What is the relationship between evaluation and performance of Church of Uganda Projects in Namirembe Diocese?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47941/ijcrs.1088Keywords:
Evaluation, Performance, Church of Uganda, DioceseAbstract
Purpose: Evaluation as a good management practice and an integral function of the project life cycle improves project performance (Shapiro, 2007; Nyonje et al, 2012; Shelber, 2014). The Church of Uganda planned various evaluations to determine the performance of the strategic plan 2025. This paper examined the relationship between evaluation and performance of Church of Uganda Projects in Namirembe Diocese.
Methodology: A Cross sectional survey design was used on a study population of 117 respondents. 87 respondents filled the Survey questionnaires whose responses were analysed by using correlational and regression analysis by using PSPP software Version 1.2.0-g0fb4db. Key Informant interviews and an FGD were carried out and responses were analysed using content analysis and results presented as text. The empirical results were presented in frequencies, percentages and summarized into tables.
Findings: Descriptive findings highlighted that evaluation to some extent improves project performance (mean 3.1), This was further supported by the qualitative findings. However, inferential statistics revealed that evaluation had a non-significant positive relationship with Project performance (β=0.17, p= 0.188>0.05).
Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: In conclusion, this paper established that evaluation to some extent influences project performance. The weaknesses included; having impromptu evaluations of what has not been monitored, lack of evaluation skills and knowledge, lack of commitment from staff, lack of allegiance to the Diocese and only local parish focus, lack of having set Key performance indicators (KPIs) and baseline information. Therefore, to improve upon the performance of Church of Uganda projects, it is important to strengthen the evaluation mechanisms; baseline evaluation, mid-term evaluation and end-term evaluation. The non-existent evaluation framework will be developed with informed decisions from the study.
Downloads
References
Amin, M. E. (2005). Social science research: Conception, methodology and analysis. Kampala, Makerere University Press.
Apajo, J. (2016). Decentralized Policy Management and Performance of Water and Sanitation Development Facility-North, Lango Sub-Region, in Northern Uganda. September. https://utamu.ac.ug/docs/research/studentresearch/masters/dissertations/DECENTRALIZED POLICY MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE.pdf
Bazira, D. (2017). Organizational Learning Culture and Utilization of Evaluation Results By International Development Agencies. a Case Study of Heifer International Uganda. https://utamu.ac.ug/docs/research/studentresearch/masters/dissertations/DanBazira.pdf
Chen, H. T. (2015). Practical program evaluation (2e d.). Thousand Oaks, É. U.: Sage.
Cupitt et al. (2014). An evaluation of the Funding Programme for Mission Opportunities in New Housing and other Development Areas. May. http://www.chester.anglican.org/content/pages/documents/1536846532.pdf
Dahler-Larsen, P., & Boodhoo, A. (2019). Evaluation culture and good governance: Is there a link?. Evaluation, 25(3), 277-293.
Edmunds & Marchant, T. (2008). Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century (PARIS21). Retrieved from https://paris21.org/sites/default/files/3638.pdf
Fetterman, D. M. (2012). Empowerment evaluation. Empowerment Evaluation Principles in Practice, 92.
Government of Uganda. (2008). National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy (NIMES): FY2007-08 Bi-annual Implementation Progress Report. https://www.jlos.go.ug/index.php/document-centre/monitoring-and-evaluation/plans-frameworks-and-strategies/157-national-integrated-monitoring-and-evaluation-strategy-nimes/file
Government of Uganda. (2013). Office of the Prime Minister National Policy on Public Sector Monitoring and Evaluation. https://usaidlearninglab.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/Attachment_J.15-_M&E_Policy_Final_Draft.pdf
Green, J., Bouce, A., & Ahn, J. (2011). A values-engaged, educative approach for evaluating education programs: A guidebook for practice.
Harold K. (2013). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling (8th Ed. ed.). Wiley.ISBN 0-471-22577-0.
Janus et al. (2010). Evaluating Early Childhood Education and Care Programs. International Encyclopedia of Education. https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/evaluating-early-childhood-education-and-care-programs
Kabuye. J, (2016) Institutional design and Utilisation of evaluation results in Uganda`s public universities: A case study of Kyambogo University, (Master's Degree Dissertation, Uganda Technology & Management University, 2016). Retrieved from http://utamu.ac.ug/research-publications/student-research/1234-masters-proposals dissertations
King, J. A., & Stevahn, L. (2013). Interactive Evaluation Practice: Mastering the Interpersonal Dynamics of Program Evaluation. Los Angeles: Sage. 431 pages. Available in paperback (ISBN 978-0-7619-2673-3).
Kirogo, M. P. (2020). Influence of Monitoring and Evaluation Practices on Performance of Church and Community Mobilization Programme. http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/153155/Mwari_Influence of Monitoring and Evaluation Practices on Performance of Church and Community Mobilization Programme - a Case of the Anglican Church of Kenya..pdf?sequence=1
Kissi, E., Agyekum, K., Baiden, B. K., Tannor, R. A., Asamoah, G. E., & Andam, E. T. (2019). Impact of project monitoring and evaluation practices on construction project success criteria in Ghana. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-11-2018-0135
Kusek, Z. J. and Rist, R. C. (2004). Ten Steps to a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System. A Handbook for Development Practitioners. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/14926 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO."
Luutu. P, (2016) Participatory evaluation and Utilisation of evaluation results in CBOs: A case study of Share an Opportunity Uganda, (Master's Degree Dissertation, Uganda Technology & Management University, 2016). Retrieved from http://utamu.ac.ug/research-publications/student-research/1234-masters-proposals-dissertations
Mbithi, V., & Kiruja, I. &dr E. (2015). Role of Monitoring and Evaluation on Performance of Public Organization Projects in Kenya: a Case of Kenya Meat Commission. International Journal of Innovative Development & Policy Studies, 3(3), 12-27. http://seahipaj.org/journals-ci/sept-2015/IJIDPS/full/IJIDPS-S-2-2015.pdf
Mohd Ishak, N., & Abu Bakar, A. Y. (2014). Developing Sampling Frame for Case Study: Challenges and Conditions. World Journal of Education, 4(3), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v4n3p29
Moleko, M. P. (2011). Influence and originality in Michael Quinn Patton ' s Utilization-Focused Evaluation (Issue March) [University of Stellenbosch]. http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/6711
Neely, A.D. (2004). Business performance measurement. Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
NewYork. John Wiley and Sons.
Ochenge Maendo, D., James, R., & Kamau, L. (2018). Effect of Project Monitoring and Evaluation on Performance of Road Infrastructure Projects Constructed By Local Firms in Kenya. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 2(04), 317-328. https://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/123456789/18856/Effect of Project Monitoring and Evaluation.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Odhiambo, J. O., Wakibia, J., & Sakwa, M. M. (2020). Effects of monitoring and evaluation planning on implementation of poverty alleviation mariculture projects in the coast of Kenya. Marine Policy, 119(December 2019), 104050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104050
OECD/DAC Network on Development Evaluation. (2019). Better Criteria for Better Evaluation. http://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/revised-evaluation-criteria-dec-2019.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2002). UTILIZATION-FOCUSED EVALUATION ( U-FE ) CHECKLIST. January. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1007/0-306-47559-6_23
Patton, M. Q. (2012). A utilization-focused approach to contribution analysis. Evaluation, 18(3), 364-377.Patton, M. Q. (1978). Utilization-focused evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2013). Utilization-Focused Evaluation Checklist. The Evaluation Center Western Michigan University, January, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4
Patton, N.Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 4th ed (2015),
Porter, S., Goldman, I., (2013). A Growing Demand for Monitoring and Evaluation in Africa. African Evaluation Journal 2013;1(1), Art. #25, 9 pages. http://dx.doi. org/10.4102/aej.v1i1.25 https://aejonline.org/index.php/aej/article/view/25
Quezada, G. V. (2005). Performance evaluation models for strategic decision-making: Towards a hybrid model. 183. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1052/
Richard, T. H. (2012). Organizational applications of business intelligence management: emerging trends. IGI Global. https://www.igi-global.com/book/organizational-applications-business-intelligence-management/59739
Sekaran, U. (2003). Research methods for business: A skills building approach. (4th Ed).
Shapiro, J. (2018). Monitoring and evaluation Overview. https://www.civicus.org/index.php/media-resources/resources/toolkits/610-monitoring-and-evaluation
Tukei et al. (2016). Risk Analysis and Staff Performance of Kampala Metropolitan Police-Uganda. International Journal of Technology and Management, l(ll). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330934827%0ARisk
Wamuntu, M. (2017). An Evaluation Of Agricultural Financing Practices And Productivity Of Agricultural Cooperatives In Kamwenge District. May, 40. https://utamu.ac.ug/docs/research/studentresearch/masters/proposals/MichaelWamuntu.pdf
Weiss, C. H. (1999). The interface between evaluation and public policy. Evaluation, 5(4), 468-486.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Duncan Katimbo, Assoc. Prof. John Micheal Maxel Okoche
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
