Monitoring, evaluation, and the project logic
MCC compacts are built on a results-based approach. M&E is not an add-on at the end of a project — it is built into the compact design from the start. Understanding the project logic helps every MCA staff member see how their work connects to the results the compact is designed to achieve.
The project logic diagram is the foundation of M&E in a compact. It sets out the causal pathway from activities through outputs and outcomes to impact — the theory of how the investment will unlock growth. Indicators, targets, and evaluation methods are all derived from this logic.
“The project logic diagram reflects the proposed project investments and economic benefits streams and sets forth the causal pathways through which the proposed activities will achieve the project objective.”
If you deliver an output that is not connected to the project logic, it cannot be measured — and if it cannot be measured, it cannot be reported as a result. Activities that drift from the logic waste resources without advancing the compact’s goals. Every MCA staff member should be able to articulate how their work connects to the project objective.
Reading the project logic: inputs to impact
The project logic connects what is invested (inputs and activities) to what is produced (outputs), what changes (outcomes), and what economic effect is achieved (impact). Each level of the logic is distinct — and each requires different types of measurement.
Output indicators measure what was directly delivered (the MCA controls these). Outcome indicators measure what changed as a result (the MCA influences but does not fully control). Impact is measured through rigorous evaluation — typically a principal evaluation comparing beneficiaries to a counterfactual. The MCA is primarily accountable for outputs and intermediate outcomes.
Indicators: measuring what matters
Every project in the compact has a set of indicators defined in the M&E Plan — the annex to the compact agreement. Indicators are the specific, measurable proxies by which progress and results are tracked.
Every indicator has a baseline (the value at the start of the compact) and an annual target and end-of-program target. Baselines must be drawn from documented sources. Targets must be realistic — they are public commitments. When project design changes, targets may need revision — which requires an M&E Plan amendment, not a quiet adjustment to reported actuals.
The Indicator Tracking Table: quarterly accountability
The Indicator Tracking Table (ITT) is the MCA’s primary quarterly tool for reporting M&E results to MCC. It is submitted as part of every QDRP and is used for public reporting and MCC senior management communications.
- Indicator name and classification
- Level (output / outcome / impact)
- Unit of measurement
- Baseline value
- Annual targets and end-of-program target
- Actuals for current and all previous quarters
- Progress towards annual and final targets
- Updated every quarter with current and previous quarter actuals
- QDRP is due 20 days before quarter end — so current quarter data is partial
- Previous quarter data updated to end-of-quarter accuracy
- Cannot update data older than one quarter directly
- Older corrections require a HACR (Historical Actual Change Request)
- Only indicators in the approved M&E Plan may appear in the ITT
ITT actuals must be supported by source documentation — the original data sources from which indicator values are drawn. These may include contractor completion certificates, survey data, administrative records, or inspection reports. Source documentation is submitted alongside the ITT as part of the QDRP. Actuals without supporting documentation are not accepted.
Evaluation: learning whether the compact worked
Monitoring tells you whether activities were completed and outputs delivered. Evaluation tells you whether those outputs actually produced the intended results — and why or why not. MCC requires rigorous evaluation for all compact programs.
Every output produced under a compact contract needs to be verifiable against an indicator. Project managers must ensure that contracts specify verifiable deliverables. Finance must ensure that payments are linked to certified, measurable outputs. Procurement must ensure that contract terms support output verification. When the M&E framework cannot be applied because outputs were not designed with measurement in mind, results cannot be demonstrated — and MCC cannot justify the investment.
Your role in results accountability
M&E is a shared responsibility. The M&E team leads — but every division produces the evidence that makes results measurement possible.
Environmental and Social Performance obligations are woven into every stage of compact delivery — from design through construction through closeout. Unit 5 covers what the MCA is legally committed to, and what happens when ESP requirements are not met.