Papua New Guinea Research Monitoring and Evaluation

Evaluation - Simplifying the Idea of Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning

Most often we tend to segregate Monitoring from Evaluation and try to justify these two terminologies based on the nature or type of development project or program interventions. When I started my career working in development, I often found it very challenging to to understand the approaches to Monitoring and Evaluation and like many other like minded professionals working in this area, I often think that generally monitoring is the day to day data collection of of a project activity and evaluation is either done at the beginning, middle and end of the life cycle of a project. This understanding generally is the summary of a project management cycle as I understand it from the development perspective.

It took me a while to make sense of Evaluation in development practice. How can we evaluate the both the Monitoring aspect of a project and the link that to the overall evaluation of a development project?

Evaluation is a relatively new field that has emerged from a diverse array of applied social sciences. Although it is practice-oriented, there has been a proliferation of research on evaluation theory to prescribe underlying frameworks of evidence-based practice. According to Shadish, Cook, & Leviton (1991), the fundamental purpose of evaluation theory is to specify feasible practices that evaluators can use to construct knowledge about the value of social programs. This explanation of evaluation theory consists of five main components: practice, use, knowledge, valuing, and social programming.

Many development practitioners design evaluations around methodology. Although there are still ongoing debates of best practice approaches to evaluation especially when dealing with evaluation theories, I can confidently say that most of us working in development particularly in the Non Governmental Organisations and faith based organisations usually design evaluations around methodology. I have worked with a number of of International NGOs here in Papua New Guinea and evaluation is still a challenging concept because of the fact the most evaluations of projects or program are usually outsourced to to external consultants while we are tasked with the practical aspects of evaluation mainly in providing logistical support and data collection.

My aim is to socialise the idea of Evaluation and also create a platform where we can bring local Papua New Guinean Evaluators together to share their experiences and practical ideas on how we can make better evaluations based on local knowledge and understanding of where we work. 

In my own way of understanding evaluation approaches with respect to best practice evaluation theories and methodologies, I generally categorize evaluation into two separate categories;

1. Process Evaluation - Evaluating the activities of the project. In other words, process evaluation determines whether the project has been implemented as planned and most importantly tries to make sense of all the monitoring data that has been collected overtime. In short, process evaluation looks at key areas that a project has control over during the implementation stages. This includes inputs,processes and outputs.
2. Impact Evaluation - Impact evaluation tries to measure or make sense of the effect of the project or program intervention at the population level. Impact evaluation looks at understanding the effectiveness and relevance of the project.

Evaluators can use quantitative, qualitative, or a mix of both methods for data collection and analysis. However, before considering methodology, evaluators should reflect on the theoretical frameworks that guide their practice. Although evaluation is an applied science, it is important for practitioners to be knowledgeable of theory to ensure their designs are driven by intention and purpose rather than methodological tools.