Question5

A crucial part of any successful development project is thorough and rigorous monitoring and evaluation. Evidence is crucial to donors' faith and continued support of projects. In a world where funding resources are scarce and competition fierce, how do we collect evidence that is useful and convincing? What do donors want to know and how should evidence be presented that will ensure the survival of projects? When gathering data, how do we do this while ensuring the confidence and consent of communities? Jennifer, Forum Moderator

I would consider a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) "standard module regarding gender issues" very useful. Such a gender M&E module should be multi-level (macro - local to global scale , meso - sector, micro - org, pico - person) as gender issues are cross-cutting (see several of the posts). I have done some work exploring the option of a Multi-level M&E standard in health systems. A report with a "multi-level health system scorecard" (but without specific attention to gender issues) is available at: A multi level monitoring and evaluation standard in health care systems exploring the option A number of gender indicators could/should be consolidated globally, and initiatives (ICT for rural livelihoods, as well as others, health, education,...) should rather select existing indicators than (loose time and money in) develop(ing) "green-field" M&E instruments. For the maintenance of the "indicator pool," a maintenance procedure should be enacted by the development community, for an option here (in a very different sector), see the footnotes at http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/global-agreement Key points are: -- achieving synergies in M&E without draining project resources and constraining operational options on the ground, and -- ensure comparability of outcomes among peers, benchmarking can then support exchange of (proven) best practices (south-south)

Hi Jan, Thank you for your input and you make some valid points. I agree that we need to have a number of gender indicators given that gender issues are cross-cutting. There are also many linkages in impact such as women being able to use ICTs to access information on cost-effective ways of removing pests from crops, means better crops, more household income and e.g. money to send girls to school etc. ICT4D projects do need to build in M&E from the outset and include relevant gender indicators. the involvement of communities, service-providers etc is critical in this regard. Most of my experience with evaluation has been GEM - http://www.apcwomen.org/gem/?q=methodology And some interesting evidence in the form of digital stories from practitioners people may find useful - http://www.genderevaluation.net/mygem/videos We are soon to produce a manual which has one thematic guide on GEM for rural ICT4D projects. GEM has been used by a number of organisations undertaking rural ICT4D projects, and most of them designed their evaluations to focus on addressing needs that went beyond issues of availability of ICTs to: * whether or not women are in a position to actually reap the benefits of ICTs; * how society's perceptions of women's roles can change; * how women's own perceptions of themselves (self-esteem) and their roles in society can change; * determine the extent of women's awareness of ICTs, and their comfort and use of ICTs; * how gender issues and unequal power dynamics between men and women may have been further exacerbated or may have been reduced through the development intervention. Perhaps others have examples of M&E for their projects? Warm regards, Jenny

Question 5 How are ICT related projects evaluated? The best way to evaluate ICT projects is to take a gender perspective. This certainly provide concrete results as to which gender benefited the most and where improvements are still needed. APC introduced the GEM tool for evaluating ICT and internet projects/programs. Like some of our colleagues, we used it when we evaluated the two telecentres; Buwama and Kawolo. It was a perfect solution to identifying the gaps that for a very long time had not been realized. All rural based telecentres focus on extending ICT to the communities without considering whether the problems that hamper women and men from accessing and using the services maybe be different and need a special approach. GEM was quick to identify where things went wrong and the telecentre operators knew how to focus their service so that both women and men benefited. It would be realistic when one talks about the outputs and outcomes of the project that don't leave any group underserved. There is no community that had ever realized development without developing women in the social, economic and political spheres of life, more so that women fill up the larger population in the rural setting. What do donors need in terms of evidence? 1.Was there any immediate change in terms of the project intervention, statistical figures may help? 2.How about the long term? 3.Were there any differences in the effects of the intervention on one particular gender compared to the other? Indicators may apply. 4.What benefits did the users report as a result of access to and usage of ICT tools for this matter, for their rural livelihoods? Use digital stories if possible. 5.Were there any unexpected results of the intervention? 6.For any upcoming projects/interventions gender should be on a high agenda. So there is need to highlight how the project will help women and men to bring about change in their lives. 7.What the project seeks to accomplish that was not accomplished that would seek additional funding for a couple of years ahead. 8.Highlight the plight of women, attaching relevancy of ICT for developing their rural livelihoods. Those are my two cents, any additions or subtractions from my contribution...are welcome. Best, Sarah UgaBYTES

M & E: How do we collect evidence that is useful ? In consultation with the community members, partners and/or stakeholders, specific indicators would need to be identified and agreed on to be used for monitoring progress towards output targets, milestones, social, economic and environmental outcomes. At the project design level, gender disaggregated roles would have to be explicitly addressed in all objectives, especially on • Gender-differentiated data collection including for baselines and impact assessments that take into account gender issues to capture differing roles and benefits for men and women. • Technologies would need to be developed that deliver particular benefit to women's needs. For example in agriculture (e.g., reducing drudgery and adding value to post-harvest, processing and food preparation operations that are typically carried out by women). The first order impacts of the project induced by delivery of specific outputs would include changes in technology adoption; crop yields, area and production; changes in practices and level of inputs; changes in production costs and profitability; changes in institutional capacity and policy; changes in attitudes and risks faced by farmers; and empowerment and reduced workload for women. The second order impacts that would need to be considered are those that result in the long term include changes in producers and consumer welfare due to income and price effects; changes in consumption, food and nutritional security; changes in distributional impacts (e.g. different wealth groups, marginal farmers, women, and workers); changes in social conditions (poverty, education, health, attitudes, role of men and women in society); changes in resource management and environmental conditions (soil, water and biodiversity); and other spill over and indirect economy-wide effects. Overall methodologies like the Gender Evaluation methodologies that have been tested and used for example by Women of Uganda Network in assessing some of their impacts in projects can also be used in M & E. This would enable data collected to give reflections of the impact of the intervention both to the communities(Men and women) and development partners. Janet C Achora Women of Uganda Network - WOUGNET

Dear all, I'm finding this discussion very informative and providing a lot of food for thought. I don't have a great deal to add to what's already been said, except to perhaps reinforce what I think Jan was getting at, by saying we can look at evaluation of ICT projects through a set of layers or nested circle. The largest outside circles would look at the overall effects on women's status in society -- including some of the things Jennifer mentioned. Is the use of the technology increasing women's empowerment and status in some way. Other circles would look at their participation in decision making around the technology and whether it increases their ability to make decisions, have choices and play a leadership role in their community, etc. And we can move farther down to look at issues such as whether women are able to provide for their own and their families' wellbeing and income generation needs as a result of use of the technology. But to look specifically at gender, ICT and livelihoods, the consensus seems to be that the effects of the global economic crisis are particularly hard on women. They are hard on women who are employed in vulnerable manufacturing sectors. They are also hard on women who are finding they have to support more people on a small income and/or small plot of land. Since it is known that they are at the center of poverty reduction and crisis management strategies, one way to get donors interested in the concept could be to focus on how women's food production and income generation is improved and increased as a result of the use of ICTs. The role of ICTs in improving food security, decreasing poverty and supporting crisis management as part of achieving the MDGs could be a way to get donors and governments to take notice. Cheers, Sophia

Greetings, Thank you Oumy for sharing the smart toolkit for evaluating Information Products and Services. It is good to see that there are tools freely available for M&E given the cost (as you pointed out) of resources for thorough and meaningful evaluation. We do need to value evaluation enough to budget for this in our projects. Sophia your point of women being hardest hit by the current economic crisis is important to acknowledge. I found the following article very good: "How women are being impacted by the crisis - 10 things you should know" http://tinyurl.com/36wx4vm I also like your point about providing evidence of the sucess of ICT, gender and rural livelihoods to governments and donors and connecting this to evidence that it could assist in achieving the MDGs. I guess we often think about our work in isolation and should make sure that we are connecting to existing platforms and protocols which we need to influence. Best, Jenny