Yesterday I went to an event in London, hosted by Barclays, which functioned as the official opening of the Katine project. The Guardian's Katine website went online immediately afterwards, and today's Guardian newspaper features a front page article about the Guardian's involvement in Katine, and a magazine insert giving a detailed description of Katine: the place, the people and the project.
Already some differences in expectations are evident and will need to be managed. Visits to Katine by Guardian and Barclay's staff have clearly had a psychological impact on those staff that visited, and on those they have talked to since. Others are interested to go there as well. But at the same time, AMREF staff have an understandable concern about the manageability of a stream of such visitors. How much of their staff time will be taken up with the planning and hosting of these visits, and what effect will that diversion of resources have on the implementation of the project?
My Terms of Reference (ToRs) already include a responsibility to "Assess whether the Guardian is impacting project delivery or negatively impacting the lives of the community" Already I am thinking that this responsibility needs to be amended to refer to the involvement of the Guardian and Barclays in more general terms, not just media activities.
There are some practical (M&E) steps that could be taken right now. AMREF could start to log the time spent by their staff in planning and hosting each visit by outsiders. On the Guardian and Barclays side, as I suggested to one staff member yesterday, it would be useful if those thinking about a visit could try to be as clear as possible about the objectives of their proposed visit. The nature of what would be a reasonable level of visits is also under negotiation, as part of ongoing contract discussions between AMREF, Barclays and the Guardian.
Another issue that may need to be attended to is the possible impact of the Guardian choosing to focus its media attention on Katine village, which has a population of 1500 people, although AMREF will be working with a much larger group, the 25,000 people living in the wider Katine sub-country (which Katine village is part of). It is possible, though accident and/or intention that a disproportionate amount of project resources may end up being invested in Katine village. For this and other reasons I will need to examine AMREF's plans to see how they intended to address issues of equity: who is being assisted by what project activities, and why so. This leads us into wider issues of what are the most appropriate criteria for assessing AMREF's performance, in addition to equity and effectiveness. This will be the subject of another blog posting, yet to come.
Postscript (31/10/07): I have now set up a Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs) webpage on the topic of Monitoring and Evaluating Success in Katine
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
On the linkage of Aid and reporting it is worth looking at
ReplyDeletehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/nov/05/mondaymediasection.pressandpublishing2
As Glenda Cooper, says, when covering famines, earthquakes or tsunamis, the media do not always prioritise objectivity.
I believe that this could be an issue with the Katine project, that reporting and the campaign both get muddled.
Thanks for this link to a very interesting article. Very timely.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of user generated content (UGC) reminded me of incidents during a recent evaluation of a health project in Indonesia. Both in government organised workshops and in villages visits, it seemed at times like everyone was videoing / photographing everyone. It was no longer just the evaluation team / outsiders wanting to take photos. A good development, in my view.
But it also highlights the differences between development challenges in some parts of Asia (e.g. that part of Indonesia) and some parts of Africa (e.g. Katine), where possession of digital video / cameras will be much less common.
I found your site for a class on managing non-profits and I was interested in how you will monitor and evaluate the impact of the website on the project. I assume you will account for the changes experienced by individuals as the site evolves and the affect on donor and public participation and ffedback on the project via the web. Is their any other criteria you will use?
ReplyDeleteI have been working on projects in Mexico and Peru on community involvement in environmental protection and indigenous issues and I found the community run website format a refreshing idea.
I think this is a great way to create community ownership along with global awareness. The fact that individuals are involved with content should keep the reporting and the campaign from being "muddled".
I look forward to following the progress of the Katine project and you have given me food for thought and action as to the projects I am involved with.
Re Voncat's comments: "I
ReplyDeletewas interested in how you will monitor and evaluate the impact of the website on the project"
It is early days yet, but there are some ideas under consideration:
One is to periodically ask AMREF staff about their knowledge of, and response to, postings on the Guardian website. A number of hypotheses could be developed and then tested by interviewing staff. For example:
* Few have ever got round to looking at the website
* They have visited the website, got demoralized, and stop looking at the website
* They have visited the website, and picked up new contacts and ideas that they think will be useful for the project
* Etc
Another proposal under consideration is to have another party, probably an academic, to do some ongoing analysis of the contents of the dialog that takes place on the website, in terms of recurrent themes
Two of hypotheses that you raise are interesting 1) that there is a risk of Amref workers visiting the website, getting demoralized, and stop looking at the website and 2) They have visited the website, and picked up new contacts and ideas that they think will be useful for the project.
ReplyDeleteThe sad thing is that hypotheses 1 is far more likely. Instead of an academic study it would be good to see in what ways of the criticisms on the web blog could be countered. There is a sizable number of Africans who are now anti aid. If the project is going to be groundbreaking then surely some of their ideas should be considered.
One thing that I thought was odd was that the journalists where told not give presents. Presents are very part of the custom of traveling in Africa. I think next time the advice should be bring hundreds of pens, pencils, postcards, and newspapers.
Surely part of the project is to increase the understanding between the cultures of the Europe and Katine?
On the separate issue of KPI I would like to see statistics that can be easily compared to the rest of the region. And see if over a three year time frame school leaving age, life expectancy, etc can be dramatically improved. Are these basic statistics available for Katine?
The odd KPI's (to work out that is) is the inflationary effect of the project, and if the project changes the communication habits of the village?
Thanks, "make-it-simple", for more interesting comments
ReplyDeleteSome responses…
Instead of an academic study it would be good to see in what ways of the criticisms on the web blog could be countered. There is a sizable number of Africans who are now anti aid. If the project is going to be groundbreaking then surely some of their ideas should be considered.
The two options are not mutually exclusive (hypothesis testing and analysis of themes). One way in which alternate views could be aired, and one way of widening the debate, is to not just rely on the Guardian website. For example, we are debating this here, on my website which is linked to the Guardian website and vice versa. AMREF have a website of their own, at http://uk.amref.org/and http://www.amref.org/ As far as I can see they do not yet have a facility on those websites for people like yourself to make comments. But this is something they could do, without difficulty. So there could be at least three strands of debate, taking place on linked websites(AMREF, Guardian,Rick Davies). Other websites could also get involved on their own initiative
One thing that I thought was odd was that the journalists where told not give presents. Presents are very part of the custom of traveling in Africa. I think next time the advice should be bring hundreds of pens, pencils, postcards, and newspapers.
It would be useful to ask who gave the advice. If it came from AMREF staff I would assume the advice was given for good reasons. But even then, one could ask about those reasons.
On the separate issue of KPI I would like to see statistics that can be easily compared to the rest of the region. And see if over a three year time frame school leaving age, life expectancy, etc can be dramatically improved. Are these basic statistics available for Katine?
Very good question, and a good suggestion to make them available. My understanding is that a baseline survey is underway. That baseline survey should be made publicly available. But behind this is the wider question of public availability of information in/about development projects. I believe AMREF are now considering the development of a Disclosure Policy, and I will be reporting on developments in this area.
The odd KPI's (to work out that is) is the inflationary effect of the project, and if the project changes the communication habits of the village?
Two different but interesting questions, amongst many. Because there are many things that could be monitored, but limited resources to do this, and many other needs (e.g. funding actual development activities) there would need to be some good prima facie reasons for trying to answer these questions. Is there a risk that development aid to Katine will increase inflation locally? If so, in what way? Perhaps, the cost of local room rates in a hotel? Is that a concern, or a good thing? One persons price inflation is another persons increased incomes. Inflation risk is a potential issue, so I will inquire about it.