Monitoring and evaluation evidence use and the influence on government policy

by Shelton Mandondo, sheltonm@elsenburg.com

TThe Western Cape Department of Agriculture (WCDoA) has commissioned 24 external evaluations over the past six years. The programmes evaluated were identified for a variety of reasons, mostly related to questions of relevance, focus/scope, effectiveness, and alignment with emerging government priorities and mandates. However, some evaluations commissioned have had a forward-looking interest, such as the opportunities provided by the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR). Managers found the evaluation process to be valuable because it caused the programme staff to reflect on what they were trying to achieve through their programmes, as opposed to simply delivering services. There is widespread evidence of improvements in programme delivery and effectiveness of programmes in keeping with improvement plans.

Evidence generated has caused a new way of thinking that recognises that programme achievements are as often as not the outcomes of interaction between different programmes and agencies. This emerging framework causes a more evidence-based systemic approach, through mapping out the relationships between programmes, subprogrammes, internal and external partners. It recognises the interrelationships between programmes and their desired impacts.

The WCDoA approach has been acknowledged nationally. At the recent South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association Conference1 (SAMEA), delegates placed greater emphasis on using evaluation evidence to influence government policy decisions and to restructure regulatory frameworks worldwide. Evidence use can be loosely described as the use of the best available data, information and knowledge that are gathered with an objective evaluation process. Decisions can then be made that optimise planning processes, improve outcomes and have the greatest community impact.

The use of evidence is important for improving development outcomes in a number of ways. It can trigger resource allocation, policy shifts and accountability, and ensure good governance. Different types of evidence answer different questions and therefore evidence synthesis is needed because one manifestation may not be enough to justify decision-making. Government intervention policy ought to be guided by robust evidence to ensure the greatest impact on citizens. However, it is equally important to target the correct levels of power to secure the greatest buy-in. Strengthening evidence use for example in the executives, parliament, civil society, and media will go a long way towards making informed choices for policymaking and refinement, and effective implementation thereafter. The evidence must be disaggregated to reflect the realities of different stakeholders, especially the disadvantaged. The South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association (SAMEA) preferred evidence generation toolkit for policymaking is represented in Figure 1 below:

While practitioners are advocating for evaluation evidence to guide policy shifts and effective governance, other informants have influenced policymaking and the extent of evidence use in government. Figure 2 represents alternative policymaking informants: