BackHome
Refresh: OffView Personal Schedule
Session Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Utilization of findings: Exploring how multi and bi-lateral M&E priorities influence the ‘why’, ‘what’ and ‘how’ of education projects

Thu, March 12, 1:15 to 2:45pm, Washington Hilton, Floor: Lobby Level, Oak Lawn

Session Submission Type: Group Panel

Description of Session

There is a growing consensus that utilization of findings is a critical marker of successful monitoring and evaluation (DAC 2002 , Patton 2009 , Fitzpatrick et al., 2011, World Bank 2004 , Bamberger et al., 2012 ). Given this importance, it is critical to understand the challenges and opportunities international education development projects face as they begin to implement this approach to evaluation within the donor/client/development community. What do we know about how donor policies and priorities influence project level evaluation? How useful is it for learning about what interventions work – or do not work in improving outcomes? What can we tell evaluators and other project staff about how they use and implement the ideal of utilization-focused evaluation in current development context?
There is a growing body of literature that looks at the monitoring and evaluation polices and priorities of bi-lateral and multi-lateral organizations and how they align with the various development initiatives that these organizations’ and national governments’ have implemented (i.e. Millenium Development Goals, Education for All, Fast Track Intiative, The US President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief, etc.). However, there is little literature on the evaluation practices of the development organizations that implement projects in the field and how these practices are characterized in response to the bi-lateral and multi-lateral organizations development priorities and policies.
FHI 360 Global Learning Group’s Monitoring and Evaluation Team (META) has initiated a study into its own M&E practices over the past 20 years. This study describes the common characteristics of their project M&E systems and highlights the various pressures the bilateral and multi-lateral policies and priorities place on this system design. By looking for evidence of M&E practices where the findings have contributed to the body of knowledge about what works and what doesn’t work in education development interventions – we draw attention to the challenges that project level M&E faces in drawing a balance between M&E for accountability and M&E where findings can be utilized to improve program performance or inform future design.
This panel will serve as a forum to further discuss findings and explore with panel members and audience members how bi-lateral and multi-lateral agendas can influence M&E system design at the project level.
The following questions will guide the panel presentation and group discussion:
1. What are the key characteristics of project M&E practices over the past 15 - 20 years (specifically focused on Global Learning Group education projects in FHI 360 (previously AED))?
2. What are the M&E policies and priorities on, for example: key indicators; evaluation management; M&E funding, M&E standards; M&E staff qualifications – of the development organizations linked most closely to FHI 360 projects (i.e. USAID, UNESCO, World Bank) in the past 20 years? How do they link to the goal of utilization of findings?
3. How are the project M&E practices tied to global/institutional/organizational M&E policies and priorities?
4. How do project these M&E practices enable or limit the utilization of findings?
5. In what ways have the priorities and policies of international development organizations – like USAID, World Bank, UNESCO – encouraged M&E practices that support learning and understanding or good practice?

Sub Unit

Chair

Individual Presentations