Return to MandE NEWS

Social Development Systems for Coordinated Poverty Eradication SD SCOPE Paper No.10

DEVELOPING GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSING ACHIEVEMENT IN THE EIGHT FOCAL AREAS OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT WORK AND FOR ASSESSING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES
January 2000

UMA KOTHARI
INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT POLICY AND MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER
Tel: 0161 275 2896 Fax: 0161 273 8829 Email: uma.kothari@man.ac.uk

Executive Summary

The eight theme papers for the Social Development Systems for Co-ordinated Poverty Eradication Project (SD SCOPE) Output 1 included sections on measurement, evaluation and performance processes and indicators. This paper synthesises these sections from the theme papers and presents some of the key findings in relation to measurement and assessment of Department for International Development (DFID) projects with social development input.

Section 1 identifies existing approaches and methods used in measurement and assessment in Social Development (SD) work within DFID funded projects. Section 2 identifies good practice and lessons learned in methods and indicators of assessing outcomes of social development work. The third section explores briefly some of the issues that will need to be considered when developing guidelines and indicators for future SD work.

These three sections consider the following approaches most used in DFID funded projects in assessment procedures:

• Logical frameworks: goal, purpose, output and activity indicators;
• output to purpose reviews;
• baseline data;
• qualitative and quantitative analysis;
• stakeholder analysis and participatory assessment.

The wide variation in the methods and procedures in use in the different projects and some important limitations are identified across the range of projects reviewed.

The next three sections explore key issues which impact upon the assessment process and include:

• Monitoring output and impact;
• understanding causation: expected and unexpected outcomes;
• gender disaggregated data and information.

The following section examines the role of SDAs in the assessment procedure and the final section identifies areas for developing guidelines and indicators for assessing performance, achievement and outcomes. It is argued here that there is a need to:

• Improve indicators;

• logical framework matrices;
• increase participation of project stakeholders;
• feed assessment findings into the policy and planning process;
• explore good practice in other agencies.

Finally, the paper suggests that the key question that remains fundamental to the development of assessment procedures is who is assessment for and for what purpose is it carried out. Greater acknowledgement needs to be made of the dilemma between monitoring for accountability and monitoring for project management and assessment. This is an issue which fundamentally shapes the form of assessment procedure and the ways in which the findings are presented.

Thus, there is a need to give attention not only to the type of data to be collected but also to important questions of:

• Which decisions need to be informed by the data;
• who will take these decisions;
• how will the data be collected and analysed;
• how will the data be presented?

Publisher

Published by DFID, 94 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 5JL United Kingdom. Email: sdd@dfid.gov.uk

Return to MandE NEWS