Presentation on theme: "Monitoring & Evaluation in NIE"— Presentation transcript:
1Monitoring & Evaluation in NIE Module 20This session is designed for a duration of approx. 90 min.Note: this presentation focuses on M&E of programmes, NOT situations such as early warning systems etc27-Mar-17
2Learning objectivesBe familiar with the basic concepts and main characteristics of monitoring and evaluationUnderstand the differences between various kinds of evaluationsExplain the different kinds of indicatorsDescribe the very basics of a ‘log frame’Optional: Be familiar with the monitoring and evaluation of CMAM interventions27-Mar-17
3Has anyone been involved in Monitoring & Evaluation? How?27-Mar-17
5Monitoring &Evaluation What is M&E?Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaThrough group debate the first key words related to M&E will appear. Later the formal definitions will be presented. The following slide might capture of of the key words that participants might mention*
6M&E assessment performance A WASP NEST………? efficiency target Logframes outputseffectivenessappropriatenessoutcomesQuantitative indicatorsQualitative indicatorstargetLogframesimpactassessmentDO NO HARMcoverageA WASP NEST………?INPUTSSource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaA lot of difficult terms are related to M&E. This sessions tries to deal with them and aims to make M&E more understandable.connectednessaccountabilitytimeliness*
7Definition Monitoring It is NOT only about PROCESS ‘The systematic and continuous assessment of theprogress of a piece of work over time….’‘To continuously measure progress against programmeobjectives and check on relevance of the programme’It involves collecting and analysing data/informationIt is NOT only about PROCESSThere are various definitions but they all aim at the same: we measure progress and changes need to be made if progress is not made. Obviously ‘progress’ has all to do with what our programme originally aimed for, i.e. the objectives. Are we in the process of reaching them? If not, we need to make adjustments to ensure we reach these objectives eventually.‘The systematic and continuous assessment of the progress of a piece of work over time….It is a basic and universal management tool for identifying the strengths and weaknesses in a programme. Its purpose is to help all the people involved make appropriate and timely decisions that will improve the quality of the work.’Gosling and Edwards, 1995 cited in ALNAP Review of Humanitarian Action 2003*
8Purpose of monitoring to document progress and results of project to provide the necessary information to Management for timely decision taking and corrective action (if necessary)to promote accountability* to all stakeholders of a project (to beneficiaries, donors, etc)Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*accountable = being responsible to someone for some actionMonitoring and evaluation, though two distinct activities are very closely linked. Monitoring is a routine activity with data collected on a regular e.g. daily or monthly basis. Its basic purpose is to keep track of programme activities and improve the efficiency of interventions. Evaluation tends to be episodic, undertaken at critical points in a project cycle and its basic purpose is more to do with improving effectiveness and informing future programming. Monitoring data provides essential inputs into more episodic evaluation. Monitoring data may highlight specific issues in the programme’s implementation that require deeper investigation through evaluation to be resolved. In turn, evaluation can help to identify what needs to be monitored in the future. In a well designed M&E system, data routinely collected through monitoring activities can contribute greatly towards evaluation*
9Information collected for monitoring must be:Useful and relevantAccurateRegularActed uponSharedTimelySource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
10Monitoring is an implicit part of an evaluation. It is often done badly:Routine data collection not done routinely!Data collection done poorlyInformation not processed/used in a timely mannerFocus only on process indicators and neglecting (lack of) preliminary impactSource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
11Can you give examples of Monitoring in your current work? For example- From a CMAM programme?From a Micronutrient programme?From a General Food Distribution?From a Health programme?From a Livelihoods programme?*
12Monitoring Monitoring compares intentions with results It guides project revisions, verifies targeting criteria and whether assistance is reaching the people intended.It checks the relevance of the project to the needs.It integrates and responds to community feedbackIt enhances transparency and accountability
13Difference between Process/activities Impact/results Monitoring of * Both are important and fulfil their own specific role: monitoring process/activities refer to whether the programme implementation is on track and whether the planned activities are taking place.Monitoring results look whether the intended impact is on track to be reached.*
15Why would you do an evaluation of a programme? *
16Definitions Evaluation It involves the objective assessment of an The aim is to determine relevance and fulfilment ofobjectives, as well as efficiency, effectiveness, impactand sustainability of a project.It involves the objective assessment of anongoing or completed project/programme, itsdesign, implementation and results.These are all terms we will look at more in detail.Evaluations are also very important to identify LESSONS LEARNT*
17There has been an increased focus on evaluation of humanitarian action as partof efforts to improve quality and standardsQuality and standards will be more presented in detail in Module 21.*
18Evaluation Improve policy and practice Enhance accountability It aims toImprove policy and practiceEnhance accountabilitySource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
19Evaluations are done when / because: Monitoring highlights unexpected resultsMore information is needed for decision makingImplementation problems or unmet needs are identifiedIssues of sustainability, cost effectiveness or relevance ariseRecommendations for actions to improve performance are neededLessons learning are necessary for future activitiesAdditionally, the donor (often from one or various Governments) that funds the project is accountable to its tax payers, and the donor wants to know what exactly is done with the money and whether the objectives were reached. And if not, why not.
20EvaluationsEvaluation involves the same skills as assessment and analysisEvaluation should be done impartially and ideally by external staffEvaluation can also occur during (e.g. mid-term) and after implementation of the projectWhy?Evaluation should be done impartially and ideally by external staff: people that have been involved or are responsible for the project might not be objective towards the data collected, results, etc. They might have a stake and therefore lose their objectivity. Some might be defending negative findings or the opposite: they might be extra negative towards their project as they might not have agreed with certain decisions in the past. This will not enable a neutral and objective process of learning. External people might have a fresh eye on all the findings and are likely to be more impartial.One of the most important sourcesof information for evaluations isdata used for monitoring27-Mar-17*
21The OECD-DAC criteria Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development The Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria are currently at the heart of the evaluation of humanitarian action.The DAC criteria are designed to improve evaluation of humanitarian action.Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
22Evaluation looks atRelevance/Appropriateness: Doing the right thing in the right way at the right time.Connectedness (and coordination): Was there any replication or gaps left in programming due to a lack of coordination?Coherence: Did the intervention make sense in the context of the emergency and the mandate of the implementing agency? Are their detrimental effects of the intervention on long run?Coverage: Who has been reached by the intervention, and where: linked to effectiveness?Efficiency: Were the results delivered in the least costly manner possible?Effectiveness: To what extent has the intervention achieved its objectives?Impact: Doing the right thing, changing the situation more profoundly and in the longer-term.Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
23Evaluation looks atRelevance/Appropriateness: Doing the right thing in the right way at the right time.Connectedness (and coordination): Was there any replication or gaps left in programming due to a lack of coordination?Coherence: Did the intervention make sense in the context of the emergency and the mandate of the implementing agency? Are their detrimental effects of the intervention on long run?Coverage: Who has been reached by the intervention, and where: linked to effectiveness?Efficiency: The extent to which results have been delivered in the least costly manner possible.Effectiveness: The extent to which an intervention has achieved its objectives –Impact: Doing the right thing, changing the situation more profoundly and in the longer-term.Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
24Example on General Food Distribution Relevance/Appropriateness: Doing the right thing in the right way at the right time.Was food aid the right thing to do, not cash?Connectedness: Are their detrimental effects of the intervention on long run?Did food aid lower food prices? Did local farmers suffer from that?Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaRelevance / appropriateness-> assessing whether the project is in line with local needs and priorities/tailoring of activities to local needs, increasing ownership, accountability and cost-effectiveness. It assesses whether the type of intervention was the ‘best fit’ for a situation.
25Were those that needed food aid indeed reached? Coverage: Who has been reached by the intervention, and where: linked to effectiveness?Were those that needed food aid indeed reached?Efficiency: Were the results delivered in the least costly manner possible?Was it right to import the food or should it have been purchased locally? Could the results have been achieved with less (financial) resources? Food aid was provided, would cash have been more cost-effective?Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaCoverageReaching major population groups facing life-threatening suffering wherever they are.Can target geographical area (flooded area) or specific groups (malnourished children).In all cases, baseline information is required on the area or the population targeted. Estimates are often used to compensate lack of baseline.Efficiency:The outputs achieved by maximizing resourcesDiscussions and debates around efficiency as decisions taken cannot always aim towards efficiency, mainly in early stages of an emergencyLooks at method employed for achieving a result: cash or food aid for prevention of malnutrition? BP5 or local food?Needs for intervention to be rapid often limits possibility of focus on efficiency in early stages of emergencies
26Did food aid avoid undernutrition? (assuming it was an objective) Effectiveness: To what extent has the intervention achieved its objectives?Did food aid avoid undernutrition? (assuming it was an objective)Impact: Doing the right thing, changing the situation more profoundly and in the longer-term.Did the food aid avoid people becoming displaced? Did the people become dependent on food aid?Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaEffectiveness: the extent to which an activity achieves its purposeFor supplementary feeding programmes (for example) effectiveness is measured through exit indicator such as cure, death and defaulter rates.ImpactImpact evaluation in emergency situations has numerous difficulties as many factors can interfere with the ‘normal’ running of any intervention, and the cause-and-effect chain varies for different types of intervention..Same interventions have very different impact in different settings or contexts.Measure of impact requires an adequate baseline information (often absent), but even if available, it is required to understand what causal factors have influenced the measured impact.
27Impact:Very much related to the general goal of the projectMeasures both positive and negative long-term effects, as well as intended and unintended effects.GFD: did it lower general food prices with long-term economic consequences for certain groups ? Were people that received food aid attacked because of the ration? (therefore more death…?)Need for baseline information!!!!(to measure results against….)
28To evaluate projects well is a real skill! And you often need a team… Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
29M&E in emergencies?YESAny project without Monitoring and/or Evaluation is a BAD projectSource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
30Help!Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaThis slides aims to ‘monitor’ how the participants are doing on M&E. Do they feel they belong to the category on the left: they all understand most of the issues dealt with so far. Or are many people feeling lost in the terminology? If so, try to find out what is difficult and refer back to previous slides.*
31The “M” and the “E”… Monitoring Evaluation Primary use of the data Project managementAccountabilityPlanning (future projects)Frequency of data collectionOngoingPeriodicType of data collectedInfo on process and effectsInfo on effectsWho collects the dataProject staffExternal evaluatorsSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
32Evaluations in Humanitarian Context Single-agency evaluation (during/after project)There is an increasing move towards:Inter-agency evaluations: the objective is to evaluate responses as a whole and the links between interventionsReal-time evaluations: carried out 8 to 12 weeks after the onset of an emergency and are processed within one month of data collectionSource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaMany evaluations are done on work conducted by a single agency. However, more and more one also sees evaluations that cover interventions done by various agencies at the same time. In this way the whole response can be evaluated rather than just one agency’s work.
33Real-time evaluations (1) WHY?Arose from concern that evaluations came too late to affect the operations they were assessingVarious groups of organizations aim to undertake real-time evaluationsSame purpose as any other evaluationCommon characteristics:Takes place during the course of implementationIn a short time frameSource: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
34Real-time evaluations (2) It is an improvement-oriented review; it can be regarded more as an internal function than an external process.It helps to bring about changes in the programme, rather than just reflecting on its quality after the event.A real-time “evaluator” is a “facilitator”, working with staff to find creative solutions to any difficulties they encounter.It helps to get closer to the people affected by crisis, and this enables to improve accountability to ‘beneficiaries’.Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
35Monitoring & Evaluation systems Main components of M&E systems:M&E work plan for data collection and analysis, covering baseline, on-going M&ELogical framework, including indicators and means/source of verificationReporting flows and formatsFeedback and review planCapacity building designImplementation scheduleHuman resources and budget27-Mar-17
36Examples of data collection methods for M&E Quantitative MethodsQualitative methodsAdministering structured oral or written interviews with closed questionsSemi structured interviews e.g. key informantPopulation based surveysFocus group discussionReviewing medical and financial recordsObservingCompleting forms and tally sheetsCase studiesDirect measurement (anthropometry, biochemical analysis, clinical signs)Mapping, ranking, scoringLot quality assessmentProblem sorting, ranking
37Focus on INDICATORSSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
38IndicatorsAn indicator is a measure that is used to show change in a situation, or the progress in/results of an activity, project, or programme.Indicators:enable us to be “watchdogs”;are essential instruments for monitoring and evaluation.are objectively verifiable measurementsSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
39What are the Qualities of a Good Indicator? SpecificMeasurableAchievableRelevantTime-boundThe Sphere Project provides the mostaccepted indicators for nutrition andfood security interventions in emergencies: see Module 21.Source: MTV for UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaWhat are the characteristics of a good indicator?A good indicator is SMART:S for SPECIFIC:By specific, we mean that it specifies the magnitude of the attribute that we’re measuring in a particular time frame and for a particular populationIn other words, that they measure what they’re supposed to measure… blood retinol measures vitamin A status (not iron status, not any other vitamin…)Can you think of another word starting with “S” that describes a good indicator? Good! it’s SIMPLE: clearly and precisely definedM for Measurable:Measurable indicators are objective: we are able to quantify themYou can measure the temperature, you can count how many correct answers students get on a test, you can observe if someone is washing their hands before they handle foodCan you think of other examples of indicators and how to measure them?A for Achievable:Achievable indicators means that we can actually obtain them: you need to have the resources and capacities to collect, store and process the information obtained from that indicatorR is for relevant:Relevant to you project, your situationAnd T is for Time bound:Always stating the time period in which that indicator was measuredBeginning and end of projects are commonly used time-marksSeasons and seasonality too: amount of grain produced in the month of July, total sales in the pre-holidays season, malnutrition rates in the lean (or hungry) season preceding the harvest.Can you think of other examples of indicators that are time-bound?SMART InitiativeThe Standardised Monitoring and Assessment in Relief and Transition (SMART) Initiative - is an interagency initiative, begun in 2002, to improve the M&E of humanitarian assistance interventions through:• The development of standardised methodologies for determining comparative needs based on nutritional status, mortality rate and food security.• Establishing comprehensive, collaborative systems to ensure reliable data is used for decision-making and reportingA Standardised Training Package (STP) for SMART methodology has recently been released. More information available atAnd there is also the SMART initiative….Standardised Monitoring and Assessment in Relief and TransitionInitiative - interagency initiative to improve the M&E of humanitarianassistance
40Types of indicators Examples? Indicators exist in many different forms:Examples?DirectDirect indicators correspond precisely to results at any performance level.Indirect or "proxy" indicators demonstrate the change or results if direct measures are not feasible.Indirect / proxyIndicators are usually quantitative measures, expressed as percentage or share, as a rate, etc.Indicators may also be qualitative observations.QualitativeQuantitativeSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, UgandaDirect - Number of children with acute malnutritionProxy – diet composition for nutritional statusGlobal / standardisedStandardised global indicators are comparable in all settings.Other indicators tend to be context specific and must be developed locally.Locally developed
41Impact Outcome Output Input Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
42Impact Outcome Output Input Related to Goal Related to Objectives (or Purposes)OutputRelated to OutputsInputRelated to Activities/ResourcesSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda
43Impact Outcome Output Input * Malnutrition rates amongst young children reducedRelated to GoalOutcome% of young childrengetting appropriatecomplementary foodRelated to Objectives (or Purposes)X number of mothersknow about goodcomplementary food andhow to prepare thatOutputRelated to OutputsNutritional education to mothers on complementary foodInputRelated to Activities/ResourcesSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda*
44All the previous terms, such as impact, outcome, etc can be put in this ‘tree’. It is just a different way of putting them together.
45What is a Log Frame?The logical framework or logframe is an analytical toolused to plan, monitor, and evaluate projects.???The logical framework or logframe derives its name from the logical linkages set out by the planner(s) to connect aproject’s means with its ends.?Victim of a log frame?
46Log Frames IMPACT OUTCOME INPUTS Log frames appear in different shapes and with different names sometimes, but overall they look like this.INPUTS
47? ? ? ? ? ? ? …and can be put in a ‘tree’ like this. INPUTS ImpactOutcomeOutput??Impact?OutcomeOutput?OutputOutputSource: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda…and can be put in a ‘tree’ like this.?INPUTS??
48Other terms that can be found in a logframe: The means of verification of progress towards achieving the indicators highlights the sources from where data is collected. The process of identifying the means of verification at this stage is useful as discussions on where to find information or how to collect it often lead to reformulation of the indicator.Assumptions are external factors or conditions that have the potential to influence the success of a programme. They may be factors outside the control of the programme. The achievement of a programme’s aims depends on whether or not assumptions hold true or anticipated risks do not materialise.This slide is optional and should only be shown if the main issues on inputs, outcomes, outcomes and impact are well understood.27-Mar-1748
49logical framework for M&E Project descriptionIndicatorsSource / mean of verificationAssumptions / risksGoalObjectives / outcomesDeliverable outputsActivitiesIf the OBJECTIVES are produced, then this should contribute to the overall GOALIf OUTPUTS/RESULTS are produced, then the OBJECTIVES are accomplishedIf adequate ACTIVITIES are conducted, then OUTPUT/RESULTS can be producedThis is another way of showing a log frameIf adequate RESOURCES/INPUTS are provided; then activities can be conducted49
50Activities versus Results Completed activities are not results.e.g. a hospital was built, does not mean that injured and sick people can be treated in the hospital, maybe the hospital has no water and the beds have not been delivered.Results are the actual benefits or effects ofcompleted activities:e.g. Injured and sick people have access to a fully functional health facility.*
52ExampleMore examples to illustrate the aforementioned theory. This example shows Vit A supplementation, but in a reversed order, starting with input and then subsequently working its way down to impact.
54Source: UCL + Makerere University School of Public Health, Uganda Time for questions, discussion, recap, etc
55Key messagesThe monitoring of nutrition interventions in emergencies is an integral part of saving lives and maintaining nutrition status of the affected population.Successful monitoring systems allow for improvements in interventions in ‘real time’.Evaluations are important tools for learning, assessing interventions, comparing the costs of the interventions and their impact. Essential evaluation parameters are: effectiveness; efficiency; relevance/appropriateness; impact and coverageInvolving communities in M&E places the affected population at the heart of the response, providing the opportunity for their views and perceptions to be incorporated into programme decisions and increases accountability towards them.A common mistake of designing M&E systems is creating a framework which is overly complex. Always make an M&E system practical and doable.The logical framework or logframe is an analytical tool used to plan, monitor, and evaluate projects.
56Monitoring for CMAM interventions Types of monitoring, e.g.Individual case monitoring,Programme / activities monitoringThe following slides are explaining more information on M&E in CMAM programmes. If an extended session on this topic is requested, this part can be used.27-Mar-17
57Individual monitoring for CMAM It is the basic follow up of cases in SFP / OTP / SC services:Anthropometric / clinical assessmentTools for individual case follow up include:Medical / nutrition and action protocolsIndividual follow up cardReferral forms…27-Mar-17
58Objectives of monitoring CMAM activities Assess service performance / outcomesIdentify further needsSupport decision-taking for quality improvement (staffing, training, resources, site location,…)Contribute to the analysis of the general situationAssessing the nutrition trends in the area27-Mar-17
59Methods and tools for monitoring CMAM interventions Monthly / weekly reporting:Reporting needs to be done per site (service unit) and compiled per area (district…) up to the national levelRoutine supervisionExternal evaluationsCoverage surveys are one of the most important tools for evaluation of CMAM interventions27-Mar-17
60Routine data collection for monitoring CMAM interventions Routine data is collected for specified time-periods:Nb. of new admissions ,Nb. of discharges (total and by category: cured, died, defaulted, non-recoveredNb. of cases in treatment (nb. of beneficiaries registered at the end of the reporting time-period)Data on admissions should be disaggregated by gender27-Mar-17
61Criteria (Children 6 – 59 months) CategoryCriteria (Children 6 – 59 months)New admissions for children 6 – 59 months(or > 60 months but <130 cm height)MUAC <11.5 cmorW/H < -3 Z scores (WHO) or <70% of median (NCHS)Bilateral pitting oedema grade + or ++andchild is alert, has appetite, and is clinically well Other new admissionsCarer refuses inpatient care despite adviceReturned DefaulterChild has previously defaulted and has returned to OTP(the child must meet admission criteria to be re-admitted).Readmissions/RelapsesA child is treated in OTP until discharge after meeting discharge criteria but relapses hence need for readmissionTransfer from inpatient care (SC)From in-patient care after stabilisation treatmentTransfer from OTP Patients moved in from another OTP site Ensure that the definitions are clear for everybody when monitoring is done.27-Mar-17
62Criteria (Children 6 – 59 months) CategoryCriteria (Children 6 – 59 months) CuredMUAC > 12.5cm and WFH > -2Z scores and no oedema for two consecutive visits AndChild is clinically wellDefaultedAbsent for 3 consecutive visitsDiedDied during time registered in OTPNon-CuredHas not reached discharge criteria within four months of treatmentLink the child to other programmes e.g. SFP. IYCF, GMP, targeted food distributionsTransferred to SCCondition has deteriorated and requires inpatient careTransfer to other OTPChild has been transferred to another OTP site27-Mar-17
63Monitoring of CMAM interventions: key indicators for SAM (Sphere) The proportion of discharges from therapeutic care should be:Recovered > 75 %Deaths < 10 %Defaulter < 15 %They are primarily applicable to the 6–59 month age group, although others may be part of the programme.Distance: > 90 % of the target population is within less than one day’s return walk (including time for treatment) of the service / site.Coverage is > 50 % in rural areas, > 70 % in urban areas and >90 % in camp situations27-Mar-17
64Monitoring of CMAM interventions: key indicators for MAM (Sphere) The proportion of discharges from targeted SFP should be:Recovered > 75 %Deaths < 3 %Defaulter < 15 %They are primarily applicable to the 6–59 month age group,although others may be part of the programme.Distance: > 90 % of the target population is within less than one day’s return walk (including time for treatment) of the programme site for dry ration SFP and no more than one hour’s walk for on-site wet SFPCoverage is > 50 % in rural areas, > 70 % in urban areas and > 90 % in a camp situation27-Mar-17
65Additional data for monitoring CMAM interventions Derived from routine monitoring and other sources:Sources of data:Average length of stayAverage weight gainRelapse rateDistribution of admissions per type, per age, per origin…Causes of deathReasons for defaultingInvestigation of non-recovery casesRegistration booksIndividual follow up chartsInterviews and Focus group discussionsObservation, home-visits…27-Mar-17
66M&E for CMAM interventions: Supervision Supportive supervision visits to sites are designed to ensure / improve the quality of care offered by:Identifying weaknesses in the performance of activities, taking immediate action and applying shared corrective solutionsStrengthening the technical capacity of health workers and motivating staff through encouragement of good practicesSupervisors and managers ensure that the performance of activities and organization of the services meet quality standards.27-Mar-1766
67Evaluation of SAM management interventions Effectiveness: programme performance with a strong focus on coverageAppropriateness: e.g. distribution and time of opening of treatment sitesConnectedness: relates to the links with health system and shows levels of possible integrationCost-effectiveness has also been measured with various methods and showing high differences between contexts and different approaches27-Mar-17
68M&E of CMAM interventions: population level assessments Community level assessment can be done through:Repeated anthropometric surveysProgramme coverage27-Mar-17
69Evaluation of coverage for CMAM Coverage is one of the most important elements behind the success of the CMAM approach.It is measured through studies using two main approaches:The centric systematic area sampling (CSAS)The Semi-Quantitative Evaluation of Access and Coverage (SQUEAC)Coverage should reach at least 90% of severe cases in camps situation, 70% in urban setting, 50% in rural setting (SPHERE standards)27-Mar-17
70Evaluation of management of MAM interventions Same criteria as for all other interventions (relevance, efficiency, etc.)SFP evaluations are rarely shared, but evidence showed that defaulting and non-response are very commonNeeds for evaluating use of Ready-to-Use-Supplementary Food products in terms of efficiency: gain of weight, effect of defaulting, effect on easiness for beneficiaries, etc.27-Mar-17