|
Session Title: Integrated Monitoring, Evaluation, and Planning (IMEP): An Approach to Evaluating International Research and Systems Change
|
|
Panel Session 703 to be held in California A on Friday, Nov 4, 2:50 PM to 4:20 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Systems in Evaluation TIG
and the International and Cross-cultural Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Jane Maland Cady, McKnight Foundation, jmalandcady@mcknight.org
|
| Discussant(s):
|
| Margaret Hargreaves, Mathematica Policy Research, mhargreaves@mathematica-mpr.com
|
| Abstract:
In 2008, The McKnight Foundation began a new phase of its Collaborative Crop Research Program (CCRP). An evaluation design was intended to encourage cross-program coherence among 65 independent projects; to build local and regional capacity; to support communities of practice (Andes, Western Africa, East/Horn of Africa, Southern Africa); to encourage systems thinking in the areas of gender equality, agroecointensification, and sustainability; and to evaluate systemic improvements in nutrition and livelihood arising from basic crop research. Integrated Monitoring, Evaluation, and Planning (IMEP) was the result. These three panel members provide perspectives on design, development, and implementation of this approach. The funder (McKnight Foundation) discusses the drivers and challenges of an integrated M&E approach. The designers (Human Systems Dynamics Institute) discuss the principles and practices of a dialogue-based, systemic evaluation. The implementers in the field (Regional M&E Support) describe the process of introducing IMEP to project teams in diverse cultures, locales, scientific disciplines, and readiness.
|
|
Funding (and Evaluating) Complex Systems Change
|
| Rebecca Nelson, McKnight Foundation, rjn7@cornell.edu
|
| Jane Maland Cady, McKnight Foundation, jmalandcady@mcknight.org
|
|
Funders supporting social innovation wrestle to find evaluation approaches that support the emergent nature of those approaches, while also responding to practical demands of grant compliance. Increasingly, global efforts on top of foundation values, add to the complexity of finding effective and appropriate evaluation approaches, along with foundation values. In this experience, we will examine the ways in which the grantmaking process can be infused with a comprehensive perspective using systems concepts, iterative learning, case appropriate evaluation methods, and capacity building across countries, across sectors, across disciplines. This section will also present how the integration of monitoring, evaluation and planning fits into the overall foundation evaluation strategy of the McKnight Foundation.
|
|
|
Designing an Evaluation Framework for a Complex, Global Agricultural Research Initiative
|
| Marah Moore, I2I Institute, marah@i2i-institute.com
|
| Glenda Eoyang, Human Systems Dynamics Institute, geoyang@hsdinstitute.org
|
|
As a place-based, global agricultural research initiative, the Collaborative Crop Research Program (CCRP) is complex in its functions, its relationships, its points of influence, its capacities, its accountability systems-and its needs related to evaluation. The IMEP design is a response to these complexities, attempting to strike a balance across multiple evaluation purposes: documenting outcomes; increasing understanding of the contextual influences in place-based research; supporting adaptive practice; guiding capacity building; and providing a framework for accountability at multiple levels. At the center of these is the overarching purpose of learning. IMEP is committed to a paradigm shift in international development M&E-a move from external monitoring and summative evaluation focused on accountability to an integrated, iterative, learning-based system that supports high quality evaluation practice. This presentation discusses our process of developing IMEP, the challenges and successes we have encountered along the way, and what we have learned in the process.
| |
|
Evaluation for Learning: CCRP Implementation Opportunities and Challenges
|
| Claire Nicklin, McKnight Foundation, clairenicklin@gmail.com
|
| Adiza Lamien Ouando, Independent Consultant, azouando@yahoo.fr
|
| Carolyne Nombo Mtoni, Sokoine University, cnombo@yahoo.com
|
| Kemigisa Margaret, , kemmargaret@yahoo.com
|
|
To the extent that projects and institutions in the field have worked with M&E it is usually falls into three categories, donor driven mechanisms for accountability, donor driven external evaluations and/or participative processes with stakeholders that rely on anecdotal evidence and testimonials, whereas as the CCRP approach emphasizes internal learning and flexibility based on solid data. Another challenge for the implementation of the IMEP system is that participating organizations are usually geared towards biophysical research and are unfamiliar with social and qualitative methods or the organizations are mostly dedicated to development activities and are unfamiliar with rigorous evaluation methods. The IMEP support endeavors to use various tools and methods of iterative dialogue to provide insight on the relevance and quality of project activities and thereby help facilitate the creation of flexible frameworks in the form of theories of change, monitoring and evaluation plans and work plans, which take into account the leverage points for change in agriculture systems and institutions that the projects are researching. The IMEP support also helps to aggregate the projects at a regional level to measure impact but also to see how the synergies and collaboration that the Collaborative Crop Research Program is based on creates portfolios that are more powerful than the individual parts, a process that is replicated at the program level.
| |