- Monitoring and Evaluation NEWS - http://mande.co.uk -

Developing a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework: A list

Posted By rick davies On 31 August, 2011 @ 10:14 PM In Uncategorized | No Comments

Tweet ^[1]

[Aplogies: This page is still at the draft stage, there are some formating and other problems]

A suggested definition of a M&E Framework:

A document that tells you who is expected to know what, as well as when and how they are expected to know.

The list (under development, suggestions welcomed):

Clear Horizon: Developing Frameworks Overview ^[2] (Undated!) Includes seven steps:

CES UK (Undated!) A framework for monitoring and evaluation ^[10]

Understanding and clarifying your project ^[11]
Developing a mission statement ^[12]
Aims and objectives ^[13]
Performance Indicators ^[14]
Setting targets ^[15]
Planning for monitoring and evaluatio ^[16]n

What should be found within an M&E framework / plan? ^[17] Rick Davies, 2008, one pager note on suggested contents. Soon to be revised

^[18]

Tweet ^[1]

(found via IFAD posting on Xceval)

[from the IFAD website ^[2]] “The Independent Office of Evaluation of IFAD (IOE) is making publicly available all the ratings on the performance of IFAD-supported operations evaluated since 2002. As such, IOE joins the few development organizations that currently make such data available to the public at large. The broader aim of disclosing such evaluation data is to further strengthen organizational accountability and transparency (in line with IFAD’s Disclosure and Evaluation Policies), as well as enable others interested (including researches and academics) to conduct their own analysis based on IOE data.

All evaluation ratings may be seen in the Excel database ^[3]. At the moment, the database contains ratings of 170 projects evaluated by IOE. These ratings also provide the foundation for preparing IOE’s flagship report, the Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD operations (ARRI) ^[4].

As in the past, IOE will continue to update the database annually by including ratings from new independent evaluations conducted each year based on the methodology captured in the IFAD Evaluation Manual ^[5]. It might be useful to underline that IOE uses a six-point rating scale (where 6 is the highest score and 1 the lowest) to assess the performance of IFAD-funded operations across a series of internationally recognised evaluation criteria (e.g., relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, rural poverty impact, sustainability, gender, and others).

Moreover, in 2006, IOE’s project evaluation ratings criteria were harmonized with those of IFAD’s operations, to ensure greater consistency between independent and self-evaluation data (Agreement between PMD and IOE on the Harmonization of Self-Evaluation and Independent Evaluation Systems of IFAD ^[6]). The Harmonization agreement was further enhanced in 2011 ^[7], following the Peer Review of IFAD’s Office of Evaluation and Evaluation Function. The aforementioned agreements also allow to determine any ‘disconnect’ in the reporting of project performance respectively by IOE and IFAD management.”

^[8]