Home
M&E in S&D: Practical challenges
https://www.sportanddev.org/latest/news/me-sd-practical-challenges
Share
 
The URL has been copied
https://www.sportanddev.org/latest/news/me-sd-practical-challenges
Share
 
The URL has been copied
In part three of the M&E in S&D article series, we explore the tension between M&E best practices and on-the-ground realities.

The job of an M&E practitioner is a difficult one. Challenges, to name only a few, include mediating the interests of donors, host organisations and local communities, respecting the identity and rights of the beneficiaries and working with limited budgets and a lack of resources. Tasked with somehow conducting M&E in this context, the practitioner has to find a balance between best practice and the reality of working on-the-ground.

Big claims
S&D organisations sometimes make big claims about the impact of their work. There are S&D programmes trying to make a difference in multiple impact areas. For example, it is common that a single S&D programme claim that they impact personal and social skills, gender, health and so forth. Managing these claims is not only critical to ease the burden put on M&E, but also to improve and refine the claims being made by the organisation.

Difficult concepts to measure
Measurement works best when impacts are specific and easy to be measured. For example, indicators such as income levels, access to services, and transport are easy to be measured. In the S&D sector, it is quite common to use abstract concepts to define our impacts, such as social skills, leadership, and self-perception (self-efficacy and self-esteem). These conceptual impacts create difficulties for evaluators who have to first measure it, and secondly, show that what is being measured is a good representation of the ‘impact’.

Limited capacity
Despite being essential for the sustainability of an initiative, M&E is often one of the last inputs of a project to receive funding. Good M&E requires a budget. Allocating the necessary funds escapes many organisations; especially small S&D initiatives that operate on already strained budgets. M&E needs to be made a higher priority for organisations if practitioners are to adequately do their jobs.

There is not a single framework for M&E in the S&D sector, because each S&D programme is uniquely different. We should be learning how M&E is done in other sectors. If your programme is geared towards development objectives, then your programme logic will not differ too much from other development projects tackling similar issues.

Make no mistake; M&E in S&D can be done well with the correct approach, theoretical knowledge, experience and necessary resources. By adapting to one’s environment and finding creative solutions, the M&E practitioner can be effective despite facing numerous challenges and ultimately find the balance between best practice and on-the-ground realities.

Don’t miss part four in this series, which will provide a case study of a real life situation faced by an M&E practitioner and the solution chosen.

Yu Maruyama worked for Magic Bus for 18 months as a M&E practitioner. He has also interned for the Swiss Academy for Development where he worked on a post-conflict education programme in Nepal, conducting capacity building workshops to facilitate a better integration of sport and play. He holds a Master of Public Policy at the University of Edinburgh and is currently interning at the UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace.

Authors