1 / 20

ENHANCED LIVELIHOODS IN THE MANDERA TRIANGLE

ENHANCED LIVELIHOODS IN THE MANDERA TRIANGLE. Learning and monitoring approaches within ELMT Vanessa Tilstone, Learning, Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor. ELMT Consortium: 6 INGOs and 20 LNGOs.

nelson
Télécharger la présentation

ENHANCED LIVELIHOODS IN THE MANDERA TRIANGLE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ENHANCED LIVELIHOODS IN THE MANDERA TRIANGLE Learning and monitoring approaches within ELMT Vanessa Tilstone, Learning, Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor

  2. ELMT Consortium: 6 INGOs and 20 LNGOs Goal: Increased self-reliance and resiliency of the population through improved livelihoods in drought prone pastoral areas of the Mandera Triangle 6 intermediate results relating to: 1. Livelihood protection; 2. Livestock health, production and marketing, 3. NRM, 4. Livelihood diversification, 5. Peacebuilding 6. Promoting pastoral voice/policy

  3. Operational area

  4. Why evidence of change approach: • Needed a broad framework to accommodate different monitoring systems and a range of activities; • Needed a way to ‘break down’ broad and ambitious higher level objectives into ‘incremental changes’ we could focus on and monitor; • Needed a way to separate out changes influenced by ELMT vis a vis other complementary activities and programs;

  5. Evidence of change monitoring plan

  6. E.g. VSF Suisse Somalia: enhanced income sources

  7. Evidence of change review

  8. E.g. SC/US Negelle

  9. Important principles of evidence of change review: • It is only a tool – so it’s effectiveness depends on how it is used! • Needs to be analytical, open and honest else not worth doing; • Should be done with field staff and managers; • Examples need to be specific and verifiable: need ‘evidence’ • Should draw on other monitoring tools but also can help identify where in depth monitoring needs to take place; • Participatory monitoring techniques most appropriate way of understanding whether change happening and to get an understanding of negative influences as well as unintended consequences; e.g. Most significant change technique, stories of change; • Indicators should be reviewed to incorporate improved understanding and changing context and focus

  10. E.g. of use in reporting: Evidence of positive change: • Following CARE Ethiopia’s training of women and customary leaders on early warning and response, communities were observed to have increased hay making, diversified livestock species, buying and storing food grains when the market is good, and diversification of livelihood assets. • Following the LINKS training on EW/ER in Borana CIFA is collecting market information more regularly and in a more standardised form. Government offices are now using to plan interventions e.g. when grain prices increased DPPC used to lobby to increase the number of safety net beneficiaries. • In Negelle SC/US staff observed that as a result of supplementary feeding interventions and mobilisation communities are no longer burning crop residues but are feeding them to cattle (Mieso) as well as cutting grass (korati) and buying teff stalks (Adeo). • Following the Mandera workshop, three concept notes were developed, two of which were funded (1 for VSF-S and 1 for SADO). Evidence of no change: • The Laisamis contingency plans are still not fully developed with assistance from CARE Kenya/CIFA due to lack of capacity and government officials stationed far from new districts;

  11. Successes: • Helped in early stages of the program to get agreement on what teams were trying to do and communicating with others; e.g. feedback from Mandera workshop • Helped improve implementation e.g. agreement on selection criteria for fodder farmers; • Helped focus monitoring tools: reduced a fodder monitoring form from 21 to 7 pages! • Improved reporting: evidence of change section of report became the focus of later synthesis documents; • People found it quite intuitive and relatively easy to understand – people using in everyday language;

  12. Outcome mapping: basis • Development actors as a part of an interconnected web of relationships and systems; • Change is complex, multi-directional, non linear, non controllable; • Development actors influence rather than control change; recognizes that there are multiple influences; • Behavioural change is key to sustainable development; www.outcomemapping.ca

  13. Outcome mapping v evidence of change

  14. Challenges: • Lack of interest/priority for monitoring/program quality; • Activity/output bias in reporting and monitoring; • Lack of time for reflection and learning especially between filed and senior staff; • Getting to the evidence: not unsubstantiated assertions – quotes, case studies, quantitative information; • Lack of L, M and E capacity. M and E staff drawn into program management roles rather than capacity building and facilitating change reviews;

  15. Recommendations: • Get commitment early on the importance of L, M and E and promoting program quality: build into plans/budgets/job descriptions/appraisals/recruitment particularly at the highest levels • Build in semi-annual program reviews with managers AND field staff; • Devoted L, M and E staff – ring fenced;

  16. Other learning approaches • Technical working groups: good mechanism but generally under-resourced; • Sharing good practice and lessons learnt: good practice bibliographies (too late), technical briefs, (not systematic enough) bi-annual newsletter; monthly electronic bulletin; • Website for sharing 100+ documents www.elmt-relpa.org; • Open days and lessons’ bazaars; • PIAs and technical reviews – dropped or poorly done • Review of consortium functioning and in-depth final evaluation – on website;

  17. The vicious circle of development: Chris Roche: Impact Assessment

  18. Other lessons from ELMT for CARE • Management of consortium programs: serious deficiencies: no oversight/conflict resolution mechanism; lack of attention to relationships and process; lack of interest in/mechanisms to promote program quality; lack of accountability (particularly downward) and transparency; • Cost: only 21% of $10million went anywhere near the client group despite being the ground piece for RELPA – no mechanisms or interest in this downward accountability; • CARE systems prevented much innovative programming: bureaucracy in supporting CBO’s, time spent on chasing contracts and payments; focus on structures rather than capacity building.

  19. CARE • We can either be part of this circle or we can challenge it internally and externally and break out; • Needs more than a change in impact assessment needs a change in values, views on collaboration; thinking on development; types of programs we take on, portfolio size; organisational priorities, program and finance/risk balance; • P-shift is one way of doing this, but needs far more resources and prioritisation and the commitment of everyone – serious change management strategy

More Related