The arguments for the monitoring and evaluation of adult literacy and basic education programs are no different from those justifying monitoring and evaluation of any other educational program. The priority and status accorded different programs are likely to determine commitment to their internal and external evaluation and the form that these take. Explanations for not identifying common procedures for monitoring and evaluation are expressed in terms of complexities at program and project levels and imply limitations of evaluative procedures. However, common procedures are conceivable for monitoring and evaluation of other, equally diverse, educational projects and programs. Therefore, it is also technically conceivable in this case. Explanations for agency and government failure to introduce systematic monitoring and evaluation procedures include lack of awareness of the relevance of monitoring for effective project execution and of the importance of evaluation to future policy formulation. Structural constraints most likely explain the infrequency and lack of system in monitoring and evaluation procedures. Evaluation schemes to date have included assessment of the acquisition of the core skills of literacy and numeracy and required careful planning. A proposed common approach to evaluation would be a process by which participants have a part in systematically reviewing all stages of a literacy or basic education project and its contribution to wider sectoral objectives. (Contains 32 references.) (YLB)