##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) process ensures project efficiency and effectiveness thus imperative to exhaustively study the influence of the Monitoring and Evaluation process on HIV/AIDS project(s) to ensure healthy lives and end diseases such as AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. This study aimed to examining the influence of Monitoring and Evaluation process on the implementation of HIV/AIDS projects in Kenya: the DREAMS project in Nairobi County. The following objective guided the study: to establish how stakeholders’ participation in Monitoring and Evaluation process influences implementation of HIV/AIDS projects in Kenya. The study was anchored on stakeholders’ theory. The study targeted 51 staff from Centre for the Study of Adolescents (CSA) and census was employed in determining sample size. A structured self-administered questionnaires and interviews were used as a primary data collection instrument. A descriptive analysis was employed on the data collected, and the results were presented using charts, graphs, and tables. The findings showed a composite mean of 3.606 and a standard deviation of 1.023 implying that stakeholders play a critical role in monitoring and evaluation process and thus, there is need to include all stakeholders in the monitoring and evaluation process. The study recommends that stakeholders be involved in all the project stages to ensure an effective Monitoring and Evaluation process. The findings are of significance to project managers, monitoring and evaluation officers, donors, policy makers, and researchers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. PMBOOK (2001). A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Project Management Sage Publications.
     Google Scholar
  2. Nokes, S. (2007). The definitive guide to project management. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
     Google Scholar
  3. World Bank, (2002). The Role and Effectiveness of Development Assistance. Washington D.C.
     Google Scholar
  4. UNAIDS (2018). Fact Sheet on HIV/AIDS in Kenya.
     Google Scholar
  5. UNAIDS (2000). A Guide to Monitoring and Evaluation. Geneva: Joint United Nations
     Google Scholar
  6. Beer, et al. (2012) Journal of the International Aids Society University students and HIV in Namibia: an HIV prevalence survey and a knowledge and attitude survey.
     Google Scholar
  7. Magondu, A. (2013). Factors influencing implementation of Monitoring and Evaluation in HIV Research Projects.
     Google Scholar
  8. World Bank (2002). The Role and Effectiveness of Development Assistance. Washington D.C.
     Google Scholar
  9. Mwaniki, A. (2015). Influence of donor funding on implementation of HIV/AIDS projects by local NGOs in Mukuru slums, Nairobi county Kenya.
     Google Scholar
  10. World Bank, (2004) Monitoring and Evaluation: Some Tools, Methods, and Approaches.
     Google Scholar
  11. Nyaga, E. (2018). Factors influencing implementation of HIV/AIDS projects managed by NGOs on Kenya: a case of doctors without borders Embu county.
     Google Scholar
  12. Blackstock, K. L., Kelly, G. J. & Horsey, B. L. (2007). Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological Economics, 60(4), 726-742.
     Google Scholar
  13. Davies, R. (2004). Scale complexity and the representation of theories of change. London: SAGE publications.
     Google Scholar
  14. Njama, A. (2015). Determinants of Effectiveness of a Monitoring and Evaluation System for Projects.
     Google Scholar
  15. Njoki, M. (2008). Determinants of Effective Monitoring and Evaluation System of Public Health.
     Google Scholar
  16. Dyason, B. (2010). Action Plan: Monitoring and Evaluation Reporting and Research. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education and MIET Africa.
     Google Scholar
  17. UNDP. (2002). A Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation for Results. New York, USA: Evaluation Office 2002.
     Google Scholar
  18. Hacking, T. (2006). Sustainable development objectives in impact assessment: Why are they Needed, and Where Do they Come From? Environ Assess Policy Management, 8(3):341–371.
     Google Scholar
  19. Patton, M. (2008). Developmental Evaluation: Applying Complexity Concepts to Enhance Innovation and Use. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 2008.
     Google Scholar
  20. Davies, P. Newcomer, K. & Soydan, H. (2006) Government as structural context for evaluation. The SAGE Handbook Evaluation. London. Sage Publishers.
     Google Scholar
  21. Freeman, R.E. (2004). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
     Google Scholar
  22. Mugenda, O. M & Mugenda, A.G. (2003). Research Method: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Nairobi Centre for technology studies.
     Google Scholar
  23. UNAIDS, 2006 Organizations Working in Kenya to Address HIV and AIDS in Women.
     Google Scholar