Designing Influential Evaluations Session 3 Evaluation Design Uganda Evaluation Week - Pre-Conference Workshop 19 th and 20 th May 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Results-Based Management (RBM) and the UNDAF Results Matrix.
Advertisements

WASH Cluster – Emergency Training NA NA4 1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT Session 4 Proposal Development.
ILINOVA SUMMER SCHOOL Proposal writing on conservation of Indigenous Livestock Monday 22 nd and Tuesday 23 rd, September 2014.
Designing Influential Evaluations Session 1 Introduction Uganda Evaluation Week - Pre-Conference Workshop 19 th and 20 th May 2014.
Contribution analysis Anita Morrison and Jackie Horne, Office of the Chief Researcher, Scottish Government.
Strategic Planning Presented by: Cindy Banyai, Ph.D. Executive Director, Refocus Institute IREX Community Solutions Program August 25 – September 1, 2011.
RBM in the context of Operations and Programme and Project Management Material of the Technical Assistance Unit (TAU)
Session Four: M&E System for AfT bankable projects UNITED NATIONS Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) Expert Group Meeting on Monitoring.
Results-Based Management: Logical Framework Approach
Refining a Theory of Change 1 Barbara Reed & Dan Houston November 2014.
New frontiers Evaluation methods Theory of change Project cycle and risk management Jesper Johnsøn, CMI, U4 Bergen, February 4, 2014.
HOW TO WRITE A GOOD TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR FOR EVALUATION Programme Management Interest Group 19 October 2010 Pinky Mashigo.
Session Objectives By the end of the session you should understand
Basic Training on Project Proposal
Monitoring Evaluation Impact Assessment Objectives Be able to n explain basic monitoring and evaluation theory in relation to accountability n Identify.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Logical Framework and Indicators.
Contribution Analysis: An introduction Anita Morrison Scottish Government.
KEYWORDS REFRESHMENT. Activities: in the context of the Logframe Matrix, these are the actions (tasks) that have to be taken to produce results Analysis.
1 Monitoring and Evaluation John Hough RBEC Environment & Energy Practice Workshop Almaty, 6-9 October 2004.
Program (project team) Overall Goal / Vision Interest, Motivation, Role & Responsibility of the Project Intermediate Goal(s) Boundary Partners & their.
The LOGICAL FRAMEWORK Scoping the Essential Elements of a Project Dr. Suchat Katima Mekong Institute.

Monitoring & Evaluation Presentation for Technical Assistance Unit, National Treasury 19 August 2004 Fia van Rensburg.
Model Name Transition Project Learning Network Workshop 3 IYF Transition Project.
AS PE Evaluation and Planning for Improvement of Performance Your chance to tell us all you know about your chosen sport!
1 Second Regional Workshop on gender and Poverty Reduction Strategies, September 2003, Siem Reap Gender responsive costing and budgeting Nalini Burn.
UK Aid Direct Introduction to Logframes (only required at proposal stage)
SUB-MODULE 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE RESULTS BASED LOGICAL FRAMEWORK RESULTS BASED LOG-FRAME TRAINING Quality Assurance and Results Department (ORQR.2 )
Using a Logic Model to Plan and Evaluate Your Technology Leadership Development Program Chad Green, Program Analyst Lynn McNally, Technology Resource Supervisor.
Preparing proposals for funding RIMC Research Capacity Enhancement Workshops Series : “Achieving Research Impact”
M&E TRAINING MODULES Different tools for different applications.
Developing a Project Proposal - SPROUT - ACTRAV-Turin.
Developing a Project Proposal
Swedish Rural Network Self assessment Nordic Baltic Rural Network meeting
National Quality Assurance and Accreditation Committee & Quality Assurance and Accreditation Project Action Planning Workshop January 2007.
0 ©2015 U.S. Education Delivery Institute While there is no prescribed format for a good delivery plan, it should answer 10 questions What a good delivery.
Key Components of a successful Proposal OAS / IACML Workshop on Technical Assistance. San José, Costa Rica May 8, 2007 By: José Luis Alvarez R. Consultant.
Tools and techniques to measuring the impact of youth work (Caroline Redpath and Martin Mc Mullan – YouthAction NI)
Logic modeling. “Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?” “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.” said the Cat.
WEAP Workshop Work Plans/Progress Reports Geoff O’Brien.
Developing a Project Proposal ACTRAV-Turin. Contents Concept of “Logical Framework Approach” SPROUT – model project proposal Individual activity Presentation.
Theory of Change Articulating your project’s design theory.
Monitoring and Reporting Monitoring: regular review to keep track of progress in: Workplan implementation Resource use and the management of risks Progress.
WORKSHOP ON PROJECT CYCLE MANAGEMENT (PCM) Bruxelles 22 – 24 May 2013 Workshop supported by TAIEX.
Logical Framework Approach to PSIP formulation By Edward Joshua (Chief Economist, EP&D) Presentation 10 : 2015 PSIP Process Review Workshop 1.
Translating ideas into proposals for action programmes
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Logical Framework Approach -Critique from feminist lens
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Workshop to develop theories of change
Saxon Phonics Evaluation: Executive Summary
Session 1 – Study Objectives
Monitoring and measuring success in the Sport for Development sector
Assessing Trust Fund Performance
Logic modeling.
2018 OSEP Project Directors’ Conference
Session 9 Recap on LFM and IL.
Taking the Chair A National Development Programme for Chairs, Vice-Chairs and Chairs of Committees Module Five Activity 5.1 OHT 1 Taking the Chair.
SKILLS CONFERENCE 2019 Dr. Bangani Ngeleza
GSF Results and Financial Monitoring Workshop
Logic modeling.
Translating ideas into proposals for action programmes
Translating ideas into proposals for action programmes
BOOTCAMP SOCIAL INNOVATION ACCELERATOR TO CREATE LASTING CHANGE
Integrating Gender into Rural Development M&E in Projects and Programs
Climate Change Leadership
How is an M & E framework derived from the logframe?
Interest, Motivation, Role & Responsibility of the Project
Logic modeling.
WP Research and Evaluation Manager
Presentation transcript:

Designing Influential Evaluations Session 3 Evaluation Design Uganda Evaluation Week - Pre-Conference Workshop 19 th and 20 th May 2014

Training Objectives By the end of the session, participants will: Understand the use of programme logic models and theory of change Understand how to develop evaluation questions Lewis Caroll, author of ‘Alice in Wonderland’ 2

LOGFRAME AND THEORY OF CHANGE Logic models 3

Simple results chain Physical & financial resources Processes which turn Inputs into Outputs Operational changes (new skills or abilities, the availability of new products and services). Behavioural or institutional/ changes in response to the outputs Progress towards thematic priorities Results External perspective Internal perspective Management control diminishes External factors become more important 4

A logframe is an ‘abstract’ of a project InputsCosts The resources required How much the project will cost What the project will do & deliver Outputs Activities Goal(s) Purpose Objectives What the project seeks to achieve Factors that may affect progress & success Pre- conditions Assumptions How progress & success will be measured What will be How will it be measured? IndicatorsVerification 5

The missing middle Activities Outputs Purpose Goal 6

Response to outputs – the ‘miracle’! Goal Purpose Outputs ActivitiesInputsCosts ObjectivesIndicatorsVerificationAssumptions Response to project services Behaviour or system change! Critical conditions for success 7

Discussion Turn to your neighbour or work in a small group Discuss for 5 minutes: ◦ What are the common weaknesses in development and use of logframes? Summarise 2-3 points Brief plenary discussion on common themes 8

Analysis of DFID logframes Drew & Albone, 2008; Agulhas, 2007 Problems: Only 18% of performance indicators measured outcomes 64% measured ‘inputs’ and ‘processes’ Only 8% disaggregated data by gender Indicators not specific and time bound Measurement and the evidence base not well planned Assumptions/risks not monitorable Clear targets support better performance ◦ Only 24% of projects with a partially clear Purpose scored 1 or 2 at OPR ◦ 73% of projects with unclear Purpose scored <3 Statement Fully clear Partially clear Unclear Goal79%14%6% Purpose54%35%10% Output64%29%6% 9

10

What is ‘Theory of change’? A theory of change is a set of statements about how change happens, and/or an attempt to describe underlying logic and assumptions 11

Key elements of a theory of change But no agreed format or convention 12

Funds to Min of Ed. School needs assessment Curriculum development Buildings Attendance Teachers Decision to fund Select teachers Mobilise PTA for building Teachers attend training Build/ rehabilitate schools Teachers return to schools Teachers apply new skills Improved facilities supplemented by materials & curriculum Parents respond to improvements and permit boys & girls to enrol Boys & girls respond to improved quality Increase in teaching quality Theory of change for a primary education project Enrolment improves Attendance improves Retention improves Boys & girls literacy rates increase Assume teachers can travel to training Risk of teachers moving schools Assume training effective Assume Min of Ed funds books & materials Assume children can be released from other tasks Assume building is of satisfactory quality Assume selection on merit Risk of children leaving for employment or family duties Assume no barriers to children enrolling Other contextual factors such as roads & transport Start End 13

Discussion exercise Working in small groups, consider how a Theory of Change approach might affect the way you plan your evaluation? Prepare your ideas for presentation and discussion in plenary. 14

EVALUATION QUESTIONS Theory of change & evaluation criteria 15

Formulating questions – from simple logframe for education Funding & staffing School building, teacher training & curriculum development Improved access to & quality of schooling Increased net enrolment Increased literacy What was the distribution of funding? How many staff were appointed? 2.How many schools received building projects? How many teachers were trained? How was the curriculum developed? 3.How much did access change? What aspects of quality were improved? 4.Did a change in net enrolment take place? 5.Did literacy rates improve? 16

Funds to Min of Ed. School needs assessment Curriculum development Buildings Attendance Teachers Decision to fund Select teachers Mobilise PTA for building Teachers attend training Build/ rehabilitate schools Teachers return to schools Teachers apply new skills Improved facilities supplemented by materials & curriculum Parents respond to improvements and permit boys & girls to enrol Boys & girls respond to improved quality Increase in teaching quality Theory of change for a primary education project Enrolment improves Attendance improves Retention improves Boys & girls literacy rates increase Assume teachers can travel to training Risk of teachers moving schools Assume training effective Assume Min of Ed funds books & materials Assume children can be released from other tasks Assume building is of satisfactory quality Assume selection on merit Risk of children leaving for employment or family duties Assume no barriers to children enrolling Other contextual factors such as roads & transport Start End 17

If … then … - the intervention logic If the school needs assessment is effective Then the schools with the greatest need and potential will be chosen If teachers are selected on merit Then those with potential will be put forward for training If teachers are able to travel Then selected teachers will attend training If teachers gain new skills And do not leave for jobs in other locations And facilities are improved by the building programme And improved facilities are complemented by teaching materials and the new curriculum Then teachers will apply new skills If teachers will apply new skills Then quality of teaching will improve If parents respond to improvements And children can be released from other tasks And there are no socio-cultural barriers to boys and girls enrolling Then enrolment of boys and girls will increase If boys and girls respond to improved quality Then attendance will increase 18

Hypotheses about education improvement 19

Formulating questions Funding & staffing School building, teacher training & curriculum development Improved access to & quality of schooling Increased net enrolment Increased literacy How were schools selected for the project; what was known about their enrolment and literacy status in advance? 2.Who was selected for teacher training; how effective was it; how many teachers were retained afterwards? 3.How much did access change and for who; what aspects of quality were improved and against what standard? 4.Did a change in net enrolment take place? Was it the result of the outputs delivered under this project or did other factors such as improved roads and transport, or demographic changes affect the outcome? 5.Did literacy rates improve? For both boys and girls? How widespread or consistent have these changes been. Do they reflect specific locations or a general trend? 20

OECD-DAC Evaluation criteria 21

Relate to evaluation criteria Funding & staffing School building, teacher training & curriculum development Improved access to & quality of schooling Increased net enrolment Increased literacy Economy Efficiency Effectiveness Impact 22

Developing questions 23

Discussion exercise Working in small groups, consider at what stage evaluation questions should be developed and whose responsibility that should be? Prepare your ideas for presentation and discussion in plenary. 24

Summary Analyse the intervention logic using a logic model such as the logframe or (better) theory of change Develop evaluation questions from the details of the intervention logic These provide the basis for considering an approach and methods An evaluation framework can help link questions to approach and methods

END