User Tools

Site Tools


mel_approach_principles_and_standards

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
mel_approach_principles_and_standards [2019/07/16 12:58]
admin [MEL STANDARDS]
mel_approach_principles_and_standards [2019/07/16 13:48]
admin [MEAL Standards]
Line 101: Line 101:
 ==== MEAL Standards ==== ==== MEAL Standards ====
  
-<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❶</​font>​**Design your MEL system based on a clear theory of change and evidence needs.**+<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❶ </​font>​**Design your MEAL system based on a clear theory of change and evidence needs.**
  
-Projects and initiatives are normally designed based on a holistic analysis of context and stakeholders,​ plus a theory of change or any similar type of comprehensive explanation of the desired changes, the different pathways to get to the desired change and causality. The core of your MEL system should be designed to continuously test the Theory of Change of the project and initiative, being able to answer questions like the following:+Projects and initiatives are normally designed based on a holistic analysis of context and stakeholders,​ plus a theory of change or any similar type of comprehensive explanation of the desired changes, the different pathways to get to the desired change and causality. The core of your MEAL system should be designed to continuously test the Theory of Change of the project and initiative, being able to answer questions like the following:
  
-  * What are the key __outputs and activities__ ​ the MEL system will track in order to inform if the implementation of activities is in the right track, and reaching the expected participants?​ (direct and indirect participants) +  * What are the key __outputs and activities__ ​ the MEAL system will track in order to inform if the implementation of activities is in the right track, and reaching the expected participants?​ (direct and indirect participants) 
-  * What are the key __qualitative and quantitative changes (impact and outcomes)__ ​ the MEL system will track in order to inform if CARE is contributing to significant and lasting changes? Which pathways of change and causality relationships will we track? Who are the actors we will focus on when tracking those pathways? (impact and target populations) +  * What are the key __qualitative and quantitative changes (impact and outcomes)__ ​ the MEAL system will track in order to inform if CARE is contributing to significant and lasting changes? Which pathways of change and causality relationships will we track? Who are the actors we will focus on when tracking those pathways? (impact and target populations) 
-  * What are the __key risks and assumptions__ ​ the MEL system will track and review during implementation in order to ensure the project or initiative is responsive to the context? How will unintended consequences or emerging changes be part of the continuous testing of the theory of change? +  * What are the __key risks and assumptions__ ​ the MEAL system will track and review during implementation in order to ensure the project or initiative is responsive to the context? How will unintended consequences or emerging changes be part of the continuous testing of the theory of change? 
-  * What are __gender, governance and resilience considerations__ ​ the MEL system will track?+  * What are __gender, governance and resilience considerations__ ​ the MEAL system will track?
  
-|For guidance on how to design ​theory ​of change, please see Page 26 of CARE's {{:​long-term_program_guidelines_-_draft_2_27_july_2015-1.docx|Guidelines for Designing ​and Managing Long-Term Programs }} |+**<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❷ </​font>​Have ​clear definition ​of participants ​and the mechanisms to register/​count/​track/​report participants’ data**  ​
  
-**<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❷</​font>​Have a clear definition of participants:​ direct/​indirect participants ​and target/impact groups.**  ​Participants reached and impacted trough CARE projects or initiatives include all individuals ​directly ​or indirectly affected by the problem the project or initiative seeks to address, benefited by the changes the project or initiative ​is contributing to and/or influenced by the strategies CARE uses to facilitate change. Tracking participants in project or initiativeand generating evidence on the changes participants experience requires clear definitions ​and representations on who these individuals areParticipants,​ in CARE, are categorized based on the following criteria: \\ **Criteria 1 - REACH:​** ​ The way an individual is directly or indirectly involved in activities and benefits of the project or initiative’s interventions:​ direct and indirect participants+Projects or initiatives normally have well defined ​**impact group(s)** - those individuals that will ultimately experience impact or lasting change ​and **target ​group(s)** - those individuals ​whose behaviors ​or actions will influence ​the realization of changes ​for the impact groups (see figure in next page). If your project or initiative ​has a theory of change ​or has done stakeholder mapping, the identification of impact ​and target groups would normally come from there.
  
-{{:4581b4edca25a3cd61f700fb167ad86a.png}}+**Important note here:**  When looking at impact and target groups in your project/​initiative,​ please remember that they must be identifiable as individuals that can be described and counted. They cannot be identified in general terms like households, families, groups, communities,​ organizations or other
  
-{{:465ef1d5a2b8e3f6bda3e105b340278e.png}}+Here some examples of questions that can help you confirm if you are looking at concrete individuals:
  
-<font 13.33px/​inherit;;​inherit;;​inherit>​**Criteria 2 - IMPACT:**</​font><​font 13.33px/​inherit;​;inherit;;​inherit>​The way an individual ​either experiences significant ​and lasting change facilitated by the project ​or initiative, or facilitates change for others: impact population/​target population.</​font>​+For the impact groupis the impact group composed of only some individuals from a household? (e.g. mothers and children under 5)or the entire household? (e.g. all individual ​members of food insecure families); or a clear portion of the population in a given location? (e.g. only women and girls of school age in the area where the project ​intervenes).
  
-{{:23c686c2af4b3a7cfcf562af82ea1a24.png}}+* For the target groupswho are the individuals that compose the target groups? Is it a clearly defined group of community/​religious leaders? Or a specific number of decision makers or government officials? Or a number of members of civil society organizations?​ Or a clear portion of the population in a community? Or all the population in a given location?
  
-<font 13.33px/​inherit;;​inherit;;​inherit>​The two ways of defining participants respond to two different ways of explaining who we work with, therefore it is not recommended to make direct equivalences (e.g. direct participants are not necessarily equivalent to impact groups). In CARE, we use both ways as they respond two different purposes when explaining our work:</​font>​ 
  
-  * Direct/​indirect ​participants are used for reporting on the **REACH** ​ of CARE’s ​workand this helps us determining ​the people directly ​and indirectly ​involved in CARE activities, receiving ​or not services/goods/resources, from CARE or through a partner. +{{ ::participants.png?nolink |}} 
-  * Impact groups/​target groups ​are used when looking at the **IMPACT**  of CARE’s work, and this helps us determining ​the people experiencing change/impact (impact groups) from the people that facilitate ​and/​or ​influence those changes (target groups).+ 
 +Once the project or initiative has clarity on who the impact groups and target groups ​are, the next step would be for the project or initiative to define how it will count/track and report on these participants. In CARE’s ​language, this is where the concept of participants REACHED ​and participants IMPACTED comes into play: 
 + 
 +|<font 14px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​**Participants REACHED**</​font>​||<​font 14px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​**Participants IMPACTED**</​font>​| 
 +|* Refers to all those **individuals that a project/​initiative connects with as it implements its activities and delivers outputs**. \\ \\ * Participants REACHED may include: \\ \\ 1) individuals who are __directly__ ​involved in activities ​implemented by the project or initiative, receiving ​support, ​servicesgoodsresources ​or other, from CARE or partners \\ 2) individuals who are __not directly__ involved in activities implemented by the project or initiative, but still indirectly connect with the outputs resulting from those activities. \\ \\ * **Participants REACHED can be classified as DIRECT or INDIRECT participants**, however, this classification greatly depends on the modality ​of implementation that the project/​initiative adopts, and other factors. \\ \\ * For detailed guidance on how to define participants REACHED and IMPACTED for different modalities of implementation,​ please refer to this [[http://​careglobalmel.careinternationalwikis.org/​piirs_fy19_definitions_participants|guidance note]]guidance note||* Refers to all those **individuals who, as a result of the materialization of the goals of a project or initiative, __experience lasting change__** (impact or outcomes). \\ \\  * Depending on the impact or outcome metrics/indicators your project or initiative uses to measure lasting change, the participants IMPACTED could include: \\ \\ 1) __Individuals from the impact ​group__, experiencing lasting change in their lives (e.g. households graduating from extreme poverty; families becoming food secure; children under 5 no longer stunted; women generating income and accessing education; women participating in joint decision-making in the household, etc.) \\ 2) __Individuals ​from the target groups__ whose changed behaviors are also part of lasting change (e.g. local leaders/​men ​and boys rejecting intimate partner violence). \\ \\ * For detailed guidance on how to define participants REACHED and IMPACTED for different modalities of implementation,​ please refer to this [[http://​careglobalmel.careinternationalwikis.org/​piirs_fy19_definitions_participants|guidance note]]guidance note|| 
 +
 + 
 +Note that, within the definition of participants REACHED, we are just looking at tracking/​counting and reporting on individuals that are involved in the activities of a project ​or initiative. We are not counting/​tracking/​reporting if/how these individuals are experiencing important ​changes ​in their lives, like impact/​outcomes ​(e.g. a participant that is receiving training would be counted as REACHED and, unless there is an evaluation process to determine if the knowledge acquired in the training has led to an outcome or impact, this individual would not yet be counted as participant IMPACTED).  
 + 
 +The tracking of participants impacted, normally needs to be supported by an evaluation process (external or coming from a solid monitoring of outcomes) and requires measurement of outcome or impact indicators that the project or initiative has defined since its design (see next standard).  
  
 <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❸</​font>​**Define a meaningful and manageable set of quantitative and qualitative indicators and/or questions for impact, outcomes and outputs in each participant group, and the methods to track them.** <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❸</​font>​**Define a meaningful and manageable set of quantitative and qualitative indicators and/or questions for impact, outcomes and outputs in each participant group, and the methods to track them.**
Line 134: Line 143:
  
 Based on the indicators and questions you select for tracking impact, outcomes and outputs, define the most appropriate combination of methodological approaches to track them. Based on the indicators and questions you select for tracking impact, outcomes and outputs, define the most appropriate combination of methodological approaches to track them.
 +
 +|<font 12px>​**Cost-effectiveness:​** If the project or initiative has then intention to track cost-effectiveness,​ this is where you will need to design a tracked record of expenditures utilization linked with the identified outcome indicators, in order to be able to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of certain strategies or outcome areas.</​font>​|
  
 <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❹</​font>​**Define the monitoring and evaluation moments and methods that best ensure robust and comparable tracking of outputs, outcomes and impact.** <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❹</​font>​**Define the monitoring and evaluation moments and methods that best ensure robust and comparable tracking of outputs, outcomes and impact.**
Line 139: Line 150:
 <font 14px/​inherit;;​inherit;;​inherit>​**4.1 Monitoring outputs and participants**</​font>​ <font 14px/​inherit;;​inherit;;​inherit>​**4.1 Monitoring outputs and participants**</​font>​
  
-Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative to track outputs from all those key activities being implemented (e.g. health staff from health services participating in training). While collecting and analyzing data at this level, the MEL system won’t generate explanations related to impact or outcomesbut will regularly ask if all the activities and outputs are the most appropriate and if they are really setting the bases towards the expected outcomes and impacts. \\  \\ **Important considerations when monitoring participants ​(direct/​indirect or impact/​target groups):** +Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative to track outputs from all those key activities being implemented (e.g. health staff from health services participating in training). While collecting and analyzing data at this level, the MEAL system won’t generate explanations related to impact or outcomes but will regularly ask if all the activities and outputs are the most appropriate and if they are really setting the bases towards the expected outcomes and impacts. \\ \\ **Important considerations when monitoring participants:​** 
-  * Participants are always individuals. Even if our projects or initiatives work with households, communities or institutions,​ these are always composed of individuals,​ therefore, should ultimately monitored as individuals. + 
-  * One individual can be reached by one or more project or initiative in one particular context. The monitoring actions should be aware of duplications with other projects or initiatives,​ and establish the mechanism to report data without double counting. + * Participants are always individuals. Even if our projects or initiatives work with households, communities or institutions,​ these are always composed of individuals,​ therefore, should ultimately monitored as individuals.  
-  * Participants’ data should normally be disaggregated by sex, age and potentially by disability or any key criteria related to the problem or vulnerability the project or initiative seeks to address. Estimations based on statistical references (e.g. census) are not always the most accurate measure. If the disaggregation is made using estimates, the source of the ratio must be explained. + * One individual can be reached by one or more project or initiative in one particular context. The monitoring actions should be aware of duplications with other projects or initiatives,​ and establish the mechanism to report data without double counting.  
-  * In projects or initiative implemented in the course of multiple years, the total participants in a particular year should be cumulative and single counted (existing and new participants). Even though it is important to know the incremental process, participant’s information is not normally aggregated year by year.+ * Participants’ data should normally be disaggregated by sex, age and potentially by disability or any key criteria related to the problem or vulnerability the project or initiative seeks to address. Estimations based on statistical references (e.g. census) are not always the most accurate measure. If the disaggregation is made using estimates, the source of the ratio must be explained. 
 + * In projects or initiative implemented in the course of multiple years, the total participants in a particular year should be cumulative and single counted (existing and new participants). Even though it is important to know the incremental process, participant’s information is not normally aggregated year by year.
  
 **4.2 Monitoring of Outcomes** **4.2 Monitoring of Outcomes**
  
-Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative, to track key behavioral changes in some actors or strategic elements that set the causal linkage between outputs and outcomes and impact. Outcome monitoring helps generating indicative information (qualitative and quantitative) of what’s changing and what’s not / what’s working and what’s not, as the project or initiative advances towards the expected outcomes. For example, what happens after health staff participates in training? Do their behaviors change? How does changes in behavior favor women’s access to SRMH services? Outcome monitoring can be a continuous action (e.g. performing participant observation or doing informal interviews constantly),​ or a periodic action (e.g. applying an annual questionnaire or survey). In all cases, outcome monitoring may or may not have the same levels of representativeness of an evaluation, nevertheless,​ it does provide with important indications of progress and learning around the way the project is progressing towards contribution to change, the appropriateness of the strategies used and the validity of the assumptions in the theory of change. \\  \\ **Important considerations when operationalizing outcome monitoring actions:**+Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative, to track key behavioral changes in some actors or strategic elements that set the causal linkage between outputs and outcomes and impact. Outcome monitoring helps generating indicative information (qualitative and quantitative) of what’s changing and what’s not / what’s working and what’s not, as the project or initiative advances towards the expected outcomes. For example, what happens after health staff participates in training? Do their behaviors change? How does changes in behavior favor women’s access to SRMH services? Outcome monitoring can be a continuous action (e.g. performing participant observation or doing informal interviews constantly),​ or a periodic action (e.g. applying an annual questionnaire or survey). In all cases, outcome monitoring may or may not have the same levels of representativeness of an evaluation, nevertheless,​ it does provide with important indications of progress and learning around the way the project is progressing towards contribution to change, the appropriateness of the strategies used and the validity of the assumptions in the theory of change. \\ \\ **Important considerations when operationalizing outcome monitoring actions:​** ​\\  
   * Is the volume of data, the frequency with which data is collected and the moments in time monitoring actions are undertaken, and the most useful for the project or initiative?   * Is the volume of data, the frequency with which data is collected and the moments in time monitoring actions are undertaken, and the most useful for the project or initiative?
   * Are the monitoring actions (collecting,​ reporting or analyzing data) considering the availability of time and predisposition of project staff or to project participants?​   * Are the monitoring actions (collecting,​ reporting or analyzing data) considering the availability of time and predisposition of project staff or to project participants?​
   * Will all the data generated by monitoring actions be used and disseminated,​ and will inform decisions on the implementation or the theory of change of the project or initiative? Note: If that is not the case, you may be collecting more data than you actually need.   * Will all the data generated by monitoring actions be used and disseminated,​ and will inform decisions on the implementation or the theory of change of the project or initiative? Note: If that is not the case, you may be collecting more data than you actually need.
 +
 +|<font 12px> **Value for Money:** If your MEAL system needs to look at “Value for Money”, the monitoring component should incorporate elements that look at other elements like economy (quality of inputs), efficiency (delivery of outputs), effectiveness (extent to which outputs are converted into outcomes and impacts) and equity (extent to which most vulnerable groups are reached) of the actions implemented by the project or the initiative.</​font>​|
  
 **4.3 Evaluation** **4.3 Evaluation**
  
-Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative, to objectively assess its relevance and fulfillment ​of objectives, its efficiency, effectiveness,​ impact and sustainability,​ and/or its worth or significance (based on the OECD/DAC definitions). Evaluations in CARE projects and initiatives can be carried out for different purposes and take a variety of forms (see descriptions below). Nonetheless,​ all evaluations need to provide with substantiated evidence of the changes that took place as a result of a project or initiative’s actions, and a plausible explanation of how CARE’s actions contributed to the materialization of those changes.+Define the moments, tools and resources used throughout the life of the project or initiative, to objectively assess its relevance and fulfilment ​of objectives, its efficiency, effectiveness,​ impact and sustainability,​ and/or its worth or significance (based on the OECD/DAC definitions). Evaluations in CARE projects and initiatives can be carried out for different purposes and take a variety of forms (see descriptions below). Nonetheless,​ all evaluations need to provide with substantiated evidence of the changes that took place as a result of a project or initiative’s actions, and a plausible explanation of how CARE’s actions contributed to the materialization of those changes. ​\\ \\ 
  
   * **Formative evaluations:​** ​ carried out during implementation of a project or initiative, intended to improve a project´s performance,​ informing necessary adjustments of project in relation to project design, planning, resources, approaches and methodologies,​ and capturing lessons and promising practices that inform decision-making (e.g. real time/​mid-term evaluations of any project or initiative).   * **Formative evaluations:​** ​ carried out during implementation of a project or initiative, intended to improve a project´s performance,​ informing necessary adjustments of project in relation to project design, planning, resources, approaches and methodologies,​ and capturing lessons and promising practices that inform decision-making (e.g. real time/​mid-term evaluations of any project or initiative).
   * **Summative or End-line evaluation:​**often carried out at the end of a project, intended to assess the extent to which expected outcomes have materialized and assessing its significance or relevance (end-line evaluations).   * **Summative or End-line evaluation:​**often carried out at the end of a project, intended to assess the extent to which expected outcomes have materialized and assessing its significance or relevance (end-line evaluations).
-  * **Impact evaluations**:​ carried out either during or after the implementation of a project or initiative, intended to demonstrate impact in a cause-and-effect manner to an intervention. In impact evaluations,​ the focus shifts away from what CARE is doing, to observe and track the changes that take place in the lives of the impact groups, and how these changes come about. Impact evaluation normally entails a step further than any other type of evaluation and implies a deeper look to the participants and the changes they experience, plus collaborating with others in order to explain how these changes were facilitated by the project or initiative. As a result, it directs all is attention to test the theory of change behind the project or initiative and demonstrate how CARE contributes to that. +  * **Impact evaluations**:​ carried out either during or after the implementation of a project or initiative, intended to demonstrate impact in a cause-and-effect manner to an intervention. In impact evaluations,​ the focus shifts away from what CARE is doing, to observe and track the changes that take place in the lives of the impact groups, and how these changes come about. Impact evaluation normally entails a step further than any other type of evaluation and implies a deeper look to the participants and the changes they experience, plus collaborating with others in order to explain how these changes were facilitated by the project or initiative. As a result, it directs all is attention to test the theory of change behind the project or initiative and demonstrate how CARE contributes to that. \\ \\ **Important considerations when operationalizing evaluations:​** ​\\ 
-**Important considerations when operationalizing evaluations:​**+
   * Evaluations should provide with complete and comparable assessments of the before-after or with-without situation.   * Evaluations should provide with complete and comparable assessments of the before-after or with-without situation.
   * Evaluations should assess desired as well as unexpected outcomes.   * Evaluations should assess desired as well as unexpected outcomes.
   * Evaluations can be conducted or supported by qualified professionals who establish and maintain credibility in the evaluation context. However, CARE staff should be highly involved in the whole evaluative process from the very beginning, not only to guarantee ownership of the process but also to open opportunity to strengthen MEL capacities and to learn.   * Evaluations can be conducted or supported by qualified professionals who establish and maintain credibility in the evaluation context. However, CARE staff should be highly involved in the whole evaluative process from the very beginning, not only to guarantee ownership of the process but also to open opportunity to strengthen MEL capacities and to learn.
   * Evaluation results need to be processed and reported in multiple ways and addressing different stakeholder needs and purposes. Evaluation results should be accessible for learning and for encouraging the project and participants to rediscover, reinterpret,​ or revise their understandings,​ plans and behaviors.   * Evaluation results need to be processed and reported in multiple ways and addressing different stakeholder needs and purposes. Evaluation results should be accessible for learning and for encouraging the project and participants to rediscover, reinterpret,​ or revise their understandings,​ plans and behaviors.
- 
-| \\  <font 14px/​Arial,​Helvetica,​sans-serif;;​inherit;;​inherit>​Additional guidance available around this standard: \\  \\ 
-Guidance on hiring an external evaluator:</​font>​**{{:​hiringanevaluator_guidelines_final.docx|hiringanevaluator_guidelines_final.docx}} 
- ** \\  \\ <font 14px/​Arial,​Helvetica,​sans-serif;;​inherit;;​inherit>​TOR template for external evaluators:</​font>​**{{:​tor_template_final.docx|tor_template_final.docx}} 
- ** \\  \\ <font 14px/​Arial,​Helvetica,​sans-serif;;​inherit;;​inherit>​Template for Evaluation Reports:</​font>​**{{:​evaluation_report_template.docx|evaluation_report_template.docx}} 
- ** | 
  
 <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❺</​font>​**Ensure your evidence can be translated into learning and support on the identification of potential for scale.** <font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❺</​font>​**Ensure your evidence can be translated into learning and support on the identification of potential for scale.**
  
-Monitoring and Evaluation actions normally generate a great amount of data and evidence, therefore, can naturally contribute to a structured body of information and knowledge inside and outside of. However, data and evidence can only be useful for learning and for multiplying impact, when data and evidence is adequately organized, processed, analyzed, discussed and shared. \\ **Important considerations to link monitoring and evaluation with learning:**+Monitoring and Evaluation actions normally generate a great amount of data and evidence, therefore, can naturally contribute to a structured body of information and knowledge inside and outside of. However, data and evidence can only be useful for learning and for multiplying impact, when data and evidence is adequately organized, processed, analyzed, discussed and shared. ​\\ \\ **Important considerations to link monitoring and evaluation with learning:​** ​\\ 
   * Define a learning agenda from the very beginning of the project or initiative, around the following question:   * Define a learning agenda from the very beginning of the project or initiative, around the following question:
       * What is it that we want to learn from the implementation of this project or initiative?       * What is it that we want to learn from the implementation of this project or initiative?
Line 186: Line 194:
   * Whenever possible, include external actors on monitoring or evaluation teams (e.g. project staff, representatives of other CARE projects or partner agencies, etc.).   * Whenever possible, include external actors on monitoring or evaluation teams (e.g. project staff, representatives of other CARE projects or partner agencies, etc.).
  
-<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❻</​font>​**Make your evidence accessible, and ensure your MEL practices are participative and responsive to feedback.**+<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❻</​font>​**Make your evidence accessible, and ensure your MEAL practices are participative and responsive to feedback.**
  
-CARE’s [[https://​www.care-international.org/​files/​files/​CARE International Accountability Framework.pdf|commitment to accountability]] implies that projects and initiatives promote transparency in their actions, information and decisions, encourage participation from different stakeholders to shape their work, and deliberately open channels for feedback and take action based on feedback. +CARE’s [[https://​www.care-international.org/​files/​files/​CARE International Accountability Framework.pdf|commitment to accountability]] implies that projects and initiatives promote transparency in their actions, information and decisions, encourage participation from different stakeholders to shape their work, and deliberately open channels for feedback and take action based on feedback. ​\\ \\ **Important considerations when linking monitoring and evaluation with accountability:​** ​\\  
- +  * Ensure your MEAL actions balance the moments for data/​evidence collection with moments for actors to provide feedback to CARE, and make sure to connect this feedback to the appropriate instances, so that feedback is always followed by action. 
- \\ **Important considerations when linking monitoring and evaluation with accountability:​** +  * Define how and in which moments will MEAL staff, program managers and other CARE and non-CARE actors will engage and collaborate in all the different steps of generating and using data, analyzing and responding to feedback, as well as making decisions for adaptive management. 
-  * Ensure your MEL actions balance the moments for data/​evidence collection with moments for actors to provide feedback to CARE, and make sure to connect this feedback to the appropriate instances, so that feedback is always followed by action. +  * Ensure ​the MEAL system embeds a feedback ​and complaints ​mechanism that is comprehensive and in line with global standards (e.g. Core Humanitarian Standards).
-  * Define how and in which moments will MEL staff, program managers and other CARE and non-CARE actors will engage and collaborate in all the different steps of generating and using data, analyzing and responding to feedback, as well as making decisions for adaptive management. +
-  * For humanitarian projects, ensure ​the MEL system embeds a complaint and feedback mechanism that is comprehensive and au pair with Core Humanitarian Standards.+
   * Make sure the targeting strategy of the project or initiative and the definition of participants promote equity and address the needs of the most vulnerable groups.   * Make sure the targeting strategy of the project or initiative and the definition of participants promote equity and address the needs of the most vulnerable groups.
-  * Make sure key information generated by your MEL system is accurately reported and available for all the organizationThis can be via the PIIRS system or the [[https://​impact.care-international.org/​reach/​countries|Reach and Impact Map]]. +  * Make sure key information generated by your MEAL system is accurately reported and available for different audiences (examples: [[http://​careglobalmel.careinternationalwikis.org/​global_data|PIIRS data]], ​the [[https://​impact.care-international.org/​reach/​countries|Reach and Impact Map]], etc.) 
-  * Make sure your evaluations are well documented ​andpublically ​available in CARE’s Electronic Evaluation Library [[http://​www.careevaluations.org|http://​www.careevaluations.org]].+  * Make sure your evaluations are well documented ​and publicly ​available in CARE’s Electronic Evaluation Library [[http://​www.careevaluations.org|http://​www.careevaluations.org]]. 
  
-<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❼</​font>​**Use your MEL system to continuously read the context and adapt to it.**+<font 16px/​inherit;;#​e67e22;;​inherit>​❼</​font>​**Use your MEAL system to continuously read the context and adapt to it.**
  
-Adaptive approaches are increasingly and undeniable relevant to address complexity in the contexts in which we implement projects and initiatives. Our capacity to adapt covers many other areas of organizational culture, structures, processes and capacities that go beyond ​MEL purely. However, ​MEL systems can be highly instrumental for adaptation. \\  \\ **Important elements to consider when linking ​MEL to adaptive management:​** +Adaptive approaches are increasingly and undeniable relevant to address complexity in the contexts in which we implement projects and initiatives. Our capacity to adapt covers many other areas of organizational culture, structures, processes and capacities that go beyond ​MEAL purely. However, ​MEAL systems can be highly instrumental for adaptation. \\ \\ **Important elements to consider when linking ​MEAL to adaptive management:​** ​\\ 
-  * Your MEL practices need to be agile and have the capacity to collect data, generate evidence, identify changes and generate recommendations more frequently. + * Your MEAL practices need to be agile and have the capacity to collect data, generate evidence, identify changes and generate recommendations more frequently.  
-  * The MEL system should include regular review points when monitoring and feedback data is assessed against the theory of change, so that adaptation can occur accordingly. + * The MEAL system should include regular review points when monitoring and feedback data is assessed against the theory of change, so that adaptation can occur accordingly. 
-  * Your MEL system should dedicate considerable effort to rapid learning and very agile feedback, in order to inform changes. + * Your MEAL system should dedicate considerable effort to rapid learning and very agile feedback, in order to inform changes. 
-  * Your MEL system needs to be flexible, adjusting indicators, methods, tools and resources based on potential changes of the overall design of the project or the initiative. + * Your MEAL system needs to be flexible, adjusting indicators, methods, tools and resources based on potential changes of the overall design of the project or the initiative. 
-  * Your MEL system should be clearly linked with decision making instances, in order to make sure that data and evidence signaling need for adjustments are taken into action.+ * Your MEAL system should be clearly linked with decision making instances, in order to make sure that data and evidence signaling need for adjustments are taken into action.
  
-\\ 
  
  
mel_approach_principles_and_standards.txt · Last modified: 2019/07/16 13:55 by admin