Making M&E Grassroots
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•990 views
The document is a presentation on making monitoring and evaluation (M&E) accessible to grassroots organizations. It discusses guiding principles for M&E with grassroots groups, including meeting them where they are and building their ability to do their own M&E. It explains the differences between monitoring, evaluation, outputs, outcomes and impact. Challenges to M&E for grassroots groups are addressed, and tips provided on collecting and analyzing data simply and involving the community. The goal is for groups to use M&E for learning and improving programs while not being overburdened by it.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (17)
Similar to Making M&E Grassroots
Similar to Making M&E Grassroots (20)
More from GlobalGiving
More from GlobalGiving (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Making M&E Grassroots
- 1. Making M&E Accessible to Grassroots Organizations Webinar presented to GlobalGiving grantees DRAFT 17 May 2011 Jennifer Lentfer of www.how-matters.org
- 2. Acknowledgements & Thanks Child-focused groups in Lesotho in an M&E training developed specifically for community-based organizations by Insideout/Otherwise. Supported by Firelight Foundation. Photo credit: J. Lentfer
- 5. M&E? RESULTS? FEAR Policing SCRUTINY PRESSURE! End of Funding? Confusion DISTRUST BURDEN
- 6. Monitoring & Evaluation: The International Development Paradigm Objectives Statements Performance Indicator Statements Measurement Methods / Data Sources Goal Strategic Objectives Intermediate Results Outputs Activities Critical Assumptions
- 7. TRUE OR FALSE? 1. A key purpose of M&E is to help organizations assess achievements. 5. The results of grassroots organizations’ work is easy to measure. 3. M&E activities will automatically lead to improved programming. 7. “Knowing” is most accurate when you experience something firsthand. 9. The human dimensions of community work are more important than the numbers. EXERCISE
- 10. M&E: What’s the Difference? Monitoring Evaluation Ongoing process Event that occurs periodically Recordkeeping/Tracking Activities Analyzing results Observing trends Assessing impact Mainly descriptive, recording inputs, outputs, and activities (e.g. How many children received supplementary school feeding?) More analytical and examines processes (e,g. Did implementing school feeding successfully increase attendance levels?) Allows us to make adjustments or corrective actions in a project Informs future programming for all stakeholders Data collection is part of day-to-day management & activities Additional, special data may be collected using research methodologies Is objective and systematic Is objective and systematic
- 11. M&E: What’s the Difference? EXERCISE We monitor… We evaluate… 1. A child’s height and weight. 1. Whether children are growing at a normal rate. 2. The number of weekly visits to chronically ill people. 2. The effectiveness of home-based care. 3. The number of families planting improved crop varieties. 3. An increase/ decrease in food security. 4. The number of people trained in human rights. 4. Whether reports of human rights abuses have increased or decreased and why.
- 12. Choosing M&E Methods Cost Complexity Existing records (e.g. household lists) Routine statistics Focus groups Specific sample surveys Key informant interviews Observation Special or ’point’ studies Keep expectations realistic.
- 13. Making M&E Accessible De-technicalize language. ROADMAP TO MONITORING What are we trying to change? Where do we want to get to? How are we going to get there? What do we expect to happen along the way? OUTPUT OUTCOME IMPACT How do we know we are on the right road? problem analysis goals, objectives strategy, activities RESULTS indicators, baseline, targets
- 14. Making M&E Accessible OUTPUT OUTCOME IMPACT ACTIVITIES Have the activities taken place? The very first result of an activity. Organizations have direct control over this result. What happened next? Change of behavior in participants. Organizations have less control over this result. So what? Change at population/ societal level. Organizations have very little control, if any. RESULTS
- 15. Results: which is which? OUTPUT Have the activities taken place? OUTCOME What happened next? IMPACT So what? ACTIVITY RESULTS Healthier children Children receive more nutritious food School feeding Children weight and height increased ?
- 16. Results: which is which? OUTPUT Have the activities taken place? OUTCOME What happened next? IMPACT So what? ACTIVITY RESULTS HIV+ people visited in their homes Home-based care for HIV+ people HIV+ people live longer HIV+ people have increased BMI and ART adherence ?
- 17. Results: which is which? OUTPUT Have the activities taken place? OUTCOME What happened next? IMPACT So what? ACTIVITY RESULTS Farmers oriented on improved crop varieties More farmers harvesting improved varieties Extension services offered to farmers Increased food security ?
- 18. Results: which is which? OUTPUT Have the activities taken place? OUTCOME What happened next? IMPACT So what? ACTIVITY RESULTS Community members trained in human rights Human rights training Human rights more widely upheld Increased reporting of human rights violations ?
- 22. Challenges? What is your organization facing? What do you anticipate? Staff of child-focused organizations in Zambia engaged in practical exercises during M&E training developed specifically for community-based organizations by Insideout/Otherwise. Supported by Firelight Foundation. Photo credit: J. Lentfer
- 24. Challenges: Reality Check “ Absence of computers to process data and store the information so it can be easily accessed.” “ We now need to be able to cross the river more frequently.”
- 26. Remember: G reat work does not equal great M&E. Poor M&E does not equal poor work. Good luck in your M&E efforts! THANK YOU
Editor's Notes
- Keywords: monitoring, evaluation, M&E, GlobalGiving, Jennifer Lentfer, how-matters.org, international aid, philanthropy, organizational development, grassroots organizations, community-based organizations
- to interact with fellow participants focus on sharing experiences and problem-solving
- Not just an extraneous tool Most important – INCREASED CONFIDENCE articulate their successes and challenges and to mobilize resources to sustain their programs Help grantees tell their own story - build c onfidence in asking “so what?”
- Baggage exists – inaccessibility of M&E paradigm
- 13 M&E – research discipline, project-based Example: Would YOU know how to measure % of children age 6-59 months below -2 z score wt/ht?
- by supporting organizational development where they are - i.e. having realistic and appropriate expectations depending on the capacity level of a partner Can’t stress the importance of realizing the difference between your donors’ information needs and those of your grantees. Though inexorably linked, strengthening the capacity of grantee-partners to monitor and evaluate their programs is not equivalent to fulfilling Firelight’s information needs about our own theory of change and advocacy. Therefore, the two initiatives will inform each other, but be carried out separately.
- Impact - such a loaded & over-used word communities can see ‘impact’ even if it’s difficult to describe…
- Monitoring is a process that systematically observes events and activities related to our work. When we monitor, we gather information regularly to check our progress. Evaluation , on the other hand, is the assessment of a program’s relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and impact on the target population and beneficiaries. We evaluate periodically .
- Exercise – read for response A child’s height and weight. Whether children are growing at a normal rate. The effectiveness of home-based care. The number of weekly visits to chronically ill people. An increase/ decrease in food security. The number of families planting improved crop varieties. The number of people trained in human rights. Whether reports of human rights abuses have increased or decreased and why.
- This slide shows the trade-offs in cost and complexity among different methods of data collection. Can also think of M&E as regular/routine (part of everyday duties such as beneficiary records) or special/periodic (which require additional time, resources, planning such as household surveys) Consider the level of financial/human resources available. The effort expended should match the improvement in decision-making.
- These are abstract concepts - but understandable. Your logic does not equal your partners - other ways of knowing exist that are not empirical Aims to build grantees’ capacity to measure their own progress in a more meaningful way. Training is practical and experiential, to apply principles to organizations’ day-to-day work.
- M&E is about testing assumptions - that should be the new definition of building “evidence” Indicators - completely theoretical concept
- EXERCISE Healthier children Children receive more nutritious food School feeding Children weight and height increased HIV+ people visited in their homes HIV+ people have increased BMI and ART adherence HIV+ people live longer Home-based care for HIV+ people Farmers oriented on improved crop varieties Extension services offered to farmers Increased food security More farmers harvesting improved varieties Community members trained in human rights Human rights more widely upheld Increased reporting of human rights violations Human rights training
- , e.g. who is responsible, when and how often it is needed, how feedback will be shared, etc M&E doesn’t need to be complicated. Use a mix of quantitative (numerical, precise) and qualitative (in-depth, aspects of people’s lives) methods to understand your beneficiaries more fully. This will give us an improved and deeper understandings of how our programs are affecting the lives of the people we serve.
- A ssume nothing – transport (road and water), recordkeeping skills, volunteer staff, basic planning, beneficiary selection, funding insecurity, illiteracy, large catchment areas, financial mgmt the first issue each org different, different capacities/types of programming (e.g. orgs with smaller #s of case work vs. community mobilization) Not surprising considering output-level results are easier to comprehend and directly related to day-to-day activities. Outcomes is the new part.
- already overburdened workloads A ssume nothing – transport (road and water), recordkeeping skills, volunteer staff, basic planning, beneficiary selection, funding insecurity, illiteracy, large catchment areas, financial mgmt the first issue
- it’s about internalizing the importance of M&E – shifts in organizational culture from emergency/crisis mode to planning & reflection More important than standardized administrative procedures, M&E activities constitute an informed process of reflection . Ultimately, M&E must be a learning/management tool for an organization. Process of transformation to a learning organization does not happen overnight. What happens within the organization is the most important factor in “institutionalizing” reflective practices.
- It’s not about the indicators. It’s about reflection and learning . Sing your own praises!