Monitoring is a continuous evaluation that aims to provide all stakeholders with early detailed information on the progress or delay of ongoing evaluated activities.[1]​ It is a supervision of the implementation stage of the activity. Its purpose is to determine whether planned results, deliverables, and schedules have been achieved so that action can be taken to correct deficiencies as quickly as possible.

Good planning, combined with effective monitoring and evaluation, can play an important role in improving the effectiveness of development programs and projects. Good planning helps focus on the outcomes that matter, while monitoring and evaluation helps us learn from past successes and challenges and inform decision-making so that current and future initiatives can improve people's lives and expand their options.[4]​.

In monitoring, feedback and recommendation are inevitable for the project manager, but in evaluation, this is not the case.

The common ground for monitoring and evaluation is that they are both management tools. For monitoring, the collection of data and information to track progress in accordance with the terms of reference is collected periodically, which is not the case in evaluations for which the collection of data and information is carried out during or in view of the evaluation. Monitoring is a short-term evaluation and does not take into consideration results and impact unlike the evaluation process which also evaluates results and sometimes long-term impact. This impact assessment sometimes occurs after the end of a project, although it is rare due to its cost and the difficulty of determining whether the project is responsible for the observed results.[2]​

Evaluation is a systematic and objective examination that is carried out monthly and/or annually, unlike monitoring, which is a continuous evaluation that provides interested parties with early information. Monitoring controls on all activities [in the last stage of implementation] unlike Evaluation, which involves information on whether donated funds are well managed and spent transparently.

Although evaluations are often retrospective, their purpose is essentially to look into the future. The evaluation applies the lessons and recommendations to decisions about current and future programs. Evaluations can also be used to promote new projects, obtain support from governments, raise funds from public or private institutions and inform the general public about different activities.[2]​.

The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in February 2005 and the follow-up meeting in Accra underlined the importance of the evaluation process and ownership of its conduct by project host countries. Many developing countries now have M&E systems and the trend is growing.[5]​.

The credibility of findings and evaluations depends largely on the way in which monitoring and evaluation is carried out. To evaluate performance, it is necessary to select, before project implementation, indicators that allow specific products and results to be qualified. According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), a results indicator has two components: the baseline, which is the situation before the program or project begins, and the objective, which is the expected situation at the end of the project. An output indicator that does not have any baseline since the purpose of the output is to introduce something that does not yet exist.[6]​.

The most important specialized agencies of the United Nations have a monitoring and evaluation unit. All these agencies are supposed to follow the common standards of the United Nations Evaluation group. These standards refer to the institutional framework and management of the evaluation function, competencies and ethics, and the way of conducting evaluations and reporting (design, process, team selection, implementation, reporting and monitoring). This group also provides guidance and relevant documentation to all evaluation bodies whether part of the United Nations or not.[7]​.

Most agencies implementing projects and programs, even if they follow the common standards of the United Nations Evaluation group, have their own manual and guidelines on how to carry out M&E. In fact, UN agencies have different specializations and have different needs and ways of approaching M&E. The M&E branches of each UN agency are monitored and rated by the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit [8]​.[9]​.

• - Assessment.

• - UN.

Monitoring is a continuous evaluation that aims to provide all stakeholders with early detailed information on the progress or delay of ongoing evaluated activities.[1]​ It is a supervision of the implementation stage of the activity. Its purpose is to determine whether planned results, deliverables, and schedules have been achieved so that action can be taken to correct deficiencies as quickly as possible.

Good planning, combined with effective monitoring and evaluation, can play an important role in improving the effectiveness of development programs and projects. Good planning helps focus on the outcomes that matter, while monitoring and evaluation helps us learn from past successes and challenges and inform decision-making so that current and future initiatives can improve people's lives and expand their options.[4]​.

In monitoring, feedback and recommendation are inevitable for the project manager, but in evaluation, this is not the case.

The common ground for monitoring and evaluation is that they are both management tools. For monitoring, the collection of data and information to track progress in accordance with the terms of reference is collected periodically, which is not the case in evaluations for which the collection of data and information is carried out during or in view of the evaluation. Monitoring is a short-term evaluation and does not take into consideration results and impact unlike the evaluation process which also evaluates results and sometimes long-term impact. This impact assessment sometimes occurs after the end of a project, although it is rare due to its cost and the difficulty of determining whether the project is responsible for the observed results.[2]​

Evaluation is a systematic and objective examination that is carried out monthly and/or annually, unlike monitoring, which is a continuous evaluation that provides interested parties with early information. Monitoring controls on all activities [in the last stage of implementation] unlike Evaluation, which involves information on whether donated funds are well managed and spent transparently.

Although evaluations are often retrospective, their purpose is essentially to look into the future. The evaluation applies the lessons and recommendations to decisions about current and future programs. Evaluations can also be used to promote new projects, obtain support from governments, raise funds from public or private institutions and inform the general public about different activities.[2]​.

The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in February 2005 and the follow-up meeting in Accra underlined the importance of the evaluation process and ownership of its conduct by project host countries. Many developing countries now have M&E systems and the trend is growing.[5]​.

The credibility of findings and evaluations depends largely on the way in which monitoring and evaluation is carried out. To evaluate performance, it is necessary to select, before project implementation, indicators that allow specific products and results to be qualified. According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), a results indicator has two components: the baseline, which is the situation before the program or project begins, and the objective, which is the expected situation at the end of the project. An output indicator that does not have any baseline since the purpose of the output is to introduce something that does not yet exist.[6]​.

The most important specialized agencies of the United Nations have a monitoring and evaluation unit. All these agencies are supposed to follow the common standards of the United Nations Evaluation group. These standards refer to the institutional framework and management of the evaluation function, competencies and ethics, and the way of conducting evaluations and reporting (design, process, team selection, implementation, reporting and monitoring). This group also provides guidance and relevant documentation to all evaluation bodies whether part of the United Nations or not.[7]​.

Most agencies implementing projects and programs, even if they follow the common standards of the United Nations Evaluation group, have their own manual and guidelines on how to carry out M&E. In fact, UN agencies have different specializations and have different needs and ways of approaching M&E. The M&E branches of each UN agency are monitored and rated by the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit [8]​.[9]​.

• - Assessment.

• - UN.