What is monitoring?

The distinctions between monitoring and evaluation are blurred, and the terms have been defined in various ways. In this training we use monitoring to describe an ongoing process of collecting routine data. Monitoring occurs at different levels (i.e. it can include monitoring the condition of the environment or social indices (e.g. literacy) as well as monitoring various activities) and is usually conducted internally by program staff. The purpose of monitoring is usually three-fold:

• to help project/program teams see if they are on track in terms of delivery
• to collect data to do routine reports to others (e.g. quarterly reports)
• to monitor the state of the environment or social indices

The secrets of good, useful, effective monitoring

Monitoring can be a pointless bureaucratic exercise if it is imposed from above, and makes little sense to program staff. This is especially the case if no feedback is received from those requesting the data. The secrets to successful monitoring systems appear to be associated with making the system truly meaningful to those delivering the program and collecting the data.

In summary the key elements to good, useful effective monitoring are:

• focus on program teams’ information needs first
• develop a logic model together
• monitor meaningful things!
• using the logic identify some medium term results that will provide evidence as to whether we are on track
• wherever possible use existing data
• be proactive and negotiate reporting requirements
• make sure that the program team are involved in reflecting on their achievements and using the data
• ensure that the system evolves

Monitoring for unexpected outcomes

Monitoring systems are usually orientated towards determining whether expected results have been achieved. However it can be extremely useful to also track unexpected outcomes. This can also be combined with a more qualitative approach. This is especially important if your program involves attitudinal, cultural or practice changes. Some organisations opt for collecting qualitative descriptions written by program staff based on their experiences and observations. A more in-depth method of qualitative monitoring is the ‘Most Significant Change’ technique (MSC), which involves ongoing collection of stories of significant change from participants and community members. It may not suit all programs, but it can be an important addition to a monitoring framework for some types of programs.