9.2 The Project Management Cycle: Identification, Planning, Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation
Key Takeaways
- TOS competencies G.1.3, G.2.1 and G.2.2 require candidates to explain the project management cycle and apply tools for identification, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
- The cycle runs identification, formulation and appraisal, financing, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and feedback into the next identification.
- Monitoring is continuous and asks whether implementation is on track; evaluation is periodic and asks whether objectives were achieved and why.
- Formative evaluation improves an ongoing project; summative evaluation judges a completed one.
- The standard evaluation criteria are relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability.
9.2 The Project Management Cycle
Blueprint anchor. TOS competency G.1.3 requires candidates to explain the Project Management Cycle; G.2.1 repeats it at sub-topic level; and G.2.2 requires applying tools for project identification and planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. These are the highest-frequency competencies in Topic G.
1. The Phases of the Cycle
| Phase | Central question | Principal outputs |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Identification | What is the problem and is a project the right response? | Situational analysis, needs assessment, problem tree, project idea |
| 2. Formulation / design | What exactly will be done, by whom, with what? | Objectives, logical framework, work plan, budget, indicators |
| 3. Appraisal | Is the design sound and worth funding? | Feasibility, cost, risk and gender appraisal; approval or revision |
| 4. Financing / mobilisation | Where do the resources come from and on what terms? | Approved budget, memorandum of agreement, procurement plan |
| 5. Implementation | Is the plan being carried out? | Delivered activities and outputs, financial reports |
| 6. Monitoring | Are we on track, and what needs adjusting now? | Progress reports, indicator tracking, corrective actions |
| 7. Evaluation | Did it achieve its objectives, and why or why not? | Evaluation report, lessons, recommendations |
| 8. Feedback / learning | What does this teach the next project? | Revised design standards; new identification |
The cycle is closed, not linear: evaluation feeds identification. A project whose evaluation changes nothing has completed a line, not a cycle.
2. Identification Tools
- Situational analysis using a dimensional scan of the community.
- Needs assessment through survey, focus group discussion or participatory appraisal.
- Problem tree — the core problem in the trunk, causes below as roots, effects above as branches. Converting each element to its positive form produces the objective tree, and the chosen branch of that tree becomes the project strategy.
- Stakeholder analysis — who is affected, who has influence, who must be involved, who may resist.
- Prioritisation matrix — scoring candidate problems on magnitude, severity, feasibility, community concern and available resources.
3. Planning Tools
The logical framework (logframe) is the standard planning matrix and appears frequently in items.
| Narrative summary | Objectively verifiable indicators | Means of verification | Assumptions / risks | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goal | Long-term change contributed to | Impact indicators | National or municipal statistics | Conditions beyond the project hold |
| Purpose / outcome | Change in participants | Outcome indicators | Survey, records | Participants able to act |
| Outputs | Deliverables | Output indicators | Activity reports, attendance | Outputs are used as intended |
| Activities | Actions | Inputs and budget | Financial records | Resources arrive on time |
The vertical logic reads upward: if activities are done, outputs are produced; if outputs are produced and assumptions hold, the outcome follows. Naming assumptions honestly is what separates a logframe from a wish list.
Other planning tools: the work and financial plan, the Gantt chart for scheduling, the work breakdown structure, and the responsibility matrix assigning each activity to a named person.
SMART indicators are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound. "Improved wellbeing" is not an indicator; "proportion of enrolled children attending at least 85 percent of school days in the second semester" is.
4. Implementation
Core management tasks: mobilising and orienting staff, procurement in accordance with public procurement rules where public funds are used, community organising and participant enrolment, scheduling, financial control and liquidation, documentation, coordination with the local government unit and partners, and risk management as conditions change.
The most common implementation failures in social welfare projects are procurement delay, staff turnover, weak documentation, and drift from the design under local pressure — for example, quietly substituting easier-to-reach participants for the intended hardest-to-reach group.
5. Monitoring Versus Evaluation
| Monitoring | Evaluation | |
|---|---|---|
| Timing | Continuous, during implementation | Periodic: mid-term, terminal, or ex-post |
| Question | Are we doing what we planned? | Did it work, and why? |
| Focus | Inputs, activities, outputs | Outcomes, impact, and the causal account |
| Who | Project team, community monitors | Often includes external or independent evaluators |
| Use | Immediate correction | Decisions on continuation, redesign, scale-up |
Formative evaluation is conducted while the project runs, to improve it. Summative evaluation is conducted at or after the end, to judge it. Process evaluation examines how implementation actually occurred; outcome evaluation examines what changed; impact evaluation attempts to attribute change to the project against what would have happened otherwise.
Standard Evaluation Criteria
| Criterion | Question |
|---|---|
| Relevance | Did it address a real and priority need? |
| Effectiveness | Were the objectives achieved? |
| Efficiency | Were resources used economically for the results obtained? |
| Impact | What wider or unintended changes followed? |
| Sustainability | Will the benefits continue after the project ends? |
Social work practice adds equity (who benefited and who was left out) and participation (whose decisions shaped the project) as criteria in their own right.
6. Worked Practice Application
A municipality implements a twelve-month day-care improvement project in eight barangays: rehabilitating centres, training child development workers, and supplying learning materials.
| Phase | What was done | What the social worker contributes |
|---|---|---|
| Identification | Enrolment and nutrition data reviewed; parents' assemblies held in all eight barangays | Ensures the problem tree separates causes (worker skill, facility condition, parent participation) from effects (low readiness) |
| Formulation | Logframe with outcome "school readiness scores improved among enrolled children" and outputs on facilities, training and materials | Insists that assumptions — that parents will continue to enrol, that workers will remain in post — are written down |
| Appraisal | Costed and reviewed; risk of worker turnover flagged | Recommends a retention measure, since training a worker who then leaves converts an output into a loss |
| Implementation | Facilities rehabilitated; 24 workers trained; materials delivered | Detects that two barangays enrolled easier-to-reach children and restores the intended targeting |
| Monitoring | Monthly attendance, session delivery and material use tracked by barangay child development committees | Uses community monitors so that monitoring itself builds capacity |
| Evaluation | Terminal evaluation against the five criteria plus equity and participation | Reports that outputs were met, outcomes rose in six of eight barangays, and that the two exceptions coincide with worker turnover |
| Feedback | Findings taken to the municipal development council | Recommends that the next cycle fund a worker retention allowance, closing the loop |
The examinable point is in the last row: the evaluation finding changed the next design. That is what makes the sequence a cycle.
Which statement correctly distinguishes monitoring from evaluation?
In a logical framework, what belongs in the assumptions column at the output level?
A mid-term review is conducted so that the project team can adjust delivery before the project ends. This is best described as: