This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
UK Aid Direct
Jo Cox Memorial Grants (Strengthening) – Project Completion
Report (PCR) guidance
Contents
Jo Cox Memorial (Strengthening) Project Completion Report (PCR) grant holder guidance ..... 1
and parents on parent/family involvement approaches to strengthen the parents’ connection to their
children’s school activities.
At the end of the project, police reports revealed that there has been a reduction in incidents reported
on alcohol abuse by the youth – only two cases reported in the last 18 months compared to the
baseline where at least two youth alcohol abuse incidents were reported on a daily basis. Following
the training of the students, the schools also reported improved positive school behaviour and
academic achievement. The parents and family members trained also reported a change in attitude
towards involvement in student’s school activities to enhance positive behaviour in schools.
2. Beneficiary Data Summary This section relates to the Beneficiary Data Summary, which is a separate excel document containing total beneficiaries reached, and data disaggregated by gender, age, disability and other key population characteristics. This template is the same used for six-monthly progress reporting.
Download the Beneficiary Data Summary from SMILE and update the Project Completion Report tab. Ensure data is provided for the entire duration of the project. Refer to the ‘data summary’ tab to reflect on data management and collection.
3. a) Achievement against outcome targets This section encourages reflection on achievement of outcome indicators by reviewing performance against the target for each outcome indicator. When completing, add or delete as necessary to ensure all outcome indicators in the approved results framework are reported against.
For each outcome indicator, copy the indicator information from the approved Results Framework.
This includes the indicator title, final milestone target, and achieved figures. For each indicator, grant
holders must provide a self-assessed score, provide evidence of data verification, and explain any
over or under achievement of the target.
3.1 Scoring outcomes
For each indicator, provide a self-assessed score using the below guidance. This will be reviewed and
validated by the performance management team, and it is therefore important to provide robust
Data management and collection – key considerations
• Were you able to collect relevant data to evidence the project achievements?
• Reflect on whether the approaches to sampling provided representative information and evidence
• Did the approaches to data disaggregation work effectively? What challenges were experienced and how were these overcome?
• Reflect on the methods used to analyse the data and the extent to which this information has been used to inform programming. Has this information been shared beyond the project?
Page 5 of 13
UK Aid Direct
evidence of this achievement.
Score Outcome description
A++ Outcome substantially exceeded expectation, where the milestone has been exceeded by 20% or more
A+ Outcome moderately exceeded expectation, where the milestone has been exceeded by more than 10% but less than 20%
A Outcome met expectations, where the milestone has been achieved by +/- 10%
B Outcome moderately did not meet expectation, where the milestone has been
underachieved by more than 10% but less than 20%
C Outcome substantially did not meet expectation, where the milestone has been
underachieved by more than 20% or there is insufficient data available
Scoring example: The target was to enrol 50 children into vocational courses to attend training for a
minimum of six months. Data indicates that 48 enrolled however, three dropped out and only 45
attended training for the full six-month period. This outcome would therefore score an ‘A’ - this is
because the 45/50 target achieved is 90%, hence milestone has been achieved by +/- 10%.
3.2 Means of verification
It is essential that achievements are supported by robust and credible data. For each outcome indicator, outline the data sources used to verify the results presented.
Means of verification example: to evidence that 45 children were enrolled into vocational courses
and attended training for a minimum of six months, enrolment data has been provided alongside
attendance sheets. To evidence the quality of the vocational courses, a feedback survey was
conducted with all students indicating that 80% of students who completed a course felt confident to
access employment opportunities. Furthermore, trainers grade students at the end of the course and
all students completing the course were graded ‘B’ or above.
3.3 Over/under achievement
It is important to reflect on why indicators may be over or under achieved to support future
programming and learning. In this section, provide a brief analysis as illustrated in the example below.
Analysis of over/under achievement example: The project enrolled 50 children but three dropped
out due to family commitments. This represents a 10% underachievement. These three children
attended on average 50% of the course. One fell pregnant and was unable to continue, and a further
two experienced changes in family circumstances and were required to stay home. These were all
female students and future programme should consider engaging parents and family members at an
early stage in the project, on the importance of supporting students to complete the course. This could
involve communicating the longer-term benefits of the courses and using role models to share
experience within the community.
Page 6 of 13
UK Aid Direct
3. b) Overall outcome assessment An overall outcome assessment is required based on the outcome indicator assessments. Reflect on the progress made for each outcome indicator and assess overall achievement. This should be a balanced judgement based on findings reported.
4. Achievement against output target This section requires your Results Framework to be updated to include the ‘achieved’ column. For each output, outline the achieved data. This should be supported by the information and data provided in the Beneficiary Data Summary.
5. Understanding project impact This section requires reflection on the overall impact of the project, considering the intended objectives and approach to achieve these. In this section, reflect on:
5.1 Change achieved
• Based on outcome and output level assessment, has the project achieved what was intended?
• Reflect on the beneficiary data and outline who has benefitted and why
• At this final stage of the project, reflect on the change that has been achieved.
5.2 Project approach
• Reflect on why the interventions used were selected and consider if they led to the anticipated change
5.3 Adaptive management
• Reflect on what changes to the approach were made during implementation and why
• Based on the data now, what changes might be appropriate for future programming.
6. Learning Reflection and learning are important to establish how well the project has performed and should
inform future programming. In this section, analyse and reflect on the learnings the project has had
over the implementing period.
Reflect on the key achievements and challenges, and consider what factors contributed to these. It is
important to consider:
Page 7 of 13
UK Aid Direct
• Whether activities had the intended outcomes and reflect on any unintended outcomes
there might have been
• Operational processes and procedures involving delivery of outputs
• Working with certain downstream partners, project teams or other stakeholders
• How challenges were mitigated.
6.3 Beneficiary Feedback (BFM)
Learning from beneficiaries through beneficiary feedback mechanisms (BFM) is a key element of
project delivery and adaptive management. Through consistent interaction beneficiary feedback
promotes project relevance and accountability. In this section, describe the ways you have collected
and used feedback providing specific examples and reflecting on how this influenced project impact
and accountability.
BFM example: Through monthly community discussion meetings we sought feedback, not only from
direct beneficiaries of the project, but also the wider community on how the project was progressing.
Originally, these were mass gatherings of all community members, however we found that women
were not very vocal, and feedback was only received from men. As such, we quickly adapted to host
two separate community discussion meetings, one for women and one for men. This led to
significantly more feedback from both groups.
The feedback received was used to adapt the project. For instance, the community suggested that we
consider distributing a new breed of goats -“galla goats” - as opposed to the local breeds. Following
consultation with technical experts, we were advised that “galla goats” perform well in hot and
drought-ridden areas and have higher milk potential over the local breed. We therefore adapted the
project based on this feedback to offer “gall goats” and as a result, reduced the kid mortality rate in
the project from four kids reported in the first three months to none. Beneficiaries also enjoyed higher
milk production from one litre per day to three litres per day per goat.
6.4 Communications
Use this section to share project-specific case studies that exemplify what the project has achieved.
Ensure that the case study is clearly structured, briefly outlining:
• What the problem was
• How it was addressed
• The results, including any problems encountered and how they were overcome.
Provide images or videos to accompany the case study. Please try to include evidence or statistics on
the impact or the change. Please try to also provide a personal story from beneficiaries which
exemplifies the bigger picture story of the project.
Additional guidance
• UK Aid Direct grant holder Communications Handbook on the UK Aid Direct website
This section should analyse how the project has identified and targeted the most marginalised and
vulnerable beneficiaries during the project life, with emphasis on disability inclusion and gender
equality. It is important to consider:
• How the project consulted the most marginalised and vulnerable groups to ensure equal
access to project activities. Please note that access does not only refer to physical access for
individuals with mobility challenges. It is important to consider all forms of marginalisation.
• How the project has promoted greater gender equality during the project life
• How people with disabilities have engaged in the project and accessed project benefits
(again, please note that access does not only refer to physical access)
• How the project has adapted activities or interventions to ensure equal access and
opportunity for the most vulnerable and marginalised populations.
Provide practical examples and reflect on the impact of these strategies to consider how well they have worked and any unintended outcomes.
Disability inclusion example: We supported families to feel that their children with disabilities were
safe both within the context of the community and the school. We worked closely with the church
and community leaders to challenge attitudes and help breakdown social barriers. For instance, in
Ethiopian culture it is important to drink coffee with people, and a coffee ceremony shows you are a
part of the community. Parents of disabled children were empowered to offer coffee to other
people in their rural communities as a way of helping breakdown social barriers. Through this
approach we were able to target and work with individuals that were not identified before.
8. Risk This section looks to understand how the project has understood, reported and mitigated against risk during the project life. This should be written in conjunction with a review and update of both the project’s Risk Register and Delivery Chain Risk Map.
In the narrative report, outline any key changes to project and delivery chain risks, and how this has
impacted on risk mitigation. Top tips for reviewing the risk register:
• Ensure the ‘what’s changed’ column is fully updated, with dates
• Review the risk ratings to ensure they remain appropriate and align with FCDO’s likelihood
versus impact matrix (available in the risk register template).
• Reflect on the mitigation strategies and how well these have worked.
Additional guidance
• Watch our webinar on YouTube, completing your risk register
What is the difference between the risk register and delivery chain risk map?
The risk register should capture all risks that the project faced across the six UK Foreign,
Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) risk categories: context, fiduciary, reputational,
safeguarding, operational, delivery. These are risks that, if materialised, would have impacted on
project implementation. The delivery chain risk map captures the structure of the delivery chain. For
example, the lead grant holder and any downstream partners delivering project activities. Any risks
associated with working with and delivering with these downstream partners need to be captured in
Alongside the review of technical performance, a financial review will take place. This will involve a
review of cumulative spend to ensure budget threshold tolerances have not been breached and that
there are no significant variances. This does not require any further submissions from grant holders.
In this section of the narrative report, grant holders are required to submit annual audited accounts
and an updated asset inventory.
13.1 Asset Disposal
Any project assets over £500 in value, are considered FCDO assets and at the end of the project
require a disposal plan. Grant holders can request to transfer the assets to the grant holder, delivery
partner or suitable third party. It should not be automatically assumed that project assets will
remain with the local partners after completion of the grant.
Refer to the UK Aid Direct Asset disposal guidance on the UK Aid Direct website for detailed
information. To request asset transfer, grant holders must submit:
• Signed asset register (listing all assets valued over £500)
• A depreciation policy
• Asset transfer letter
The performance management team will share additional information three months prior to project
completion and request that to support smooth project completion process, grant holders submit
the asset disposal plan and request three months before the project end date, to allow for
submission to FCDO.
13.2 Annual audited accounts
It is a requirement of the grant arrangement to submit audited or independently examined annual
accounts within six months of the organisation's financial year end. If these have not yet been
shared, submit them with this report. If they are not yet ready, note when they will be expected in
the report.
14. Feedback to fund manager It is useful for the fund manager to receive grant holder feedback to strengthen the support and guidance provided. Please be honest and provide constructive feedback, suggestions or requests to the fund management team.
15. Project Completion Report checklist
Document Key information / guidance links
1 Narrative Report (Word document)
Complete the full template and use the checklist to confirm all supporting documents are submitted.