types of evaluation-reviewed

8/18/2019 Types of Evaluation-reviewed

1/23

LDP608: Project Monitoring and Evaluation

UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND EXTERNAL STUDIES

SCHOOL OF CONTINUING AND DISTANCE EDUCATION

DEPARTMENT OF EXTRA-MURAL STUDIES

COURSE: MASTERS OF ARTS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

UNIT CODE: LDP 608

UNIT NAME: PROJECT MONITORING AND EVALAUATION

LECTURER: DR. FLORENCE ITEGI

LIST OF GROUP MEMBERS

NO.

NAME REF: NO. SIGNATURE

1. MWAHENDO OLL!N" H!#O L$0%8&'(0%)01)

). #AH!ND! #A*!"A MA"HA L$0%8))0)%)01)&. MM+ANO PA,*!# M-#!N! L$0%(0&1/%)011

/. E,*-DE M-H-,"- L$0%6))61%)01)

$. ADAM EDDLE MOHAMED L$0%80/6)%)01)

6. L!L!AN NAEMA L$0%60/8&%)01&(. *E"L MA#ENA M-,-A L$0%61&8(%)01&8. WAM+-A !NEN, *E2.

No.1)($6%)01&'. OM+OO MO"E" ODH!AM+O L$0%8/1'1%)01)

10. M-#H-LE ON",ANE L$0%('&')%)01)

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page 1


2/23


Table of Contents

Cover page…………………………………………………………………………1

Task/Assignment………………………………………………………………….3

Introduction………………………………………………………………………4

Types of valuation in !ro"ect #onitoring and valuation……………………$

%ternal valuation………………………………………………………………$

Internal valuation………………………………………………………………..&

'orms of valuation………………………………………………………………(

'ormative valuation……………………………………………………………..)

*ummative valuation………………………………………………………….)

+t,er 'orms of valuation………………………………………………………)

-iImpact valuation……………………………………………………………...)

-ii!rocess valuation……………………………………………………………1

-iii 0aseline valuation…………………………………………………………11

-iv Cost 0enefit and cost ffectiveness valuation…………………………...1

!articipatory valuation Approac,……………………………………………1&

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..

2eferences………………………………………………………………………...1

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page )


3/23


Term ork /Assignment/Task

Types of valuations in !ro"ect #onitoring and valuation

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page &


4/23


1. Introduction

In the course of implementing a project, various types of information are gathered. Project

managers often want to know how many individuals participated in an event, whether

participants were satisfied with the logistics, and whether staff members and volunteers feel

confident in their ability to deliver a particular educational experience. Answers to these

questions provide useful information. hey help managers monitor specific aspects of the

project. !owever, in practice, this type of information gathering tends to be more sporadic and

patchy than methodical and comprehensive.

1.1. efinition of valuation

"valuation is an analytical process aimed at determining as systematically and objectively as

possible the efficiency, effectiveness, significance and relevance of a project. "valuation can also

be defined as the systematic collection of information about activities, characteristics, and

outcomes of projects to make judgments about the project, improve effectiveness, and#or inform

decisions about future programming $Patton, %&'(). "valuation is not merely the accumulation

and summary of data and information about a project. Importantly, evaluation provides managers

with well*documented and considered evidence to support the decision*making process.

Project evaluation serves two general purposes. "valuation helps to determine the project+s merit

$oes it work-) and its worth $do we need it-). "valuation helps decision*makers determine if a

project should be continued and, if so, suggests ways to improve it. Additionally, evaluation

documents project $and program) accomplishments $udda, /0%%). If the project has been

designed properly with well*articulated objectives that specify what must be accomplished, to

what degree, and within what time period, the evaluation can determine whether or not the

objectives are being met. he evaluation can gather information as to why a project is or is not

meeting its objectives. It is therefore important to understand the different types of evaluation

that can be conducted over a program+s life*cycle and when they should be used.

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page /


5/23


.. Types of valuation in pro"ect #onitoring and valuation

.1. %ternal valuation.

his is evaluation that is carried out by someone who is $or was) not directly involved in the

development or operation of the system being evaluated, i.e. by someone from out with the

project team. 1learly, such an external evaluator has a number of advantages, bringing $it is to be

hoped) objectivity, lack of vested interest, and the ability to look at matters from a fresh

perspective. An external evaluator also has a number of disadvantages, however, most of which

are related to relative value systems and to the lack of involvement the evaluator has had in

project*related decisions. 2uch an evaluator may not, for example, fully appreciate why the

development team chose to act in a particular way, or appreciate the thinking that lay behind

certain decisions. he project team may also feel threatened by the evaluator, and feel that alienvalues or a negative, 3nit*picking3 approach are being adopted $4lank 5. %&&6)

"xternal project evaluation is the classical form of evaluation. In this context 7external8 meansthat the evaluators are not project members, but experts from the 9orth, 2outh or "ast who,

owing to their specific skills and in line with specifications, are called in for a period of one to

three weeks to investigate the defined questions. "xternal evaluations are therefore suitable for factual issues, relatively complex situations, and overall appraisals. :ith their outsider+s view

the external evaluators use appropriate methods to collect information on the project and its

environment, in order to assess and answer the questions posed. he end product is a report

which they submit to the commissioning party$ I;< =arch /0%6)

he strengt,s of an external evaluation lie in its distance and its independence. uestions of sustainability, impact and

effectiveness can be addressed through an external evaluation. he external evaluation is theonly possible form of evaluation for conducting a cross*sectoral analysis.

he 5eaknesses of an external evaluation lie in the substantial effort required in its preparation

and implementation, as well as its limited time frame.


6/23


Costs of an e%ternal evaluation6 he goal and tasks of an evaluation influence the budget indifferent ways. A prior self*evaluation can result in a shorter mandate for the external evaluation,

thereby reducing external costs.

.. Advantages of %ternal valuation

•Provide supportive feedback for decision making

• It provides for expertise knowledge to boost project performance

• It provides assistance in development of new products or services

• he evaluation are carefully elected and possess the relevant skills

• he evaluation team have little or no interest on the project

.3 isadvantage of %ternal valuation

• here are dangers of external evaluators coming with preconceived ideas which influence

the evaluation results.

• It is expensive and time consuming, the external evaluators have to be paid well

•

he context may not only be new but unfamiliar to the external evaluators and this mayaffect the evaluation results

• =ay lack basic information about the project in progress

3. Internal valuation.

Internal evaluation is conducted and managed by project management, with little or no budget being

required. he self*evaluation should include assessments of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency,

impact and sustainability. 2ometimes considered a part of regular project reporting, a self*evaluation

should address issues of project accountability to the extent possible, as well as offer insights into

how future projects might benefit from knowledge gained through the self*evaluation $I;< =arch

/0%6).

his is evaluation that is carried out by someone from the actual project team. 1learly, such an

evaluator has the advantage of understanding fully the thinking behind the development, together

with an appreciation of any problems that may have arisen, and should also command the trust

and cooperation of the other members of the team.


7/23


he strengt,s of a self*evaluation lie in the evaluators+ detailed and specific knowledge of the project and

the participating institutions in the partner country. It can be flexibly conducted with little effort on a

regular basis, and facilitates rapid adjustments. It promises to be successful if those involved are

sufficiently self*critical, and generally leads to stronger team building and cooperation.

eaknesses result from the tendency not to see the forest for the trees and when there is no distance from

daily operations. 2elf*evaluation is also less suitable for analy?ing issues of relevance in a broadercontext.

3.1Advantages of Internal valuation in !ro"ect #anagement

• It has the ability to get first*hand information

• It involves internal parties who understand the project better

• It is easier to plan as insider

• It gives room for modification

• It enhances commitment of those involved among others

3. isadvantages of Internal valuation in pro"ect #anagement

• It involves bias due to the tendency to defend or justify activities

• It is ineffective especially in case of difficulties that may require external evaluators

• It is limited to old project as internal evaluators not conversant with new project.

• "valuators may lack objectivity in dealing with fellow staff

• here tend to be personal influence in collecting evidence data or information

4. 'orms of valuation in #onitoring and valuation


8/23


he eventual form of the evaluation activity is determined by the focus of the evaluation and thescope. he scope refers to the boundaries of the evaluation activities, e.g. timeframe, discipline

area$s), extent of measurement, etc,

4.1. *ummative valuation

his is done at the end of the project and involves considering the project as a whole, from

beginning to 3end3. It is meant to summari?e and inform decisions about whether to continue the

project $or parts of it), whether it is valuable to expand into other settings.

It can also take place during and following the project implementation, and is associated with

more objective, quantitative methods. he distinction between formative and summative

evaluation can become blurred. enerally it is important to know both how an intervention

works, as well as if it worked. It is therefore important to capture and assess both qualitative and

quantitative data.

At the completion of the program it may also be valuable to conduct summative evaluation. his

considers the entire program cycle and assists in decisions such as@

o you continue the program-

If so, do you continue it in its entirety-

Is it possible to implement the program in other settings- !ow sustainable is the program-

:as the project effective in attaining the desired objectives or benefits- !ow did the

project impact the intended audience$s)- :hat elements could have helped or hindered the program-

:hat recommendations have evolved out of the program-

:hat were the main benefits and disappointments-

In retrospect, what could have strengthened it- 2omething similar-

:hat aspects will be sustained and how-

5esults of a summative evaluation are used to, inform stakeholders about the value of a project

informs decision*makers about the value or worth of the project, helps provide the information

necessary to make decisions about the continuation, revision, or expansion of the project.

4. 'ormative valuation



9/23


Cormative evaluation is conducted throughout the project, during project design, development,

and implementation. =ost often, formative evaluation is used to test out methods and materials.

At its best, formative evaluation can be an essential decision*making tool that will transform the

project. Cormative evaluation often lends itself to qualitative methods of inquiry.

Cormative evaluation@

• athers information#data about an audience+s reaction to and learning from a project+s

pilot or prototype products#materials. 1hanges may also be made as a result of formative

evaluation.

• athers information#data about problems with project delivery, and assesses progress

towards outcomes of a project during implementation.

• !elps provide information that can be used in making decisions about modification,• 1an lead to continuation, expansion or termination of the project

7uestions t,at mig,t be addressed by formative evaluation include6

• Is a particular project reaching its target audience-

• Is the project being implemented well- Are the intended activities, products, or services

being provided-

• Is the project effective in attaining the desired objectives or benefits-

4.3. Impact valuation

Impact evaluation involves judging the extent to which your project has had an effect on the

changes you were seeking i.e. the extent to which your project has met its goals and objectives.

Impact evaluation judges how well the objectives were achieved and outcome evaluation

involves judging how well the goal has been achieved. It involves seeking answers to questions

such as@

•

!ow well has the project achieved its objectives $and sub*objectives)-

• !ow well have the desired short term changes been achieved-

• :hat progress has been made toward achieving the goal-

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page '


10/23


• o what extent has the project met its objectives-

• !ow effective has the project been at producing changes-

• Are there any factors outside of the project that have contributed to $or prevented) the

desired change-

• !as the project resulted in any unintended change-

Cor example, one of the objectives of the 7=y*Peer project8 is to provide a safe space and

learning environment for young people, without fear of judgment, misunderstanding, harassment

or abuse. Impact evaluation will assess the attitudes of young people towards the learning

environment and how they perceived it. It may also assess changes in participants+ self esteem,

confidence and social connectedness.

Impact evaluation measures the program effectiveness immediately after the completion of the

program and up to six months after the completion of the program.

4.4. !rocess valuation

1luster evaluation of projects to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of a particular process

and modality they have adopted. his involves judging the activities $or strategies) of your

project. Process evaluation is used to 7measure the activities of the program, program quality and

who it is reaching. Process evaluation, as outlined by $!awe et al, %&&0) will help answer

questions about your program such as@

• !as the project reached the target group-

• Are all project activities reaching all parts of the target group-

• Are participants and other key stakeholders satisfied with all aspects of the project-

• Are all activities being implemented as intended- If not why-



11/23


• :hat if any changes have been made to intended activities-

• Are all materials, information and presentations suitable for the target audience-

4.$. 8oals based valuation

"valuation has typically involved measuring whether predetermined targets have been met. Dou

may be familiar with the term E2=A5+ $2pecific, =easurable, Attainable, 5elevant, and

imely) targets. hese type of targets fall under the banner of goals*based evaluation.

oals*based evaluations have ob"ectively9set targets usually determined by people responsible

for the funding or implementation of the project. oals*based evaluation does not question

whether the selected goals are valid, nor whether appropriate measures of effectiveness are being

assessed. "valuation has typically involved measuring whether predetermined targets have been

met. 5ecent behavior change and research and evaluation practice proposes the use of goals*free

evaluation.

4.&. 8oals9free valuation

oals*free evaluation looks at emergence and unintended conse:uences of a project, by

looking at the actual effects without pre*empting what these may be. his type of evaluation

focuses on the change process within the target group. he goals*free evaluation parallels a

social learning approach to evaluation which can be desirable where the goal of a project seeks to

build capacity of people to manage a complex issue. In such cases, relying solely on a goals*

based evaluation may not be appropriate as it can be difficult to set targets and quantify a process

of change, as well as capture change which one may not anticipate.

A key point to consider in setting goals and indicators of success is the validity of the indicator.

his is especially important when you are looking to measure a largely 7unobservable8 behavior

$for example, those that happen within the home, and cannot be readily objectively observed). In

such cases, proxy indicators are often used $for example, household electricity use) but these

indicators may be gross measures that consist of many varied behaviours, of which only one may

be of interest. he question is how to establish meaningful indicators.


http://evaluationtoolbox.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67&Itemid=169http://evaluationtoolbox.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67&Itemid=169


12/23


4.( %9ante valuation -;eeds assessment/ 0aseline *urvey

As might be expected, a front*end evaluation or needs assessment takes place prior to

undertaking the project. Cront*end evaluation gathers information#data about the gap between the

current and desired level of audience skills, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. It takes place

before the project is designed. It helps confirm or negate assumptions of audience characteristics

and appropriate content, define goals and objectives, and identify stakeholders and potential

collaborators. It is carried out during the planning phase of the project.

7uestions t,at mig,t be addressed by %9ante evaluation include6

• :hat are the nature and scope of the problem- :here is the problem located, whom does

it affect, and how does it affect them-

• :hat is it about the problem or its effects that justifies new, expanded, or modified

projects or programs-

• :hat feasible actions are likely to significantly ameliorate the problem-

• :hat has the project set out to achieve-

• :hat are the objectives of the project-

• :ho are the intended beneficiaries and how are they to benefit-

• :hat are the main intended inputs $financial, technical, manpower, materials, etc)-

• :hat are the main intended outputs-

• !ow do the outputs relate to the project objectives-

• :hat is the project+s implementation plan-

•

!ave the alternative methods of achieving project objectives considered-

4.


13/23


hese analyses compare a program+s outputs or outcomes with the costs $resources expended) to

produce them. :hen applied to existing programs, they are also considered a form of program

evaluation. 1ost*effectiveness analysis assesses the cost of meeting a single goal or objective,

and can be used to identify the least costly alternative to meet that goal. 1ost*benefit analysis

aims to identify all relevant costs and benefits, usually expressed in dollar terms.

4.1. *trategic evaluation

2trategy "valuation is as significant as strategy formulation because it throws light on the efficiency and

effectiveness of the comprehensive plans in achieving the desired results. he managers can also assess t

appropriateness of the current strategy in today+s dynamic world with socio*economic, political and

technological innovations. 2trategic "valuation is the final phase of strategic management.

he significance of strategy evaluation lies in its capacity to co*ordinate the task performed by managers

groups, departments etc, through control of performance. 2trategic "valuation is significant because of v

factors such as * developing inputs for new strategic planning, the urge for feedback, appraisal and rewar

development of the strategic management process, judging the validity of strategic choice etc.

T,e process of *trategy valuation consists of follo5ing steps9

• 'i%ing benc,mark of performance 9 :hile fixing the benchmark, strategists encounter

questions such as * what benchmarks to set, how to set them and how to express them. In

order to determine the benchmark performance to be set, it is essential to discover the

special requirements for performing the main task. he performance indicator that best

identify and express the special requirements might then be determined to be used for

evaluation. he organi?ation can use both quantitative and qualitative criteria for

comprehensive assessment of performance. >uantitative criteria include determination of

net profit, 5ualitative factors are subjective evaluation of factors such as * skills and

competencies, risk taking potential, flexibility etc.

• #easurement of performance 9 he standard performance is a bench mark with which

the actual performance is to be compared. he reporting and communication system help

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page 1&

http://www.managementstudyguide.com/strategic-management.htmhttp://www.managementstudyguide.com/strategic-management.htmhttp://www.managementstudyguide.com/strategic-management.htm


14/23


in measuring the performance. If appropriate means are available for measuring the

performance and if the standards are set in the right manner, strategy evaluation becomes

easier. 4ut various factors such as manager+s contribution are difficult to measure.

2imilarly divisional performance is sometimes difficult to measure as compared to

individual performance. hus, variable objectives must be created against which

measurement of performance can be done. he measurement must be done at right time

else evaluation will not meet its purpose. Cor measuring the performance, financial

statements like * balance sheet, profit and loss account must be prepared on an annual

basis.

• Analy=ing >ariance 9 :hile measuring the actual performance and comparing it with

standard performance there may be variances which must be analy?ed. he strategists

must mention the degree of tolerance limits between which the variance between actualand standard performance may be accepted. he positive deviation indicates a better

performance but it is quite unusual exceeding the target always. he negative deviation is

an issue of concern because it indicates a shortfall in performance. hus in this case the

strategists must discover the causes of deviation and must take corrective action to

overcome it.

• Taking Corrective Action 9


15/23


the programme will be the central focus.

hese types of evaluation are often performed in combination. Cor example@

• A thematic cross-programme evaluation could focus on innovation in several

programmesF

• An operational cross-programme evaluation would look at operational aspects of several

programmes, such as the performance of the indicators in several programmes.

4.1. valuation by *cope

i. Project evaluation

his is conducted for a single project. Cocus depends on the timing of the evaluation i.e.

whether formative or summative

ii. 2ectoral evaluations

his is the cluster evaluation of project in a sector.

It focuses on a comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches,

modalities and# strategies to address sectoral issues, collective effects of the projects on

sectoral objectives at the country, regional and#global level

iii. hematic evaluation

his is a cluster evaluation of projects addressing a particular theme that may cut across

sectors or geographical boundaries.

iv. Programme evaluation

"valuation of programme $using the programme approach) and the portfolio of activities

under the same management or fund.

4.13. !olicy evaluation

"valuation of a cluster of projects dealing with particular policy issues at the sectoral or thematic

level.

It aims at supporting policy making by recommending new policies or changes in the existing

ones that are necessary to attain the sectoral#thematic objectives.

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page 1$


16/23


It focuses on relevance, implications#impact of policies on directly and indirectly affected by

them, costs and benefits, effectiveness of institutional arrangements to implement#enforce the

policies.

$.. #idterm and Terminal valuations

i. =idterm

=idterm evaluation is conducted at midpoint of the project implementation. It focuses on the

relevance, performance $effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness), issues requiring decisions and

actions, initial lessons learned about project design and implementation.

ii. erminal

his evaluation is conducted at the end of the project implementation. It focuses onF relevance,

performance $effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness), issues requiring decisions and actions,

initial lessons learned about project design and implementation.

"arly signs of potential impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity

development, recommendations for follow up activities and those proposed e.g. second phase of

a project.

&.. !articipatory valuation Approac, to #onitoring and valuation

,at is participatory evaluation?

7Participatory monitoring and evaluation is not just a matter of using participatory techniques

within a conventional monitoring and evaluation setting. It is about radically rethinking who

initiates and undertakes the process, and who learns or benefits from the findings.8

GInstitute of evelopment 2tudies, %&&'

Participatory evaluation is a partnership approach to evaluation in which stakeholders actively

engage in developing the evaluation and all phases of its implementation. hose who have the

most at stake in the program partners, program beneficiaries, funders and key decision makers

play active roles. Participation occurs throughout the evaluation process including@

• Identifying relevant questionsF

• planning the evaluation designF



17/23


• 2electing appropriate measures and data collection methodsF

• athering and analy?ing dataF

• 5eaching consensus about findings, conclusions and recommendationsF

• isseminating results and preparing an action plan to improve program performance.

Cundamentally, participatory evaluation is about sharing knowledge and building the evaluation

skills of program beneficiaries and implementers, funders and others. he process seeks to honor

the perspectives, voices, preferences and decisions of the least powerful and most affected

stakeholders and program beneficiaries. Ideally, through this process, participants determine the

evaluation+s focus, design and outcomes within their own socioeconomic, cultural and political

environments.

,y do participatory evaluation?

Participatory approaches require the commitment and valuable time of many. Det, the benefits

are far*reaching.

Participatory evaluation allows groups to@

Identify locally relevant evaluation :uestions

Participatory evaluation ensures that the evaluation focuses on locally relevant questions that

meet the needs of program planners and beneficiaries. Participatory approaches allow local

stakeholders to determine the most important evaluation questions that will affect and improve

their work.

Improve program performance

Participatory evaluation is reflective and action*oriented. It provides stakeholders, including

beneficiaries, with the opportunity to reflect on project progress and generate knowledge that

results in being able to apply the lessons learned. It provides opportunities for groups to take

corrective action and make mid*course improvements.

mpo5er participants

A participatory approach is empowering because it claims the right for local people to control

and own the process of making evaluation decisions and implementing them. Participating in an

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page 1(


18/23


evaluation from start to finish can give stakeholders a sense of ownership over the results.

5ecogni?ing local talents and expertise builds confidence and pride in the community, and

among participants.

0uild capacity

1onducting a participatory evaluation promotes participant learning and is an opportunity to

introduce and strengthen evaluation skills. Active participation by stakeholders can result in new

knowledge and a better understanding of their environment. his, in turn, enables groups to

identify action steps and advocate for policy changes. It can provide participants with tools to

transform their environments.

evelop leaders and build teamsParticipatory evaluation builds teams and participant commitment through collaborative inquiry.

Inviting a broad range of stakeholders to participate and lead different parts of the process can

develop and celebrate local leadership skills. It can lead to stronger, more organi?ed groups,

strengthening the community+s resources and networks.

*ustain organi=ational learning and gro5t,

Cinally, a participatory evaluation is not just interested in findingsF it is focused on creating a

learning process. It creates a knowledge base among local people and organi?ations, which can

be applied to other programs and projects. he techniques and skills acquired can lead to self*

sustained action.

&.1 8uiding !rinciples of !articipatory valuation

• Participant focus and ownership H 2tructures and processes are created to include those

most frequently powerless or voiceless in program design and implementation. he

participatory process honors human contributions and cultural knowledge.

• 9egotiation H Participants commit to work together to decide on the evaluation focus,

how it should be conducted, how findings will be used and what action will result.


19/23


• Clexibility H ses creative methodologies to match the resources, needs and skills of

participants. 2ource@ .2. Agency for International evelopment, %&& and Institute of

evelopment 2tudies, %&&'

&. *teps In planning for participatory valuation

2ome of the key steps in the process of participatory monitoring and evaluation are as follows

$www.unesco.org#ed, /0%6).

i *etting +b"ectives6 'rames of reference

"stablishing the frame of reference and planning the details of the process, keeping in mind the

concerns of the stakeholders and ensuring their participation is the first task in any P=J "

exercise. In this step you need to discuss about why evaluation is needed, to whom it is going to

benefit, what problems one might face and what should be the objectives of evaluation exercise

takes place.


20/23


involvement local population, people, likely to benefit from the programs, field level staff and

organi?ers. :hen the emphasis is on development promoting organi?ations, open, critical and

collective reflections on various organi?ational issues like people to people interactions,

interpersonal interactions, issues of team building conflict management, tensions between the

need for routine structure and spontaneity and flexibility can bring about a common and shared

understanding of problems and collective efforts to solve them.

iii eveloping met,ods to obtain t,at information and data collection

1hoice of methods becomes relevant here. :e can have open*ended interviews, questionnaires,

structured interviews, group discussions, field observations study of records etc. Colk media,

songs, role plays, dramas, art, drawing, have also been extensively used in getting information.

iv Analy=ing data

his is a stage of systemati?ation of information obtained. At this stage a collective process is

supported and encouraged. P= and " involves at all levels all end users and stakeholders

including the beneficiaries in data analysis. 2takeholders groups engage in critical reflection and

thinking about the problems and constraints, success and outcomes of the activities undertaken.

ata analysis primarily depends on the tools chosen for gathering data and on the information

required by the participants.

v ocumenting@ 2eporting and *,aring

he collective analysis should be disseminated to all constituencies from where the information

has been taken. his feedback is an important step. 2ome of the important criteria in

documentation and reporting include@ clarity, simplicity, brevity, use of visuals, timeliness

familiarity, and accessibility. 5esults should be communicated in different ways responding to

end users+ needs.

vi Creating 'uture *cenarios

his step entails painting future scenarios on the basis of analysis developed and assessment of

outside environment for their work and programs etc.

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page )0


21/23


vii volving Action !lans

hese action plans are broadly identified and not concretely planned in detail. =ultiple future

scenarios are discussed, sorted out, integrated and the parties are encouraged to develop concrete

action plans $www.unsesco.or#ed. /0%6)

(. Conclusion

he goal of evaluation is to determine the worth or merit of some procedure, project, process, or

product. :ell*designed evaluations also provide information that can help explain the findings

that are observed. In these days of reform, educators are continually faced with the challenges of

evaluating their innovations and determining whether progress is being made or stated goals

have, in fact, been reached. 4oth common sense and accepted professional practice would

suggest a systematic approach to these evaluation challenges. he role that evaluation may play

will vary depending on the timing, the specific questions to be addressed, and the resources

available. It is best to think of evaluation not as an event, but as a process. he goal should be to

provide an ongoing source of information that can aid decision making at various steps along the

way.

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page )1

http://www.unsesco.or/edhttp://www.unsesco.or/ed


22/23


) 2eferences%. 4lank, 5. $%&&6) Developing a System of Education Indicators: Selecting, Implementing,

and Reporting Indicators. "ducational "valuation and Policy Analysis, %B $%, 2pring)@/. 1hikati K $/00&). Monitoring and Evaluation Handboo, ! regional "artnership for

resource development "ublication, signal press ltd, 9airobi

6. Palton =.> $%&&0). #uality Evaluation and Research Methods, /nd "d. 9ew bury Park,

sage

L. A


23/23


%0. http@##www.unfpa.org#monitoring#toolkit#stakeholder.pdf ate accessed@ th Kune /0%6

%%. http@##depts.washington.edu#ccph#pdfMfiles#"valuation.pdf read Kune /0%6

ate accessed@ th Kune, /0%6

%/. http@##www.unesco.org#education#aladin#paldin#pdf#course0%#unitM0&.pdf

ate accessed@ th Kune, /0%6

,34e5 o Evaluation in Monitoring and Evaluation rou4 / A55ign7ent une )01&Page )&
http://www.unfpa.org/monitoring/toolkit/stakeholder.pdfhttp://www.unfpa.org/monitoring/toolkit/stakeholder.pdfhttp://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/Evaluation.pdf%20read%20June%202013http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course01/unit_09.pdfhttp://www.unfpa.org/monitoring/toolkit/stakeholder.pdfhttp://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/Evaluation.pdf%20read%20June%202013http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course01/unit_09.pdf

types of evaluation-reviewed

Documents