Program process monitoring: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:56, 7 October 2012

Latest revision as of 03:25, 24 March 2025

(19 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{short description|Assessment of the process of a program or intervention}}

'''Program process monitoring''' is an assessment of the process of a program or intervention. Process monitoring falls under the overall evaluation of a program. [[Program evaluation]] involves answering questions about a [[social program]] in a systematic way. Examples of social programs include school feeding programs, job training in a community and out-patient services of a community health care facility. Questions about a social program can be asked by program sponsors, developers, [[policymaker]]s and even [[taxpayer]]s who want to determine whether or not a particular program is effective.<ref name="O'Sullivan">O’Sullivan, R. G. (2004). Practicing Evaluation: A Collaborative Approach. London: Sage Publications</ref> More specifically, purposes of social programs include identifying a programs’ strengths and weaknesses, assessing the impact of a program, justifying the need for additional resources and responding to attacks on a program, among others.<ref name="O'Sullivan" />

== Process Monitoringmonitoring ==

Apart from measuring the needs, inputs and outcomes of a program, evaluations also monitor the process of a program.<ref name="O'Sullivan" /> According to <ref name="Rossi">Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W. & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.) London: Sage Publications</ref> (p.&nbsp;171), program process monitoring “is"is the systematic and continual documentation of [the] key aspects of program performance that assesses whether the program is performing as intended or according to some appropriate standard.”" Therefore, program process monitoring involves a systematic and continuous way of monitoring certain aspects of a program’sprogram's process which would indicate how well the program is performing, if at all. These activities help to facilitate the effective management of the program because continuous [[wikt:assessment|assessment]] allows for regular feedback about the program’sprogram's performance.<ref name="Rossi" />

to

== Tools for data gathering ==

Line 17 ⟶ 19:

=== From an evaluators perspective ===

In order to evaluate the outcomes of a program, the evaluator first needs to monitor the process in order to assess the implementation of the intervention. The reason for this is that many program failures are due to failures in the implementation of the program. Therefore, in order to determine whether or not the planned outcomes have been reached, the evaluator needs to assess hoehow the intervention was implemented.<ref name="Rossi" />

== ProgrammeProgram Processprocess Evaluationevaluation ==

'''ProgrammeProgram process evaluation''' is an assessment of how the program is performing in terms of [[service utilisation]] and [[program organisation]]. '''Service utilisation''' looksexamines atprogram thecoverage extentin toterms which theof intended targetservices population receivesfor the intended servicestarget population whereas '''programmeprogram organisation''' looks at whether services provided are the ones actually laid down in the planprogram.

== Monitoring Serviceservice Utilisationutilisation ==

According to <ref name="Valadez">Valadez, J., Bamberger, M. (1994). Monitoring and Evaluating Social Programs in Developing Countries: A Handbook for Policymakers, Managers, and Researchers EDI Development Studies, The World Bank: USA</ref> (p.&nbsp;136), an objective of many program projects is to ensure that project services or benefits reach a certain target population - defined in terms of its geographic, economic, or [[demographic]] charactirusticscharacteristics. What is critical in program process monitoring is determining whether intended targets actually receive programmeprogram services intended for them in the plan. This is of paramount importance especially in programs that are voluntary, that involve behaviour change, taking of instructions or learning of new procedures.<ref name="Rossi" />.

=== Coverage and Biasbias ===

'''Coverage''' refers to the extent to which a program reaches its intended target population whereas '''bias''' is the extent to which subgroups of a target population are reached unequally by a program <ref name="Rossi" />(p.&nbsp;200). Coverage and bias are related. The aim of all programs is total coverage but very few social programs ever achieve total coverage, making bias an issue.

Causes of [[bias]] are, among others,:

:* [[self-selection]]: participation of some groups more frequently than others;

:* program actions: acting favourably to some subgroups while rejecting others; and

:* [[cream-skimming|creaming]]: selecting most success-prone targets.<ref name="Rossi" />

Some programs can experience [[overcoverage]], whereby the program captures numbers far exceeding the intended targets (e.g. feeding schemes). Depending on the nature of the program, overcoverage can be costly and problematic (e.g. social grants). However, most programs fail to achieve high target participation, either because of bias in the way targets are recruited or retained or because potential [[customer|clients]] are unaware of the program, are unable to use it, or reject it.<ref name="Rossi" />(p.&nbsp;185).

=== Measuring and Monitoringmonitoring Coveragecoverage ===

Overcoverage and [[undercoverage]] are basic concerns in programmeprogram [[implementation]] and should be measured and monitored to ascertain the extent of their effect on service utilisation. Efficient service utilisation requires that the program serve as many people as possible who are in need and very few who are not in need. A drawback to this exercise is that people may distort information so as to be eligible for the project .<ref name=Valadez /> .<ref name="Rossi" /> identified three sources of information that can be used to assess the extent to which a program is serving the appropriate target population:

:* program records;

:* [[statistical survey|surveys]] of program participants; and

:* community surveys.

=== Assessing Bias: Program Users, Eligibles, and Dropouts ===

In assessing bias, questions like: Do all eligible individuals participate in the program? Are there any dropouts? What is the dropout rate/attrition? What are the causes of non-participation or dropout?, could be asked. Information obtained from answers to these questions is valuable in judging the effectiveness, worth and possible modification of the program to suit the needs of the target population. The same methods of data collection mentioned under 'measuring and monitoring coverage' could be used to assess bias.

<references />

=== Assessing bias ===

In assessing bias, questions like: Do all eligible individuals participate in the program? Are there any dropouts? What is the dropout rate/attrition? What are the causes of non-participation or dropout?, could be asked. Information obtained from answers to these questions is valuable in judging the effectiveness, worth and possible modification of the program to suit the needs of the target population.<ref name="Rossi" /> The same methods of data collection mentioned under 'measuring and monitoring coverage' could be used to assess bias.

==References==

{{reflist}}

[[Category:Evaluation methods]]