Introduction
The world as we know it has been altered forever due to the recent global outbreak of coronavirus (COVID19).It is, therefore, no news that there will be implications for developmental interventions especially monitoring and evaluation activities which have recently been likened to bowling in the dark. Development organization – both donors and implementing partners are now forced to ask critical questions about monitoring and evaluation activities. There are ongoing conversations on how best to engage beneficiaries without attrition, best alternatives to fieldwork, the kind of technology that can be effectively used during the pandemic and how to reach people in very rural communities with little access to technology. Despite these thoughts, it is useful to explore available options to ensure that valuable insight and data is not lost during the pandemic.
Evaluators are adjusting evaluation designs, plans, and approaches, postponing, or canceling field missions to avoid putting at risk partners and beneficiaries. A large part of data collection is being done remotely, using various methods and tools e.g., virtual interviews with evaluation stakeholders, use of online surveys. Field-surveys and interviews at the household, community, and sub-national institutional level, are put on hold and alternatives for reaching out to beneficiaries remotely are being explored e.g. via mobile phone. The question remains – how effective are these alternatives?
A Drive Towards Tech for Monitoring and Evaluation
With the recent imposition of lockdown in many countries around the world as measures to contain the pandemic, there will be unintended outcomes for interventions that commenced before the lockdown. These outcomes will have implications for gender, location, social status, health as well as the entire intervention deployed. It is therefore expedient to ensure the continuity of monitoring and evaluation activities during the pandemic to avoid the loss of useful insight which may have implications for future programming and research.
There is therefore an increased focus on technology through the use of various toolkits of tech-enabled handheld devices for digital data collection including mobile phone-based feedback mechanisms, remote sensing with satellites or delivery tracking, communication and engagements via online platforms and broadcasting with radios and other forms of (social) media.
However, like most innovations, technology has its limitations even in a pandemic situation. Thoughts bothering on the effectiveness of technology, how inclusive is its use seeing that less women have access to high tech devices than men, and its cultural and linguistical sensitivity for monitoring and evaluation are been called to question.
A Blended Approach to Monitoring and Evaluation
While there are thoughts on how to advance monitoring and evaluation using technology, it will be useful to recognize that field work cannot be entirely done away with even during pandemics. Using mix methods of data collection sometimes means that an evaluator may be required to carry out ethnological studies and perception-based surveys to collect qualitative data especially in areas with little or no technology. Although conversations on the use of third parties to carry out monitoring and evaluation activities has begun, however, its effectiveness has been called to question.
There is therefore a necessity to introduce a blended approach to monitoring and evaluation such that technology is leveraged to enhance and intensify human efforts. This means an understanding that technology may not be able to substitute human efforts and vice versa; they are two sides of the same coin geared towards effective impact evaluation. The limitations and biases of one can be nuanced by the other to ensure that data-driven evaluation tests positive for validity and reliability.
What Next?
Although projections suggest that the COVID19 pandemic may last till the third quarter of the year, it is important that planning and learning continues. This is indeed a wakeup call for development partners to rethink how interventions are framed, who benefits from such interventions, how effective monitoring and evaluation can be carried out, what resources and technology should be leveraged, what are the non-essential components that can either be outsourced or done away with.
Effective communication is at the core of managing monitoring and evaluation process during a pandemic. Letting funders understand the implication and risks occasioned by the pandemic; questions about what should be prioritized, what component of projects can be undertaken remotely to ensure minimal loss or waste of resources. On the flip side, communicating with beneficiaries is equally important; thoughts around how best they can be engaged, what kind of data can be collected from them remotely, how has the pandemic affected the implementation process that may lead to a change in the Theory of Change.
Interestingly, the pandemic offers an important time of learning and reflections for evaluators as they can now go back to their drawing boards, check indicators against emerging outcomes and seek for new and innovative ways to evaluate, rethink frameworks and approaches engage, report, and learn. It is within this purview that the use of technology is encouraged despite the limitations of technology.
By Obamwonyi H. Imuetinyan
