Session 8

Scoring Method

Project for Capacity Development for Implementing the Organic Law at the

Capital and Provincial Level (PILAC 2)

Objectives and Content

Objective of Session 8: Training participants understand the

Scoring Method and learn how to use it in the formulation of the CPDP and CPIP.

Content: 1. Presentation: the Scoring Method 2. Q&A

2

3

Scoring Method

The Scoring Method is recommended for use in the formulation of the CPDP and CPIP.

CPDP To prepare:

the table of prioritized C/P situational analysis, and the table of the C/P development framework

CPIP To prepare the consolidated table of project proposals

with priority

Scoring Method

for the CPDP

5

Scoring Method for the CPDP

The Scoring Method is recommended to discuss and prioritize the following.

Problems in and causes for preparing the table of prioritized C/P situational analysis; and

Goals, objectives, and solutions for preparing the table of the C/P development framework

The Scoring Method is a useful tool to decide which problems are more important than others.

6

Process of the Scoring Method for the Situational Analysis (1)

1. Each group discusses problems under its responsible component in the consolidated table of situational analysis prepared by the PWG.

2. When the number of problems under respective components is too many, it is recommended to reduce the number to five because it is not realistic to solve all the problems in five years. The Scoring Method is recommended.

3. Before starting the Scoring Method, each group discusses and chooses the criteria. The number of criteria should be three or four. In addition, the range of scores is fixed, e.g., from the highest score of 5 to the lowest score of 1.

4. Discuss and give scores based on the criteria, and screen the problems.

7

Process of the Scoring Method for the Situational Analysis (2)

Example Criteria Definition

Urgency • Does this problem show the urgency from the local needs?

Needs • Does this problem reflect the local needs?

Policy Prioritization

• Does the problem meet the priority of policies such as a Policy Guidance, Sector Development Plan, or other National and C/P Policy?

Beneficiaries • Does this problem affect a large number of people?

8

Process of the Scoring Method for the Development Framework (1)

1. The table of C/P development framework is made using the table of prioritized situational analysis.

2. When the number of solutions under respective objectives in the table of C/P development framework is over three, it is not realistic to implement all the solutions in five years. It is recommended to screen the solutions by the Scoring Method.

3. Before starting the Scoring Method, the group members discuss and choose the criteria and reach a consensus on the definition of the chosen criteria. The number of criteria should be three or four. In addition, the range of scores is also fixed, e.g., from the highest score of 5 to the lowest score of 1.

4. Discuss and give scores based on the criteria, and screen the solutions.

9

Process of the Scoring Method for the Development Framework (2)

Example Criteria Definition

Logic • Whether problems and causes are logically linked or not• If it is not logical, the possibility of achievement becomes low.

Time • Whether identified problems can be solved within five years (the term of the CPDP) or not

Feasibility • The feasibility can be considered in terms of technical aspects (e.g., whether the C/P has enough technical capacity), financial aspects (expected necessary cost), and human resource aspect (necessary number of capable human resources).

Impact • The impact should be estimated in terms of the scale of positive benefit such as the number of beneficiaries and expected increase of income.

10

Sample Table of Scoring Method for Screening Solutions

Each group screens solutions through discussion by referring to the result of scoring.

Note. The scores should be fixed in vertical direction. After the scoring in each criteria, the result of scoring should be reviewed again.

Solutions Logic Time Feasibility Impact Total

Solution A 3 5 2 2 12

Solution B 3 4 3 1 11

Solution C 3 3 5 3 14

The Score ranges from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high).

Scoring Method

for the CPIP

12

Scoring Method for the Project Proposal

The Scoring Method is recommended to give the order of priority to the projects in the consolidated table of project proposals.

It is conducted at “Sub-step 1-3: Screening of Project Proposals” in the CPDP formulation.

13

Process of Scoring Method for the Project Proposal

1. The order of project priority is given per component.

2. Before starting the Scoring Method, the participants discuss and choose the criteria and reach a consensus on the definition of the criteria chosen. The number of criteria should be three or four. In addition, the range of scores is fixed, e.g., from the highest score of 5 to the lowest score of 1.

3. Discuss and give scores to each project based on the criteria, and fix the order of priority: high, medium, and low.

Note: If one component includes over ten projects, it is recommended that the number of projects be reduced to ten or fewer through discussion before conducting the scoring.

14

Process of Scoring Method for Situational Analysis (2)

Example Criteria Example DefinitionUrgency • Does this project respond to the urgency of the local needs?

Technical Aspects • Are technical skills available for the projects?

Cost • Does the project cost meet the budget?

Policy Prioritization • Does the project meet the prioritization of policy?

Beneficiaries • Does this project benefit a large number of people?

Sustainability • Does the project include the consideration of methods/outputs that can be sustained by the target group?

Gender • Does the project contribute to improving the situation for women?

Environmental Aspects • Is the project free from negative impact on the environment?

Feasibility • Does the project consider the adequate project implementation and supervision arrangements to complete within the project period?

15

Q&A

Any questions in relation to Session 8?

16

Thank You