MONITORING, EVALUATION,

ACCOUNTABILITY AND
LEARNING (MEAL DPRO)
PRESENTED TO TAKAFUL ORGANIZATION: MANAGEMENT BOARD

& EXECUTIVE OFFICE

KHALED MOKHTAR
 LOGIC MODELS:

• Logic model:
A systematic, visual way to present a summarized understanding of a
project and how it works.
Types of logic models:
1- Theory of Change (ToC),
2- Results Framework (RF),
3- Logical Framework (Logframe).
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK (LOG-FRAME)

• Log frame
A logic model that describes the key features of the project
(objectives, indicators, measurement methods and assumptions) and
highlights the logical linkages between them. With the inclusion of
these additional items, the Logframe provides the basis for later
developing the MEAL plan.
Log frame template
Log frame template

i on
at
al u
Ev

r i ng
n ito
Mo
 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK (LOG-FRAME)

• Indicators are measures used to track progress, reflect change or assess project
performance.
• Measurement methods identify how the project will gather the data to track the
progress of the indicators.
• Assumptions: as before.
Activities: describe the work that will be conducted to deliver the project outputs.
ASSUMPTIONS (COLUMN 4)
INDICATORS (COLUMN 2)
Are measures used to track progress, reflect change or assess project performance

Objectives Indicator description

statement
Goal Generally No indicator (not single project can achieve)
Strategic objectives Indicators reflect change that is sought, often from a single initiative, among, target
populations.
Intermediate results Indicators reflect the expected change(s) in identifiable behaviors of a specific
group or the expected change(s) in systems, policies or institutions required to
achieve the higher outcome.
Outputs Indicators represent tangible goods and services delivered by the initiative.
Examples: people trained with increased knowledge and skills, quality roads built,
goods delivered and services performed.
Activities Activities indicators are often stated in the activity descriptions
themselves. (activates managed at implementation plan level)
SMART INDICATOR CHECKLIST
 INDICATORS SAMPLE
CHECK PAGE (39-40)

• By Year 3, 40 water points are established (4 per village)

• By Year 3, 10 trained community water boards are operational
• Each quarter, 100 percent of water points managed by community water boards meet WHO
water quality standards
• 100 percent of WASH volunteers can effectively explain WASH principles to IDPs upon
completion of training events
• 40 WASH volunteers pass the certification exam each year
• 1,000 baskets delivered to the families in need.
• At least 50% of the families do not have regular income source.
 DIRECT OR INDIRECT (PROXY) INDICATORS?

• Direct indicators track change by directly examining what you are trying to
measure.
• Indirect or proxy indicators track change by examining markers that are generally
accepted as being proxies for what you are trying to measure.
• For example, the number of group meetings can be used as a proxy measure of
group success.
• Also handwashing practices can use direct indicator like direct observation or a
proxy indicator (the presence of soap and water at latrine locations)
 QUANTITATIVE OR QUALITATIVE INDICATORS?

• Quantitative indicators are measures of quantities or amounts. They help

you measure project progress in the form of numerical information, such as:
Numbers, Percentages. Rates (e.g., birth rate: births per 1,000 population),
Ratios (e.g., gender ratio: number of men to number of women).
• Qualitative indicators measure judgments, opinions, perceptions and
attitudes toward a given situation or subject.
An example of a qualitative indicator might be “Female IDPs feel safe
collecting water from IDP water points.”
MEASUREMENT METHODS (COLUMN 3)

• Measurement methods identify how the project will gather the data
to track the indicators.
• Two categories: quantitative and qualitative.
1- Quantitative methods collect data that can be counted and
subjected to statistical analysis.
2- Qualitative methods capture participants’ experiences using
words, pictures and stories.
 MEASUREMENT METHODS (COLUMN 3)
Strength Weakness
Quantitative ● Scalable ● Results from quantitative methods
methods ● Generalizable sometimes miss the depth and complexity
● Objective less personal bias in the of an issue
collection and analysis of data ● Not suitable for identifying and exploring
● Standardized unanticipated or unexpected factors
● Suited to ICT4D Well-suited to use of
digital devices for data gathering and
analysis.

Qualitative methods ● Provide depth and detail Provide
detailed descriptions of situation,
● Create openness
● Simulate people’s individual
experiences
● Identify the unexpected
● Results are harder to generalize
● Data are relatively difficult to
collect and analyze
● Data are susceptible to the hidden bias of
collectors and participants
● More difficult to transcribe
data directly to digital devices
A MIXED-METHODS

• A mixed-methods (Using both quantitative and qualitative

measurement methods )approach deepens understanding of the
project, providing more comprehensive, integrated data for tracking
progress, analyzing results and making decisions.
• Triangulation The validation of data through cross-verification
of more than two sources.
 CRITICAL THINKING: IDENTIFYING OPPORTUNITIES
TO USE SECONDARY DATA SOURCES

• Primary data come from information collected directly by the project’s team and
stakeholders (provide the most reliable and appropriate data for measuring the
progress of your project).
• Secondary data come from information that is already available through other
published or unpublished sources.
• The advantage of collecting data from secondary sources is that it is more cost
effective and it reduces the risk of duplicating effort. Examples of secondary
data sources include existing records, statistics and reports.
MEASUREMENT METHODS COST-COMPLEXITY
COMPARISON