relationship between monitoring, evaluation, accountability and

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MONITORING, EVALUATION,

ACCOUNTABILITY AND SERVICE QUALITY IN WATER PROJECTS

Dr. Patrick Joseph Owuori, PhD, *

Dr. Judith Bwonya, PhD,

Saronge Ngala

Bonnyventure,

Prof. Evans Aosa, PhD,

Dr. Eng. Patrick Joseph Owuori, PhD, MBA, BSc (Eng. Civil), PE, MIEK, MCIArb

Dr. Judith Bwonya, MB ChB, MPH, PhD, MBS

Saronge Ngala Bonnyventure

Prof. Evans Aosa, PhD, Professor, Strategic Management, Department of Business

Administration, School of Business, University of Nairobi, Kenya

Publication Date: April 2022

ABSTRACT

The success of projects plays a key role in achieving organization growth and development. For

the project success to be realized, it requires project monitoring and evaluation exercise. This

adds value to the overall efficiency of project planning, management and implementation by

offering corrective action to the variances from the expected standard. Monitoring and

evaluation systems can aid in promoting greater transparency and accountability within

organizations and governments. Monitoring and evaluation can be done at the project, program,

or policy levels. This paper aimed at establishing the contribution of M&E in promoting

effective service delivery, focusing on three variables for measuring the contribution of M&E

on service delivery. The study considered factors like management decisions, accountability,

efficiency, effectiveness and transparency as important measures of service quality. There is a

growing recognition that takes a stance on service delivery stating that, in order to improve

public service delivery, it is not enough to concentrate merely on the monitoring and evaluation

mechanisms. When privatizing water systems, a project evaluation might involve the

assessment of the improvement in water fee collection rates for instance. Generating and using

information on the performance of service providers by both government and non-governmental

actors can lead to substantial enhancement of public transparency and accountability, which in

turn fosters adherence to higher quality standards in service delivery. The discussion from the

paper will enable organizations adopt best practices in improving the service delivery. The paper

elucidates that in order to improve service delivery, there is need to ensure improved

infrastructure and equipment, better technical capacity and internal reforms, which all are

complementary to building capacity for greater accountability. The paper recommends on the

need for examining the roles or influences of monitoring practices that have not been covered

in the study on sharing and transferring project management skills, cognitive skills, technical

skills, human skills within or outside organizations projects.

Key words: Impact Evaluation, Performance, Public Services, Service Delivery, Organisations.

PROJECT

MANAGEMENT

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

1.1 Introduction

Monitoring and evaluation is an integral part of the project’s design, implementation and

completion (Chaplowe, 2008). Monitoring and evaluation entails tracking the performance of

programmes, policies, and projects with ongoing assessments of costs, deliverables, and

timelines to ensure that implementation is accomplished as planned (Haque & Khan 2014).

Monitoring and evaluation as a management tool for efficient governance has become an

important source of learning to improve planning, service delivery, and ideal appointment of

resources (Abrahams, 2015). With the arrival of globalisation, there are developing

requirements for social entities and associations around the globe to be more receptive to the

requirements of stakeholders for competitive governance, transparency, accountability, more

viable improvement, and conveyance of substantial outcomes (Haque & Khan, 2014). Although

monitoring and evaluation are not of inherent value by themselves, the information they provide

is significant to improving performance (Mackay, 2010), which helps in learning from

what/how we are doing or have done by focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance

and sustainability (Hunter, 2009). Naidoo (2011) argued that a sound M&E should not just

improve compliance, it should also enhance the reflective capacity of organisations, whilst

simultaneously increasing transparency, accountability and supporting a culture of learning.

Monitoring and evaluation systems vary with type, sector and country of application (Pearce,

Robinson & Subramanian, 2002; Fitzgerald, Posner & Workman, 2009). Rural areas in Africa

remain severely disadvantaged without sustainable water supply projects. Only 47% of the

rural population of sub-Saharan Africa has access to an improved water source

(WHO/UNICEF 2015). Regionally, poor performance of projects has been attributed to the

lack of project monitoring and evaluation practices including planning (Ihuah & Kakulu, 2014).

Sustaining a functional rural water supply infrastructure has been a challenge in Sub-Saharan

Africa. In Tanzania, nearly half of rural water points are not functional and about 20% of newly

constructed water points become non- functional within one year due to lack of monitoring and

evaluation practices and specifically planning. Rural citizens soon return to traditional,

unimproved water sources and endanger their health and well-being (Gine & Perez-Foguet,

2008). The performance and sustainability of water supply projects has been prophesied as a

promising direction for a variety of communities in Kenya (Dube, 2012) Formal monitoring

and evaluation systems as practiced in Kenya have not fully been incorporated in the

government projects control systems (Abdulkadir, 2014). Kenya’s Vision 2030 has an

ambitious target of ensuring universal access to water and improved sanitation services by the

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

year 2030. This aspiration is also reflected in the Kenya Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene

Policy (KESHP) 2016 - 2030 that aims at ensuring 100% access to improved sanitation services

by 2030 (Republic of Kenya, 2016).

1.2 Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) has become an increasingly important tool within global

efforts toward achieving environmental, economic and social sustainability through acting as

a check and balance machinery in the process of projects and programs implementation

(OECD, 2015b). Monitoring and Evaluation is a combination of two processes which are

different yet complementary (Gorgens & Kusek, 2009). It is a process of systematically

collecting and analyzing information of ongoing project and comparison of the project

outcome/impact against the project intentions (Hunter, 2009).

Monitoring and evaluation include the proper management of budgets and personnel and legal

and regulatory compliance with processes and procedures, where deviation from any of the

standards invites censure (Phiri, 2015). However, Tuckerman (2008) contradicts the statement

by insisting that the propensity for M&E to be utilised in decision making is higher when

administrators and policymakers hold M&E in high regard, creating a conducive atmosphere

for good governance. Monitoring and evaluation is a major success factor for a project (Ika et

al, 2012).

Ramothamo (2013) argues that each M&E entity that functions at different levels and each

function should be tied to specific time. Time, cost and quality are, however, the predominant

performance evaluation dimensions. Another interesting way of evaluating project

performance is through common sets of indicators (Pheng & Chuan, 2006). Hwang and Lim

(2013) argue that monitoring and evaluating practices, fund management and activity

scheduling could result in the success of the project at hand. Additionally, Kyriakopoulos

(2011) elucidates that it is very important to carry out frequent monitoring and perform focused

reviews involving all the stakeholders in keeping the project on track. Finally, during project

closeout, monitoring and evaluation just like other management activities is less intensified

compared to the execution stage. Most of the monitoring activities during this stage involve

reporting on the project outcome and preparing for future projects (Kyriakopoulos, 2011; May,

2011; Müller & Turner, 2007; Khang & Moe, 2008). Failure to implement projects successfully

can result in unintended outcomes and impacts. This success requires an all-inclusive

stakeholder monitoring and evaluation framework approach. Yet this is often lacking,

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

ultimately leaving most of the already started projects to tarry from implementation (Kyalo &

Muturi, 2015).

1.3 Accountability

Accountability encompasses the acknowledgement and assumption of responsibility for

actions, decisions and policies (Mulgan, 2000). Goetz (2005) argues that to define

accountability principles means to define who has the power to call for an account and who is

obligated to give an explanation for their actions. Accountability is also the appropriate

accounting policies that strengthen account-giving relationships among individuals, especially

in a governing system. Accountability could be broadly classified into seven types: moral,

administrative, political, managerial, legal/judicial, constituency relations and professional

(Busuioc & Lodge 2016). Accountability in M&E is associated with auditing, compliance and

performance management by oversighting (Cook, 2006). Mackay (2009) suggests that

monitoring and evaluation is necessary to achieve evidence-based policy-making, management

and accountability.

Accountability has been seen as a means to achieve particular conceptions of government or

public service (Lodge & Stirton 2010; Hood, 2010). According to Milward and Provan (2006)

accountability in this sense is seen as two-sided, implying both a willingness to take

responsibility for one’s action and an expectation that these actions will be recognized.

Accountability can also be defined differently based upon social, political, cultural and

institutional conditions (Dubnick & Frederickson, 2011a). To explain and to justify their

conduct, public organizations release information about their actions to the public. Thus,

accountability is often seen as ‘’transparency’ of information. In addition to definitions of the

concept, a variety of frameworks for understanding accountability and its relationships has

developed (Brandsma & Schillemans, 2013). The majority talk about a conflicting nature of

accountability to which managers have to respond (Schillemans & Bovens, 2011).

1.4 Service Quality

Service quality dimensions have been seen as critical for the success of organizations because

of their close link with customer satisfaction (Tan, Oriande & Fallo, 2014) and more so in the

service industry. Several empirical studies (Nimako, Gyamfi, Mumuni & Wandaogou 2013;

Uddin & Bilkis; 2012) indicate that perceived service quality is the antecedent of customer

satisfaction, gives direct and indirect effects on behavioral intentions and positively influences

customer satisfaction. Jiang and Wang (2006) define service quality as the consumer’s

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

evaluation of the service performance received and how it compared with their expectation.

Despite the variety of definitions of service quality, most of the authors agree that service

quality is a multidimensional construct due to its elusive nature.

Service quality has been defined as a form of consumers’ attitudes toward a specific service

and their overall evaluation of the service provided (Iqbal, Ahmad & Nasim, 2016). Service

firms should therefore, deliver flawless service in order to satisfy potential customers. The

widely used definition of service quality is the difference between consumers’ perceptions of

the services provided by a service firm and their expectations toward that service. This

definition was the most cited definition by the other researchers for defining service quality

(Mestrovic, 2017; Ismail and Yunan, 2016; Iqbal et al., 2016; Kaushal, 2016). This definition

implies that, when consumers’ perception exceed their expectations, they are satisfied and the

service firm delivers superior service, while when consumers’ perception is less than their

expectations, this indicates that consumers are dissatisfied with the service and the firm

provides an inferior service.

Service quality can differentiate service firms from one another by providing a long-lasting

competitive advantage (Boshoff & Gray, 2004). In order to succeed in a competitive

environment, service firms must focus on the standard of service they provide (Chen & Li,

2017). Service quality is a perceived judgement resulting from the assessment of the expected

service compared with the perceived service (Chawla & Sharma, 2017), thus it is determined

by subjective evaluation of the perceived service rather than objective assessment (Chen, Li,

& Liu, 2017).

Recognizing dimensions of service quality and the importance of each of these dimensions for

customer as well as expectations and perception analysis in relation to each of these dimensions

is the first step in providing service with quality to customers (Kimasi, Karimi & Rastian

Ardestani, 2014). Service quality is one of the significant structures that explain and justify

behavioral objectives related to future and desired effects on the financial results and

consequences of a company. Considering the importance of service quality, it is no wonder that

many researchers have dedicated themselves to understanding its dimensions (Nejadjavad &

Gilaninia, 2016).

Service quality is a multi-dimensional construct (Kouthouris & Alexandris, 2005, thereby,

Kang and James (2004) suggest that consumers use similar criteria in order to evaluate the

quality of service regardless of its type. They argue that these criteria fall into 10 categories

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

called service quality determinants: Reliability, Responsiveness, Competence, Access,

Courtesy, Communication, Security, Credibility, Understanding and Tangibles. Due to the

overlapping between some of these dimensions, the 10 categories were condensed into five

dimensions (Reliability, Tangibility, Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy) that make up

SERVQUAL, which is the instrument they proposed to measure service quality. It is important

to note that SERVQUAL only measure functional quality that is perceived by consumers in

order to evaluate the service (Kaushal, 2016).

1.5 Objectives

The paper sought to establish the relationship between monitoring, evaluation, accountability

and service quality.

2.1 Theoretical Underpinning

2.2 Theory of Change

Theory of Change (ToC) traces its origin from the 1950s with Kirkpatrick’s famous model.

Theory of change is part of the program theory that emerged in the 1990s as an improvement

to the evaluation theory (Stein &Valters, 2012). The focus of this theory is on how to bring

about change, and who is responsible for the change. Program theory provides tools to control

influential areas in monitoring and evaluation (Müller & Turner, 2007). The theory of change

gives tools to determine areas of impact in evaluation (Müller & Turner, 2007).

Theory of Change (ToC) makes organizations think about planning in a different way from the

traditional planning practices such as the logic models (Taplin, Clark, Collins & Colby, 2013).

Theory of Change is used as a project management technique (Bisits-Bullen, 2014). In other

cases, it is brought to life by other tools such as the Logical Framework Approach (Bakewell

& Garbutt, 2005). Theory of Change is used by a wide range of actors in the development

community, both donor and implementing agencies (Vogel, 2012).

Using the theory of change, M&E practices can be regarded as inputs whose outcome will be

visible in more effective M&E systems. The theory of change can indicate which aspects of

implementation need to be checked for quality, to help distinguish between implementation

failure and theory failure. It also provides a basis for identifying where along the impact

pathway (or causal chain), an intervention may stop working. The theory is applied in the input

output model to monitor performance, communicate findings and improve project

performance.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

2.3 Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Service Quality

Mardini, Pramuka and Putri (2020) examined the relationship between accountability,

transparency, service quality and loyalty and established that accountability, transparency, and

service quality have a significant and positive effect towards loyalty of zakat payers.

Quantitative approach was used to collect primary data. The data was collected using

questionnaires. Convenience sampling method was used. Data was analyzed using multiple

regression analysis.

Sofyani, Riyadh and Fahlevi (2020) studied way of improving service quality, accountability

and transparency of local government. Data was gathered through questionnaires distributed

directly to the respondents. The respondents are LGOs employees who are involved with e-

government implementation. The number of distributed questionnaires was 200, but there were

only 141 returned and analyzed. The partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-

SEM) was utilized to analyze the data. The results of this study demonstrate that the culture of

compliance in information technology (IT) associates with service quality, accountability, and

transparency indirectly through effective IT governance (ITG). Sofyani and Dwirama (2018)

have investigated the level of information disclosure on local government websites in

Indonesia. They found that local government websites have not fully provided important and

sufficient information for the public.

Olatokun and Ojo (2014) did a study on the influence of service quality on consumers’

satisfaction with mobile telecommunication services in Nigeria. Using survey design, the study

assessed customer satisfaction with mobile telecommunication services in Ibadan, a Nigerian

municipality. A structured questionnaire, consisting of SERVQUAL dimensions of reliability,

responsiveness, assurance, empathy and tangibility, was used to collect data. Convenience

sampling technique was used to select 431 mobile telecommunication users to measure their

satisfaction level. Findings revealed responsiveness, assurance and empathy to be significant

in explaining customer satisfaction. Aliata, Ojera and Mise (2016) study revealed that service

quality significantly contributed to customer satisfaction. The study examined the relationship

between service quality and customer satisfaction of commercial bank customers, Nairobi

Kenya. A sample of 384 was drawn using proportionate stratified random sampling technique.

Rezania, Baker and Nixon (2019) explored project managers’ accountability. The study was

guided by critical realism as a philosophy of science. Desk information on the existing project

management accountability literature was used. The study results revealed that practice of

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

socializing accountability through face-to-face negotiation and symmetries of power due to

interdependencies happen to some extent in management of projects. It was evidence that there

was ambidexterity in accountability in project-based organizations.

Wilson, Bernard and Wario (2020) studied the effects of monitoring and evaluation framework

on performance of public sector. The study was a case study design adopting a quantitative and

qualitative approach. Target population of 73 where by a sample of 62 respondents was used.

Questionnaire and interview were used to collect data for the study. Descriptive statistics and

Pearson's correlation coefficient were used. The findings revealed a high influence of M&E on

performance of Ministry of Mining and a strong positive relationship between M&E

Framework and Performance of Ministry of Mining.

Ojok and Basheka (2016) study on effectiveness of the role of public sector monitoring and

evaluation in promoting good governance revealed that M&E accountability, M&E

management decision and M&E organisation learning had significant roles in promoting good

governance in the Ministry of Local Government. The study employed a case study design in

collecting quantitative and qualitative data, used descriptive and inferential statistics to analyse

data. Naidoo (2011) examined the role of M&E in promoting good governance in a department

of Gender in South Africa and established that whilst information has been generated through

different forms of M&E, without effective follow-through by decision-makers, it generated

transparency not accountability.

Al-Azzam (2015) studied the impact of service quality on customer satisfaction: a field study

of Arab Bank in Irbid City, Jordan. The study used the model of service quality with five

dimensions to evaluate its effect on the customer satisfaction. The results indicated that the

higher the service quality, the more the customer’s satisfaction. Rahhal (2015) evaluated the

effects of service quality on customer satisfaction: an empirical investigation in Syrian Mobile

Telecommunication Services. Convenience sampling was used to select 600 mobile phone

service users and was distributed among the Damascus and Aleppo. Confirmatory factor

analysis was used in the analysis. The findings of the study showed the direct significant impact

of service quality on customer satisfaction.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

2.4 Conceptual Model

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Extraneous Variable

3.1 Methodology

The paper utilised a qualitative method which is grounded on conceptual analysis, theory

building and literature reviews. The study considered the role of impact of monitoring and

evaluation on service delivery in the water service projects as moderated by accountability.

The paper will be significant to institutions in determining the importance of adopting the best

practices that will create the enabling environment for improved service delivery and

accountability.

4.1 Discussion and Conclusion

The discussion on service quality in public projects has been long overdue. Executives of

service organizations are aware that superior quality would be led to better performance and

have benefits like customer loyalty, responding to their needs, market share growth and

productivity for enterprises. They use the quality of service as a lever to create competitive

advantage. The highest aim of assessment of services quality is focused on physical conditions

(facilities), interpersonal (among employee and customer and customer- customer) and basic

services.

Finally, the Theory of Change provides a profound information on how the planned activities

for specified target persons represents the expected social benefits. The theory will assist

organizations establish funds utilizations plans thereby improving service delivery systems.

The M & E practices are the basic inputs, which when utilised well, equates to the processing

Monitoring and Evaluation

Service Quality

Accountability

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

of the inputs and eventually give measurable output. Theory of Change explains the effects of

influencing the input and processes to achieve better output, and yield good results.

The desire to offer services with quality plays a crucial role in service industries such as the

water projects because service quality is vital for the survival and profitability of organizations.

Another point to note is that, while accountability is not a silver bullet, it is a powerful driver

of change and improved performance. To really improve service delivery, it needs to be

accompanied by other elements (such as increased resources, improved infrastructure and

equipment, better technical capacity and internal reforms), which all are complementary to

building capacity for greater accountability.

In conclusion, there is a universal consensus that public service organizations should provide

efficient services to the public. However, how do these organizations determine what works

and what does not work in order to provide satisfactory services? This paper has attempted to

illustrate the role of monitoring and evaluation in ensuring accountability in the service

delivery. The discussion from the paper will enable organizations adopt best practices in

improving the services delivery. From the paper, it is thus evident that the role of monitoring

and evaluation through intervention of accountability is rapidly emerging as the prevailing

international standard to evaluate policies and programs in public service organizations in order

to enhance efficient delivery of services. This paper harmonizes with other empirical evidences

that illustrate the significance and the role of accountability on monitoring and evaluation as a

management tool for improving service delivery within organizations, particularly in the public

sector.

The paper recommends the need for examining the roles or influences of monitoring practices

that have not been covered in the study on sharing and transferring project management skills,

cognitive skills, technical skills, human skills within or outside organizations projects.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

REFERENCES

Abdulkadir, H. S. (2014). Challenges of implementing internal control systems in Non-

Governmental Organizations (NGO) in Kenya: A case of Faith-Based Organizations

(FBO) in Coast Region. Journal of Business and Management, 16(3), 57-62.

Abrahams, M. A. (2015). A review of the growth of monitoring and evaluation in South Africa:

Monitoring and evaluation as a profession, an industry and a governance tool. African

evaluation journal, 3(1), 8.

Al-Azzam, A. F. M. (2015). The impact of service quality dimensions on customer satisfaction:

A field study of Arab bank in Irbid city, Jordan. European Journal of Business and

Management, 7(15), 45-53.

Aliata, V. L., Ojera, P. B., & Mise, J. K. (2016). Relationship between Service quality and

customer satisfaction of commercial bank customers, Nairobi Kenya. iJARS

International Journal of Management & Corporate Affairs, 2(5), 27-47.

Bakewell, O., & Garbutt, A. (2005). The use and abuse of the logical framework

approach Swedish international development cooperation agency. Stockholm: SIDA

Bisits Bullen, P. A. (2011). The positive deviance/hearth approach to reducing child

malnutrition: systematic review. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 16(11),

1354-1366.

Boshoff, C., & Gray, B. (2004). The relationships between service quality, customer

satisfaction and buying intentions in the private hospital industry. South African journal

of business management, 35(4), 27-37.

Brandsma, G. J., & Schillemans, T. (2013). The accountability cube: Measuring

accountability. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4), 953-975.

Busuioc, E. M., & Lodge, M. (2016). The reputational basis of public accountability.

Governance, 29(2), 247-263.

Chaplowe, S. G. (2008). Monitoring and evaluation planning. American Red Cross/CRS M&E

Module Series, American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Washington,

DC and Baltimore, MD.

Chawla, S., & Sharma, P. (2017). An assessment of service quality among general insurance

policyholders in Punjab: An empirical study. IUP Journal of Management

Research, 16(1), 47.

Chen, L., Li, Y. Q., & Liu, C. H. (2019). How airline service quality determines the quantity

of repurchase intention-Mediate and moderate effects of brand quality and perceived

value. Journal of Air Transport Management, 75, 185-197.

Cook, K. J. (2006). Doing difference and accountability in restorative justice

conferences. Theoretical Criminology, 10(1), 107-124.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

Dube, T. (2012). Emerging issues on the Sustainability of the Community Based Rural Water

Resources Management Approach. International. Journal of Sustainable

Development, 1(3), 46-64.

Dubnick, M., & Frederickson, H. G. (2011). Public accountability: Performance measurement,

the extended state, and the search for trust. National Academy of Public Administration

& The Kettering Foundation. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1875024

Fitzgerald, M., Posner, J., & Workman, A. (2009). Monitoring and Evaluation of NGO

Capacity Building Interventions in Conflict Affected Settings.

Giné, R., & Pérez‐Foguet, A. (2008). Sustainability assessment of national rural water supply

program in Tanzania. In Natural Resources Forum, 32 (4), 327-342.

Gorgens, M., & Kusek, J. Z. (2009). Making Monitoring and Evaluation Systems Work: A

Capacity Development Toolkit. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Haque, M. A., & Khan, M. M. (2014). Good Governance Project in Nepal: In Search of a

Demand-Side Good Governance Theory for Evaluation. Dynamics of Public

Administration, 31(1), 30-46.

Hood, C. (2010). Accountability and transparency: Siamese twins, matching parts, awkward

couple?. West European Politics, 33(5), 989-1009.

Hunter, J. (2009). Monitoring and Evaluation: Are We Making a Difference?. Namibia

Institute for Democracy.

Ihuah, P. W., & Kakulu, I. I. (2014). Rural water supply projects and sustainable development

in Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 16(1), 56-68.

Ika, L. A. (2012). Project management for development in Africa: Why projects are failing and

what can be done about it. Project management journal, 43(4), 27-41.

Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, B., & Nasim, A. (2016). A Gender-Based Approach: Service Quality and

Customer’s Loyalty. International Journal of Management, Accounting and

Economics, 3(12), 822-836.

Ismail, A., & Yunan, Y. M. (2016). Service quality as a predictor of customer satisfaction and

customer loyalty. LogForum, 12(4), 269-283.

Jiang, Y., & Wang, C. L. (2006). The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction: the

moderation of service contexts. Journal of Services Marketing, 20 (4), 211-218

Kang, G. D., & James, J. (2004). Service quality dimensions: an examination of Grönroos’s

service quality model. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 14 (4),

266-277.

Kaushal, S. K. (2016). Service quality expectations and perceptions of patients towards health

care services. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 13(4), 5-18.

Khang, D. B., & Moe, T. L. (2008). Success criteria and factors for international development

projects: A life-cycle-based framework. Project management journal, 39(1), 72-84.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

Kimasi, M., Karimi, A., & Rastian Ardestani, H. (2014). Evaluation of service quality in

routine diagnostic laboratories of Tehran using SERVIMPERF Model. Journal of

School of Public Health and Institute of Health Research, 12(4), 29-42.

Kouthouris, C., & Alexandris, K. (2005). Can service quality predict customer satisfaction and

behavioral intentions in the sport tourism industry? An application of the SERVQUAL

model in an outdoors setting. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 10(2), 101-111.

Kyalo, J. K., & Muturi, W. (2015). Factors Affecting Completion of Government Funded

Projects, a Survey of Projects in the Ministry of Water and Environment. Journal of

Economics and Sustainable Development, 6(8), 177184.

Kyriakopoulos, G. L. (2011). Project management (PM) prosperity: A second half of the 20th

century literature review. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 1(1), 64.

Lodge, M., & Stirton, L. (2010). Accountability in the regulatory state. In The Oxford

handbook of regulation. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560219.003.0015

Mackay, K. (2009). Building monitoring and evaluation systems to improve government

performance. Country-led monitoring and evaluation systems, 169.

Mackay, K. (2010). Conceptual Framework for Monitoring and Evaluation. PREM Notes and

Special Series on the Nuts and Bolts of Government M&E Systems; No. 1. World Bank,

Mardini, I. A., Pramuka, B. A., & Putri, N. K. (2020). The Effect of Accountability,

Transparency, And Service Quality Toward Loyalty of Zakat Payers. Oikonomika:

Jurnal Kajian Ekonomi dan Keuangan Syariah, 1(2), 51-67.

May, C. C. M. (2011). Development of a project management methodology for use in a

university-industry collaborative research environment (Doctoral dissertation, Tesis

Doktor Falsafah. University Nottigham).

Meštrović, D. (2017). Service quality, students’ satisfaction and behavioural intentions in stem

and ic higher education institutions. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems:

INDECS, 15(1), 66-77.

Mulgan, R. (2000). Accountability: An ever‐expanding concept?. Public

administration, 78(3), 555-573.

Müller, R., & Turner, R. (2007). The influence of project managers on project success criteria

and project success by type of project. European management journal, 25(4), 298-309.

Naidoo, I. A. (2011). The role of monitoring and evaluation in promoting good governance in

South Africa: A case study of the Department of Social Development. Johannesburg:

University of Witwatersrand.

Nejadjavad, M., & Gilaninia, S. (2016). The role of service quality in organizations. Kuwait

Chapter of the Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(7), 19.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

Nimako, S. G., Gyamfi, N. K., & Wandaogou, A. M. M. (2013). Customer satisfaction with

internet banking service quality in the Ghanaian banking industry. International

journal of scientific & technology research, 2(7), 165-175.

OECD (2015b). National Climate Change Adaptation: Emerging Practices in Monitoring and

Evaluation, OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from

https://www.oecd.org/env/cc/national-climate-change-adaptation-9789264229679-

en.htm

Ojok, J., & Basheka, B. C. (2016). Measuring the effective role of public sector monitoring

and evaluation in promoting good governance in Uganda: Implications from the

Ministry of Local Government. Africa’s Public Service Delivery & Performance

Review, 4(3), 410-439.

Olatokun, W. M., & Ojo, F. O. (2016). Influence of service quality on consumers’ satisfaction

with mobile telecommunication services in Nigeria. Information Development, 32(3),

398-408.

Pearce, J. A., Robinson, R. B., & Subramanian, R. (2000). Strategic management:

Formulation, implementation, and control. Columbus, OH: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Pheng, L. S., & Chuan, Q. T. (2006). Environmental factors and work performance of project

managers in the construction industry. International journal of project

management, 24(1), 24-37.

Phiri, B. (2015). Influence of monitoring and evaluation on project performance: A Case of

African Virtual University, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).

Ramothamo, S. S. (2013). Monitoring and evaluation of HIV/AIDS donor funded projects in

Maseru: an analysis of six organisations (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch:

Stellenbosch University).

Republic of Kenya. Kenya Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene Policy 2016-2030, 2016.

Available on

https://www.wsp.org/sites/wsp/files/publications/Kenya%20Environmental%20Sanita

tion%20and%20Hygiene%20Policy.pdf

Rezania, D., Baker, R., & Nixon, A. (2019). Exploring project managers’

accountability. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, International

Journal of Managing Projects in Business,12(2)

Schillemans, T., & Bovens, M. (2011). The Challenge of Multiple Accountability. Accountable

governance: Problems and promises, 3-21.

Sofyani, H., & Dwirama, V. (2018). Determinants financial and-non-financial information

disclosure in Indonesian local government. Yogyakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah

Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

Sofyani, H., Riyadh, H. A., & Fahlevi, H. (2020). Improving service quality, accountability

and transparency of local government: The intervening role of information technology

governance. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1735690.

African Journal of Emerging Issues (AJOEI). Online ISSN: 2663-9335, Vol (4), Issue 3, Pg. 83-97

Stein, D., & Valters, C. (2012). Understanding theory of change in international development.

Justice and Security Research Programme, International Development Department,

London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.

Tan, Q., Oriade, A., & Fallon, P. (2014). Service quality and customer satisfaction in Chinese

fast food sector: A proposal for CFFRSERV. Advances in Hospitality and Tourism

Research (AHTR), 2(1), 30-53.

Taplin, D. H., Clark, H., Collins, E., & Colby, D. C. (2013). Theory of change. Technical

papers: a series of papers to support development of theories of change based on

practice in the field. Acknowledge, New York, NY, USA.

Tuckermann, B. C. (2008). Challenges and key success factors to integrating learning and

change in monitoring and evaluation of development projects. Knowledge management

for development journal, 4(1), 21-30.

Uddin, M. B., & Akhter, B. (2012). Customer satisfaction in mobile phone services in

Bangladesh: A survey research. Management & Marketing Journal, 10(1).

van Graan, J., & Ukpere, W. I. (2012). The role of impact evaluation on service delivery within

the public sector organizations. African Journal of Business Management, 6(39),

10458-10463.

Vogel, I. (2012). Review of the Use of ‘Theory of Change’ in International Development, 1–

86. UK: Department for International Development (DFID).

WHO/UNICEF Joint Water Supply, & Sanitation Monitoring Programme. (2015). Progress

on sanitation and drinking water: 2015 update and MDG assessment. World Health

Organization.

Wilson, M. A., Bernard, O., & Wario, W. (2020). Effects of Monitoring and Evaluation

Framework on Performance of Public Sector: A Case of Ministry of Mining in

Tanzania. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 3(8), 121-133