SENN 2013 Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation-130918

Participatory Monitoring and
Evaluation
Dominique Senn, seecon international gmbh
Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 1

Find this presentation and more on www.sswm.info
Copyright & Disclaimer

Copy it, adapt it, use it – but acknowledge the source!
Copyright
Included in the SSWM Toolbox are materials from various organisations and sources. Those materials are open source. Following the open-
source concept for capacity building and non-profit use, copying and adapting is allowed provided proper acknowledgement of the source is
made (see below). The publication of these materials in the SSWM Toolbox does not alter any existing copyrights. Material published in the
SSWM Toolbox for the first time follows the same open-source concept, with all rights remaining with the original authors or producing
organisations.
To view an official copy of the the Creative Commons Attribution Works 3.0 Unported License we build upon, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0. This agreement officially states that:
You are free to:
• Share - to copy, distribute and transmit this document
• Remix - to adapt this document. We would appreciate receiving a copy of any changes that you have made to improve this document.
Under the following conditions:
• Attribution: You must always give the original authors or publishing agencies credit for the document or picture you are using.
Disclaimer
The contents of the SSWM Toolbox reflect the opinions of the respective authors and not necessarily the official opinion of the funding or
supporting partner organisations.
Depending on the initial situations and respective local circumstances, there is no guarantee that single measures described in the toolbox
will make the local water and sanitation system more sustainable. The main aim of the SSWM Toolbox is to be a reference tool to provide
ideas for improving the local water and sanitation situation in a sustainable manner. Results depend largely on the respective situation and
the implementation and combination of the measures described. An in-depth analysis of respective advantages and disadvantages and the
suitability of the measure is necessary in every single case. We do not assume any responsibility for and make no warranty with respect to
the results that may be obtained from the use of the information provided.
Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
3. Steps of a PM&E Process
4. Techniques and Tools for PM&E
5. References

1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Participation (1/3)
Through participation, we lost ‚control‘

of the project and in so doing gained
PARTICIPATIO ownership and sustainability.
N (World Bank Task Manager, Source: THE WORLD BANK 1996)
There is no agreement among planners and managers about what

participation exactly is and why it is important.
Possible definition:
“Participation is a process through which stakeholders influence and
share control over development initiatives and the decisions and
resources which affect them.” (THE WORLD BANK 1996)

1. Introduction
Why participation? PARTICIPATION
For many governments, the United Nations Agencies and

non-governmental organisations (NGOs), participation is considered
to be critical to programme planning and poverty alleviation as a
means to seek sustainability and equity.
(RIFKIN and KANGERE 2002)
Tell me, and I will forget.

Show me, and I may remember.
INVOLVE me, and I will UNDERSTAND.
Source: http://www.drmdk.com/PIx/blackboard-green-clean.png [Accessed: 06.09.2013]

1. Introduction
Why participation? (RIFKIN and KANGERE 2002) PARTICIPATION
• People know what works for them and

professionals need to learn from people.
• People make contributions of resources (money, materials, labour)
for these programmes.
• People become committed to activities that they have helped
develop.
• People can develop skills, knowledge and experience that will aid
them in their future work.

1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Monitoring (1/3)
What is monitoring?
Monitoring is a continuous process of collecting and
MONITORING analysing information to compare how well a
project, programme or policy is being implemented
against expected results.
(INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES 2007)

1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Monitoring (2/3)
What is monitoring?
Compare
Actual state of a project /

programme / policy Expected Results
Sources: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Abandoned_pit_latrine_(2940958117).jpg [Accessed: 06.09.2013];

http://petecodella.com/diy-social-media-monitoring-10001789.htm [Accessed: 05.09.2013]
http://www.wsscc.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/gallery_dl/photo_toilets3_south_africa.jpg [Accessed: 06.09.2013]

1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Monitoring (3/3) MONITORING
Why monitoring?
Monitoring aims at providing managers and major
stakeholders with regular feedback and early indications of progress
or lack thereof in the achievement of intended results.
Monitoring generally
involves collecting and
analysing data on
implementation
processes, strategies
and results, and
recommending
corrective measures.
(INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND RED
CRESCENT SOCIETIES 2007)
The three central elements of monitoring.
Source: http://img.bhs4.com/8a/7/8a723596707a70e55cda39bd9d170b8da41d1597_large.jpg
[Accessed: 06.09.2013]

1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Evaluation (1/2)
What is evaluation?
Evaluation is the systematic and objective
EVALUATION assessment of an ongoing or completed project,
programme or policy, its design, implementation
and results. Evaluation determines the relevance
and fulfilment of objectives, efficiency,
effectiveness, impact and sustainability.
(INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES 2007)
f o b j ectives
ul fi l l ment o
F cy
Efficien
Impact
st ai nability
Su 10
1. Introduction
Outlining the Terms – Evaluation (2/2)
Why evaluation? EVALUATION
An evaluation should provide information that is

credible and useful, so that lessons learnt can be included
into the decision-making process.
(INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND
RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES 2007)
Source: http://www.clearhorizon.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/theproject25percent.jpg
[Accessed: 06.09.2013]


Putting the Pieces Together
MONITORIN
G
AND EVALUATION
PARTICIPATOR
Y


Participation, Monitoring and Evaluation in the Project Cycle
EVALUATION
STAKEHOLDER
PARTICIPATION


Definition
Participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) is a process through

which :
•Stakeholders at various levels
•Engage in monitoring or evaluating a particular project, program or
policy
•Share control over the content, the process and the results of the
monitoring and evaluation activity and
•Engage in taking or identifying corrective actions.
(WORLD BANK 2010)


Stakeholder Groups
The following stakeholder groups are typically involved in PM&E:

• The end users of project goods and services, including both men
and women at the community level
• Intermediary organisations, including NGOs
• Private sector businesses involved in the project
• Government staff at all levels.
(RIETBERGEN-McCRACKEN et al. 1998)


Conventional vs. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
Conventional Participatory(RIETBERGEN-McCRACKEN et al. 1998)
• Outside experts measure • Project stakeholders

performance against pre-set (including local people) are
indicators active participants, not just
• Use of standardised source of information
procedures and tools • Stakeholders evaluate,
outsiders facilitate
• Focus on building stakeholder
capacity for analysis and
problem-solving
• Process builds commitment to
implementing any
recommended corrective
actions


The 4 Steps of a PM&E Process


Step 1: Planning the Process (Adapted from AUBEL 2004)
The planning phase of a PM&E process includes:

•Identification of stakeholder groups to be involved in the planning of
the PM&E process.
•Stakeholders define the objectives of the PM&E, what will be
monitored, how and by whom. This step includes the identification of
relevant indicators. In some cases, a common set of indicators is
developed, while in other instances different stakeholder groups
develop their own sets of indicators.
This requires a lengthy process of negotiation, contestation and
collaborative decision-marking among various stakeholders.


Step 2: Gathering Data (1/2)
Data on implementation processes, strategies and results can be
collected using both quantitative and qualitative methods.
Examples for quantitative methods are community surveys,
interviews and observations.
Conducting interviews in Togo.
Source: SPUHLER (2007)
Community Survey in Vietnam.

Source: http://www.cbm.org/I-can-serve-the-community-better-362538.php# [Accessed: 06.09.2013]


Step 2: Gathering Data (2/2)
Examples for qualitative methods are participatory learning
methods using visual (e.g. rich pictures, locality mapping),
interviewing and group tools (e.g. focus groups, world café) and
exercices.
Locality mapping:
Illustration of
the water,
nutrition and
sanitation
situation in
Mumbai, India,
from the
viewpoint of the
inhabitants.
Source: KROPAC (2009)
World café: A group discussion technique

which facilitates social learning and consensus
finding in relaxed and open discussions.
Picture Source: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1421/624509210_ae8751d3a3.jpg
[Accessed: 07.09.2013]


Step 3: Analysing Data
While data analysis is often thought of as a rather mechanical and

expert-driven task, PM&E should be an opportunity to actively involve
various categories of program stakeholders in the critical analysis of
successes and constraints and the formulation of conclusions and
lessons learned.
Formulation of
Gathered conclusions
Data and lessons
learnt.
Discussion of the results.

Source:
http://www.fauna-flora.org/wp-content/uploads/participatory-data-analysis-cover
-photo.jpg
[Accessed: 07.09.2013]


Step 4: Sharing the Information and Defining Actions to Be Taken
Not all stakeholders can be involved in M&E data collection and
analysis.
 In step 4, the results of preceding M&E activities are shared with
other stakeholders, and there is discussion of appropriate actions to
be taken based on the findings.

A participatory approach to monitoring and evaluation will usually

make use of a number of techniques and tools, selected and combined
to suit the objectives of the M&E work and the resources available.
Many of the techniques associated with Participatory Rural Appraisal
(PRA), Beneficiary Assessment (BA) and SARAR have been used in the
context of monitoring or evaluation.


Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) (1/2)
PRA is an approach used in the field of international development. It
aims to incorporate the knowledge and opinions of rural people in the
planning and management of projects and programmes.
PRA uses a large variety of techniques, including:
•Group dynamics (e.g. learning contracts, role reversals, feedback
sessions)
•Sampling (e.g. transect walks, wealth ranking, social mapping)
•Interviewing (e.g. focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews,
triangulation)
•Visualisation (e.g. Venn diagrams, matrix scoring, timelines)


Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) (2/2)
Social mapping: Maps usually drawn by a group of
villagers either on the ground using chalk or on a large
sheet of paper. The maps provide information about
the physical characteristics of the community, about
the socio-economic conditions and how the participants
perceive their community.
(
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTISPMA/0,,contentMDK:2
0190393~menuPK:415131~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384329~isCURL:Y,00.html
[Accessed: 07.09.2013])
Picture Source: http://youthdevelopmentvoice.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/pra1.jpg

[Accessed: 07.09.2013]
Transect walk: Involves walking with the villagers

through an area and discussing about different
aspects of land-use and agro-ecological zones in the
village observed during the walk.
(MUKHERJEE 1993)
Picture Source: http://www.espa.ac.uk/october-2012-newsletter [Accessed: 07.09.2013]


Beneficiary Assessment
Beneficiary assessment is a qualitative research tool used to improve
the impact of development operations by gaining the views of intended
beneficiaries regarding a planned or ongoing intervention. (SALMEN 1999)
The tools usually used are conversational interviewing and focus group
discussions on changes and impacts.
Focus group discussion with water kiosk

users and vendors in Lusaka, Zambia.
Source: SENN (2012)


SARAR (1/2)
SARAR is an education/training methodology for working with
stakeholders at different levels to engage their creative capacities in
planning, problem solving and evaluation.
The acronym SARAR stands for the five attributes and capacities that
are considered the minimum essentials for participation to be a
dynamic and self-sustaining process.


SARAR (2/2)
A sense of self-worth as a person as well as a
S Self-esteem
valuable resource for development
The capacity to define and work toward a
Associative
A strength
common vision through mutual respect, trust,
and collaborative effort
The capacity to visualise new solutions to
Resourcefulnes
R s
problems even against the odds, and the
willingness to be challenged and take risks
Combining critical thinking and creativity to
come up with new, effective, and reality-based
A Action planning
plans in which each participant has a useful and
fulfilling role
For follow-through until the commitments made
R Responsibility are fully discharged and the hoped-for benefits
achieved

Further M&E Techniques
• Visual self-evaluation tools
• Testimonials
• Photographing the evidence
• Community records and indicators

6. References
AUBEL, J. (2004): Strategic Report 9, Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation for Hygiene Improvement, Beyond the
Toolbox: What else is Required for Effective PM&E? A Literature Review. Washington, D.C.: Office of Health,
Infectious Diseases and Nutrition, Bureau for Global Health U.S. Agency for International Development. URL:
http://www.ehproject.org/PDF/Strategic_papers/SR-9%20Lit%20Rev.pdf [Accessed: 06.09.2013]
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES (Editor) (2007): Monitoring and Evaluation in
a Nutshell. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.
MUKHERJEE, N. (1993): Participatory Rural Appraisal. Methodology and Applications. New Delhi: Ashok Kumar Mittal.
RIETBERGEN-McCRACKEN, J.; NARAYAN, D. ; WORLD BANK (Editor) (1998): Participation and Social Assessment: Tools
and Techniques. Washington: World Bank. URL: http://www.rmportal.net/library/content/tools/biodiversity-
conservation-tools/putting-conservation-in-context-cd/participatory-approaches-resources/1-c.pdf/
at_download/file [Accessed: 06.09.2013]
RIFKIN, S.B., KANGERE, M. (2002): What Is Participation? In: HARTLEY, S. (Editor) (2002): CBR – A Participatory
Strategy in Africa. Based on the Proceedings of a Conference Uganda, September 2001. London: University
College London and Centre for International Child Health. URL:
http://participatory-pages.yolasite.com/resources/Community%20Participation%20basics%5B1%5D.pdf [Accessed:
06.09.2013]
SALMEN, L.F. (1999): Beneficiary Assessment Manual for Social Funds. Washington: The World Bank. URL: http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2000/11/30/000094946_00111505375712/Rendered/
PDF/multi_page.pdf [Accessed: 07.09.2013]
THE WORLD BANK (Editor) (1996): The World Bank Participation Source Book. Washington: World Bank. URL:
http://www.betuco.be/voorlichting/Participation%20Sourcebook%20-%20World%20Bank.pdf [Accessed:
06.09.2013]
THE WORLD BANK (Editor) (2010): Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation, in Topics: Participation and Civic
Engagement. Washington D.C.: The World Bank. URL:
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/EXTPCENG/
0,,contentMDK:20509352~menuPK:1278203~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:410306,00.html [Accessed
06.09.2013] 30
“Linking up Sustainable Sanitation,
Water Management & Agriculture”
SSWM is an
initiative
supported by:
Created
by:

SENN 2013 Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation-130918

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

SENN 2013 Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation-130918

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SENN 2013 Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation-130918

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Participatory Monitoring and

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 1

Copyright & Disclaimer

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 3

Through participation, we lost ‚control‘

There is no agreement among planners and managers about what

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 4

Why participation? PARTICIPATION

For many governments, the United Nations Agencies and

Tell me, and I will forget.

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 5

Why participation? (RIFKIN and KANGERE 2002) PARTICIPATION

• People know what works for them and

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 6

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 7

Actual state of a project /

Sources: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Abandoned_pit_latrine_(2940958117).jpg [Accessed: 06.09.2013];

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 8

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 9

Why evaluation? EVALUATION

An evaluation should provide information that is

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 11

2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 12

2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 13

2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Participatory monitoring and evaluation (PM&E) is a process through

(WORLD BANK 2010)

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 14

2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

The following stakeholder groups are typically involved in PM&E:

(RIETBERGEN-McCRACKEN et al. 1998)

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 15

2. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation

Conventional Participatory(RIETBERGEN-McCRACKEN et al. 1998)

• Outside experts measure • Project stakeholders

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 16

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 17

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

The planning phase of a PM&E process includes:

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 18

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

Community Survey in Vietnam.

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 19

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

World café: A group discussion technique

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 20

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

While data analysis is often thought of as a rather mechanical and

Discussion of the results.

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 21

3. Steps of a PM&E Process

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 22

4. Techniques and Tools for PM&E

A participatory approach to monitoring and evaluation will usually

Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation 23