|
== Programme Process Evaluation ==
'''Programme 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 target populationservices receivesfor the intended servicestarget population whereas '''programme organisation''' looks at whether services provided are the ones actually laid down in the plan.
== Monitoring Service Utilisation ==
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. 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 programme services intended for them in the plan. This is of paramount importance especially in programs that are voluntary, involve behaviour change, taking of instructions or learning of new procedures.<ref name="Rossi" />.
=== Coverage and Bias ===
'''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. 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
:* [[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 [[clients]] are unaware of the program, are unable to use it, or reject it.<ref name="Rossi" />(p. 185).
=== Measuring and Monitoring Coverage ===
Overcoverage and [[undercoverage]] are basic concerns in programme [[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;
:* [[surveys]] of program participants; and
:* community surveys.
| 