GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»When and how to develop an impact-oriented monitoring and evaluation system

When and how to develop an impact-oriented monitoring and evaluation system

Library
Greet Peersman et al.
2016

Summary

This guidance note was developed in response to a common challenge experienced by organisations whereby they commission an impact evaluation at the end of intervention only to find that there is insufficient data about implementation, context, baselines or interim results. Dealing with impact – if deemed relevant to the type of intervention – early on in the intervention cycle helps to broaden what can be learned about the value of the intervention. It can improve the availability, timeliness and quality of data that are pertinent for decision making about the intervention. And it enables early attention to collective sense-making and appropriate interpretation of data collected as well as building in support for effective use.

The note sets out considerations and tools to help organisations decide whether it makes sense to invest time and resources into developing an impact-oriented M&E system. Specifically, integrating an impact orientation should only happen when:

  • information about impact will be useful and timely to support specified decision-making needs;
  • impact is deemed probable and is feasible to assess with rigor; and
  • resources and capacity for collecting, analysing and interpreting impact data are adequate.

The note discusses the importance of using the Theory of Change as the foundation for impact-oriented M&E; determining impact focus based on complexity thinking; balancing emphasis on accountability and learning; prioritising impact-related information needs; and clarifying M&E roles and sequencing M&E activities.

The guide draws on the practical experiences of programme managers and staff, and those commissioning or conducting M&E of development interventions.

 

Source

Peersman, G., Rogers, P., Guijt, I., Hearn, S., Pasanen, T. & Buffardi, A. L. (2016). When and how to develop an impact-oriented monitoring and evaluation system. London: ODI.

Related Content

Lessons from stabilisation, statebuilding, and development programming in South Sudan
Helpdesk Report
2020
Doing research in fragile contexts
Literature Review
2019
Indicators and Methods for Assessing Entrepreneurship Training Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2018
Decentralisation of budgeting process
Literature Review
2017

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".