Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Projects
Handbook
for
Participatory Evaluation
(For Internal Project Evaluation)
Prepared by:
Bishnu Pokhrel
April 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATION........................................................................................................................................................5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................................................18
ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................................................19
3
ANNEX 3. IMPORTANCE –SUCCESS MATRIX AND FLOW DIAGRAM ....................................................23
ANNEX 8. TIMELINE..............................................................................................................................................41
4
Abbreviation
LF Leader Farmer
MG Mother Group
UC User Committee
WG Women Group
5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my sincere gratitude and profound appreciation to CARE Nepal project staff
who have kindly and generously extended their help in the preparation of this Participatory
Evaluation Handbook (an Internal Evaluation Handbook for CARE Nepal supported projects).
I am deeply indebted to the communities who helped to test the various PRA tools.
I am grateful to Ms Shova Gurung, Mr. Padma N. Poudel, Mr. Gopal Shrestha and Om Ghimire
for their support during field-test. I am also grateful to Ms. Marcy Vigoda, Dr. Balaram Thapa
and Mr. Govinda Rajbhandari and other Senior Management Team members. Similarly, I am
grateful to Specialists and Training Officers for their support.
Bishnu Pokhrel
6
1. Introduction and Background
Internal Evaluation is relatively a new system in CARE Nepal. For the first time, community
representatives were invited in the final evaluations of two projects viz. Begnas Tal Rupa Tal
Watershed Management Project (BTRT), Kaski District and Small Farmers Community Project
(SFCP), Rapti Zone. These were the first events whereby the community representatives got
opportunities to observe and evaluate their projects.
In fiscal year 1993/94, CARE Nepal introduced internal evaluation in Remote Area Basic Needs
Projects of Bajura and Solukhumbu Districts. Then after Mahottari Natural Resource
Management Project, Mustang Natural Resource Management Project, Remote Area Basic
Needs Projects (Gorkha) and Upper Andhi Khola Watershed Management Project (Syangja)
conducted internal evaluations.
There are two types of internal evaluations–Self-Evaluation and Community Evaluation. The
project self evaluation is a process in which the project staff and /or others involved in a project
analyze and/or measure the achievements and limitations over a period of time. The community
evaluation involves the evaluation of a project, process or activities by community members who
are involved in the project. It may involve some facilitation by project staff, but this should be
minimal1.
In the past, internal evaluations were conducted separately and reports were prepared in different
ways. In some cases, the recommendations of staff and community evaluations were different
and therefore it was found difficult to implement them. Efforts weren’t made to compare the
recommendations of internal evaluations for the easy implementation. The evaluation findings
were not shared with communities.
The new thoughts for internal evaluations are different than in the past. Both the evaluations are
conducted separately as before but there must be a single report having common conclusions and
recommendations so these could be implemented easily for better programming. In case of
community evaluation, no external evaluators (except project staff) are involved. The
beneficiaries themselves evaluate their programs.
Internal evaluations are based on three-dimensional evaluation model as given in Annex 1. The
overall concept of evaluations is to assess development factors against each evaluation
components. The evaluation factors, which are applicable to all CARE Nepal projects, are as
follows:
1
This definition is taken from allnepal communication #871, which was written by Ms. Marcy Vigoda.
7
Immediate outputs or achievements of the project
Local capacity building
Local human resource development
Gender aspects in development
Use of appropriate technologies
Financial and economic aspects
Other factors: Depend upon project's goals (impact and effect goals)
Some other development factors, which could be project specific, are as follows:
Environmental protection
Institutional coordination
Natural resource management, etc.
The internal evaluations must focus on the following components of Output, Effect and Impact
goals2:
i. Efficiency (achievements of results): How the results stand in relation to the effort
expanded. How economically inputs are converted into outputs. Whether the same
results could have been achieved in another, better way.
ii. Effectiveness (achievements of objectives): The extent to which the purpose (this is
called effect goal in CARE) has been achieved; whether this can be expected to happen
on the basis of the outputs of the project.
iii. Impact (other effects of the project): The changes and effects positive and negative,
planned and unforeseen of the project, seen in relation to target groups and others who
are affected.
iv. Relevance (the direction and usefulness of the project): The degree to which the project
can still be justified in relation to local and national development priorities.
The two types of internal evaluations are very much integral parts of each other and hence cannot
be separated. These are conducted separately and may have different findings, but the
2
The definitions of evaluation components are taken from Handbook for evaluators, Royal Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Norway, November 1993
8
conclusions and recommendations should be compared and presented together in one section.
The advantage of preparing single report is that the communities and project will have better
understanding. This process also helps to provide feedback to the external evaluators and project
management team. The process of internal evaluation is given in Figure 1.
Conclusions
Recommendations
Dissemination of lessons
learned
3. Evaluation Works
• There is a need of periodic evaluation, which should be done by beneficiaries and project
staff to determine and document impacts (both positive and negative).
• The projects are planned with specific phases and therefore it is necessary to internal
evaluations just before the mid term or final evaluations. This may also provide feedback to
external evaluations.
• The plan of future components depends on experience from preceding-phases.
• To assess whether some of the project activities should be changed, terminated or continued.
• To identify the problems, their causes and solutions.
• This is a process of community empowerment and local capacity building.
• There is a need for building staffs’ capacity to do internal evaluation.
9
3.2 Preparing the Terms of Reference (ToR)
It is recommended to prepare a single ToR for internal evaluation, which shall satisfy the
requirements of staff and communities. The following elements are included in a standard ToR.
These elements are included in a standard ToR. Since project staff and beneficiaries conduct the
internal evaluations a short ToR (2-3 page long) covering relevant elements as mentioned above
is recommended. This can enable the team to carry out the evaluations smoothly. Depending
upon the needs project management can make decision on contents.
Since staff self evaluation is done by the project staff, it is recommended to ask all project staff
to participate the evaluation. Regarding the community evaluation, the experience of evaluation
team members is vital to the success. Other personal qualities like the ability to communicate,
analytical skill and teamwork capabilities are also important. Therefore, in case of community
evaluation, literacy is not an important criterion. While selecting the evaluation team for
community members the following factors are considered.
The ideal persons for leading the community evaluations would be Community Based
Organization (CBO) member, other social workers, Village Development Committee
(VDC) members and Local NGO representatives. They would be from the evaluating
community or outside the community. It depends upon the project management’s
decision.
10
Project Coordinator, Project Manager, Sector Heads, Training Officer or Specialists can
lead the evaluation. This also depends upon project decision.
ii. Professional expertise: The team members should have professional expertise on the
areas planned for the evaluations. For example, a traditional birth attendant (TBA) is not
a right choice to ask for evaluating community forestry program.
iii. Cross-disciplinarity: The team members should consist of persons with the different
professional background. In community evaluation, Leader Farmers, Animal Health
Workers, Mother Group (MG)/ Women Group (WG) representatives, Caretakers of rural
infrastructure, TBAs, Female Community Health Volunteer (FCHVs), Village
Development Committee (VDC) representatives, etc. are involved. This also depends
upon the nature of a project to be evaluated.
iv. Gender balance: Since the evaluation factors also include gender aspects in development,
team members also require having gender analysis skill. The team should comprise of
both women and men.
The evaluation plan provides a clear description of the evaluation. The methods should also be
clearly written. The evaluation Plan should describe what the evaluation team is supposed to do,
as well as when, where, how and why. Separate evaluation plans can be prepared for staff and
community evaluations.
iv. Workplan: timetable and work division among the team members.
v. Documentation: The documentation process should also be planned. This includes note
taking during evaluation work, writing, drawings, maps and diagram, etc.
ii. Initial talks: This includes discussion on ToR, area selection including sample size and
other logistical arrangements.
iii. Data collection and fieldwork: This includes review of documents, interviews, field
studies, field visits, group discussion, etc. Ideally it is not relevant to conduct fieldwork
for staff self evaluation.
In case of staff self evaluation, field-based staff are key informants and therefore it may
or may not be necessary to do field observations. Project progress report review is
necessary for assessing the achievements.
iv. Data analysis: The team leaders are responsible for data analysis. For the community
evaluations, the community members may or may not have analytical skills and therefore
project staff have to facilitate to analyze information and draw conclusions and
recommendations. In case of staff self evaluation, Project Manager and Sector Heads are
responsible for data analysis.
vi. Debriefing: After finalizing international evaluation report, a debriefing among project
staff and selected community members is needed to organize. Field-based staff can
debrief evaluation findings and recommendations to community members.
Two separate brief reports are recommended to prepare. Project staff self-evaluation report can
be written either in Nepali or in English. But the community evaluation reports are written in
Nepali. Then after both reports should be combined to draw common conclusions and
recommendations. In the past, most projects had written reports separately and therefore it was
difficult to draw conclusions and to implement them for better programming as well.
12
i. Executive summary
Summary of conclusions and recommendations
ii. Introduction
Methodology and approach
Scope and limitation
It is recommended that the main document of combined report should not exceed 20 pages.
Additional information should be kept in annexes.
13
4.2 Community Evaluation
After final report, the evaluation team leaders are responsible for debriefing the outcomes to
project office, local level counterpart and communities.
5. Quality Requirements
It is recommended to lower both the level of ambition and level of precision. Obtaining reliable
information may be difficult and time/resource consuming.
In general, the information obtained and conclusions drawn from the evaluation works should be
reliable and valid. The descriptions and conclusions should be valid for more than specific
situation i.e. within the project area. It should also be impartial.
PRA tools are recommended for internal evaluations. Different PRA tools and their relation for
internal evaluations have been put in logical order in Annexes. It is recommended to use
appropriate tools depending upon the specific situation and nature of information to be gathered.
The following tools are recommended for internal evaluations.
i. Success-Importance Matrix: To find out successful and failure activities and core
activities of the project, Success-Importance Matrix is used. Refer Annex 3 for method of
using the matrix.
14
ii. Flow Diagram: To find out positive and negative impacts of core activities of a project,
the Flow Diagram is drawn. For detail refer Annex 4.
iii. Diamond Ranking: It is also a PRA tool, which is used to find out strengths and
weaknesses of a project or an intervention. The possible areas for analysis by using
Diamond Ranking in internal evaluation are program core activities; process and
approaches of project and project support system (administrative and finance) See Annex
5 for the detail.
iv. Analysis of Gender Aspects: Gender aspect is a cross cutting issue and therefore this is
included in all methods.
v. Review of Secondary Data (achievements against the planned targets): Evaluators should
also analyze the achievement against project goals. This can be presented in logframe
format. By reviewing project database and Project Implementation Report, the
achievements can be reported. Refer Annex 2.3.
i. Social and Resource Mapping: Social and Resource maps are useful tools of internal
evaluations. The following areas can be covered by using these maps:
• Location of various groups in the community.
• Location and coverage of human resources such as Animal health Workers (AHW),
Leader Farmer (LF), Maintenance Workers, Female Community Health Volunteers
(FCHV), etc.
• Various development activities implemented with the support of project. Comparison
of before and after project can also be done.
• The changes in communities can be identified.
• Coverage of the project can be seen.
iv. Resource Location: Resources allocated for core activities is evaluated by using this tool.
Based on resource allocation, sustainability of project activities can be assessed. See
Annex 7 for details.
Pie diagrams are drawn after Resource Location exercises. Trend analysis of
contribution on the core activities by CARE, community, VDC, counterpart and other
15
agencies can be found. The trend analysis (past, present and future), gives the picture of
sustainability of project activities. See Annex 7 for details.
v. Timelines: (only for the core activities): This tool is used to assess impacts of the project
and communities’ capacity at the local level to manage development activities. See
Annex 8 for details.
vi. Analysis of gender aspects: Since it is a cross cutting issue, it has to be incorporated in all
exercises of internal evaluations. It is expected that the evaluation team members will
cover the following areas:
Gender related needs
− Practical needs: access to basic commodities such as water; access to basic social
services; access to IGAs, etc.
− Strategic needs: Reducing inequalities in the division of labor between sexes;
reducing the burden of work connected to home and child-care; access to credit,
etc.
• Gender role analysis:
− Community management: Work in maintaining societal functions such as
water supply, health services, education, etc.
− Reproductive roles
− Productive roles
7. Use of Evaluations
Evaluation findings have wider use. If the internal evaluations are conducted just before
external evaluations (mid-term or final), the outcomes can influence the external evaluation.
Project management team can use the findings and recommendations for improving program
qualities.
This is a process for empowering the local communities and building the local capacity in
monitoring and evaluation. It is also a process of building skills and increasing knowledge of
project staff.
17
References
3. Ideas for Project self-evaluation and community Evaluation, Marcy Vigoda, June 1996
4. Community Evaluation Report, Buffer Zone Development Project, Bardia, June 1999
18
Input
Annexes
Process
Efficiency
Output
Sustainability
Effect
Relevance
Annex 1. Internal Evaluation Model
Effectiveness
Impact
Impact
Note: This model is adapted from Hand Book for Evaluators, Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway, 1993
Environmental protection
Institutional coordination
Annex 2. Process of Internal Evaluations
Social and Resource map Importance – Success Core activities Flow Diagram
Matrix
Note: It is not always necessary to combine all the tools together. Evaluators decide the right tools for internal evaluation.
20
Annex 2.2 Diamond ranking process
Processes and
approaches of the Strengths
project
Causes & solutions
Weaknesses
21
Annex 2.3: Secondary Data Review
Project Achievements
22
Annex 3. Importance –Success Matrix and Flow Diagram
The objectives of drawing Importance –Success matrix is to find out successful and important
activities of the project, which will enable to develop flow diagram for evaluating impacts
(positive and negative).
i. Divide the participants into Community Organization group (including NFE and IGA),
ANR, Infrastructure and Health. The minor activities are not recommended to include in
the evaluation.
ii. Ask the participants to list the activities implemented. The facilitator should have a
checklist of activities. The participants can use symbols to indicate the activities.
iii. Ask the participants to categorize the activities in order of importance. Then again ask
them to put into three categories- Most Important, Average Important and Least
Important.
iv. Ask the participants to categorize the activities in order of success (as most, average and
least successful). Then again ask them to put into three categories- Highly Successful,
Average Successful and Least Successful.
v. Summarize the activities in the following matrix
Importance
I IV VII
Most
Successful
(Medium)
Average
II V VIII
III VI IX
Least
vi. After completing the matrix, start to identify core activities. The core activities should be
from cell I, II and III. Activities fall in cell IV and V can also be considered as core
activities. Identify the core activities and share with the participants.
vii. Make conclusion based on the matrix result.
viii. Divide the participants into different groups. Let them to choose the core activities (at
least two activities per group).
ix. Brief the task. Ask the participants to list positive and negative changes/impacts of the
selected activities. The impacts should be presented in a flow diagram as given in Annex
4. Give specific examples for each change.
x. After finding the positive and negative impacts by the small groups, share it in plenary.
xi. Again, ask the small groups to go back and do the analysis on negative impacts. The
causes and solutions should be identified for the negative impacts.
xii. Conclude and present.
24
An Example of Importance - Success Matrix
Importance
• Boring
• Kitchen garden
• Dalit Group Formation
• Plantation • Non formal
• Nursery establishment education
Demonstration Cross visit
Successful
• •
(Medium)
Average
preparation
• Agroforestry farm
management training
Source: Source: Community Evaluation Report, Ranjha Bij Tole User Committee, Buffer Zone Development Project, 14-15 June,
1999
Before filling out the matrix, the participants had set criteria for Important Activities and
Successful Activities. Based on the set criteria, the participants discussed the reasons for high
importance, Most Successful, and so on. The final outcomes were also included in the report.
In this example, the evaluation concluded that Cross Visit program is not the core activity.
25
Annex 4. Flow Diagram
DRINKING WATER Safe Personal hygiene
SUPPLY SYSTEM Piped Water available drinking improved
ESTABLISHED water
available
Less water for crop Time
land irrigation (One Poor drainage (5 saved
lps decreased) tapstand posts have) (average
30min)
Water User Committee (Out Water for Water for kitchen
of 11 EC members, 3 are cattle (from 8 garden (from 7
women and 2 are Dalits) tapstands) tapstands)
Workload of
children increased
Instability of Maintained & repaired Production
system the system regularly of meat &
(one paid caretaker milk
exist) increased
Income increased
HEALTH
STATUS:
improved/
not improved
Irrigation
Boring
Production
increased
Conflicts and
other problems
raised
Income increased Family income
increased
Source: Source: Community Evaluation Report, Ranjha Bij Tole User Committee, Buffer Zone
Development Project, 14-15 June, 1999
27
Annex 5. Diamond ranking to find out strengths and weaknesses
Diamond ranking is a tool, which can be used to identify strengths and weaknesses of a
project. Three areas of the project can be analyzed. They are:
After finding strengths and weaknesses, further analysis can be done. The analysis of
results gives the efficiency and effectiveness of the project.
28
5.1 Diagram of Diamond Ranking
Strengths
II II
IV IV IV IV
4 4 4 4
Weaknesses
3 3 3
2 2
Shape of Diamond Ranking is given in the figure above. Ideally it would be nice if the
strengths and weaknesses can be presented in a diamond shape. But it is not necessary
that the project should always have equal number of strengths and weaknesses.
Therefore some of the boxes can be kept blank. For example a project may have ten
strengths and five weaknesses. In such case five boxes in weaknesses are blank.
29
Annex 5.1 Project Approaches and Processes Evaluation
Some of the areas that can be analyzed by using Diamond Ranking are given below.
2. Maintenance of facilities
− Infrastructure (drinking water system, irrigation system, others)
− Agriculture (kitchen garden, agroforestry farm, orchards, etc)
− Forestry (Community plantation, private plantation, community forestry, etc)
− IGAs
4. Institutional coordination
4.a
CARE UC/CBOs
Counter
part
CARE VDC
Counter
part
30
4.c Institutional coordination-
CARE DDC
Counter
part
CARE Other
agencies
Counter
part
7. Implementation modalities
− Partnership with NGOs, CBOs and Government Counterpart.
− Direct implementation
31
Annex 5. 2 Evaluation of Project Support System
Under the project support system the following areas can be covered.
i. Administrative support
ii. Financial support
iii. Logistic support
The facilitators should identify the areas that have to be analyzed. Since the evaluation
depends upon the nature of project, it cannot be generalized. Administrative and
financial support systems can be lumped together for analysis. This depends upon
participants’ choice.
32
An Example of Diamond Ranking
Construction
materials are
available on time
Strengths
implemented. boring and drinking
water system
Private pipes have Projects has not led the Delay in project
not been provided forest protection works planning and
to Dalits decision making
Conflicts raised in
Weaknesses
Failure in plantation
protection
Source: Community Evaluation Report, Ranjha Bij Tole User Committee, Buffer Zone
Development Project, 14-15 June, 1999
33
Annex 6. Social and Resource Map
Social and Resource maps can be used for internal evaluations. Both of the maps can be
combined together. This is an easy way of involving illiterate people in the participatory
community evaluation process. The following steps are recommended for evaluation:
i. Choose appropriate place for drawing the maps. Cleaned ground without grass is
the best place for drawing maps. Since the whole process may last for about three
hours it is recommended to choose comfortable place.
ii. Ask participants to select the persons who want to draw social and resource map.
iii. Let the participants draw the maps on ground by using locally available materials.
iv. Check whether all the visible things such as village road, forest, physical
infrastructure, school, VDC building, stream, etc. are included in the map or not.
v. Ensure that the following things, if applicable are also located in the maps
vi. Ask the participants to list major problems such as deforestation, landslide, etc. and
locate in the map, if possible.
34
An Example of Use of Social and Resource Map
After preparing the Social and Resource Map, the participants listed the major activities
of their village. Then, before the project and after the project has been compared.
35
Problems, their causes and the solutions
Based on the Social and Resource Map, the participants were asked to find out the major
problems, their causes and the solutions. An example is given below:
36
Annex 7. Resource Location and Pie Diagramming
Resource location analysis is a PRA tool, which is used to find out the resources used for
an activity. The resources can be divided into three types as follows:
− Community resources
− CARE/the Project resources
− Outside resources
The following steps are recommended to find out various resources allocated for an
activity:
i. Choose the activities to be analyzed and share with the participants.
ii. Ask the communities to list the resources required for each activity.
iii. Distribute the resources in the matrix given in figure below.
iv. To know the contribution percentage of different agencies give Soya bean or
maize seeds or any types of locally available materials to the participants and ask
them to distribute to different segments as per the actual situation.
v. Take note simultaneously.
37
vi. Do analysis for each activity by asking the following questions:
− Has the activity created dependency on the project? What was the past trend?
− If the project has stopped to support the resources, would it be continued?
− What should be the activity phase-out strategy?
vii. Conclusion: Draw conclusion for each activity in the following areas:
− Appropriateness of use of project resources
− Sustainability of the activity after the project
− Use/ mobilization of local resources
viii. Repeat the above processes (step i to vii) for other activities.
38
Pie row
Pie column
iii. Analyze the findings in the following patterns: For this pie diagram should be related
with Importance-Success matrix, which gives core activities.
ii. Conclusions:
Type I: Relatively better than the other categories. These are the areas of
strengths.
Type II: Find out the reasons of least successful activities. Does the project want to
move it to type I?
Type III: Need to rethink and further analysis.
Type IV: Drop it.
Type V: The best areas. Continue.
Type VI: Find out the reasons of least successful activities and gradually improve
the program.
Type VII: Need to rethink
Type VIII: Why do we want to continue this activity? Drop it.
Note: This exercise can also be done during staff self evaluation by using secondary data
from the project file.
39
Example of Resource Location and Pie Diagramming
Source: Community Evaluation Report, Asneri User Committee, Buffer Zone Development Project, 14-15 June, 1999
40
Annex 8. Timeline
Timeline can be used to assess the inputs of the project and communities' capacity
building at the local level to manage development activities.
Project Started
People
Participation oo oooo ooooo ooooo
Men
oo o ooo ooooo ooooo
oo ooo ooooo ooooooo
Women
Villagers
Women ooooo oooooo
would like ooooo
ooooo oooooo
oo
to participate
now 2 yrs in future 5 yrs in future
End of Project
41
An Example of Timeline
Source: Community Evaluation Report, Ranjha Bij Tole User Committee, Buffer Zone Development Project, 14-15 June, 1999
42