| dc.description.abstract | Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is a discipline of vast interest to researchers, scholars, planners, development practitioners, donor community as well as Government. Not only due to the recent recognition that M&E is an integral and central management functions for organizational development and project implementation but also that post-project management in both developed and developing countries requires good records of success and failures of the project. As a result, M&E has been elevated to a higher-order management function where services and policies are monitored and evaluated to assess their appropriateness and effectiveness. This has only been possible due to the existence of an effective M&E capacity among the donors, NGOs, and public organizations. Weak monitoring and evaluation systems were said to have created problem in performance in the malaria control program. This shows that the M&E systems are not performing satisfactorily due to some challenges that are contributing to their insufficiency; and if not urgently reversed the program resources may be plundered without proper accountability. This research, therefore, seeks to look at the existing M&E systems, used in the malaria control program in Uganda, in regard to how it is affecting service delivery. It employed primary data collected using face to face interviews in health centers where the malaria control program has been implemented. And it found that most of the respondents were within the age bracket of 20- 39 with very few in 40 and above and most of them are educated with most of them having a certificate, Diploma, bachelors with very few professional qualifications; as well as many years of working experience both as health workers and on the malaria control program and are all familiar with the program. The study also found that monitoring and evaluation is done through review meeting and supportive supervision in the malaria control program through reports and sometimes Health Management and Information System (HMIS). The system used is appropriate and it is mostly done by the district health officials. The study also shows that monitoring and evaluation is incorporated at almost all stages of implementation and after it is incorporated at all the stages, and it’s done mostly quarterly, and annually performed by qualified and professional people. The ordered probit model to find factors that influenced the level of success achieved by the project as a measure of service delivery indicated that involvement of stakeholders; use of district and ministry officials in monitoring and evaluation use of reports, review meetings and Health Management Information systems were significant. It is thus recommended that government should put in place a policy that ensures merit in the recruitment process of all the personnel needed on any project especially the monitoring and evaluation staff to deal with the problem of the presence of unqualified and unprofessional personnel with limited knowledge in the program. The government should put in place policies that will ensure sufficient funding, consistence of monitoring and evaluation to avoid project failures. The government should find a way to improve the monitoring and evaluation systems used if it is to change the direction of its influence on service delivery. And lastly positive correlation between all the dimensions of monitoring and evaluation and service delivery is an implication that proper monitoring and evaluation improves and enhances service delivery.
Key words; monitoring & evaluation system and service delivery | en_US |
