Posts filed under ‘Advocacy evaluation’

Resource: Evaluating Policy Influence and Advocacy

Better Evaluation logo

The website Better Evaluation has many great resources and explanations of evaluation approaches, processes and methods.

I just came across this page on Evaluating Policy Influence and Advocacy that details well the methods and types of advocacy/policy influence – well worth a read!

March 7, 2017 at 10:00 am Leave a comment

Toolkit: Advocating for Evaluation

Here is an interesting new publication “Advocating for Evaluation: A toolkit to develop advocacy strategies to strengthen an enabling environment for evaluation” (pdf) from Eval Partners. The focus of the toolkit is on how to advocate for a supportive environment for evaluation.

January 17, 2017 at 3:04 pm Leave a comment

Network analysis and evaluation

For those interested in the use of network analysis for evaluation, here is an interesting article using network analysis to show how organisations worked together in advocacy and information sharing.

View the article here>>

 

August 18, 2016 at 4:06 pm Leave a comment

Short Course on M&E and policy influence: are results worth the effort?

Here is an interesting short course from 5-21 April 2016 that can be taken online:

“Short Course on Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning about policy influence: are results worth the effort?”

Presented by On Think Tanks, the course is for individuals and members of think tanks and other policy research organisations who are looking for viable and innovative ways to assess how their own research influences policy-making.

The course helps those looking to:

-Better reflect and enhance the impact of research in pub­lic policy,
-Satisfy their (and their donors’) interests in enhancing the uptake of research in policy,
-Build their reputation and visibility and attract more and better support to their work,
-Organise what they are already doing so that it can be useful for Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning purposes -and let go of processes that may not be useful.

Further information and registration>>

 

March 21, 2016 at 8:28 am Leave a comment

Adapting M&E at the field level

The NGO Saferworld has published a very interesting Learning Paper (pdf) on  their approach to monitoring and evaluation (M&E) focused on the field level. What is interesting in their paper, is that they explain some of the challenges they faced with reporting and logframes and the approaches they adopted consequently – adapting such tool as outcome harvesting and outcome mapping. Also for those interested in  advocacy evaluation, many of the examples featured are from evaluating advocacy activities.

January 22, 2016 at 1:36 pm 1 comment

Evaluating global campaigning – example of HLP advocacy

From evaluating global campaigns and advocacy projects we naturally learn a lot about the challenges and obstacles faced at this level.

I recently carried out an evaluation for  Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) on their programme-based advocacy initiative on housing, land, and property (HLP) – the evaluation report is available online (pdf).

This was a very interesting project as it both aimed to bring about policy change at the local (national) and global levels to strengthen the HLP rights of displaced persons, some of the key learnings for global campaigns and advocacy that I’d highlight were as follows:

– the positive results seen in combining country and global level advocacy with country-level cases providing substantive evidence for the global advocacy;

– the importance of achieving change within the organisations carrying out the advocacy, particularly when they are carrying programmes in the given sector (in this case, assistance and support for displaced persons);

– the balance between going alone on or building broader alliances for advocacy initiatives;

– the need to follow up advocacy initiatives and treat advocacy not as “one-off” events or activities but as activities that will need to be monitored and supported until the given objectives are met.

The evaluation was carried out by Patricia Goldschmid and myself for Owl RE.

 

September 1, 2015 at 6:48 am Leave a comment

Beyond online vanity metrics

Here is a very interesting study (pdf) from the Mobilisation Lab on what counts and doesn’t for online metrics and campaigns.

The study looks at what they call “vanity metrics” for online campaigns that they define as “data that are easily manipulated, are biased toward the short-term, often paint a rosy picture of program success, or do not help campaigners make wise strategic decisions”. Examples of vanity metrics include: number of petition signatures; web traffic, number of “opens” (of emails I guess).

So what do they recommend campaigns should be measuring?

They have plenty of good suggestions and insights. Here are some of the metrics they mentioned that could be more significant (and possible to measure online):

  • Monthly members returning for action
  • Actions per member (rather than size of lists)
  • Number of members actively part of a campaign

View the study here (pdf)>>

July 28, 2015 at 8:28 am 1 comment

Older Posts


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,082 other followers

Categories

Feeds