Transcript M & E - Experience in KZN

Monitoring and Evaluation Systems:
the KwaZulu-Natal Experience
Khulani Mkhize
Chief Executive Officer
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife
Introduction
Overview
• Organisations structure
• Corporate Performance Evaluation and Indicators
• Province Wide Rapid Assessment (WWF RAPPAM)
• Site Level Evaluation (Enhancing Our Heritage)
• Integration of M & E Information
• The Way Forward
KZN Wildlife Management Structure
Chief Executive Officer
Head Finance
Head Conservation
General Manager
Coast
General Manager
uKhahlamba
Protected Areas
Other Heads
General Manager
Zululand
Outside P.A.
KZN Management Regions
• 3 Regions.
• 110 Public Protected
Areas.
• 7 128 km2 - 7.7 % of
the province.
Corporate Performance Indicators
At the corporate level, the organisation adopts a business
strategy and performance measures approach to achieving
it mission which is:
The sustainable biodiversity conservation and ecotourism
management in KwaZulu-Natal in partnership with people.
Biodiversity Objectives
To ensure exemplary conservation of the indigenous biodiversity
of KZN both within and beyond protected areas.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Address conservation priorities with stakeholders
Ensure management effectiveness
Manage for sustainable use
Build a sound knowledge base
Contribute nationally and internationally
Develop co-operative biodiversity governance
Key Performance Indicators
Biodiversity
• The level of protection
afforded biodiversity in the
province (representation in
formal or agreement parks).
• The status and trend of
threatened and or endemic
biodiversity features.
• The status and trend of
protected area
management effectiveness.
Province Wide Rapid Assessment (WWF
RAPPAM)
•
Pilot P.A. management effectiveness assessment
undertaken in conjunction with WWF International.
•
EKZNW was in a state of transition, and the primary aim
of the assessment was to:
 Identify strengths and weakness of current P.A.
management practices and identify priorities for
management action and resource allocation.
•
The Comparative Approach was necessary and valuable.
•
System wide threats
were assessed and
quantified.
Province Wide Rapid Assessment (WWF
RAPPAM)
• Management actions and resource allocation were
prioritised.
• Assessment outcomes were adopted by the organisation
(for details see Goodman 2003a & b).
Site Level Evaluation
(Enhancing Our Heritage)
•
Pilot study in conjunction with the Enhancing our
Heritage Programme.
•
Undertaken in the Greater St Lucia Wetland Park
World Heritage Site.
•
A large effort has gone into data collection and
reporting.
•
Detailed information across all evaluation elements
(Context, Planning, Inputs, Processes, Outputs,
Outcomes) was collected and synthesised.
•
Much of the information appears to impinge on that
collected for the conventional Management Plan and
its repeated evaluation through the management
process.
•
The synthesis of the large body of data and its
accessibility for management action appears
complex, but its use for management and planning
has not yet been fully assessed.
Integration of M & E Information
•
•
•
•
Links between levels of
evaluation must be
established.
Seamless upward synthesis to
inform corporate performance
measures is essential.
Mechanisms for enabling
prioritisation and resource
allocation at Executive and
Regional levels are essential.
Compatibility of methodologies
between levels and
standardisation of
terminologies is essential.
Executive
Resources
Information & Priorities
Region
Region
Region
Information & Priorities
P.A.
P.A.
P.A.
The Way Forward
• Management effectiveness evaluation and prioritisation is part
of the corporate culture at all levels.
• There will always be a need to prioritise resource allocation –
RAPPAM has been adopted and will be adapted where
necessary for this purpose.
• The need for a rapid site level evaluation tool has been
identified and RAPPAM is being adapted to meet this need.
• Management implementation has become cumbersome, as
have management plans. Strategic more streamlined plans
with evaluation built in are being developed.
• The seamless integration of the three levels of monitoring and
evaluation is to be pursued.