Basic Impact Assessment At Project Level Page 21
ADVERTISEMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36summaries, short user-friendly papers, snappy presentations and strategic cups of
coffee are the key to this environment.
(ii)
The timing of findings needs to be carefully considered. As a general rule of thumb
the longer the length of time between data collection and presentation of findings,
then the lower the impact for IAs focused on ‘improving’ practice. The common
response to initial findings presented more than 9 months after completion of
fieldwork is ‘our program has already been redesigned so your findings have little
relevance’.
(iii)
Program managers often regard impact assessors as impractical people who have
lots of time on their hands. For high cost approaches pursuing the scientific method
this will be of only limited significance as the people to whom one’s results must be
credible are in Washington and European capitals. However, for the vast majority
of IA studies the issue of how to develop constructive relationships with program
staff requires careful thought and action. Efforts to achieve co-ownership of findings
by involving program staff in IA design, showing respect for their ideas and
opinions, and discussing interim findings are ways of making influence more
probable.
• How ‘robust’ have the findings got to be?
If an IA is to provide findings to a high degree of confidence (e.g. 95% confidence levels in
statistical tests) then in most cases a ‘complex approach’ will be needed. This will be
costly and time-consuming. By contrast, if an IA is required to provide corroboration of
programme impact and strengthen aspects of implementation then a ‘simple approach’
should be adopted.
The following approaches have been developed for micro-finance institutions, but are
largely applicable to other enterprise projects, although measurable assessment of outputs
and outcomes is harder to achieve in some other areas (e.g. impact of business
development services), and will need to be well supported by qualitative and participatory
studies.
Simple Approach
These are the most numerous forms of IAs. Reliability is moderate, at best (and based
mainly on triangulation), and the major objective is to test the existing understanding of
impacts and contribute to improvements in programme operation. The main audiences
are programme managers and donor ‘country-based’ staff. The central methodological
feature of such an approach is the use of a variety of methods. Usually this involves a
small scale client survey, compared with a comparison group that could be rapidly
identified (e.g. approved clients who have not yet received services) and cross-checked by
rapid or participatory appraisal methods. If a baseline study is not available then a recall
methodology would be utilised. The key variables to be studied would depend on
programme objectives, but for easily quantifiable variables (e.g. income and assets) the
focus would be on ordinal and nominal measurements. For programmes prioritising
21
ADVERTISEMENT
0 votes
Related Articles
Related forms
Privacy Impact Assessment Update For The Advance Passenger Information System (apis) - U.s. Department Of Homeland Security - 2013
Legal
Template For Automatic Number Plate Recognition (anpr) Infrastructure Development Privacy Impact Assessment
Business
Real Property Assessment Division First Level Appeal Application Form - Government Of The District Of Columbia
Financial
Related Categories
Parent category: Education