Using a results-based evaluation methodology in a public sector environment that focuses on activities

1
Using a results-based evaluation methodology in a
public sector environment that focuses on
activities
2
Terms of Reference - Example

• To conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness and
  impact of the DLGTA support over the past five
  years using a results based management (RBM)
  approach.
• Investigation into the performance and management
  of the community libraries recapitalisation
  programme
• The department of economic development agency
  micro-level monitoring and evaluation system.
• Evaluation of the soul buddyz clubs

3
What are we faced with at the commencement of the
monitoring and evaluation assignment
4
Planning StatementsStrategic Goals - Examples

• To invest and ensure the provision of quality
  social welfare services to children including
  those in need of care and protection.
• Facilitate integrated and responsive governance
  in a developmental state.
• Promote health, prevent and manage illness or
  conditions with emphasis on poverty, lifestyle,
  trauma and violence and psychosocial factors

5
Planning StatementsStrategic Objectives -
Examples
Strategic Objective Indicator
Ensure that municipalities meet basic needs of communities.
Lateral contribution Executive development learning framework. Capacity for better implementation of donor funded projects
Transformation Design and deliver innovative multimodal programmes.
6
Planning Statements Measurable Objectives -
Examples

• Reduce infant and under five morbidity and
  mortality
• To ensure effective leadership, management and
  administrative support to the department through
  the continuous refinement of organisational
  strategy and structure, in compliance with
  appropriate legislation and best practice.
• Conduct campaigns on key nutrition priorities
  such as obesity
• To promote growth, social development and poverty
  reduction through sound fiscal and financial
  policies, and the effective, efficient and
  appropriate allocation of public funds.

7
Results Statements Outcomes - Examples
Outcome Indicators
Enhance service delivery   Regulatory and support mechanisms for Municipal Councils and ward committees reformed and implemented
Maturity in ME system for cooperative governance A coordinated and functional M,RE system for Provincial and Local Government
Coordinated ME system for cooperative governance Regulatory framework for ME implemented
8
Results Statements Outputs - Example
Output indicators
Improved quality and quantity of measurable objectives and trend based performance indicators by departments and public entities Publication and implementation of a standard operating procedures manual
Local government budget Framework Integrity of the framework fiscal sustainability, structure and trends in fiscal indicators
Infrastructure delivery improvement programme Technical Assistants deployed in targeted provincial Departments
Enhance coordination across government for effective implementation of MFMA An agenda that ensures alignment of activities of national and government departments consistent with agreed Priorities
9
Where do we start
10
(No Transcript)
11
Where do we start

• Review all planning documents these include
• Strategic plans
• Annual performance plans
• Business Plans
• Operational Plans
• Map the planning statements, the indicators,
  targets, activities etc.
• Identify all available data
• Quarterly reports
• Annual Reports
• Baseline data
• Reports developed for special studies conducted

12
Evaluation Parameters
Results Matrix
13
Reconstructing the Intervention Logic

• Check whether the planning statements (goal,
  strategic objectives and measurable objectives)
  could be reformulated as results statements
  (output, outcome and impact), so they can be
  measured accordingly.
• Check whether the sum of the planned
  components/support is sufficient to produce the
  intended result.
• Explicitly describe the planning assumptions and
  minimize the risk of failure (did we assume too
  much?)
• Map the indicators detailed in the Strategic
  Plans, APP and the Operational Plans to the
  remapped results matrix.
• In trying to establish the model of evaluation
  and the methodology to be employed for the
  evaluation the following should be considered
• remapping of the planning levels using the
  parameters governing logic models.
• establish whether there are linkages between the
  activities, the outputs, the outcomes and the
  impacts.

14
Logic Model
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
DIRECT OUTCOME
INTERMEDIATE OUTCOME
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
ULTIMATE OUTCOME
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
DIRECT OUTCOME
INPUTS
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
INTERMEDIATE OUTCOME
INPUTS
ACTIVITIES
DIRECT OUTCOME
OUTPUTS
15
Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to
go from here? That depends a good deal on
where you want to get to, said the Cat. I dont
much care where said Alice. Then it doesnt
matter which way you go, said the Cat. so
long as I get SOMEWHERE, Alice added as an
explanation. Oh, youre sure to do that, said
the Cat, if you only walk long enough.
16
Evaluability Assessment

• Evaluability assessment is a brief preliminary
  study to determine whether an evaluation would be
  useful and feasible.
• Establish the discrepancies between the rhetoric
  and the reality according to Nay and Kay (1982)
  different levels of policy makers and programme
  managers may have different rhetorical models for
  the same programme and they cling to these models
  because it is perceived that approach to bring
  about change.
• The planning framework utilised and the evidence
  of the logical linkages between the different
  levels of planning.
• The appropriateness and plausibility of the
  Strategic goals and Strategic Objectives in terms
  of the legislative mandate and core functions of
  the province.

17
Evaluability Assessment

• Assess the extent to which the intervention logic
  provides evaluators with operational benchmarks
  against which outputs, outcomes, impacts and
  assumptions can be evaluated.
• Check whether necessary baseline and monitoring
  data is available.
•  
• An exploration of the evaluation models to
  determine the degree the models are relevant,
  appropriate and feasible in terms of
• The availability of information routine, ad hoc
  and research information
• The logic used to construct the programmes
• The timing and relevance of such an evaluation.
•  
• Check the availability of key informants, such as
  planners, intervention staff, and target group
  representatives.
• Assess the extent to which the evaluation
  questions can be answered, given the timing of
  the evaluation in relation to the current phase
  of the intervention cycle.

18
The Evaluation
19
Measuring change and inferring causality

• Relevance
• The extent to which a development intervention
  conforms to the needs and priorities of target
  groups and the policies of recipient countries
  and donors.
• Sustainability
• The continuation or longevity of benefits from a
  development intervention after the cessation of
  development assistance.
• Efficiency
• The extent to which the costs of a development
  intervention can be justified by its results,
  taking alternatives into account.
• Assumes that there has been effectiveness
• Other evaluation criteria
• Appropriateness tailored to local needs and
  changing demands
• Coverage evenness, comprehensiveness
• Connectedness co-operation
• Coherence and alignment

20
Components of an Evaluation

• There are 3 general components to comprehensive
  evaluation
• Process evaluation How was the strategy/
  programme implemented?
• Outcome evaluation Did the strategy/ programme
  meet its objectives?
• Impact evaluation Was the ultimate goal of the
  strategy/programme achieved?

21

• Every program has

Every program evaluation should have
Impact Indicators
Goals Objectives Activities
Outcome Indicators
Process Indicators
22

• Every Operational Plan/Programme has

Every evaluation should have
Impact Indicators
Goals Objectives Activities
Outcome Indicators
Process Indicators
23
What is Process Evaluation?

• Process evaluation
• Addresses how, and how well, the program is
  functioning
• It can help to
• Create a better learning environment
• Improve presentation skills
• Show accountability to funder
• Reflect the target populations
• Track service units

24
Process Evaluation cont

• Key questions in process evaluation
• Who is served?
• What activities or services are provided?
• Where, when, and how long is the program?
• Identify how a product or outcome is produced
• Identify strengths weaknesses of a program
• Create detailed description of the program

25

• Every Strategic Plan/Operational Plan/Programme
  has

Every program evaluation should have
Impact Indicators
Goals Objectives Activities
Outcome Indicators
Process Indicators
26
Outcome Evaluation

• Outcome evaluation
• Measures the extent to which a Strategy/
  programme produces its intended improvements
• Examines effectiveness, goal attainment and
  unintended outcomes
• In simple terms, Whats different as a result of
  your efforts?

27
Outcome Evaluation cont

• Key questions in outcome evaluation
• To what degree did the desired change(s) occur?
• Outcomes can be immediate, intermediate or
  longer-term
• Outcomes can be measured at the patient,
  provider, organization, or system level.

28

• Every Strategic Plan/ Programme has

Every evaluation should have
Impact Indicators
Goals Objectives Activities
Outcome Indicators
Process Indicators
29
Impact Evaluation

• Impact is sometimes used to mean ultimate
  outcome.
• Impact is perhaps better defined as a longer-term
  or ultimate outcome.

30
Results-Based Evaluation
Results-Based Evaluation is an assessment of
a planned, ongoing, or completed intervention to
determine its relevance, efficiency,
effectiveness, impact and sustainability. The
intent is to incorporate lessons learned into the
decision-making process.
31
INFORMATION (MIS) USE
Focus should be knowledge generation