1. Geographic tools and M&E: Linking data to support M&E

2. DATA LINKING

3. Many Data Streams

4. But it can be well worth the effort to link data

5. Value of linking: Gives insight into data by adding additional context Maximizes use of data Promotes opportunities to leverage efforts and minimize duplication of effort

6. M&E and GIS  Programs don’t exist in vacuum  People may be touched by multiple programs or influenced by the world around them  Strengthen M&E by using that fact.

7. M&E is evolving  Limitations of experimental design  Growth of district based evaluation platforms

8. M&E and GIS  Geography as basis for evaluation  Multiple programs that can influence outcome  Link data to better understand program and outcomes  Spatial analysis techniques can help with deriving outcomes measures

10. GIS is a tool that can facilitate evaluation  Linking data  Producing tools for analysis and understanding of data GIS can support evaluation even if no maps are produced

14. GIS AND M&E

15. Programmatic successes depend on reaching the right places, the right people with the right intervention

16. Who is doing what, where in my country? http://goo.gl/Zw4Qv

18. xxx xxx Decision makers identify priorities and support programs Program is managed by an organization Program serves clients Health outcomes M&E data inform policy

19. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

20. ‣ It can quickly become challenging to see opportunities for integration and coordination ‣ There may not be common stakeholders participating in every step of the process

21. Example: Kenya OVC Program MEASURE Evaluation worked with US Mission in Kenya to improve interoperability of OVC data from 3 stakeholders

22. Data Snapshot

24. Kenya OVC Data Mode l Simple approach that makes it possible to integrate program data Geography (district) is the key

25. Barriers to linking data

27. Kenya Data Model  Six elements that allow data to be linked together  Geography  Services provided  Funder  Implementing organization name  Timeframe  Number of beneficiaries

29.  By linking data from multiple stakeholders it was possible to see patterns that were not observed without linking  Important to note that there may be legitimate reasons why there were no services in Kuria – map doesn’t provide all the answers just points in a direction for further study.

30. Key points  Evaluation is evolving  Using geography (and GIS) to link data can strengthen M&E  Many barriers to linking data  Technical barriers may be easy to overcome, non-technical barriers may be more challenging  Any questions?

31. Thank You