MONITORING REPORTS - Food Resources Manual

Results from monitoring visits should be summarized in a standardized monitoring report. The reports should kept on file and made available to counterparts and donors as required.

Information in Reports

  1. General Site Information
    • Project name and number
    • The names and/or identification number of all sites that were visited
    • Location of sites monitored
    • Date of previous site visit
    • Average interval between monitoring visits
  2. Project Participants
    • The difference between approved number of beneficiaries and actual attendance, according to distribution site records
    • All centers that had at least one participant/beneficiary on the attendance record who could not be verified or who responded to interviews in such a way that the validity of the center's attendance records is in doubt
    • If distributions were taking place during visits, the percentage difference between the approved number of beneficiaries and the number counted by the monitor. Reasons for any differences should also be noted.
  3. Distribution Site Management
    • All sites by percentage difference in inventory balances (ledger balances minus physical counts)
    • All sites that had at least one deficiency in the storage area
    • All sites by percentage difference between the actual ration distributed and the approved ration for distribution. (This can depend on whether the site takes attendance, how the food is distributed, and the amount of food on hand to distribute.)
    • All sites that could not distribute food because of late or missed deliveries, by location
  4. Recommendations
  5. Increasing or decreasing the amount of food provided to each site, a review of past problem areas, progress on implementing previous recommendations and any recommendations for imposing sanctions.

Scoring and Follow-up

To assist in the management of distribution sites and determine which sites are operating more effectively than others, country offices should establish standards of operating acceptability with counterparts. A rating system can be adopted which summarizes the performance of the center, based on the monitor’s examination and the adequacy of the site’s reports. For example, criteria could be established for five categories, ranging from “very good" rating to "very inadequate".

  • Very Good = (letter of congratulations from CARE)
  • Good = (letter of congratulations from CARE)
  • Adequate = (additional training)
  • Inadequate = (training, warning and follow-up visit)
  • Very Inadequate = (suspension or de-selection)

While random sampling of sites will still be required to monitor activities at distribution sites, establishing a rating system such as above may help country offices more efficiently target resources for sites with problem make decisions to terminate activities.


All rights reserved © 2018 Wisdom IT Services India Pvt. Ltd DMCA.com Protection Status

Food Resources Manual Topics