CALL FOR PROPOSAL (2)
Call for Proposals
The project has four parts, that will require the use of mixed methods;
1. Define the conceptual framework for the tool and find relevant examples that might be adapted to the South African context – including defining the variables that will influence its effectiveness, such as rural vs urban, types of CSOs etc
2. Undertake a participatory design process and pre-test the tool in two districts
3. Co-create a process for wider roll-out
4. Document and explore the learning aspects as part of Twende Mbele’s learning plan.
Send proposals to [email protected] by 13th April 2021
Use the link to access the full ToR: bit.do/fQffZ
CALL FOR PROPOSAL
Call for Proposals
The rapid assessment will be guided by a Technical Working Group (TWG) comprised of relevant government stakeholders.
The TWG will be responsible for signing off on all deliverables. The day-to-day operations will be overseen by the DPME, while the contractual and learning requirements will be administered by Twende Mbele.
Send proposals to [email protected] by 13th April 2021
Click the link for the full ToR: http://bit.do/fQbju
Mere compliance or learning – how is M&E culture in the public service affecting the response to COVID
Mere compliance or learning – how is M&E culture in the public service affecting the response to COVID
This chapter builds on research on the performance monitoring and evaluation (M&E) culture in Benin, Uganda and South Africa conducted through the Twende Mbele African M&E partnership, which is presented here to provide a context for the cases in the book.
The research was conducted on approximately five national departments per country and 368 managers were interviewed: 149 from Benin, 127 from South Africa, and 92 from Uganda. We see a mixed picture and many similarities in the three countries.
Overall, all three have significant planning and monitoring systems and an established evaluation system. Around half of managers are seen to be using evidence from M&E, with evaluations used particularly in an ex-post role rather than during the life of interventions. The effect of each country’s national evaluation system is recognised. However, there is also evidence of negative behaviour, using reports to conceal information, not interrogating the cause of failure. The survey is itself a baseline for Twende Mbele and the trends in these figures will be interesting.
Click the link join the discussion:
Building a robust M&E System: Getting political buy-in on the use of evaluation (Webinar)
Building a robust M&E System: Getting political buy-in on the use of evaluation (Webinar)
Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are at the center of sound governance arrangements. They are necessary for the achievement of evidence-based policy making, budget decisions, management, and accountability. There is no “best” model of what a government M&E system should look like. Much depends on which of the several potential uses of M&E information constitute the main reasons for building such a system.
But in order for all of this to happen, political buy-in has to be sought and obtained. Demand from governments is crucial for the utilization of M&E information and for the ongoing funding of M&E activities. Thus, it is necessary to secure the buy-in of the key stakeholders such as government ministers or finance ministries if substantive effort is to be put into creating, strengthening, or funding M&E functions. This webinar will explore how political buy-in for M&E looks in different country contexts.
Click the link to join the webinar:
bit.do/fKh7R
The Growing Practice of Rapid Evaluations in Africa – Insights from Three Countries
In a 2017-19 research study by Twende Mbele to assess the state of M&E culture in five participating countries which included, Benin, South Africa, Uganda, Kenya and Ghana a question regarding the ‘[timeliness of] information provided to decision-makers’ was asked to more than 462 managers.
According to a respondent, information needed to make key decisions does not make it to them on time and when it does, it is not relevant anymore. This suggested that there was a problem with key evidence being available when needed to make decisions. This and other reasons led Twende Mbele to begin an initiative to look at rapid evaluations to plug this gap.
Rapid evaluations are intended to reduce the costs of evaluation projects and the time they take (DPME, 2020). These are evaluations which can produce a result that can feed into policy and practice quickly, but yet is sufficiently robust to provide good guidance for decision-making.
They address the need to quickly assess policy/programme/strategy/function delivery, and establish the main performance data, with main recommendations for improvements (Hercules, 2019). And they also help to understand and learn from what works, what doesn’t, when and for whom.
The last couple of years has seen the advancement of methods for doing Rapid Evaluations, many African countries have taken up the opportunities to conduct this type of evaluation for quicker results. This blog gives a short insight and update of three Twende Mbele country governments in doing the type of evaluation.
At the start of 2019, Twende Mbele designed a Rapid Evaluation Toolkit to provide a framework to think about rapid evaluations, and example questions, indicators and tools to do rapid evaluations. This toolkit is intended for use by officials in evaluations, research and program delivery working in all spheres of government.
In South Africa, the Department of Planning Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) introduced a Rapid Evaluation Guideline in May 2020. The guideline was developed collaboratively between the DPME, the Western Cape Department of the Premier (DoTP) and the Twende Mbele. The Guideline is an introduction to doing rapid evaluations, either conducted internally or externally. It was designed to provide guidance for implementing rapid evaluations in a government context.
Borrowing from the South African Rapid Evaluation Guideline, Benin adapted the guidelines to its existing national guidelines. A training of National Evaluation System (NES) actors took place in June 2020, with the aim of developing the capacities of national actors in this new form of evaluation for use in the event of an emergency, or as part of a preliminary analysis to help determine priorities, identify emerging problems and trends, and enable decision-making to support adjustments to an intervention. With that said, the Bureau of Evaluation of Public policy and Analysis of Government Action BEPPAAG will be undertaking a Rapid Evaluation of the recent effects of COVID-19 on the informal sector.
In Ghana, the Ministry of Monitoring & Evaluation conducted their first rapid evaluation with IDInsight in 2019. This was the Rapid Evaluation of the One Village One Dam (1V1D) project, an intervention which seeks to increase access to reliable source of water for livestock watering, domestic activities and dry season farming as a means of contributing to poverty eradication and addressing the various forms of inequalities with particular emphasis on rural and deprived communities.
The aim of the Rapid Evaluation was to assess the progress of implementation, emerging outcomes and potential impacts of the 1V1D intervention. It also sought to document emerging issues and challenges that will require immediate attention of the Cabinet, Ministry for Special Development Initiative (MSDI) and other stakeholders.
For critical decision-making, Rapid Evaluation have been used in response to unplanned or planned actions by governments for urgent information needs. Inevitably, there is a trade-off for one to use Rapid Evaluation instead of more rigorous evaluation in the public sector. While there is potential for a greater use of findings when they are timely, a longer evaluation allows for more data points, deeper investigation of the literature, etc.
CreativeBox
