1 / 25

Measuring Impact in Implementation Monday, April 21, 2014 @ 2.00pm

Measuring Impact in Implementation Monday, April 21, 2014 @ 2.00pm. Jeffrey Swedberg (Senior M&E Associate, QED Group). Purpose .

penn
Télécharger la présentation

Measuring Impact in Implementation Monday, April 21, 2014 @ 2.00pm

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. Measuring Impact in ImplementationMonday, April 21, 2014 @ 2.00pm Jeffrey Swedberg (Senior M&E Associate, QED Group)

  2. Purpose “The success or otherwise of the implementation of security and human rights programs can often be difficult to measure. Regardless, interested parties demand that monitoring and evaluation provide demonstrable results of the effectiveness of implementation projects. This Roundtable will examine how the effectiveness of implementation can be measured.”

  3. Overview • USG Peace and Security Indicators – Program Level (Where is the impact?) • Peace and Security Index – Country Level (Where is the attribution?) • Need to focus on regions, or sub-regions of need • Two evaluations conducted for USAID in unstable regions of Africa (2010-2013) provide some lessons for future exploration

  4. USG Peace & Security Indicator List (Examples) Program Area: Counter-Terrorism • ELEMENT: PS 1.1 – DENY TERRORIST SPONSORSHIP, SUPPORT AND SANCTUARY • INDICATOR TITLE: NUMBER OF PEOPLE TRAINED ON COUNTERTERRORISM FINANCE BY USG PROGRAMS • ELEMENT: PS 1.2 – DE-LEGITIMIZE TERRORIST IDEOLOGY • INDICATOR TITLE: NUMBER OF PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS COMPLETED BY USG PROGRAMS

  5. An Index for Peace and Security Program Elements as Defined by U.S. State Department

  6. Index Elements: State Department’s annual Country Reports on Terrorism…

  7. State Department’s Annual Country Reports on Terrorism (excerpt) THAILAND  There was no direct evidence that international terrorist groups were directly involved in attacks within Thailand, nor was there any evidence of operational linkages between the southern Thai insurgent groups and international terrorist networks. …. Countering Radicalization and Violent Extremism: A range of Thai government agencies, including the Ministries of Interior and of Social Development and Human Security, and the Thai military and police academies continued to organize outreach programs to ethnic Malay-Muslims to counter radicalization and violent extremism. A small group of international non-governmental organizations also reached out to communities in the southern provinces to provide services and to identify the underlying causes of the area's violence…..

  8. Index Elements: Failed States Index

  9. Failed States Index

  10. Index Elements: World Bank Institute

  11. Index Elements: Human Rights

  12. Index Elements: Homicide Rate

  13. International Crime - Trafficking

  14. Peace and Security Issues Are Often Very Localized…within a Country…

  15. …or a larger region

  16. Proposed Indicators from Two Evaluations

  17. Data Collected in Five Countries (2010-12)

  18. Based on USAID Analysis of Drivers of Violent Extremism • Perception that the international system is unjust; a mechanism through which Muslims are oppressed and their culture de-valued • Perceptions of social exclusion and marginality • Real or perceived societal discrimination • Frustrated expectations and relative deprivation • Unmet social and economic needs • Local conflicts

  19. Output Indicators – From “F” Common Indicator List

  20. Acceptance of violence in name of religion

  21. Community Alienation

  22. Community Participation

  23. Results: Mogadishu Full beneficiaries (100) Partial beneficiaries (80) Comparison group (100) Violentactivities permitted under Attendance of a community meeting 5.0 Islamiclaw? Raised an issue with authorities 4.5 4.0 Justification of using violence in the 3.5 Participation in decision-making name of Islam 3.0 2.5 2.0 Importance of training vs family Satisfaction with local government 1.5 connections decisionmaking 1.0 How much can an ordinary person do? Optimism about a better future o? Do youth associations make a Preparedness to enter the job market positive contribution? Supported by youth organizations? View of youth by leaders

  24. What Does this Tell Us? • Indicators based on targeted surveying can assess attitudes at sub-national level - information not always available at country level. • Provide information beyond output level • Can address attribution through use of counterfactuals • Use of standard survey questions allows comparability

More Related