funaab agric - cotonou 2015
TRANSCRIPT
ACE PROJECT WORKSHOP, COTONOU
Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta
Mon. 16th – Fri. 20th November, 2015
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 1 DLR1.1 Establishmentof the Running of CEADESE Office
Office Accomodationand Staff Administrative tools
100%
Functionaloffice.Administrative and Academic Staff
-
DLR 1.2Coordination Meetings
Number of Meeting held 100%
16 Coordination Meetings held
-
DLR 1.3World Bank Meeting / Workshops
Regularattendance at World Bank / AAU Meeting
100%
4 meetings attended
-
Status of Implementation of Activities
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI DLR1.4Technical / Management Training
Number of Staff Trained
10%
FiducialTraining of 2 Centre staff
Financial Constraints
DLR 1.6Development of Website
Functional website 100%
Website up and Running -
DLR 1.7IndustrialRelations
MoUs signed
13%
2 MoUs Legal issues delayingMoU. Causing delay
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 1 DLR 1.8Internal and External M & E
Number ResultFrame work submitted
100%2 Result Framework submitted
-
DLI 2 DLR 2.1Masters Student
a.) No Masters curriculum Developed or Revised
100%
1.) 28 Masters (4 Regional).
2.) 2 New curriculumDeveloped for 6 programmes
3.) Curriculum Revised into 5 programmes
-
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.2PhD students
a.) No PhDb.) Curriculum Developed
100%100%
1.) 37 PhD (3 regional)
2.) New curriculum Developed for 5 Programmes.
3.) Curriculum Revised into 5 programmes
-
DLR 2.3Short-term courses for students
No of Participants
0%
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.4Outreach periods (Faculty and Students)
No. of student completing at least 4 weeks of internship
100% 1.65 students on internship
2.) 65 Faculties on Supervision
-
DLR 2.5Accreditation
1.Internal Accreditation (Mock)
2.NUCResource Verification
0%
1.Delay in funding
2.NUC has no benchmark
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED
REMARKS: EXPLANATION
DLI 2 DLR 2.6ResearchPublications
No. of papers published
0% Students’ Research yet to
start
DLR 2.7Externally Generated Revenue
Amount ofRevenue generated
100%
N10,250,000$52,030.50
DLR 2.8Improved Teaching & Learning Environment
No. of Faculties upgraded/renovated/provided. Hostel/Creche/Book/Cleaning
0% 0 Funding
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED
REMARKS: EXPLANATION
DLI 3 DLR 3.1Timely withdrawal application
No. of timely withdrawal
100% 1 timely withdrawal application for 1st dis-bursement
Preparing Interim financial
Report for December, 2015
DLR 3.2Functional University AuditCommittee
No. of Reports
0% 0No meeting
yet??
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED
REMARKS: EXPLANATION
DLI 3 DLR 3.3Functionalinternal audit
No. of Reports100%
Several reports -
DLR 3.4Web transparency on financial management
Timely and full disbursement in website. - 0
Awaiting for external audit report
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
DLI PLANNED ACTIVITY EXPECTED RESULTS% ACTIVITY
COMPLETED TO-DATE
RESULT OBTAINED
REMARKS:EXPLANATION
DLI 4 DLR 4.1Third party Procurement Verification
1.) Procurement Plan
2.) Appointed procurement Consultant.
3.) No. of Procurements verified
1. 100%
2. 0%
3. 0%
1.) Plan approved
Funding delay
DLR 4.2Timeliness of Procurement Process
1.) Procurement Plan2.) No. of Procurements completed as scheduled on Plan
1. 100%
2. 0%
1.) Plan approved
Funding delay
Status of Implementation of Activities – Cont’d
2015 ACE IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING FORM
Date and Period of Reporting:
May 2015 –November, 2015
Issues Comments
Did you undertake
a kick off meeting
with all partners?
Yes, in the form of
stakeholders meeting
Were stakeholders
included in kick off
meeting?
YES
Are coordination, management and financing arrangements clearly defined and do they support institutional strengthening and local ownership?
•Depending on the role of the partner in the project.•Institutional partners for lectures and supervision•Industry partners internship & supervision
What reporting arrangements are in place between you and the partners?
•Partners coordinators report to Programme Leader Director.•Academic Board / Management Board.
What monitoring arrangements are in place/envisaged?
Role for M & E
What management tool are you using, if any? Does it incorporate the activity section of the IP? Does it constantly relate and reflect the DLIs
Regular meeting of Board
Is the timescale and/or range of activities realistic? Do you think a review is necessary?
Not often realistic especially procurements.A review is necessary
To what extent are activities implemented as scheduled? If there are delays how are they rectified?
For academic activities –Yes
Are funds committed and spent in line with the implementation plan? Are there any variations? What are the reasons?
Yes. The Accounting software is rigid on pre budgeted amount. However when it come to spending on research – variation
Have all planned outputs been delivered to date? And in a logic sequence?
Academic activities –YesProcurement – No
Have the planned results to date been achieved?
Academic –Yes
Are the DLIs/results appropriate and are they being reported against?
The DLIs are appropriate and reported against
Have all planned target groups access to / using project results/services available so far?
Target groups have access. No project results yet. Our students are designing their research to solve problems
Are there any factors
which prevent target
groups accessing the
results/services?
None
If appropriate, how
flexible is the project in
adapting to changing
needs/circumstances?
Not very flexible in
terms of financial
commitments