ENRAP

Photo to come

ENRAP Project

Users

1. IDRC / IFAD management

2. ENRAP PCU

3. CPM/FPU/GLO

4. IFAD Projects Directors and Staff

5. Other IFAD Networks

6. Project Partners

Uses

1. Gathering lessons for improving project effectiveness.

2. Assess the appropriateness of project strategy.

3. Have a measure on ‘Return of Investment’

Evaluation Questions and Rationale

To what extent are IFAD partners & projects using the network to share knowledge and information? And how?

  • Outcome question
  • Approach: Use LFA as the predominant tool and MSC and the supplementary tool.
  • Rationale: Contractually obliged to use LFA, the current LFA has some useful idea and existing buy-in, the outcomes have independently verifiable indicators in the LFA. MSC would be useful to achieve greater depth in the evaluation; will promote replication, dialogue.
  • Differentiate between 1) intra-networking 2) inter-networking and knowledge sharing
  • Update LFA indicators to look at content related to quantitative indicators.
  • Use gender disaggregated data in the LFA to influence IFAD

To what extent have IFAD project partners been appropriately engaged in KM and networking?

  • Process question. To what extent has ENRAP sparked off and sustained engagements by IFAD project partners? Are there mechanisms within different levels of IFAD to sustain the engagement?
  • Approach: Sequence of semi-structured interviews comparative analysis [semi-structured interviews and desk-study of other interventions]
  • Rationale: Semi-structured interview – need to understand different perspectives within the network. Comparative Analysis –

To what extent do the partners value ENRAP? And why?

  • Perceived relevance question:
  • Approach: Confidential survey using questionnaire format at a decision making format. Analyse data and present during the same event. At every national and regional event.
  • Who: An external evaluator.

Next Steps: Short Term and Long Term

  • To plan and implement your evaluation
  1. Getting approval from IDRC for integrating OM and LFA and including MSC
  2. Develop monitoring and evaluation plan.
  3. Get updated LFA and evaluation plan approved by IFAD
  4. Share updated LFA and m&e evaluation plan with the community using mailing list. Try and engage the existing m&e group.
  5. Revise based on feedback
  6. Start m&e as per plan

  • To develop capacities in evaluation in your project and/or organizations
  1. Conduct MSC trainings through national write-shops
  2. Hire a consultant

  • To network with others on evaluation
  1. Share the m&e system and experience via website or mailing list

  • To document, share and innovate on approaches to evaluate ICT4D
  1. Not sure how this is different from the previous question.

Buzz Group – OM

1) General aspects that you find appealing:

  • Flexibility
  • Provides a more realistic framework for evaluation

2) General aspects you find challenging or that are not yet clear:

  • Buy-in of the concept
  • Trade off between flexibility and project objectives
  • How many people to involve and at whwat level for multi-country projects

3) Pressing questions or comments in relation to if / how the approach may be practically applied in your project context:

  • How to marry OM & LFA I need support and guidance in format and process design

Buzz Group – MSC

1) General aspects that you find appealing:

  • Starting without pre-determined criteria, inclusive, not testing hypotheses
  • Focus on ? phenomenon and a positive perspective

2) General aspects you find challenging or that are not yet clear:

  • Room for dishonesty
  • How does one make sense of all the stories – summarize? analyze?

3) Pressing questions or comments in relation to if / how the approach may be practically applied in your project context:

  • MSC is more appropriate than quantitative methods for ENRAP – Stories act as internal
  • ?? on mechanism for other boundary partners

Buzz Group – GEM
1) General aspects that you find appealing:

  • Including gender throughout the life cycle

2) General aspects you find challenging or that are not yet clear:

  • How to break through the tokenism that exists in many organizations
  • How to evaluate based on gender when gender has not been considered during the design process

3) Pressing questions or comments in relation to if / how the approach may be practically applied in your project context:

  • We need to invest some time to see how gender issues unpack ENRAP
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: