Program process monitoring: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:55, 5 October 2012

Revision as of 13:08, 7 October 2012

Line 19:

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 hoe the intervention was implemented.<ref name="Rossi" />

== Programme Process Evaluation ==

== Monitoring Service Utilisation ==

'''Programme Process Evaluation''' is an assessment of how the program is performing in terms of service utilisation and program organisation.'''Service utilisation''' looks at the extent to which the intended target population receives the intended services whereas '''programme organisation''' looks at whether services provided are the ones actually laid down in the plan.

What is critical in program process monitoring is determining whether intended targets actually receive programme services.<ref name="Rossi" />

== 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.&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 charactirustics. 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 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.&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

:* 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 scheme). 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.&nbsp;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.

==== 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 />