Technical services and feasibility studies III and IV : evaluation report, Jordan

External evaluation covers the period 5/82-3/87 and is based on document review, interviews, and findings from 64 activity questionnaires comprising a project management data base developed by the evaluation team at the Mission's request. Overall, the projects have been effective, well-used, and relevant. They have provided an appropriate mechanism by which to facilitate development program and project planning and activities, and have involved the Ministry of Planning (MOP) and GOJ executing agencies in meaningful and largely efficient ways. GOJ activities funded by the projects have played catalytic, bridging, institutional development, and "cutting edge" roles in the areas of technology development and transfer, development administration, and planning, or in support of policy dialogue and policy reform. Project management has improved markedly over time, especially during the past 6 months, after creation of a review committee to set priorities, define selection criteria, and approve or disapprove GOJ requests over $10,000. With slight improvements, project and activity management can be strengthened, especially monitoring, evaluation, and reporting. A key need is to pay greater attention to the nature and quality of outputs (at both project and activity levels) vs. a stress on programming inputs, as has been the case in the past. Recommendations are made for streamlining project management, revising the project purpose to reflect changed conditions, and initiating a follow-on. Three lessons have been learned. (1) Projects such as these increase a mission's ability to respond flexibly and quickly to a range of host government (HG) requests, even as A.I.D. and HG priorities and needs change. Such projects - which may be the only or major form of scarce flexible response resources to remain for programming as A.I.D. funding levels decrease - should be encouraged in other countries where geopolitical concerns warrant and HG's have good management capacities. (2) Where flexibility and speed of funding have high priority, attention to monitoring and output assessment tends to suffer. However, more attention in these areas can actually increase flexibility rather than reduce it, as is sometimes feared. (3) Attempting to introduce a project management data base and a management system derived from it in the context of a 3-week evaluation is not maximally efficient. Missions and HG counterparts need more time to participate in data base development and to review and adjust their concepts of data-related priorities and needs.