ST.

MARY’S UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF BUSINESS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

AN ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF
PROJECT EVALUATION
IN CASE OF ETHIOPIAN ROADS AUTHORITY (ERA)
EASTERN REGION

BY
TEWODROS LULIE

JUNE, 2014
SMU
ADDIS ABABA

1
 AN ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION
OFPROJECT EVALUATION
IN CASE OF ETHIOPIAN ROADS AUTHORITY (ERA)
EASTERN REGION

A SENIOR RESEARCH SUBMITTED TO THE

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT
BUSINESS FACULTY
ST. MARY’S UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR
OF ARTS IN MANAGEMENT

BY
TEWODROS LULIE

JUNE, 2014
SMU
ADDIS ABABA
1
 ST. MARY’S UNIVERSITY

AN ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION
OFPROJECT EVALUATION
IN CASE OF ETHIOPIAN ROADS AUTHORITY (ERA)
EASTERN REGION

BY
TEWODROS LULIE

FACULTY OF BUSINESS
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE OF EXAMINERS

Department Head Signature

Advisor Signature

Internal Examiner Signature

External Examiner Signature

1
 Acknowledgments

First of all, I would like to thank GODfor helping me this far and giving me the courage to
succeed in my study.

I would also like to express my deep gratitude to AtoBiruk G/Michael, my research advisor,
for his patient guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and useful critiques of this research
work.MY father AtoLulieWondimu without your irreplaceable love, concern, support and
advice I may not go this far, my dear brother Hallelujah Lulie no words can express my
gratitude for your time and support, also my brother WondimagegnTadessethank you for your
time and advice. Finally, I thank staffs of Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA) Eastern Region
for their assistance with collection of data.

i
 Table of Contents
Page
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................. i
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................iv
Acronyms/Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ v

CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCITON .................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background of the Study .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Objective of the Study ...................................................................................................... 3
1.3.1 General Objective ................................................................................................... 3
1.3.2 Specific Objectives ................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Delimitation/Scope/ of the Study ...................................................................................... 4
1.5 Limitation of the study...................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Significance of the study................................................................................................... 5
1.7. Definition of Terms/Concepts .......................................................................................... 5
1.8 Research Design and Methodology ................................................................................... 6
1.8.1. Research Design .................................................................................................... 6
1.8.2. Population, Sample Size and Sampling Techniques................................................ 6
1.8.3. Types of Data Collected ......................................................................................... 6
1.8.4. Methods of Data Collection ................................................................................... 6
1.8.5. Methods of Data Analysis ...................................................................................... 6
1.9. Organization of the Study ................................................................................................ 7

CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................... 8

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ............................................................................... 8
2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.1Implementation of Project Evaluation ...................................................................... 8
2.1.2 Implementation ....................................................................................................... 8
2.2 Evaluations ..................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1 Major Principles ................................................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Types .................................................................................................................... 14
2.2.3Evaluation Criteria ................................................................................................. 14
2.2.4Evaluation, Monitoring &Audit ............................................................................. 15
2.2.5EvaluationReports.................................................................................................. 15
2.3.5.1Sharing Findings .......................................................................................................15
ii
 2.2.6 Purposes ............................................................................................................... 16
2.3 Evaluation plan ............................................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Goals of an Evaluation Plan .................................................................................. 17
2.4 Results of a Project Evaluation ....................................................................................... 18
2.5.1 Outcome Evaluation ............................................................................................. 18

CHAPTER THREE .............................................................................................................. 20

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION..................................... 20
3.1 Respondent Rates ........................................................................................................... 20
3.1.1 Employees Profile................................................................................................. 20
3.1.2 Analysis of Data Obtained from Questionnaire ..................................................... 22
3.3 Analysis of Data Obtained From Documents .................................................................. 33

CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................ 35

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................... 35
4.1. Summary ....................................................................................................................... 35
4.2. Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 36
1.3. Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 37
Bibliography
Annexes

iii
 List of Tables

Page

Table 1: General Characteristics of the Respondents............................................................ 21

Table 2: Replay on factors affecting implementation of project evaluation .......................... 22
Table 3: Replays on techniques used during the planning implementation
of theproject evaluation………………………………………………………….… 25
Table 4: Replays on effect of implementation of project evaluation………………...………25
Table 5: Replay on role of project evaluation...................................................................... 26
Table 6: Responses on benefits of implementation of project evaluation ............................. 27
Table 7: Responses on planning elements effect on service delivery ................................... 29
Table 8: The reply on effectiveness of implementation of project evaluation ...................... 31
Table 9: Response on coordination ..................................................................................... 32
Chart1: Response managers confidence and trust………………………………………….24
Graph.1: ShowsProject evaluation techniques……………………………………… 32

iv
 Acronyms/Abbreviations

ERA Ethiopian Roads Authority

v
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCITON

1.1 Background of the Study

Evaluation is an important tool that organizations can use to demonstrate their accountability,
improve performance, increase abilities for obtaining funds for future planning, and fulfill the
organizational objectives. By communicating the results of the evaluation, organizations can
inform their staff, board of directors, service users, funders, the public, or other stakeholders
about the benefits and effectiveness of the organization’s services and programs, and explain
how budgets work and how they are monitored. Although there are many benefits in
conducting evaluation, it will be a waste of the organization’s resources if the evaluation
results are not used.(learning program evaluation,www.jrf.org.uk.)
Evaluationis a systematic investigation of the worth or significance of an object(Louisa
gosling, July 2010). Evaluation normally involves some standards, criteria, measures of
neither success, nor objectives that describethe value of the object. Evaluation can identify
criteria for success, lessons to learn, things to achieve, ways to improve the work, and the
means to move forward.

Louisa goslingcited(2010) project evaluationassesses activities that are designed to perform a

specified task in a specific period of time. For example, a road construction to connect two
cities, an irrigation project to support farmers, a construction of huge dam to produce electric
power , etc…are all projects that can be evaluated.

Road, as one of the basic infrastructure plays a vital role on the development of a country’s
development and civilization by connecting rural areas to deliver products to the nearest
market and to services and products from cities to country side. Building roads is a very
costly and need highly educated man power and roads are expected to serve longer period of
time.

1
Evaluating the quality of roads means a lot to countries (especially developing countries like
Ethiopia) by saving huge funds of money and expected economical benefits to the society and
to the country as a whole.

With their limited resources like highly skilled man power, finance, machineries the final
expected output of the road construction must be evaluated carefully.

Background of the organization

Ethiopian roads authority was established during the time of H.I.M Haleselassie I 1943
(Ethiopian calendar) to build roads all over the country. At the time most of the roads was
built by foreign companies from different European countries like Italy and Holland.

Now ERA performs its activities using RSDP (Road sector development program) developed
by the federal government to upgrade rural roads, to maintain old roads and to construct new
roads.

ERA now perform its activities by dividing the country in five regions such as North, East,
West, South and Central regions.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

By evaluating a project, organizations monitor the process to ensure that appropriate
procedures are in place for completing the project on time, and it identify and measure the
outcomes to ensure the effectiveness and achievements ofthe project. All these efforts make
the organization capable of reporting, answering all inquiries, and being accountable for its
plans (FatanehZarinpoush: 2006).

Managers, creditors, stakeholders are interested to know the final out result of projects and
programs by properly performed and reported evaluation, that expected evaluation must be
performed in a professional way.It is possible to implement the evaluation by ignoring the
standardized procedures but this may lead the company to fail from achieving its
objectives.ERAas government agency expected to fulfill the demand for quality roads
evaluation practices during the construction of roads by implementing standardize and fruit
full evaluation process.

2
Emphasis is given to evaluation aspect of the organization but reporting
aspectsevaluationwere not performed to get the exact and accurate information on projects.
Although evaluation systems might not be perfect, some literatures suggest some mechanisms
to reduce the level of errors mainly through incorporating more objective forms of
evaluations.In my observations the practices have been inappropriately handled and fail to
give the expected results. On different projects, evaluation processes and methods are either
deemphasized or neglected. Therefore this study attempts to make the holistic assessment of
the de-emphasized or neglected aspects of project evaluation, which are reporting evaluation
of projects in the case of Ethiopian Roads Authority Eastern region.

The research will intend to answer the following questions:

1. Factors that are considered during planning of implementation of projects evaluation.
2. What reporting mechanisms are used in implementation of project evaluation?
3. How is the relation shipbetween managers and subordinates

1.3 Objective of the Study

The objective of the study classified into general objective and specific objective

1.3.1 General Objective

The general objective of this study is to assess the implementationof evaluation on roads
constructed by Ethiopian roads authority and its role on keeping qualities of roads in Ethiopia.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

In addition to the above general objective the study was focused on the following specific
objectives
1. To study and evaluate the current practice of implementation of project evaluation.
2. Identify efficiency of the organization in implementing evaluation process like
documentation, implementation plan preparation evaluation plan preparation
&implementation evaluation of projects.
3. To identify the challenges of implementation evaluation activity or process.

3
1.4Delimitation/Scope/ of the Study
The study specifically focuses on the implementation of evaluation on the road construction
performance of ERA with that of more related in pre evaluation and on evaluation. Because
ofthe researcher’s shortage of time and finance the focus of this paper does not include the ex-
post evaluation of project evaluation.

Geographical Delimitation
Projects managed by ERA eastern region are widelydispersed; eastern region covers very
wide area of the country. To use direct observation of implementation of project evaluation is
very difficult because the distance of sites are very far for the student researcher.

Time Delimitation
Evaluation time table of ERA for its projects are not fixed. It varies depending upon the
progress of projects. To get direct and real information on projects evaluation; the students
face a time variation because the time schedule to this research is limited.

4
1.5 Limitation of the study
The major limitations of the study include because of lack of time and money information
which may be significant is not collected on project site, employees meetings and resource
constraint. Lack of sources of information on government documents that provide the
researcher relevant information. The other limitation was lack of relevant and up to date
literature and research findings in the area was also the major constraint during the study.

1.6 Significance of the study

The fact that, Ethiopian roads authority working on building roads in wide range of the
country and exposed to plenty of construction related activities, conducting such study on
ERA helps to have a reliable information. Since trade service process of road construction
activity play important role in the countries development, the study will have positive impact
on the evaluation performance of the organization. The studies also create awareness on the
party that involve in evaluating projects and brings a considerable change on the
successfulness of the organization.

In addition to this, the assessment helps to identify the bottlenecks and challenges that hinder
or slow the growth implementing evaluation activities or implementing evaluation process
throughout the organization. Therefore, the study's findings and recommendations are very
important to higher officials because it draws their attention to point out some deviations
where corrective measures need to be taken.

On the other hand the assessment will help as an input and as an initial idea for other
researchers.

1.7. Definition of Terms/Concepts

Project:-an enterprise carefully planned to achieve a particular aim.
Evaluation as ‘to determine the worth of to find the amount or value of to appraise,
“evaluation is also termed as to examine and judge concerning the worth, quality,
significance, amount, degree or condition of any given thing (Webster’s New 20th Century
Dictionary).

5
Evaluation: - Evaluation is an important tool that the organization can use to demonstrate its
accountability, improve its performance, increase its abilities for obtaining funds or future
planning, and fulfill the organizational objectives.

1.8 Research Design and Methodology

1.8.1. Research Design
The student researcher will use descriptive research design followed by quantitative and
qualitative approach.

1.8.2. Population, Sample Size and Sampling Techniques

The target population of the study are all professional employee of Ethiopian roads authority
eastern region the total number of 75 (ERA payroll data, June 2013).Out of the total
population which the researcher took 75 employees as sample of the study using purposive
method. The researcher prefers this technique because all targeted peoples are professionals
and found in same filed.
1.8.3. Types of DataCollected
The researcher used both primary and secondary data sources for the study.

1.8.4. Methods of Data Collection

The primary data is directly collected from the concerned bodies and individuals through
interview with team leader and branch manager , and questionnaire. Secondary data has
gathered from different documents available in the office, faxes, mints, project evaluation
forms, evaluation plans, Internet and books.

1.8.5. Methods of Data Analysis

The study has conducted through using descriptive data analysis and the majority of
quantitative data were presented in the form of table, Figures, frequency and percentage. And
the data gathered in interview presented in narration

6
1.9. Organization of the Study
This paper is organized in to four chapters, the first chapter include background of the study,
statement of the problem, research objectives (general &specific), delimitation/scope of the
study, significance of the study, definition of terms, research design and methodology,
organization of the study and time & cost budget.

On the second chapter include review of related literature, and in the third chapter shows Data
Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation. And finally Summery, Conclusion and
Recommendation are presented in the last chapter.

7
 CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction
Different projects and programs require for different purposes, to be evaluated to answer
needs to be answered for various reasons to the concerned bodies. Implementing the planned
evaluation has its own procedures and steps .Different scholars, international organizations,
and international programs show their theories and experiences using books and web sites.

2.1.1Implementation of ProjectEvaluation
There is no blue print for conducting a good evaluation. Because the term evaluation is
subject to different interpretations, a project can be evaluated in a variety of ways. One can
discover that evaluation is more than just collecting information. It involves serious reflection
on questions like
- What is the purpose of the evaluation?
- What do we want to know?
- What do we intend to do with the information?
Answers to these questions are crucial if our evaluation is to produce useful informationbased
on the evaluation plan.

2.1.2 Implementation
The purpose of implementation evaluation is to assess whether the project is being conducted
as planned. This type of evaluation, sometimes called “process evaluation,” may occur once
or several times during the life of the program. The underlying principles that before you can
evaluate the outcomes or impact of a program, one must make sure the project and its
components are really operating and, if they are operating according to the proposed plan or
description, .a series of implementation questions guide an implementation evaluation.

8
According to UNDP: 2002 to implement the evaluation the following steps must be
considered

A. Preparing for an evaluation

• Purpose and timing
Deciding precisely why and when to conduct an outcome evaluation is a process that begins
early in the programming cycle. Evaluation plans are made on the basis of a certain (and
varying) number of outcomes that each country offices required to evaluate in a given project
(UNDP2002:46).

• Involving partners and stakeholders

An emphasis on results places an even greater emphasis on the involvement of partners and
stakeholders (those with a role and/or interest in the results) in evaluation exercises of all
kinds. In particular, key partners should be involved in every step of an outcome evaluation.
Likewise, stakeholders affected by an evaluation should also be involved, even if they are not
directly involved in the program or outcome (UNDP2002:46).

• Revisiting the outcome

One of the first steps in planning is to revisit the outcome selected for evaluation. This is done
as a check to verify that the outcome is still relevant and to re-identify explicitly the key
outputs of projects, activities and partners’ interventions that may have contributed to the
outcome.(UNDP2002:48).

• Defining the scope

Typically, the scope of a project evaluation is self-defined within the project document.The
scope of an outcome evaluation will be larger than that of a project evaluation inmost cases
(UNDP2002:48).

• Drafting the terms of reference

At a minimum, it is expected that terms of reference for all evaluations will containthe
following information:
≈ Introduction: A brief description of what is to be evaluated (outcome, project, series of
interventions by several partners, etc.);

9
 ≈ Objectives: Why the evaluation is being undertaken and a list of the main stakeholders
and partners;
≈ Scope: What issues, subjects, areas and timeframe the evaluation will cover
≈ Products expected from the evaluation: What products the evaluation isexpected to
generate (e.g. findings, recommendations, lessons learned, rating on performance, an
“action item” list);
≈ Methodology or evaluation approach: The methodology suggested to the evaluation
team;
≈ Evaluation team: Composition and areas of expertise;
≈ Implementation arrangements: Who will manage the evaluation and how it is
organized (UNDP2002:50).

• Budgeting
Budgeting for an evaluation depends upon the complexity of the project or outcome to be
evaluated and the purpose of the exercise. These factors dictate the timeframe and the number
of evaluators needed. For projects, evaluation resources are allocated from the monitoring and
evaluation lines of the project budget. Similarly, outcome evaluations draw on the respective
monitoring and evaluation allocations of the projects that contribute to that outcome
(UNDP2002:50).

• Organizing the relevant documentation

Once the scope of an evaluation has been defined, the CO gathers the basic documentation
and provides it to the evaluation team. Preliminary deskwork may be carried out to gather
information on activities and outputs of partners, selecting the evaluation team.

The official team of experts who will conduct the evaluation. The choice of the evaluators is
an important factor in the effectiveness of evaluations. Evaluators can be internal, or external.
External evaluation firms or individual evaluators may be national or international, or a
combinationof both (UNDP2002:52).

B.Undertaking Evaluation
There is no one way to carry out an evaluation, with strengths and weaknesses apparent in
most approaches.

10
A suitable approach should be developed in consultation with stakeholders such as the
community, local government, relevant coastal management groups, State government or the
funding body. It is important to ensure all relevant parties have an understanding of the
evaluation process, and its anticipated outcomes. Regardless of the method or approach, steps
involved with any evaluation should include the following:

1. Design and plan the evaluation

• Clarify the specific purpose or intended outcomes of the evaluation. Why are you doing
it? Will the evaluation be in the form of a report or a series of stories?
• Determine the questions we want to answer.
• Identify stakeholders, such as the community, local government, coastal management
groups, State government or funding body, and their requirements. They may provide you
with important guidance, which could make the evaluation more relevant.
• Identify possible sources of data.
• Identify potential methods, approaches and techniques.
• Agree on the evaluation purpose and procedures including timeframes and indicators.
• Prepare any materials required, such as questionnaires.

2. Gather information
• This may be an ongoing requirement or staged at key points during the project.

3. Analyze the information

• This may involve preparing a report. Check that your conclusions respond to the outcomes
which the evaluation was originally seeking.

4. Use the conclusions

• Once you have evaluated the worth or merits of your project tell others about what you have
learned and achieved so they too can benefit from your experience. This can empower
others to undertake similar projects and make their journey easier and more
enjoyable.(Coastal Planning and Management Manualwww.jrf.org.uk .Wednesday,
January 08,2014,8:40p.m.)

11
2.2 Evaluations
Project evaluation is a methodology for assessing the economic, social, environmental and
financial impact of proposed capital projects. All the impacts associated with a capital project
are identified and, where possible, costs and benefits valued in monetary terms, so that the
project selected by government will provide the maximum net benefit to the State.

Project is a one-time, multitask job that has clearly defined starting and ending dates, a
specific scope of work to be performed, a budget, and a specified level of performance to
be achieved.(James p.lewis:3)

Economic analysis assesses the net worth of a project for the economy. Itis usually the major
element of a project evaluation because it provides a means to rank projects in terms of the
efficient allocation of resources .It provides an initial default ranking for projects which may
then be modified by analyses of the social, environmental and budgetary issues associated
with these projects. For these reasons, economic analysis is discussed in greater detail in these
guidelines than the other analyses. Social and environmental analyses assess the effect of the
project on social groups, employment, regional development, etc. and on natural ecosystems,
pollution, heritage, rare species etc. respectively. They also identify ways to deal with these
issues. The extent to which these analyses form part of a project evaluation depends on the
importance of these issues for a particular project. The fourth element in project evaluation,
budget analysis, provides decision-makers with information on cash flows, borrowings,
funding sources, etc. in order to assess the budgetary implications of the project. It is required
for all projects which impact on the State Budget. (Queensland TreasuryFebruary1997:2.)

After the project is completed, it is necessary to see the actual. It is all the more necessary in
respect of large organizations, where construction of projects is a regular activity for
continuous additions, modifications balancing, replacements, modernization, and expansion
projects.

The actual against the parameters envisaged in the projects approved for execution are
examined for assessing the degree of its achievements for successes as well as failures or
shortcomings if any. So that same can be taken as guide for future projects. If something is
good, should be taken for further improvements and if something is bad or wrong should be
avoided for recurrences in the future projects. (Narendra Singh: 475).

12
Evaluation has its origin in the Latin word “valuere” which means the value of a particular
thing, idea or action. Webster’s New 20th Century Dictionary defines evaluation as ‘to
determine the worth of to find the amount or value of to appraise, “evaluation is also termed
as to examine and judge concerning the worth, quality, significance, amount, degree or
condition of any given thing.

In simple words evaluation is known about what is not known and also what is worth
knowing. Charles Martin views evaluation as concerned with the progress of the project in
meeting its principal objectives. The primary purpose of evaluation is to provide an objective,
systematic and comprehensive evidence on the degree to which the programme/project
achieves its intended objectives plus the degree to which it produces other unanticipated
consequences.

To put simply, evaluation by members of a project or organization will help people to learn
from their day-to-day work. It can be used by a group of people, or by individuals working
alone. It assesses the effectiveness of a piece of work, a project or a program. It can also
highlight whether your project is moving steadily and successfully towards achieving what it
set out to do, or whether it is moving in a different direction. You can then celebrate and build
on successes as well as learn from what has not worked so well. (Marilyn Taylor, Derrick
Purdue, Mandy Wilson and Pete Wilde: 2)

2.2.1 Major Principles

≈ Impartiality & independence of the evaluation process in its function from the process
concerned with policy making, the delivery and management of assistance.
≈ Credibility depending on expertise and independence of the evaluators & transparency
to be sought through an open process, wide availability of results distinction between
findings and recommendations.
≈ Usefulness: relevant, presented in clear and concise way, reflects the interests and
needs of the parties involved, easily accessible, timely and at the right moment
Participation of stakeholders (donors, recipient…) if possible: views and expertise of groups
affected should form integral part of the evaluation.( www.jrf.org.uk.Wednesday, January
08, 2014,8:40p.m.)

13
2.2.2 Types
Evaluation can take place
1. When the project is still underway:-such in term evaluation are usually under taken at
mid-term, to review progress and purpose alterations to project design during the
remaining period of implementation.
2. At the end of the project :-(final or end-of- project evaluation),to document the
resources used, results and progress towards objectives. The objective is to generate
lessons about the project which can be used to improve future designs
3. A number of years after the completion (ex-post evaluation):-often focusing on
impact.(Geoff Bates, Lisa Jons:22.).

2.2.3Evaluation Criteria
According to Europe aid project cycle management handbook the followings are major
criteria of project evaluation
1. Relevance:-The appropriateness of the project objectives to the problems that it was
suppose to address, and to the physical and policy environment with in which it
operated, and including an assessment of the quality of project preparation and design
2. Efficiency:-The fact that results have been achieved at reasonable cost, how well
inputs/means have been converted in to results, in terms of quality, quantity and time,
and the quality of the results.
3. Effectiveness:-An assessment of the contribution by results to achievement of the
project purpose, and how assumptions have affected project achievements.
4. Impact: - The effect of the project on its wider environment, and its contribution to the
wider pectoral objectives summarized in the project’s overall objective.
5. Sustainability:- An assessment of the likelihood of benefits produced by the project
to continue the flow after external funding has ended, and with particular reference to
factors of ownership by beneficiaries, policy support, economic and financial factors,
socio-cultural aspects, gender equality, appropriate technology, environmental aspects,
and institutional and management capacity.(www.jrf.org.uk. Wednesday, January 08,
2014, 8:40p.m.)

14
2.2.4Evaluation, Monitoring &Audit
Frequently there is confusion about Evaluation, monitoring & audit are where and how they
differ and how they can be delimited from each other.

Evaluation:- An in-depth analysis of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and

sustainability of the project made by external evaluators specialized in the subjects evaluated
once or twice,essentially at the end or ex-post drawing lessons from the past in order to orient
future policies and actions but also during implementation, mid-term evaluation to re-orient
implementation.

Monitoring:-A rapid and continues analysis, immediately useful to improve on-going actions,
of key importance to improving performance by internal or external (staff, monitors) regularly
(several times per year)

Audit:-Traditionally checks whether operations and statements are in compliance with legal
and contractual obligations. More concerned with compliance, but better financial
management can also contribute to improving current and future actions. More recently;
performance audit is strongly concerned with questions of efficiency and good management
(AbhasK.jha and Daniel pittet:12)

2.2.5EvaluationReports
The evaluation report should mirror the above evaluation criteria taking in to account the
nature of the project, the stage at which the evaluation is carried out and the users for whom
the project is prepared.

The structure of an evaluation report should be determined primarily by its intended main
purpose and its target groups/users.(JISC2007:15)

2.3.5.1Sharing Findings
Sharing your findings with others is important because it can help other people in the project,
or associated with it, to recognize any problems or issues that are preventing the project from
making progress. It can help everyone to learn from any mistakes that have been made, or

15
pick up on any successful ideas that have been put into action. Remember that sharing
findings can provide an opportunity to celebrate success as much as to learn from difficulties.
• Think about who you are sharing your findings with, and how best to communicate
with them.
• Is there going to be a written report and/or other ways of reporting the findings of the
evaluation? Try to ensure that any report uses clear, plain language, and follows a
logical order.
• Will you need to report the findings to different audiences using different formats? It
may be necessary to produce both a comprehensive report of the evaluation exercise
and a much briefer report or summary of key findings.
• How will you ensure that the findings inform practical changes in your project’s
work plan? For example, you could hold a special meeting or workshop for those
involved in the project at which you both feedback key findings and also collectively
consider future action plans in the light of these findings.(Weiss, Carol H.1998:17-
23)

2.2.6Purposes
The purpose of evaluation is to provide information for actions such as decision-making,
strategic planning, reporting, or program modification. Project evaluation helps to understand
the progress, success, and effectiveness of a project. It provides the evaluators with a
comprehensive description of a project, including insight on the
≈ Needs the project will address
≈ People who need to get involved in your project
≈ Definition of success for the project
≈ Outputs and immediate results
≈ Outcomes of the project
≈ Activities needed to meet the outcomes; and
≈ Alignment and relationships between your activities and outcomes.

The purposes of project evaluation are to improve the quality of services, to ensure value for
money and to priorities proposed capital projects. This is achieved through a structured
process which makes it possible to:
• Clearly define project objectives, and consider a wide range of options to meet these
objectives;
16
 • Link the project to the strategic objectives of the government, the State Capital
Works Program and an agency’s physical asset strategic plan;
• Carry out economic, social, environmental and budgetary analyses of the project; and
• Identify the net benefit of the project to the community, and the effect on the State
Budget. Project evaluations assist departments to make decisions on proposed capital
projects. They provide the means to assess the viability of proposed capital projects,
and to rank competing projects in the department’s annual capital works program.
Project evaluations also facilitate deliberations by the Cabinet Budget Committee
during the Budget process. They assist in the selection of projects to be included in
the State Capital Works Program. (Queensland TreasuryFebruary 1997:8)

2.3 Evaluation plan

The Work carried out prior to implementation should ensure that the program is clearly
defined and that it is implemented in a consistent and standardized way. It is far easier to
evaluate the impact of a complete, well-planned and executed program than one that is
implemented in an inconsistent way.

It is essential that the evaluation framework is developed and implemented alongside the
proposed program. Thus, this work would be carried out by the working group as they
develop the action plan for the program.

Baseline measures need to be collected before the intervention is put in place so that change
in such measures over time may be gauged.(Queensland Treasury 1997:13)

2.3.1 Goals of an Evaluation Plan

An evaluation plan focuses on the performance of a project or program and examines its
implementation plan, inputs, outputs and outcomes/results. A project is defined as an
individually planned undertaking designed to achieve specific objectives within a given
budget and time frame. The plan should address the following questions: Did the project take
off as planned? What problems and challenges, if any, did it face? Is it being effectively
managed? Is it providing planned activities and other outputs in a timely fashion? If not, why?
Will the project be able to meet its targets? What are its intermediary effects and impacts?
What can be done to improve its performance and impacts?

17
Most of the information for monitoring and evaluation can be gathered through reviews of
project and program documents; developing and conducting surveys, focus group discussions
and meetings with participants and other beneficiaries; and interviews with project staff, host
country officials and other stakeholders.

A solid plan generally includes a mid-term and final evaluation. The mid-term evaluation can
measure the interim progress of a program and identify areas that could be modified to
improve performance and impact. The final evaluation can not only assesses the program’s
overall results, but also provide an analysis on lessons learned and make future
recommendations. (Marilyn Taylor, Derrick Purdue, Mandy Wilson and Pete Wilde:2)

2.4 Results of a Project Evaluation

Identify ways to improve or shift your project activities

Facilitate changes in the project plan

Prepare project reports like mid-term reports, final reports

Inform internal and external stakeholders about the project;

Plan for the sustainability of the project;

Learn more about the environment in which the project is being or has been carried
out;

Learn more about the target population of the project;

Present the worth and value of the project to stakeholders and the public;

Plan for other projects;

Compare projects to plan for their futures;

Make evidence-based organizational decisions;

Demonstrate your organization’s ability in performing evaluations when searching for
funds; and
Demonstrate the organization’s concerns to be accountable for implementing its plans,
pursuing its goals, and measuring its outcomes. (www.jrf.org.uk.Wednesday, January 08,
2014,8:40p.m.)


2.5.1 Outcome Evaluation
This is where the outcomes are measured to see if the program was successful. Are less
people now drinking and driving than before? Have road crashes involving alcohol been
18
reduced? Are fewer injured drivers/riders admitted to hospital with high BAC levels?
Measuring a change in outcomes is probably the most common form of evaluation as it
provides information as to whether the program or intervention has actually made a
difference.(How to evaluate the program Module 4, www.jrf.org.uk.)

Evaluation is one of the processes that have a great contribution in the road construction to
ensure the proper utilization of raw materials, labor, finance, machineries, finance, time and
other inputs, on the other hand meeting the pre-determined standard to the quality of the roads
constructed, and also to ensure its contribution to the economical, political & social growth of
the country. In addition to this its contribution to the hope for the generating foreign currency
by exporting skilled labor, and to have political, social & economical influence on other
countries.

Implementation of the evaluation

At this point in the process of evaluation, after completed the overall structure and design for
the evaluation program. Next comes the detailed design and execution of each of the studies
we have specified. The general steps in conducting research include:
1. Write data collection instruments, which include questionnaires, focus group discussion
guides, interview guides, and observation instructions.
2. Develop and execute a sampling plan. Decide how many respondents and what kind of
respondents to include in the research, and then select those respondents.
3. Train data collectors.
4. Collect the data (conduct the survey, personal interview, focus group, or observation)
5. Analyze the results:
Tabulate and organize the data into a form that is manageable for analysis; and
Examine the data to test hypotheses and derive conclusions (www.jrf.org.uk.Wednesday
January 08, 2014, 8:40p.m.).

19
 CHAPTER THREE
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION

In this chapter data are collected from documents, respondents through questionnaire and
interview and analyzed. The chapter consists of two parts.

The first deals with the analysis of data collected through questionnaire and interview. The
second part deals with documents such as field supervision sheet, consultant timely report,
and physical implementation report…

3.1 Respondent Rates

76 questionnaires distributed from the targeted respondents and 12of them are not completed
and returned, some were discarded because of containing omissions, errors and
incompleteness 88% were completed and returned and used in this study .The questions
corporate closed ended questions and open ended questions. Based on the information gained

3.1.1 Employees Profile

Comparison of implementation of the study with the existing implementation of project
evaluation is described on the table.

20
Table: 1 General Background of the Respondents
Item Personal profile Alternatives Frequency Percent
Male 57 85
1 Sex Female 10 15
Total 67 100

20-30 42 62
31-40 20 31
2 Age 41-50 5 7

Over50 - -
Total 67 100

Under diploma - -

Diploma - -
3 Educational background First degree 57 85

Second degree 10 15

Masters and above - -

Total 67 100

Single 26 39

Married 41 61
4 Marital status Divorced - -

Widowed - -

Total 67 100
<2 years 15 23

2-4 years 36 54
5 Work experience in the 4-6 years 16 15
organization >6 years 5 8
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner

As indicated in table 3.1 respondents analyzed in terms of Age, gender, educational

background, marital status and work experience.

The distribution shows that 57(85%) of the respondents are males and 10(15%) are females,
42(62%)of them are aged between 20-30, and 20(31%) are between31 and 40, 5(7%) of
respondents found between 41 and 50 of age.
21
On the other hand, with regard to the respondents’ educational status their 57(85%) has first
degree and 10(15%) has second degree. This shows that, the organization have relatively
other of the required skilled manpower.
By their marital status 26(39%)of them are single and 41(61%) are married. And 15 (23%)
served more than 2 years,36(54%) between 2 and 4 years,16(15%) of them between 4 and 6
years and 5(8%) served more than 6 years in Ethiopian roads authority eastern region. All the
above data show, the organization needs for educated and young employees in order to have a
healthy organizational/governmental service.

3.1.2 Analysis of Data Obtained from Questionnaire

Table: 2 Replay on factors affecting implementation of project evaluation

Raised question response Frequency percent

Strongly agree 46 69
Number and type of staff needed Agree 21 31
1 were considered during Neutral - -
implementation of project evaluation disagree - -
Strongly disagree - -
Total 67 100
Strongly agree 20 31
Environmental uncertainty( political, Agree 26 38
2 social &economical) were considered Neutral 5 8
during implementation of project disagree 16 23
evaluation Strongly disagree - -
Total 67 100
Time horizon(short term, long term Strongly agree 26 39
plans & depends on degree of Agree 36 54
3 uncertainty revealing) were Neutral - -
considered during implementation of disagree - -
project evaluation Strongly disagree 5 7
Total 67 100
Strongly agree 21 31
Labor market(employability of Agree 31 46
4 people) were considered during Neutral 5 8
implementation of project evaluation disagree 10 15
Strongly disagree - -
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner
22
For the first question delivered to respondents, 46(68%) of respondents strongly agreed, and
21(32%) of the respondents agreed. Thus, that number and type of staff needed were
considered during implementation of project evaluation thus, it seems that the evaluation
process may not face shortage of skilled man power in sufficient amount when it is
implemented.

For the question about Environmental uncertainties (political, social &economical), 20(30%)
of the respondents strongly agree, 26(38%) of the respondents agree, 5(8%) of them choose
neither to agree norto disagree and 16(23%) of the respondents disagree that Environmental
uncertainty (political, social & economical) were considered during developing the
organization’s implementation of project evaluation of the organization.

Moreover, for the third question 26(38%) of the respondents strongly agree,as indicated at
table3.1.2 item 3, relatively more respondents agree that time horizon were considered as a
factor during developing the organization’s implementation of project evaluation 36(54%) ,
And 5 (8%) of the respondents disagree that time horizons (short term, long term plans &
depends on degree of uncertainty revealing) were considered during developing the
organization’s implementation of project evaluation of the organization.

Regarding to labor markets 21(31%) of the respondents strongly agree, 34 (46%) of the
respondents agree, 5(8%) wishes to stay neither agree nor disagree; 10 (15%) of the
respondents disagree that Labor markets (employability of people) were considered during
developing the organization’s implementation of projects evaluation of the organization. It
seems that a lion share of the respondents is in favor of labor market’s effect.

In relation to the above point, the eastern region contract management directorate director,
during my interview describes that the labor markets were considered during developing the
organization’s implementation of projects evaluation of the organization. Everyyear the
organization faces employee’s turnover because of the job opportunities offered by local and
foreign companies with huge difference of salary and benefits.

23
Project evaluation techniques
The first question concerning the technique was “which one of the following do you think that
the main determinant for the implementation of project evaluation of the organization”
Graph3.1

38
40 23
30 15 15
20 9 15
10 6 6
0 percent
friquency

friquency percent

Source: Primary Data from questioner

As it can be observed from the above graph 9(23%) of the respondents reply that, they think
that work force demand of the organization is the main determinant, 15(38%) of the
respondents reply that operation expansion plan is determinant. Labor
Labormarket situation is
believed by 6(15%) of the respondents that it is determinant as a project evaluation technique.
Therest
rest 6(15%) of respondents replay that competition from other organization is the main
determinant on implementation
ation of project evaluation of the organization.
On the other hand during the interview,
interview senior engineer Eastern Region team leader, one
described that foreign road construction companies from China, Korea, India and Israel have a
huge impact on the organ
organization’s
ization’s implementation of project evaluation. This implies that
planning plays its own role in planning of implementation.

24
What techniques used during the planning implementation of the project evaluation?
Table: 3 Showsreplays on techniques used during the planning implementation of the
project evaluation
techniques used response Frequency percent
during the planning Managerial judgment 36 54
implementation of Trend analysis 31 46
the project Delphi technique - -
evaluation Regression analysis - -
Total 67 100

Source: Primary Data from questioner

For the above table 3 regarding to the technique used the planning 36(54%) of the
respondents replay that managerial judgment technique was used, and 31(46%) of the
respondents replied that trend analysis was used as technique for the organization’s planning
implementation of the project evaluation.

As a professional, the engineer mentioned that field experience of evaluator engineers is the
most useful input for planning organization’s planning implementation of the project
evaluation.

Assistance of human resource

Table: 4 Shows replays on effect of implementation of project evaluation

Do you think the implementation of project evaluation has an effect on overall activities of
the organization?
Do you think the response Frequency percent
implementation of Yes 47 69
project evaluation No 15 23
has an effect Do not know 5 8
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner

25
As indicated in table3.4 from all the respondents47 (69%) thoughts that project evaluation has
an effect on overall activities of the organization, 15(23%) of respondents thinks it has no
effect and 5(8%) of them said they didn’t know. It shows us properly implemented evaluation
on projects can have an effect on the overall activities of the organization. As coastal
planning and management manual tells us“ Once you have evaluated the worth or merit of
your project tell others about what you have learned and achieved so they too can benefit
from your experience. This can empower others to undertake similar projects and make their
journey easier and more enjoyable.”
The JISC (2007)” stated in its sixth step the following “The essential purposes of project
evaluation are to use the information to improve projects while they are running, to draw out
the value of what has been learnt and to provide advice for funders and future projects. The
rationale you identified early in the evaluation process and the interests of key stakeholders
should help to guide the use of the evaluation findings. The results of the evaluation can be
used to demonstrate the effectiveness of your project, identify ways to improve future
projects, modify project planning, and demonstrate accountability, and justify funding”

The third question was about in which department of the organization you think project
evaluation plays an important role in achieving the objective of the organization. The
following is a response

Table: 5 Replay on role of project evaluation

response Frequency percent
Which department Training and 30 45
do you think play development
role of project Human resource 20 30
evaluation finance 17 25
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner

As we observed from the above responses, majority of respondents thought that training and
development played an important role in achieving the objective of the organization 30(45%),
20(30%) of them replayed that human resource played the role, and 17(25%)of respondents
think that finance plays an important role in achieving the objective of the organization. This
26
shows that the share of human resource in achieving the objective of the organization is very
high.

During our interview the directorate director w/robeza clearly stated that replacing the
turnover employee requires time consuming and budget taking training and development to
make the new entrants familiar to the existing system.

The fourth question, “How do you rate the benefit of implementation of project evaluation on
facilitation other functions of the organization?” is responded as follow

Table: 6 Responses on benefits of implementation of project evaluation

How do you rate response Frequency percent
the benefit of Very good 36 54
project evaluation Good 16 23
in facilitation of Moderate 5 8
other functions Poor 10 15
Very Poor - -
Total 67 100

Source: Primary Data from questioner

As indicated on table 3.6, more than half of respondents rated the benefit of implementation
of project evaluation Very good 36(54%), 16(23%)of respondents said that good,5(8%) of the
respondents replay that benefit of implementation of project evaluation is moderate, and
10(15%) of respondents said that benefit of implementation of project evaluation on
facilitation other functions of the organization is poor. It implies that to facilitate other
functions in the organization implementation has its own benefits.

The book titled “Program Evaluation: Principles and Practices (A Northwest Health
Foundation Handbook) Second Edition (2005)” describes the benefit of project evaluation as
“Evaluation also helps program leaders to articulate what they are learning about their
program/organization for themselves. Most people are so busy that they have little time to
stop, reflect and consider the impact of their own work. A deliberate evaluation helps to

27
delineate issues, describe strategies, and highlight areas where further work is needed. It also
provides a chance to stop and celebrate the successes that have been achieved something that
most programs rarely do. Evaluation helps to focus thinking, gaining new insights and
identifying opportunities for improvement.”

Another book prepared by Austrian development cooperation titled"Guidelines for Project

and Program Evaluations” (July 2009) lists down some of the benefits as:-“Findings of your
evaluation could also be used to support a learning environment by:
• providing a focus for group reflection,
• empower the group to move forward,
• articulating some of the unsaid knowledge which is often forgotten; and
• documenting the process for new staff.”

28
Table: 7 Responses on planning elements effect on service delivery
Raised question Response Frequency percent
Very strong 36 54
To what extent do you think the effect of Strong 26 39
1 planning on the service delivery of the Neutral - -
organization? Weak 5 7
Very weak - -
Total 67 100
Very strong 41 61
To what extent do you think the effect of Strong 21 31
2 Allocating resources on the service Neutral - -
delivery of the organization? Weak 5 7
Very weak - -
Total 67 100
Very strong 46 70
To what extent do you think the effect of Strong 15 23
3 Timing on the service delivery of the Neutral - -
organization? Weak 5 7
Very weak - -
Total 67 100
Very strong 26 39
Strong 31 46
4 To what extent do you think the effect of Neutral - -
reporting on the service delivery of the Weak 10 15
organization? Very weak - -
Total 67 100
Very strong 10 15
To what extent do you think the effect of Strong 41 61
5 organizing relevant documents on the Neutral 10 15
service delivery of the organization? Weak - -
Very weak 6 9
Total 67 100
Very strong 10 15
To what extent do you think the effect of Strong 41 61
6 revisiting relevant documents on the Neutral 10 15
service delivery of the organization? Weak - -
Very weak 6 9
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner
29
Table 3.7 expressed what the respondents thought about the project evaluation planning
elements effect on the service delivery of the organization, 36(54%) of the respondents replay
that planning has very strong effect 26(39%) of them replayed that planning has strong effect
and 5(7%) of respondents replayed that planning has a weak effect. This implies that planning
is the most essential element of implementing project evaluation. “Handbook on Monitoring
and Evaluating for Results” prepared by UNDP (2002) describe about the effect of planning
as “A work plan is an annual or multi-year summary of tasks, timeframes and responsibilities.
It is used as a monitoring tool to ensure the production of outputs and progress towards
outcomes. Work plans describe the activities to be conducted as well as the expected outputs
and outcomes. The overall process of work planning is a comprehensive tool that helps people
translates information or ideas into operational terms on an annual basis. Monitoring and
evaluation are integral parts of a country office’s overall work plan, which encompasses many
additional areas.”

Regarding allocating resource, 27(69%) respondents replayed that has a very strong effect,
12(31%) of respondents thought that allocating resources had strong effect and 3(8%) of
respondents thought allocating resources has weak effect on the service delivery of the
organization.

The third issue raised by the student researcher is about the effect of timing in light of it,
46(70%) of respondents thinks that timing has a very strong effect on the service delivery of
the organization, 15(23%) of respondents thought that it has strong effect and 5(7%) of the
respondents thought it has weak effect on strong effect on the service delivery of the
organization. Here in the above table item 3 , it is noted that keeping

Response regarding to reporting, as it is shown in the above table 26(39%) respondents said
that reporting has very strong effect on the service delivery of the organization, other majority
respondents think that has strong effect on the service delivery of the organization 31(46%)

The rest 10(15%) of them say the effect on the service delivery of the organization of
reporting is weak. This shows us that reporting has significant effect on the effectiveness of
the service delivery of the organization. As different scholars stated it in their books reporting

30
can serve as a feed back to clearly see the effectiveness of some job, to take a timely
correction action and to take its experience to the next job.

Responses towards organizing relevant documents, as shown in the above table 10(15%) of
the respondents replay that organizing relevant documents got very strong effect on the
service delivery of the organization, 41(61%) of respondents thought that on the service
delivery of the organization organizing relevant documents has strong effect,10(15%)nether
agree nor disagree and 6(9%) of them say that organizing relevant documents has weak effect
on the service delivery of the organization.

The last question delivered to respondents is about the effect of revisiting relevant documents
on the service delivery of the organization and 10(15%) of the total respondents said that
thought it has very strong effect, 41(61%) of them thinks that it has strong effect and 10(15%)
wishes to stayed neutral, 6(9%) of the respondents say that Revisiting relevant documents on
the service delivery of the organization is weak.

How do you rate the effectiveness of implementation of project evaluation of the

organization?
Table: 8 Reply oneffectiveness of implementation of project evaluation
Raised question response Frequency
How do you rate the Very satisfactory - -
effectiveness of satisfactory 52 78
implementation of neutral - -
project evaluation unsatisfactory 15 22
Very unsatisfactory - -
Total 67 100

Source: Primary Data from questioner

As it is showed on the above table 52(77%) of respondents reply that the effectiveness of their
organization’s implementation of project evaluation of the organization is satisfactory and
15(22%) of the rate that implementation of project evaluation of the organization is
unsatisfactory.

31
Chart - 2

Response to what extent managers have confidence and trust on your work?

Response
0%

8%
8% Very strong
Strong
Neutral
23%
61% Weak
Very weak

Source: Primary Data from question

questioner

As it can observed from the above chart,

chart none of the respondents pointed out that their
managers are confidence and trust in their
t work is not very strong, 41(61%)of
(61%)of respondents
indicated that their managers has strong confidence and trust,, 15(23%) of respondents said
nothing, 5(8%)
(8%) of them feelthat
feelthat their managersconfidence and trustin their
t work is weak,
5(8%) of them felt that their managers have confidence and trust in their w
work is very weak.
This can showss that most of the employees described they did something good and gain their
managers confidence and trust.

Responses in the case coordination

Table: 9 Response on coordination
Raised question response Frequency
In which part do Managers 5 7
you think have a Departments 21 32
good relationship Employees 36 54
Senior executives 5 7
Total 67 100
Source: Primary Data from questioner

32
As it is sown in the table 3.9, 5(7%) of the respondents believe that there is coordination with
managers, and 21 (32%) of respondents believe that there is a coordination between
departments, 36 (54%) of respondents believe the coordination between employees, and
5(7%) of respondents feel that there is coordination between senior executives.

3.3 Analysis of Data Obtained From Documents

The Evaluation process of ERA projects starts with the form that generates from site engineer
that directly goes to the consultant. As it is shown in appendix one it helps the site engineer to
record progress measurements.

The second evaluation paper generates from the consultant to ERA that shows the progress of
the project. It starts with executive summary and includes report purpose, project description,
consultant contract, works contract, financial management and appendixes. (As attached as
appendix two)

This document prepared by the consultant shows measurements, detail descriptions, maps,
graphs, and tables to deliver important information to the organization.

The third document is generated by ERA Eastern region include many projects that managed
by eastern region, which includes all the detail progresses in all projects.

The fourth document is generated by ERA head office is delivered to house of peoples
representatives (HPR) or the parliament construction permanent committee.

3.4 Answers for structured Interview questions

During the interview the eastern region contract management directorate director w/robeza
and group leader for team one engineer sisaychala briefly describe about the clear project
evaluationstandard of their organization, that ,there is a standard which follows the bottom –
up line of information flow it starts on the site.The responsible site engineermeasured and
recordeach every progress in every stage of the project and transfer it to the consultant in a
fixed time interval. Theconsultant collects that information and prepares a quarter reports and
sends it to the regional directorate director.

33
The regional director office receives only the document and compares it to their yearly plan, if
the actual does not fit to the plan or if it fits the regional office send a letter to tell the
consultant to go on or to correct errors, and send professionals to cross-check the actual.

About the importance of evaluation the directorate director and the team leader has the same
idea, that without evaluation on one can assure that the project goes smooth, and it is not
possible to west huge amount of money project without evaluating it.

Concerning the required skill of employees who participate in project evaluation both of the
interviewees thought that the minimum requirement was fully completed as it is indicated in
chapter three of this paper the lower qualification of employee is first degree. On the other
hand methods employed to the project evaluation is mainly on documentation, and site visit
by professionals, and the organization reviewed its project evaluation mainly based on yearly.
But the effectiveness of the organization’s project evaluation highly affected by turnover of
employees that generates from the competition in the labor market. The regional director
describe that the organization is now working with an England based company to upgrade
it’seffectiveness of evaluation of projects.

34
 CHAPTER FOUR
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1. Summary

This chapter summarizes, concludes and recommends the finding of the research and forward
possible solution of the problems. The study was emphasized a study of implementation
project evaluation in Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA) Eastern Region.

It also intended to suggest possible solutions on the identified a project evaluation of

implementation and those that promote good results.

To collect the relevant data for the study the researcher distributed questionnaires to
employees and interview. The responses given by the respondents and interviewees have been
analyzed and interpreted.

Based on the data presentation and analysis the study comes up with the following findings.
• 68% of respondents strongly agree that number and type of staff needed during
planning is enough.
• 38% and54 % of respondents strongly agrees and agrees respectively that
environmental uncertainties such as political social & economical are considered
during planning.
• 38% of respondents strongly agree that time horizon was considered during planning.
• 31% and 46% of respondents strongly agree and agree respectively, that labor market
(employability) of people were considered during planning.
• 23% and 38% of respondents strongly agree and agree respectively that workforce
demand of the organization is the main determinant for the implementation of project
evaluation of the organization.
• 54% of respondents replay that the organization uses managerial judgment as a
technique to plan implementation of project evaluation.

35
 • 69% or respondents replay that implementation of project evaluation has an effect on
over all activities of the organization.
• 45% of respondents thought that project evaluation plays an important role in
achieving the objective of the organization.
• 54% of respondents thought that project evaluation planning has very strong effect on
the service delivery of the organization.
• 69% of respondents believe that allocating resources has a very strong effect on the
service delivery of the organization.
• 70% of respondents thought that timing has very stung effect on the service delivery
of the organization.
• 39% and 46% of respondents thought that reporting has very strong and strong effects
respectively on service delivery of the organization.
• 61% of respondents thought that organizing relevant documents has strong effect on
the service delivery of the organization.
• 77% of respondents rated the effectiveness of implementing project evaluation in the
organization satisfactory.
• 61% of respondents felt that their managers have a weak confidence and trust on their
work.
• 61%of respondents thought that revisiting relevant documents on the service delivery
of the organization has strong effect.

4.2. Conclusions
Implementing evaluation can be a very useful. But the research has been reveled that there are
gaps throughout the process. First the plan for implementation of project evaluation was
decided by managers. It didn’t participate professionals. Moreover the expansion plan is one
of the determinant factors during planning implementations of evaluations on projects.

Projects like construction of roads cannot accept errors even if they are small because the
amount of fund delegated to these projects are very huge. All the evaluation processes are
dependent only on documents prepared without standard.
And all factors affecting the evaluation practice and determinant factorsare taken into
consideration to deliver effective service. Moreover many employees felt that their managers
have weak confidence their work.

36
On the other hand the competition on the labor market has it’s own effect on the service
delivery of the organization.

1.3. Recommendations
Hoping there can be possible ways to reduce the problems in the organization under study; the
following constructive recommendations are forwarded to be considered on the fore coming
times by the organization mangers.
• In order to solve the problems which faced in the organization according to the
implementation of project evaluation managerial judgment is the main technique, but
sub ordinates who are professionals must participate in the planning process of
evaluation of project.

• The studied organization also needs to improve the reporting system of the evaluation
process of projects. Different kinds of reporting mechanisms which are the most
reliable, effective, easy to use and the most recent technological findings like x-ray
compact measurement machine.

• To enhance better project evaluation practice the organization under study must find
some way to make employees feel that managers have their trust on their work.

• I recommend that the contribution of evaluations in keeping the quality of projects,

and to meet its objective the organization must deliver a better benefit and comfortable
working atmosphere in order to win it’s compotators in the labor market.

• Finally in the future I advice the organization to have a plan in applying improved
evaluation techniques to be used as a base for future planning and effective decision
making that will benefit individual workers and their organization.

37
 Bibliography

Geoff Bates and Lisa Jons (1997) monitoring and evaluation guide for community projects.
John moors university.

Queens land treasury (1997) project evaluation guidelines, http// www.jrf.org.uk

UNDP (2002), hand book on monitoring an evaluating for results.

MarliynTaylor,Derricpurdue,mandyWillson and pete Wilde,(2005) ,evaluating community

projects practical guide.http// www.jrf.org.uk

Austrian Development corperation(2009)Guidelines for project and programme evaluations.

Weiss,carolH. (2000), evaluation, theWorld Bank, Washington d.c.

JISC (2007) Six steps to effective evaluation, glenaffricLtd.

Rossi PH.etal.(2004) evaluation: a systematic approach, California, sage publication.

FatanehNarinpoush(2006): fundamental methods and steps for conducting project evaluation:

IMAGINE CANADA

38
Annexes

39
40
41
 DECLARATION
ADVISEES DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that this senior essay is my original work, prepared under the guidance of
AtoBiruk G/Michael. All sources of materials used to the manuscript have been dully acknowledged.

Name:
Signature:
Place of submission: St. Mary’s University
Date of Submission:

ADVISOR’S DECLARATION
This senior essay has been submitted for examination with my approval as an advisor.

Name:
Signature:
Date of Submission:

42