This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Useem, M. Articles by Chipande, G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Useem, M. Articles by Chipande, G. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Centralization and Experimentation in the Implementation of a National Monitoring and Evaluation System

The Experience of Malawi

University of Pennsylvania

Graham Chipande

University of Malawi

The general principles and technical procedures of monitoring and evaluation are well documented, but far less attention has been directed at the equally important process of field implementation in development settings. To identify general principles of implementation that may prove useful in building any monitoring and evaluation system, the authors focus on Malawi's experience over more than 2 decades in creating a national system for agriculture. Drawing on intensive interviews with managers and evaluators in Malawi's agricultural agency and on a range of evaluation documents, this study suggests that monitoring and evaluations systems generate higher quality information if they follow two principles of implementation. Information quality refers to the extent to which assembled data are reliable, valid, and focused on dimensions of interest to program managers and policymakers. The first implementation principle is to combine both centralized and decentralized elements in the organization of the monitoring and evaluation system. Central oversight helps to ensure uniform standards, and localized data collection ensures more sensitive solutions to local field problems. The second implementation principle is to build on an iterative process of field testing, refinement, and retesting of major procedures and indicators. A prolonged trial-and-error approach allows a monitoring and evaluation system to incorporate direct field evidence into procedural definitions, thereby incrementally sharpening data reliability and policy relevance.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, 233-253 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9101500205


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?