The most significant change as a part of a project evaluation in india
•
2 likes•1,518 views
This document describes an evaluation of an education project in India that was funded by donations to rebuild and improve schools after the 2004 tsunami. The evaluation objectives were to show the project's impact on education access, quality and environment. It also aimed to assess sustainability after funding ended. Due to limitations, the evaluation used a methodology called "Most Significant Change," collecting stories from community volunteers about the most impactful changes, such as empowering child clubs to improve water and sanitation. The most significant change found was increased empowerment of children. However, communication of findings was limited due to the donor not publishing the report. Lessons included using stories to communicate success and ensuring stakeholders are engaged in evaluating and communicating results.
Report
Share
The most significant change as a part of a project evaluation in india
- 1. The Most Significant Change ProLearn Project in India Inka Píbilová Czech Evaluation Society Conference in Prague, 28 May 2013
- 2. A „tsunami relief“ project 2004 first tsunami relief in Andra Pradesh India funded by individual donors of ADRA Czech Republic 2007 needs assessment with Education Office among 20 schools 2008 – 2009 infrastructure development in 8 schools to increase and retain the number of children – Classrooms construction – Teacher training – Learning aids – Community sensitisation – Children participation
- 3. Evaluation Objectives • Show evidence of the project impact on access to education, increased education quality and child-friendly learning environment, thus achieving learning outcomes and higher literacy. • Show evidence of attitudinal changes of community, school staff, children and government representatives in education. • Assess sustainability of the “Pro Learn” project after ADRA withdrew support. • Draw lessons learnt and recommendations for improvements in future projects with respect to planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.
- 4. Evaluation Methodology - Factors 1. Logical matrix did not correspond to reality 2. Audit of the construction done, client interested in impacts and sustainability. 3. Donor did not have experience with evaluations and did not have a specific method in mind. 4. Lack of funding to conduct the evaluation. 5. Lack of baseline data. 6. Field mission restricted to 3 weeks
- 5. TermsofReference–Objectives, scope,stakeholders,questions, budget,schedule,outputs,use. Desk study Interviews The Most Significant Change Community conversations Observations Preliminaryfindings&conclusions Final debriefing of project team and community volunteers Communication with the Project Partners Draft evaluation report Finalevaluationreport Inception phase 1 month Field research 1 months Reporting phase 2 months Initialbriefingandinception Evaluator Selection Evaluation Methodology
- 9. How was the technique applied MSC Training of community volunteers Collection of the MSC stories by volunteers Selection of the MSC with community volunteers and project team MSC drawings by children
- 10. How we selected the „MSC story“
- 11. What were the findings • Renovated or constructed school buildings and games for children were appreciated, but...
- 12. What were the findings The Most Significant Change was the encreased empowerment of children in established Child Clubs, who were able to secure access to potable water or clean toilets from the local authorities within 3-6 months. What were the findings
- 13. Communication of findings • Fiel mission closed after evaluation finished - key communication had to be done at the end of the evaluation. • The local community was to a big extent illiterate - community volunteers were expected to debrief the respective communities. • Headquarters in India unavailable for debriefing – done by Skype, donor organisation debriefed back in Europe. • Donor organisation decided to delay the communication and finally did not published the evaluation report. • Though a short debriefing was held with District Education Office, despite the original plan findings were not officially communicated to school management, teachers and students. • Stories had already been used in local media.
- 14. Lessons Learnt • The method can be used for evaluating impacts of projects related to behavioral changes as an additional data collection method, even in case of lack of resources. • Secure and train reliable volunteers / interviewers. • The atmosphere of trust and openess is key (interpreting) • Verify the stories in the field. • Ensure availability of key stakeholders in the selection of the Most Significant Change story. • The stories help in communicating successes of the project, therefore communication incl. budget needs to be carefully planned (to be a part of the evaluation mission or a subsequent project atcivity)
- 15. Links Detailed information on the method, including studies, evaluation reports etc. : • http://mande.co.uk/special-issues/most-significant-change- msc/ • http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MostSignificantChanges Guide: • http://www.mande.co.uk/docs/MSCGuide.pdf Trainings currently available in Europe: • www.socialimpactconsulting.com.au • www.traceydelaney.net/