the tracking and monitoring of physical and financial performance of the
different programs, projects, and major activities of the DepEd
Provides real-time data and information on the progress of implementation and
achievements of programs and projects in aid of policies and decisions of management
necessary to improve the delivery of quality outputs and thus, support basic education
outcomes
Like in other databases and Knowledge Management (KM) systems, the following considerations
are raised:
Access Arrangements (user typology and controls, web portal access for public
consumption)
Conduct of spot check and periodic reviews of the systems
Hardware Requirements (e.g., hardware lifespan and value, technical specifications for
current and future use)
Software Requirements (open source versus proprietary software; updating of modules and
whole system)
Protection of Individual Data and Data Privacy
Quality assessment covering areas of reliability, validity and timeliness
Quality assurance for data quality and freedom from data tampering and manipulation
Technical Capability of Staff (across governance levels) and other users
While the information systems identified are used and implemented nationwide, each operating
unit across governance levels shall gather additional information not captured by DepEd existing
information systems that is complementary to the achievement of agency performance indicators.
Operating units across governance levels shall establish and maintain their own database which
contains data and information gathered from their respective M&E activities that can be easily
accessed, managed, and updated. In this manner, each operating unit can easily integrate new data
requirements necessary in their respective operations, regardless if these are identified in the
national plan or not.
42
SCOPE OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)
INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES
Frequenc Responsible
Intermedia
Performance y of Data Office
te Disaggregation
Indicators Reportin
Outcomes
g
- Sex (male,
female)
- Type of learner
(formal, non-
formal)
- Sex (male,
43
female)
- Type of learner
(formal, non-
formal)
IO 2. % of learners Annual
- Governance level
CO: PS
Learners enrolled in RO: PPRD
(national, region,
access special SDO: SGOD
division, school)
programs programs School: School
- Level of education
Head
responsive (Kinder; G1-G6, G7-
to their G10, G11-G12)
needs and - Sex (male, female)
consistent - Type of special
with their program (IPEd,
Madrasah Education
interests
Program,
and SPED/LSEN, special
aptitudes interest program)
44
- Sex (male, female)
IO 4. Completion Annual
- Governance level
CO: PS
Learners Rate RO: PPRD
(national, region,
complete SDO: SGOD
division)
education - Level of education
and attain (Kinder; G1-G6, G7-
learning G10, G11-G12)
standards - Sex (male, female)
45
10, G11-G12)
- Sex (male, female)
- Level of education
(Basic Literacy, A&E
elementary, A&E
secondary)
- Delivery
mechanism (DepEd
delivered, DepEd
procured, DepEd
partners)
- Delivery
mechanism (DepEd
delivered, DepEd
46
procured, DepEd
partners)
ENABLING INDICATORS
Frequency Responsible
Intermediat Performance Disaggregati
of Data Office
e Outcomes Indicators on
Reporting
EE 1. Proportion of Annual - Governance CO: BHROD
Education schools at SBM level (national, RO: FTAD
leaders and Level 3 (Highly region, division, SDO: SGOD
managers Proficient) school) School: School
practice - Level of Head
participative Practice (Levels
and inclusive 1, 2, 3, 4)
management
processes
-Sector (Public
and Private
Schools)
47
-Sector (Public
and Private
Schools)
-Sector (Public
and Private
Schools)
48
G12)
49
completed on Program of region, division, SDO: Admin
the first cycle Works school) Unit
of the process School: School
Head
50
stakeholders financial
actively contribution of
collaborate to development
serve partners vis-a-
learners vis national
better education
budget
51
Performance measures by program
There are specific M&E information, based on indicators identified by M&E Information
DepEd program, that are collected for all outcomes at different
governance levels, in different time frames, and for specific areas. Complementarity
For this section, established indicators were identified with some key Interactional complementarity.
questions per identified area. The type of questions will be highly Decision-makers in DepEd can
dependent on the following: utilize both M&E information in
tandem to make informed decisions
Monitoring Questions. Measure input vs output. These are and act based on insights.
useful in systematically and critically observing progress to
manage inputs and adapt them to changing conditions. Information complementarity. Both
Critical steps in integrating these are: M&E can use the same data but may
o Recording data and information on key indicators, address specific M&E questions
mainly from sources existing at DepEd based on different approaches.
o Collection of primary data
o Review of education information system data Sequential complementarity.
o Analysis performed at each governance level Monitoring data can generate
o Regular reporting questions that evaluation will have
to address.
Evaluation Questions. Look at output leading to outcome. Source: Gebremedhin, Gettachew
Conducted at least once in every 3 years. These provide and Amha (2010)
information that is credible, useful, enabling the incorporation
of lessons learned in the process. Necessary considerations
are:
o Attribution
o Causality
o Incrementality
The Support to Operations consists of activities and projects which provide staff, technical, and/or
substantial support to operations, but do not produce goods or deliver services directed towards
schools or learners. Funds for this are also management overhead expenses and are therefore also
indirect costs incurred in delivering the mandate of the Department.
52
The Operations consists of programs and corresponding expenditures that relate to the mandate of
the Department – the delivery of basic education services, directly benefitting the schools or
learners. Funds for this are considered the direct costs of delivering the mandate of the
Department.
Indicators
Gender Parity
Literacy Rate
Achievement Rate
Gross Enrollment
Net Enrollment
Cohort Survival Rate
Transition Rate
Participation Rate
School Leaver Rate
Drop-Out Rate
Repetition Rate
Completion Rate
Graduation Rate
Monitoring Questions
53
Selected Key Questions
Evaluation Questions
Impact Questions
The major components under the program are the provision of a) human resources, b) learning
materials, c) learning facilities, and d) tools and equipment. More specifically, this program includes
the creation of teacher plantilla items, provision and maintenance of classrooms, workshops,
laboratories, water and sanitation facilities, provision of school seats and tables for learners and
teachers, acquisition of school sites, and provision of learning materials, tools, and equipment.
Indicators
54
Proportion of Schools with Computer Package
Proportion of Schools with Functional Library
Proportion of Schools with ICT/Computer and Science Laboratory
Proportion of Schools with Internet Access
Proportion of Schools with Access to Electricity
Monitoring Questions
Evaluation Questions
Are the learners’ material resources and school’s physical environment responsive to learners
needs?
Are learning materials representing particular groups within society available?
Are classroom conditions and school facilities supporting all learners?
What do administrators, teachers, and parents think of the policies to improve the school’s
physical environment and facilities?
Do Regional Offices and Schools Divisions have established policies and mechanisms to regularly
monitor schools for environmental health problems?
Impact Questions
Do the Regional Offices, Schools Division Offices and schools have policies to improve and
maintain a healthy physical school environment?
Are there mechanisms to evaluate aspects of physical environment (like air, water, sanitation,
hazardous chemicals, transportation, school food, disease vectors)?
DepEd has largely understood inclusive basic education as the ‘no child left behind’ policy drawn
from the EFA goals in “achieving universal education, especially for girls, ethnic minorities and
marginalized children”. This also adheres to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) #4 which aims to
achieve “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.
This program aims to provide all types of learners’ access to basic education services suitable to
their learning needs and circumstances. This includes the following intervention to make education
inclusive:
Indigenous Peoples Education Program (IPEd)
Muslim Education Program (MEP)
Multigrade Education Program
Special Education (SPED) Program
Flexible Learning Options (Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM)
Alternative Learning System (ALS)
55
Education in Emergencies (EiE)
For DepEd, promoting inclusive education has evolved to include all programs and services that
intend to capture those that have been traditionally marginalized by the formal school system such
as:
Children living with disabilities to move from SPED Centres to regular classes
Out of school children/youth/adults through the ALS
Geographically-isolated areas or areas with not enough pupils to start monograde classes
through the multi-grade system
Muslim children, whose parents still generally feel isolated from the dominant Christian culture,
through the ALIVE Program in Madrasahs
Indigenous peoples through the IP education programs.
Indicators
Monitoring Questions
Evaluation Questions
56
Selected Key Questions
Impact Questions
With the results-based M&E, inclusive education within DepEd may focus on:
Exploring specific nature of exclusion in specific/local context.
Delving into indicators of exclusion that go beyond access to schooling and capture influential
behaviours and practices.
Promoting policy dialogue and reform.
Enabling DepEd operating units across governance levels to work in contexts where participation
rates are high, that the last remaining out of school learners, who can be hard to reach, are
targeted.
Develop and fine-tune costed strategies that take into account the daily realities of excluded
learners where mainstream assistance programs are not sufficient.
This program ensures continuous improvement in the individual capacity of the personnel and in
the organizational systems by which these individuals interact as an organization, with the end view
of improving basic education service delivery.
M&E in terms of support to schools and learners, specifically the financial outlay, is critical for
accountability, transparency and equity. This area includes the following:
Operations of Schools
Government Assistance Subsidies
Joint Delivery Voucher for Senior High Schools
School Feeding Programs
Indicators
57
Disbursement Rate
Special Education Fund Usage
Percentage of JHS and SHS who availed of the vouchers
Certification Rate of SHS TVE Graduates
School-to-Work Transition Rate of SHS Graduates
Other Student Outcome Indicators
Sufficient Education Financing
Monitoring Questions
Evaluation Questions
Impact Questions
Indicators
58
Proportion of offices across governance levels with very satisfactory
ratings in the Office Performance Commitment and Review Form (OPCRF)
Client satisfactory rating of DepEd Offices’ respective stakeholders
Proportion of qualified staff and teachers (Source)
Extent of strategic alignment between DepEd’s goals and operating units
Extent of cascading of operating units’ goals to individuals
Ratings of individual performance
Monitoring Questions
What are the current SBM levels per Division?
What are the current SBM levels per Region?
How many schools have school governance councils (SGC)?
How many schools have poor ratings?
What operating units are lagging behind in terms of client
satisfaction?
Are the teachers’ and staff qualified?
Is the current DepED compensation plan aligned with the
government’s compensation and position plan?
Evaluation Questions
How do SBM levels improve?
How does improvement in SBM levels eventually translate into
educational outcomes?
To what extent are schools governance councils more relevant and
responsive to learners’ needs?
What existing practices allow operating units to maintain high client
satisfaction ratings?
What are the current ratings of individual teaching and non-teaching
staff per school/division/region?
What competency requirements are needed for teaching and non-
teaching staff?
What competencies should school administrators demonstrate to
attain high SBM ratings in their schools?
Impact Questions
59
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES BY GOVERNANCE LEVEL
The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system shall serve as an integrating mechanism across
governance levels and within operating units of the Department. This shall provide the DepEd’s
decision-makers with an evidence-based information on the applicability and feasibility of
formulation and implementation of policies, programs, projects, and major activities in the
Department.
The vertical integration of the M&E system across governance levels is the systematic alignment of
development and implementation of basic education policies, plans, programs, projects, major
activities, and M&E processes from national to region, region to school division, and school division
to school level and vice versa. It allows the national, regional, school division, and school levels to
make adjustments in the quality of their strategic basic education plans including technical, human
resource, and administrative services. Likewise, the horizontal integration of the M&E system
within governance levels shall align the development and implementation processes of basic
education plans, policies, programs, projects, major activities, and M&E processes among operating
units in a particular governance level i.e. national, regional, school division, and school. BEMEF shall
enable each office to come up with a more holistic and integrated analysis of their entire
governance situation. To make the M&E system functional, all DepEd operating units across
governance levels shall conduct the M&E of their respective basic education plans, policies,
programs, projects, and major activities in accordance to BEMEF and corresponding standards.
CENTRAL OFFICE
The National M&E shall orchestrate the entire DepEd monitoring and evaluation. This defines the
scope of the DepEd M&E system. This includes continuous review and enhancement of
performance indicators to ensure that the needs of learners are addressed.
2. Provide the mechanism for the horizontal integration of bureaus, services and other
operating units at the national level;
3. Ensure vertical integration of the M&E systems in the region, school division, and school;
4. Define the processes for validating outcomes and accomplishments. This includes design of
M&E work processes, identification of the information needs of internal and external
stakeholders, report requirements, and process for collecting and capturing data and
information;
60
5. Ensure the integration of M&E results in development policies, programs and plans,
preparation of the agency’s financial requirements and distribution of resources;
6. Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and
among operating units and external stakeholders;
7. Facilitate the implementation of third party evaluation of DepEd programs and projects;
9. Ensure that BEMEF is supportive of the achievement of DepEd goals and outcomes.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICES
The Secretary shall be the overall lead of the Department’s national M&E system. As the official
with the overall authority and supervisory responsibility of the operations of the Department,
he/she shall have the accountability and responsibility to ensure that information generated from
the national M&E system are used to: (1) formulate national educational policies, plans, standards,
programs, projects, and major activities; and, (2) assess national learning outcomes. He/she shall:
2. Provide decisions and directions on national education issues and matters arising from
various M&E activities such as national PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings,
among others;
3. Communicate education concerns to other national offices and other development partners
during meetings, fora, or conferences;
4. Approve educational policies and program recommendations from internal and external
stakeholders based on evidences presented such as completed researches, national
statistics, among others; and,
61
5. Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the national M&E
plan as necessary.
Planning Service
The Planning Service (PS), as the process owner of the national M&E system, shall:
1. Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all central office operating units and ensure
that they are adhering to established standards;
2. Maintain a national database facility to ensure that data and information gathered from
M&E activities are properly managed;
3. Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from central and regional operating units for the
preparation of national reports to be disseminated to internal and external stakeholders;
4. Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among central offices
and provide guidance/technical assistance to regional offices and SDOs on the conduct of
PIR to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the progress
implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities based on key
performance indicators (KPIs);
6. Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to central and regional operating
units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E systems.
In support of this process, the Education Program Delivery Unit (EPDU) created through DO 71, s.
2016 as the Department’s performance delivery unit, shall collaborate with the PS in monitoring
priority programs and projects. Likewise, it shall work closely with Finance Service (FS) to drive
performance improvements in the timely delivery of education inputs for both formal and non-
formal education. EPDU shall track both physical and financial performance of PAPs across
governance levels in the Department in coordination with the PS towards effective and efficient
delivery of basic education services to its clientele.
62
2. Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes;
4. Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E
activities to relevant central operating units;
REGIONAL OFFICE
The regional M&E system shall ensure the effective, efficient, and inclusive implementation of all
education policies & programs and the achievement of desired outcomes. The regional M&E system
shall provide the regional policy makers and implementers with timely and appropriate feedback on
the implementation of DepEd policies, programs, and delivery systems.
2. Ensure the horizontal integration of M&E activities of the different operating units in the
region;
3. Strengthen vertical integration to link M&E systems between region, school division and
school;
4. Ensure that M&E standards and processes are implemented at the regional level;
63
5. Evaluate the impact, effectiveness, and efficiency of education policies and programs in the
region;
6. Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and
among operating units and external stakeholders;
7. Provide feedback to CO on the regional M&E results particularly on issues with implications
for national policies and programs;
8. Ensure the integration of M&E results in developing local programs and plans, and
customizing national education strategies and policies;
9. Ensure the conduct of quarterly regional PIR (MEA) with SDOs to track physical and
financial accomplishments and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs,
projects, and major activities based on key performance indicators (KPIs); and
RESPONSIBLE OFFICES
Regional Director /
The regional director shall be the overall lead of the regional M&E system. He/she shall have the
authority, accountability, and responsibility to ensure that information generated from the regional
M&E system are used to: (1) develop regional basic education plans, standards, programs, projects,
and major activities; (2) customize national education strategies and policies; and, (3) assess
regional learning outcomes. He/she shall:
2. Provide decisions and directions on regional education issues and matters arising from
various M&E activities such as regional PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings,
among others;
3. Communicate regional education concerns to the central office, other agencies, and other
development partners during meetings, fora, or conferences;
64
5. Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the regional M&E
plan as necessary.
1. Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all regional operating units and ensure that
they are adhering to established standards;
2. Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from regional and schools’ division operating units for
the preparation of regional reports to be disseminated to internal and external
stakeholders;
3. Maintain a regional database which contains data and information gathered from regional
M&E activities that can be easily accessed, managed, and updated;
4. Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among regional and
school division operating units to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess
the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities based on
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs);
6. Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to regional and school division
operating units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E
systems.
Other Units
2. Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes;
65
4. Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E
activities to relevant central and regional operating units;
The Schools Division M&E focuses on determining effectiveness and inclusiveness of schools in
providing basic education services. This shall serve as a mechanism for reflection on the SDO’s
capacity to provide timely and needs-based basic education support services to schools. The
feedback shall allow the SDO to provide technical assistance and capacity building support to
creating and sustaining effective and inclusive schools that are relevant and responsive. Through the
M&E system, targeted technical support to schools in the areas of curriculum delivery and
assessment, training of teachers, teaching and learning process, learning environment, partnerships
and stakeholders support, and school leadership shall be regularly provided.
4. Monitor the effective and efficient implementation of education policies and programs;
5. Ensure that M&E standards and processes are implemented at the SDO and school levels;
6. Facilitate exchange of information, practices, insights, lessons and issues between and
among operating units and external stakeholders;
66
8. Ensure the integration of M&E results in developing local education plans and programs,
and in implementing national education policies and systems both at the SDO and school
levels;
9. Ensure the conduct of quarterly PIR (MEA) to track physical and financial accomplishments
and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities
based on key performance indicators (KPIs);
10. Provide M&E technical support and capacity building intervention to schools; and
RESPONSIBLE OFFICES
1. Lead the institutionalization of the basic education school division M&E system;
2. Provide decisions and directions on school division education issues and matters arising
from various M&E activities such as school division PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency
meetings, among others;
3. Communicate school division education concerns to the regional office during meetings,
fora, or conferences; and,
4. Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the school division
M&E plan as necessary.
67
As the process owner of the school division M&E system, the Schools Governance and Operations
Division (SGOD) shall:
1. Oversee and manage the conduct of M&E of all division operating units and schools, and
ensure that they are adhering to established standards;
2. Consolidate and analyze M&E reports from school division operating units and schools for
the preparation of school division reports to be disseminated to internal and external
stakeholders;
3. Maintain a school division database which contains data and information gathered from
school division M&E activities that can be easily accessed, managed, and updated;
4. Lead the conduct of quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) among school division
operating units and schools to track physical and financial accomplishments and assess the
progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities based on Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs); and
5. Provide technical assistance and capacity building support to division and school operating
units on the management and conduct of M&E within their respective M&E systems.
All the operating units in the school division M&E system shall:
2. Adhere to the established M&E standards in performing M&E activities and processes;
3. Partake in strengthening the horizontal integration in the school division M&E system by
engaging other school division operating units during development of local education plans
and programs, implementation of national education policies and systems, and M&E;
4. Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E
activities to relevant regional and school division operating units;
68
5. Participate in school division M&E initiatives such as PIRs, periodic reporting of
accomplishments of plans, programs, projects, and major activities, and submission of
O/IPCRF, among others; and
SCHOOLS
The school system shall make the teaching and learning process more learner-centered and school-
based management more effective and inclusive. This promotes the culture of self-assessment and
self-improvement among schools to transform into responsive and nimble organizations. It is a key
support system which shall allow the school heads to create and sustain a school environment that
empowers teachers to collaborate in fostering an effective and inclusive school. School M&E should
provide the platform for shared governance which is a critical component in developing,
implementing, and sustaining effective inclusive schools.
School-based M&E will provide school heads, teachers, non-teaching staff, and communities with
critical insights, lessons, and timely information on the performance of all learners, their needs, as
well as barriers preventing active participation in the teaching and learning process.
1. Ensure the periodic conduct of M&E in all school operations and processes in accordance
with existing standards;
2. Track operational bottlenecks and issues to update, calibrate, and differentiate response
every school year and regularly examine and customize teaching strategies;
3. Formalize interface between and among school head, teachers, and non-teaching staff to
discuss operational issues and challenges;
5. Ensure the conduct of quarterly PIR (MEA) to track physical and financial accomplishments
and assess the progress implementation of plans, programs, projects, and major activities
based on key performance indicators (KPIs);
6. Maintain records of M&E results and integrate such in the preparation of SIP, OPCRF, and
other school projects and programs;
69
7. Report to the SDO the M&E results for appropriate technical support; and
RESPONSIBLE OFFICES
School Head
The school head shall be the overall lead and process owner of the school M&E system. He/she shall
have the authority, accountability, and responsibility for ensuring that information generated from
the school M&E system are used in the development and implementation of plans, programs,
projects, and major activities to make the school more effective and inclusive. He/she shall:
2. Provide decisions and directions on school issues and matters arising from various M&E
activities such as school PIRs, stakeholders’ forum, inter-agency meetings, among others;
3. Communicate school concerns to the school division office during meetings, fora, or
conferences;
4. Oversee the conduct of M&E activities in the school and ensure that these are according to
established standards;
5. Engage different stakeholders in the conduct of school M&E activities such as the members
of the School Planning Team (SPT), School Governance Council (SGC), among others;
6. Conduct quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR) in the school to track physical and
financial accomplishments and assess the progress of implementation of plans, programs,
projects, and major activities based on ley performance indicators (KPIs);
7. Maintain records of M&E results and integrate such in the preparation of SIP/AIP, OPCRF,
and other school programs, projects, and major activities;
8. Prepare school M&E reports for dissemination to internal and external stakeholders such as
the School Report Card (SRC), Transparency Board, Learning Action Cells (LAC), among
others; and,
70
9. Determine additional performance indicators and other adjustments in the school M&E
plan as necessary.
2. Discuss operational issues and challenges between and among school head, fellow
teachers, and non-teaching staff;
3. Provide feedback, insights, lessons, and other issues gathered from their respective M&E
activities to relevant school operating units, community members, and other key
stakeholders through dissemination of SRC, conduct of LAC sessions, and preparation of
Transparency Board;
All DepEd operating units and personnel have the responsibility to perform M&E in accordance with
established standards and partake in the operations of M&E systems at this level.
71
VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LINKAGE PER GOVERNANCE LEVEL
At the level of the Leadership, the M&E system should be looking at the “big picture” which should
be focused on the relevant Sustainable Development Goals that contribute to education impacts
in the long-term and are aligned with the Government’s Philippine Development Plan (PDP).
With this DepEd Leadership through the Secretary (and by extension the Senior Officials and
Regional Directors) will set and provide leadership in terms of:
Policy direction based on an articulated vision, mission and with coherent and clear
strategies
Agenda and Program that is easily understood, subscribed to and followed by stakeholders
Resources to deliver on that program (i.e. a budget that enables priorities to be properly
funded
Standards to determine the quality desired of the system and expected of all schools and
offices in the bureaucracy.
CUSTOMER VALUE
The primary “customer” so to speak are the Schools and School Divisions that oversee them.
Learning as the “moment of truth” in Education. The moment of truth in Education can only happen
where LEARNING is occurring. For the most part, in the formal education system, this occurs in the
classroom, in the school and/or in a learning center. Thus, the measure of success in Education must
be measured primarily on Learning Outcomes, not on output and much less on input.
(Note that Inputs and Outputs are necessary but not sufficient to determine if an education system is
high-performing or not.)
72
This emphasizes the primordial role of operating units in DepEd. The following considerations are
emphasized:
If Learning occurs primarily in schools or learning centers, the center of gravity for the
monitoring and evaluation of the system (M&E) will necessarily be schools divisions, schools
and learning centers.
All other offices in the Department of Education system and bureaucracy play a support role
and should be aligned to try to enhance schools’ and centers’ ability to deliver education
services with quality (i.e. effectively and efficiently).
At the level of the operating units (schools divisions, schools, learning centers), the M&E
system should be looking at outcomes (learning and schooling outcomes) which are spelled
out in the Education for All goals and indicators.
Academic Support units are those offices that provide support to schools and learning centers so
that they can provide better content, pedagogy and instructional methods, and educational
technologies and processes. The identified output of these offices are input to the schools delivery
part of the system.
At the level of academic support units, the M&E system should be looking at the quality of inputs
(i.e. effectiveness and relevance). These units are not operating units and are not responsible for
learning outcomes directly; rather they contribute by helping shape content and methods. The
measure of their success will be based on the quality of input they have in helping create an
enabling environment for learning to occur.
At the level bureaucratic support units, the M&E system should be looking at process delivery (i.e.
efficiency and sustainability) of inputs. These offices are measured by how efficiently they deliver
on plans and targets (target versus actual + quality of service delivered).
Please refer to Annex B for a Conceptual Representation of the aforementioned discussion
At the core of the DepEd M&E system is the direction towards vertical and horizontal alignment
across governance levels.
73
Figure 11.0: Conceptual Representation of Vertical and Horizontal Integration
in DepEd
Seen as a system, a Results-Based M&E focused on learning outcomes and processes can be
arranged using a Logical Framework starting at the level of activities and inputs:
Education requires direction (vision, mission), policy (including budgetary support), agenda
and program of work, and standards. These are provided by the Leadership group. IF
Leadership is provided, THEN a program of work can be embarked on and resources
allocated.
IF resources are allocated and administered well (Input), THEN Output by bureaucratic
support offices can be generated (call this, output by support groups).
IF output from bureaucratic support groups are done well, THEN a proper enabling
environment can be created for units supporting academic processes (outputs by academic
support groups).
IF output from academic support groups are of quality and are timely, THEN operating units
can deliver on (learning) outcomes.
IF (learning) outcomes can be positively realized, the education system would have had an
overall positive Impact on society which should conform with the vision and mission of the
leadership core.
74
Figure 12.0 Vertical and Horizontal Integration in M&E
Figure 12.0 presents the conceptual diagram of how vertical and horizontal alignment are
articulated in the context of DepEd.
75
Figure 13.0 Vertical and Horizontal Integration in the Planning and Budget
System
The Program Expenditure Classification (PREXC) serves as the prevailing budget framework of the
Department. This structure provides a clear link between and among DepEd’s strategies, programs,
budgets, and results by showing how investments under each program are linked to the attainment
of desired sectoral organizational outcomes. The financial management system of government
attempts to use the 6-Year Philippine Development Plan (PDP) as the premiere planning document.
This is managed by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the national
planning body. The PDP sets the direction of government and serves as the policy compass of the
National Government. The translation of policy into programs and investment is contained in the
Public Investment Program (PIP). Both the PDP and PIP take on a rolling six-year horizon.
Annual budgets are intended to translate the PIP into yearly programs of work. For the DepED, the
DBCC (Development Budget Coordinating Committee) co-chaired by NEDA and the Department of
Budget and Management (DBM) has initiated a multi-year budget process which has led to higher
budget ceilings in subsequent years. It is therefore important for DepED to ensure that it has
longer-term enrolment projections to guide the multi-year budget process.
Internal Stakeholders
Central Office
76
Regional Office
Division Office
Submits division inputs, re budgeting to regional office
Budget submissions are largely driven by formulas based on enrolments
Prepares the Division Education Development Plan (DEDP)
Consolidates SIPs
Conducts the quarterly Program Implementation Review (PIR)/DMEA
School
No role in budgeting
Prepares the School Improvement Plan (SIP)
Conducts PIR/School MEA
External Stakeholders
NEDA
NEDA’s orientation is towards the national or macro economy and, hence, has little motivation to
look more closely at sub-regional matters. This could explain its inability to push PDP more strongly
among the service delivery departments.
Leads the PDP formulation process. Generally, since its inception in previous presidential
administrations, the PDP serves as the backbone of the Philippine governance system.
The task of integrating the substantive contents of the PDP is under the auspices of NEDA,
as the socio-economic planning agency of the Philippine government, in collaboration with
government departments with its corresponding bureaus. However, in terms of long-term
planning, the PDP may have limitations as the DepED Secretary decides the department’s
priorities based on its mandate.
Facilitates the preparation of the PIP to synchronize the investment programming
processes with the budget process.
Spearheads the formulation of the TRIP as input for budget preparation.
The DBM is mandated under this Order and by subsequent issuances to promote the sound,
efficient and effective management and utilization of government resources (i.e., technological,
77
manpower, physical and financial) as instrument in the achievement of national socioeconomic and
political development goals.
Facilitates the preparation of PIP in line with DepED’s prioritization, and financing of capital
investment and current operating expenditure requirements.
In view of the efforts to synchronize the investment programming processes with the
budget process, NEDA issued on September 10, 2018 the joint call for the updating of the
2017-2022 Public Investment Program (PIP) and formulation of the Three (3)-Year Rolling
Infrastructure Program (TRIP) Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2022, as input to the FY 2020 budget
preparation.
The Updated PIP shall contain the rolling list of priority programs, projects and activities
(PPAs) to be implemented by national government agencies, government-owned and
controlled corporations (GOCCs) and government financial institutions (GFIs)
Establishes departmental budget ceilings and can control funds needed to address
shortages and resource needs of DepEd.
Vertical Integration
M&E should focus on how schooling and learning indicators are supported by the academic support
groups (from below) and contribute to realizing the leadership goals of the top.
The details of the M&E system for the operating group (schools divisions, schools, learning centers
should be focused on the Intermediate outcomes (IO) of the BEMEF.
78
Horizontal Integration
M&E should focus on how the academic support groups can work with each other to provide
content and pedagogical support to the operating schools and learning centers. Some essential
points to consider:
The details of these interactions should be focused on the Enabling Environment (EE) of
the BEMEF.
Only what are IO and EE indicators should be in the core M&E system around learning
outcomes.
All other M&E indicators or measures that are looking at bureaucratic processes are best
left to an M&E system that is more generic to the Philippine bureaucracy (i.e. based on a
DBM framework, notably the “enabling environment”)
79
MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCESSES
M&E PROCESS
Established Indicators
Data Collection
Data Synthesis
Reporting
Figure 15.0 M&E Processes
M&E, usually an iterative process, involves detailed suggested steps but sometimes there is a
tendency that those who are involved will eventually go back and forth in terms of sequence.
ESTABLISHED INDICATORS
With the existing Intermediate Outcomes and Enabling Environments indicators pre-
determined by BEMEF, the preparation of M&E is streamlined.
Establishing Monitoring and Evaluation Plans involve concentrating on specific evaluation
question for M&E vis-à-vis separate monitoring focus and evaluation focus with
corresponding sources of data for monitoring and detailed evaluation methodology for
evaluation.
80
Quantitative Qualitative Indicators
Indicators Subjective
Can be Numerical
Objective
Numerical Measures Perceptions, Quality,
Measures the Scale Opinions
The focus may be limited based on particular aspects, like the following example:
81
Figure 16.0 Link between Key Evaluation Questions with Data Collection
and Analysis
Individuals and offices within DepEd can also consider the formulation of essential M&E
questions and the intended use of evaluation information. It is also essential to note that the
relationship of the questions with other processes like data collection and data analysis.
DATA COLLECTION
There is a need to ascertain how you collect the information that you need. It is essential to prepare
an M&E data collection plan.
82
Effectiveness Learners EBEIS Review of learners’ records
To what extent Characteristics ALS Learners Review of A&E Results
did ALS Profile Interviews
learners Changes in Observation of ALS classes
increase their competencies Learning Center Visits
competencies as a result of
when they participation in
participated in ALS sessions.
ALS classes.
Efficiency Costs against Procurement Secondary data review
Was the cost budget and Records Key informant interviews
of curriculum areas where Disbursement Site visits
review within overruns or Records
budget? underspends Liquidation
occurred Records
Financial Reports
Source: Adapted from Arce (2001) and Markiewicz and Patrick (2016)
For data collection, the following will be used in the context of DepEd:
83
population
In-Depth Semi-structured Interviews can be In-depth Medium to
Interviews interviews with conducted in interviews take High
open-ended person or over the time to plan,
questions telephone. coordinate, and
designed to conduct.
elicit in-depth Interviews obtain
responses from detailed
participants. information and
give the
opportunity to ask
follow-up
questions.
Results are
sometimes
subjective and not
necessarily
representative of
the population.
Depending on
sample size,
analysis can be
time-consuming
Records Physical and Do not require Depending on Low
Review digital additional when the
documents kept research. information was
in storage for a collected,
set amount of however, it may
time not be current
Surveys Structured Can be Response rate Medium
questionnaires administered in cannot be
that include person, over the determined.
close-ended telephone, or
and some online.
open-ended
questions. Cost-effective,
quick, provide
precise and easily-
analyzed data, and
maintain the
confidentiality of
participants.
Source: Ohkubo et al. (2013)
No single method of data collection is likely to be suitable M&E. In most instances, a combination of
both qualitative and quantitative information can be used. Selecting the right data to collect is key
to getting valid information that DepEd stakeholders will perceive as useful for decision making and
understanding the efforts of the department.
The strength of evaluation findings is usually found in the bringing together of data from different
sources.
84
DATA ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS
These involve sorting M&E data in different ways to develop or uncover new insights. The use of a
combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis techniques will improve an
evaluation by ensuring that the limitations of one data type is balanced by the strengths of another.
The integrative process may include the following:
Analyzing data to summarize findings and look for trends is necessary in M&E. The primary
consideration in terms of data analysis and synthesis is the type of data that you are using.
Quantitative Data
With quantitative M&E data, results can be analyzed using statistics. The following considerations
are highlighted.
Levels of Measurement. How the values are assigned to attributes.
Nominal. These can be classified into categories (e.g., Gender, Division, Region,
Ethnicity)
Ordinal. These are variables measured in terms of ranking.
Interval. These pertain to distance between values that are meaningful.
Ratio. These refer to distance between values that are meaningful and have an absolute
zero.
85
Approach.
Descriptive Statistics. If the purpose is just to explore and describe M&E data.
Inferential Statistics. If the purpose is to test or confirm hypothesized relationships
among M&E variables.
Qualitative Data
Qualitative data provide richer depiction of M&E information. Narrative or graphic information is
easier to explore and understand as a direct representation of M&E data.
The following may be the common approaches that can be used by DepEd:
86
specific outcome.
Sentiment analysis Establish a sentiment Leverage real-time
score for each stakeholder sentiment scores to take
segment. immediate actions.
Text mining Mine stakeholder Locate unsatisfied
comments to flag problem stakeholder segments to
situations and specific prioritize specific
issues. approaches.
Trend analysis Perform trend analysis to Flag critical areas and
ascertain variables that take immediate corrective
are highly correlated to actions.
specific indicator or
outcome.
Dedoose
IBM Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS)
SAS
STATA
Common applications for non-numeric data include:
ATLAS.ti
Dedoose
HyperRESEARCH
Provalis Research QDA Miner
QSR International’s NVivo
The Ethnograph
Verbi Software MAXQDA
Reporting and dissemination of the M&E findings are the culminating components of the M&E
process. This is the process where information is shared based on crude data and processed data.
This is essential in providing program implementers, as well as internal and external stakeholders an
opportunity to inform themselves of progress, problems, difficulties encountered, successes, and
lessons learned during implementation.
87
Narratives
Graphics
Presentation
Understand the purpose of the report and M&E dissemination. This is essential as this would
guide how to prepare the report and its corresponding content.
Determine the reader/audience. Knowing the reader/audience helps with the essential
elements of framing and assumptions.
This is also helpful in taking into account their expectations and what elements of the
findings should be highlighted.
Share positive and negative findings. Sharing good results is necessary. However, it is also
essential to present challenges and what did not work as these may provide potential for
learning and improvement.
Some Considerations
Make the report concise and direct as possible focusing on the information that needs to be
conveyed.
Discuss data sources, collection methods and how data were analyzed.
Present complex data using charts, drawings, figures, frameworks, infographics, tables
DATA MANAGEMENT
Data management is often neglected aspects of the M&E. These are necessary processes and
systems for how a DepEd will systematically and reliably store, manage and access M&E data. It is a
critical part of the M&E system, linking data collection with its analysis and use. Poorly managed
data wastes time, money and resources; lost or incorrectly recorded data affects not only the
quality and reliability of the data but also all the time and resources invested in its analysis and use.
Data management should be timely and secure, and in a format that is practical and user-friendly. It
should be designed according to the needs, size and complexity. Typically, M&E data management
should be a component of DepEd’s larger data management system and should adhere to any
established policies and requirements. This is essential because:
88
It ensures data quality and integrity
Data format. Standardized formats and templates improve the organization and storage of
M&E data. Generated M&E data are differentiated in terms of quantitative and qualitative data.
Storage of mere numbers or texts and/or combinations are essential in managing the database
of information. Some formats are:
Data management systems. Storage in a physical hardware on-site in DepEd, mirror DepEd
servers and cloud-based storage are important considerations as well.
Frequency of retrieval. It helps in systematizing the retrieval of data as well as improve the data
collection process.
89
Schools - Online
Data Survey of
selected
schools,
schools
division,
regions
- KIIs
- FGDs
- Field
observation
Project Quarterly Region Synthesis of Regional Central
Implementati Data Regional Data Offices Office
on Review SDO Data
District
Data
Schools
Data
Outcome Annually SDO Data Review of Regional Central
Mapping District Specific Offices Office
Data Outcome
Schools based on Division Regional
Data Indicators Offices Office
Outcome Every 3-Years Region Desk review Independen Central
Evaluation End of Data of Existing t Evaluation Office
Administratio SDO Data Database Consultant
n District
Data Desk review Central Oversight
Schools of policies Office Agencies
Data
Meta- Internatio
evaluation of nal
monitoring Partners
and
evaluation
reports
Survey of
Selected
Segments
90
REFERENCES
Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA). (2015). Joint Memorandum Circular on the National Evaluation Policy
Framework of the Philippines No. 2015-01. Manila: DBM and NEDA.
Glennerster, R. and K. Takavarasha. (2013). Running Randomized Evaluations: A Practical Guide. New
York: Princenton University Press.
IFC Advisory Services (2008). The Monitoring and Evaluation Handbook for Business Environment
Reform, IFC Business Enabling Environment Business Line, in association with GTZ and
DFID.
Kettner, P., R. Moroney, and L. Martin. (2017). Designing and Managing Programs: An Effectiveness-
Based Approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Markiewicz, A. and I. Patrick. (2016). Developing Monitoring and Evaluation Frameworks. Thousand
Oaks: Sage.
Nishishiba, M., M. Jones and M. Kraner. (2014). Research Methods and Statistics for Public and
Nonprofit Administrators: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2002). Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation
for Results. New York: Evaluation Office.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2009), Handbook on Planning, Monitoring and
Evaluating for Development Results. New York: Evaluation Office, Operations Support Group,
and Development Group Bureau for Development Policy.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2007). Evaluation
Handbook. Paris: Internal Oversight Service.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2009). Education
Indicators: Technical Guidelines. Paris: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Wholey, J. H. Hatry, and K. Newcomer (Eds). (2015). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
World Bank (WB). (2009). Making Monitoring and Evaluation Systems Work: A Capacity Development
Toolkit. N W Washington: World Bank.
91
ANNEX A: GLOSSARY
For the purpose of this Handbook, the following terms are defined and understood as follows:
TERM DEFINITION
Accountable office Any decision-making unit/s of DepEd at the national, regional, school division, or school
levels in charge of providing directives and determining strategies to achieve agency
performance targets (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Activity Output-driven undertaking that has a specific calendar schedule and resource
assignments. The objectives of an activity typically have corresponding tangible and
quantifiable outputs.
Attribution This refers to ascribing causal link between observed changes and a specific
intervention/initiative/project/program.
Audit Any independent, objective quality assurance activity designed to add value and improve
operations and/or performance.
Basic Education Plan This refers to strategic, medium-term, and operational plans developed by DepEd
operating units across governance levels (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Client The primary client of DepEd are the learners or students (ESIP Guidebook, 2015).
Counterfactuals In evaluations, the counterfactual is the value of the outcome for a treatment group in
the absence of the intervention/project/program.
Database A structured set of data and information of each DepEd operating unit gathered from its
M&E activities that is easy to access, manage, and update (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
DepEd Operating Unit Any DepEd unit across governance levels which provides support and/or implement
programs, projects, and major activities relative to the delivery of basic education in line
with the provisions of R.A. 9155 (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Efficacy The extent to which an intervention/project/program has attained its expected results.
Efficiency The extent to which the program has converted or is expected to convert its
resources/inputs (such as finances, expertise, time, etc.) economically into results in order
to achieve the maximum possible outputs, outcomes, and impacts with the minimum
92
possible inputs.
Formative Evaluation A type of evaluation intended to improve the performance of an intervention, initiative,
project or program or intervention. This is conducted during the design and pilot-testing,
but it can also be conducted early in the implementation phase.
Governance Levels This refers to the structure of the whole Department of Education representing vertical
roles and responsibilities in operating units from the Central Office, to the Regional
Offices, Division Offices and Schools.
Impact The long-term, cumulative effect of initiatives, interventions, projects and programs over
time on what they ultimately intend to change or achieve.
Impact Evaluation Assessment of the direct and/or indirect, positive and/or negative, as well as intended
and/or unintended consequences of an intervention/project/program.
Indicator Quantitative or qualitative factor or variable that provides a simple and reliable means to
measure achievement, to reflect the changes connected to an intervention, or to help
assess the performance of a program, project and/or activity specific, tangible, or
quantifiable measures of accomplishments, or if unquantifiable, they can be qualitative
specifications of achievements (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Information System An organized system for the collection, organization, storage, and communication of
information (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Input The financial, human, and material resources needed to produce an output (BEMEF Policy,
2017).
Monitoring Periodic or routine tracking and reporting of priority information about a project or
program, its inputs and intended outputs, outcomes and impacts.
M&E System A set of organizational structures, management processes, standards, strategies, plans,
indicators, information systems, reporting lines and accountability relationships which
enables offices across governance levels to perform their M&E functions effectively
(BEMEF Policy, 2017).
M&E Tools Instruments used to collect information during the conduct of monitoring and evaluation
(BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Objective A statement of a desired intervention, project or program result that meets the criteria like
being Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound (SMART) or Frequently-
Discussed, Ambitious, Specific, Transparent (FAST).
Outcome Monitoring Assessing the intended results or intermediate effects of output/s on clients.
Outcome Evaluation Focuses on changes in comprehension, behaviors that the target results from program
activities and/or output/s and may include both short-term, medium-term and long-term
93
results.
Output Products and services produced through utilization and processing of inputs (BEMEF
Policy, 2017).
Overall Lead The staff with the overall authority, accountability, and responsibility for the M&E system
at each governance level (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Performance The degree to which a project/program or Dep Ed operating Unit operates according to
specific criteria/standards/guidelines or achieves results in accordance with stated goals or
plans.
Portfolio A combination of different programs, projects and initiatives handled by specific DepEd
operating units.
Portfolio Management The design, development, organizing and management of combination of projects and
programs.
Process Evaluation A type of evaluation that explores detailed information on how specific
intervention/project/program was delivered. It examines areas like differences between
the intended population and the population served, as well as access and participation.
Process owner The office who will oversee and manage the conduct of the M&E system per governance
level.
Program Strategic intervention anchored on DepEd’s mandate, goals, and national policies the
implementation of which constitutes or supports the Department’s core business.
Project An intervention that is relatively narrower in scope compared to a program. A project
yields more immediate results for specific target groups.
Program Management This refers to designing, developing, planning, organizing and managing the effort to
accomplish different sets or combinations of projects.
Progress Monitoring This is a systematic and objective assessment of an on-going implementation of plans,
programs, projects, and major activities (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Project Management This refers to designing, developing, planning, organizing and managing the effort to
accomplish a successful project.
Quality Assurance This refers to planned and systematic processes concerned with assessing and improving
the merit or worth of a/an intervention/project/program through its compliance with given
existing guidelines and established standards.
Readiness Monitoring This is a quality assurance mechanism designed to ensure the availability of all inputs and
requirements necessary to start and sustain an efficient operation (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Relevance The extent to which the objectives, outputs, or outcomes of an intervention are consistent
94
with beneficiaries’ requirements, DepEd’ policies, country needs, and/or global priorities.
Responsible office A DepEd operating unit at the national, regional, school division, or school level in charge
of executing tasks or deliverables (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Results-Based M&E The continuous process of collecting and analyzing information to compare how well
DepEd programs, projects, and activities are performing against its expected outcome or
result (BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Results Evaluation This is an M&E approach that focuses on measuring the realization of results. It seeks to
assess the outcomes and changes brought about by program or project interventions
(BEMEF Policy, 2017).
Stakeholder A person, group, or entity who has a direct or indirect role and interest in the goals or
objectives of DepEd and implementation of its projects or programs.
Summative Evaluation A type of evaluation conducted at the end of an intervention (or a phase of that
intervention) to determine the extent to which anticipated outcomes and/or objectives
where achieved.
Sustainability The likelihood that the project or program will be continued in the future.
Target This is the desired measurable value for an indicator at a particular point in time.
95
ANNEX B: STRATEGIC M&E FRAMEWORK
96
[Project/Activity Name] LOGFRAME
OBJECTIVES INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTI
VERIFICATIO ONS
N
Goal
Outcome 1
Output 1.1
Output 1.2
Output 1.3
Activities Activities may often be Inputs/resources Costs & sources
included in separate document
(activity schedule) for practical
purposes
Outcome 2
Output 2.1
Output 2.2
Output 2.3
Activities Inputs/resources Costs & sources
Outcome 3
Output 3.1
Output 3.2
Output 3.3
Inputs/resources Costs &
Activities sources
Continue to add additional rows for outcomes, outputs and activities as necessary
97
Logical Framework (LogFrame) – Definition of Terms
ASSUMPTIO
INDICATORS MEANS OF
OBJECTIVES NS
(How to measure VERIFICATION
(What we want to achieve) (What else to
change) (Where / how to get
be aware of)
information)
criteria that
provide a simple
and reliable contribute to
contributed to by factors means to measure collect it and how the next
outside the intervention. achievement or often). level of
reflect changes intervention.
connected to the
goal.
External
conditions
not under
Outcomes1 the direct
The primary result(s) that an Outcome control of the
intervention seeks to Indicators intervention
achieve, most commonly in As above, As above necessary if
terms of the knowledge, connected to the the outcome
attitudes or practices of the stated outcome. is to
target group. contribute to
reaching
intervention
goal.
External
factors not
under the
Outputs
Output direct control
The tangible products, goods
Indicators of the
and services and other
As above, As above intervention
immediate results that lead
connected to the which could
to the achievement of
stated outputs. restrict the
outcomes.
outputs
leading to
the outcome.
External
Process As above factors not
Indicators under the
Activities2 As above, direct control
The collection of tasks to be connected to the of the
carried out in order to stated activities. intervention
achieve the outputs. which could
restrict
progress of
activities.
1 When there is more than one outcome in a project, the outputs should be listed under each outcome – see the example
above .
2 Activities may often be included in separate document (e.g. activity schedule / GANTT chart) for practical purposes.
98
ANNEX D: SAMPLE M&E PLAN TEMPLATE
NAME OF PROJECT:
RESPONSIBLE UNIT:
GOAL
Indicator 1.0
Assumption
OUTCOME 1.0
Indicator 1.1
Assumption
Indicator 1.2
Assumption
OUTCOME 2.0
Indicator 2.1
Assumption
Indicator 2.2
Assumption
99