This forum is a meeting point for donors, programmes and consultants interested in applying the DCED Standard for Results Measurement. In the space below, donor and programme staff can share their questions about results measurement, gaining feedback from their peers and from consultants experienced with the DCED Standard.
Click here to
submit
a query. To submit a response,
click
here.
For a list of Frequently Asked Questions about the
DCED Standard , click here.
Q1) We are a new programme which just started implementing the
Standard for results measurement? What would be a possible timing for
the DCED audit?
In order to enable new programmes to go for
an audit, a separate auditing guideline has been designed specifically
for programmes that are less than a year old. The compliance criteria
are less rigorous for new programmes as opposed to older ones. The
Secretariat also suggests that programmes undertake a mock audit by
consultant experienced in the DCED Standard, in preparation for a formal
audit. More information is available in the auditing guidelines.
Q2) We already have to report against our logframes? Why bother doing results chains?
A logframe is a matrix typically used by programmes to report achievements to donors against targets for impact, outputs, outcomes and activities. These activities, outputs and outcomes are shown together in the logframe matrix, which makes it difficult to see how individual activities lead to changes at particular levels. In contrast, results chains allow activities to be separated out, illustratating how each translates into changes at different levels (outputs, outcomes, impact). This makes results chains useful as a management tool to assess your programme's work.
Q3) A particular programme provided technical assistance to 12 factories (in quality assurance, human resource development). The programme has not used a market development approach but how do we measure change in the market?
The easiest way to see market change would be to start by comparing a random selection of assisted and non-assisted factories to assess their change. This might be more challenging if there is a lack of baseline data, as the factories may not keep records. If they do not keep records, a retrospective baseline has to be established by mainly relying on qualitative information (practices before, what triggered change, etc.). In terms of how the programme affected enterprises (i.e. the workers), the evaluation should try capturing the number of additional job that were created in the assisted factories and how it translated into benefits for the workers (higher salary, improved working condition, etc).
Q4) Can an enterprise development challenge fund use the
Standard for results measurement?
The Standard can be applied for challenge
funds that are supporting enterprise development projects. The Standard
is particularly useful when assessing the effectiveness of different
ventures and can thus used by challenge funds to monitor the progress of
each project, to check for cost-effectiveness, etc. DCED welcomes
challenge funds to try out the Standard, which would also contribute our
own learning on the wider application of the Standard.
Q5) Can self-assessment by programmes contribute to external evaluation by donors?
While self-evaluation generates insightful ideas on progress, internal management and strategic directions, external evaluation is perceived as more credible. The DCED Standard proposes that programmes first measure their own results, then have their results measurement system reviewed by an external auditor who checks the system’s credibility. This then boosts the programme’s credibility, because the DCED-certified auditor is someone from outside the programme.