Learning and Accountability: A Monitoring & Evaluation Consultant's Perspective. Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity Building: Is it really that difficult?
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2007-03
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
INTRAC
Abstract
With so much discussion about learning in the NGO sector, it is increasingly important that as practitioners we have examples of realistic and achievable approaches. This Praxis Note reflects on some of the issues around organisational learning, with a specific focus on how monitoring and evaluation (M&E) processes can contribute to and support 'effective' organisational learning. This Note also explores learning and accountability, using the metaphor of a warring couple whose differing mandates make their relationship complex.
Description
Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) can support effective organizational learning in NGOs, but often falls short due to overemphasis on tangible indicators and unengaging reports. To move beyond surface-level accountability, holistic methods like Most Significant Change help capture real qualitative impact. Effective M&E requires clarity of purpose—distinguishing between learning and donor accountability—and a thoughtful approach to measuring capacity-building outcomes. A mix of forward and backward analysis, appropriate tools, and participatory processes can make M&E more realistic, insightful, and transformative.
Keywords
Qualitative assessment, Evaluation, Accountability vs. learning, Monitoring & Evaluation, Holistic evaluation, Reflective practice
Citation
Adams, Jerry, Simister, Nigel, Smith, Rachel. (2007). Learning and Accountability: A Monitoring & Evaluation Consultant's Perspective. Monitoring and Evaluating Capacity Building: Is it really that difficult. INTRAC.