Defining the program indicators are essential task of M&E. Without indicators, no any measurement can be performed. If there's no measurement then management of program must be in chaos.
The quality in indicators must be ascertained to have effectiveness and credibility in measurement. The consideration of local context should be taken to enhance the quality of indicators. For example: One of outcome indicator of child nutrition program could be,
- Percentages of children increased in meat consumption at least once a week for nutrition enhancement in X area
Thinking straight forward, the above indicator follow the SMART standard. But if further analyzed from the local contextual perspective, it might not be so smart. If X area compromise more than 80% vegetarian population, it is unlikely the outcome measurement would represent true picture of the population. This type of measurement rise on one hand, the credibility question and on another the intention of program itself.
Without understanding the local culture and social dynamics, the developed M&E framework will be in limbo and worthless.
During the construction of indicators as far as possible, the targeted project beneficiary should also be involved or the indicators should be tested and discussed with stakeholders. This mitigate in large extent the hidden untidiness of developed indicators.
Going back to above example, either the indicator could be omitted if program is in initial phase or could be redefined if program is in implementation or data should be dis-aggregated into vegetarian and non-vegetarian in proper manner if program is in post completion phase.
No comments:
Post a Comment