PADEV PARTICIPATORY ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT African partners: University of Development Studies (Tamale, Ghana) Expertis...
Usual perspective backdonor INGO NGO Project a in community x September 15, 2010 <ul><li>Activities </li></ul><ul><li>Resu...
Community x Very poor  –  poor  –  average  –  rich  –  very rich  Project c Project b backdonor INGO NGO 1 Project a Loca...
Methodology History History History Community x Very poor  –  poor  –  average  –  rich  –  very rich  Projects Actors Cha...
3 day workshops <ul><li>50-60 people from area of 20,000-50,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Subgroups: men, women, old, young, centr...
September 15 2010 1 st  round 2008: Langbinsi Sandema Tô
September 15, 2010 2d round 2009 Lasia Toulo Nandom Silly
September 15, 2010 3d round 2010 Wulensi Daboya Niaburi
9 6 3 2 1 7 8 5 4 1 Langbinsi 2 Sandema 3 Tô 4 Lasia Toulo 5 Nandom 6 Silly 7 Wulensi 8 Daboya 9 Niaburi
September 15, 2010 And with eight  student thesis projects
September 15, 2010 And three  special  assignments 1.Islamic NGOs 2. PADEV with the Poor 3 Internal Criticism
Contents of workshop <ul><li>Toolbox of 10 modules with exercises: </li></ul><ul><li>Context: shocks, trends (6 “capitals ...
Module 1 <ul><li>Historical profile using different sets of memories: specific groups! </li></ul><ul><li>On historical lit...
Module 2: Changes in capitals and capabilities <ul><li>Six domains of “capitals”: the importance of concepts and hence lan...
Module 3: Wealth Classification <ul><li>Local words for wealth/poverty classes </li></ul><ul><li>Number of classes </li></...
Example: Wealth categories and bottom-up criteria
Module 4 <ul><li>List of development initiatives, and labels for ‘sectors’ and for ‘types of agencies’ </li></ul><ul><li>‘...
Example of Numbers of Projects
Module 5  <ul><li>Relating trends and interventions </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived attribution </li></ul><ul><li>Based on dom...
Module 6 <ul><li>Selection of best and worst initiatives </li></ul><ul><li>5+ and 5- per subgroup </li></ul><ul><li>In cas...
Example of findings
Module 7 <ul><li>Historical assessment of best and worst initiatives: </li></ul><ul><li>Ideas about the initiative in its ...
Module 8 <ul><li>Impact of best and worst initiatives on wealth classes </li></ul><ul><li>Based on summary wealth class pr...
Example of impact on wealth classes
Module 9 <ul><li>Evaluation of judgment criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Take one best and one worst project </li></ul><ul><li>F...
Module 10 <ul><li>Personal files and information about family members: </li></ul><ul><li>Parents </li></ul><ul><li>Childre...
Methodological hitches <ul><li>Goal: holistic, long-term; research or evaluation? </li></ul><ul><li>Scale </li></ul><ul><l...
Next: <ul><li>Comments on the pros and cons of the approach by an insider: Roger Bymolt (MSc student IDS UvA)  </li></ul><...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Participatory Assessment of Development (PADEV)

732 views

Published on

A presentation about INSIGHTS IN COMPLEXITY, Possibilities for scaling –up a bottom-up evaluation approach given by Ton Dietz on 15 September 2010

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
732
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
23
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Opening slide. This slide can be used before the presentation starts
  • Picture has NGO perspective, but is roughly similar for government or other programs
  • With every click reality becomes more complex. 1 – 1 NGO (or government, etc.) often has more interacting projects and programs 2 – and there are other development actors, with other intervention chains to backdonors 3 – and still other actors 4 – and the community is not so uniform at all 5 – and don’t forget the external influences 6 – in the different livelihood domains And: all this is just a snapshot. In reality, all relations keep changing over time.
  • Project takes the local complex web of relations as departure point. Each set of relations is seen with historical depth: attention for developments over a time of 25 – 30 years.
  • Quickly some basic information about the workshops
  • Quickly page through these 5 pictures, just to give an impression Much work in sub-groups -Local reconstruction of history: old faces represent long memories -Gendered groups -Feed back in bigger groups
  • -Feed back in bigger groups
  • -Gendered groups
  • This slide is a very short summary of the workshop contents for three days
  • Participatory Assessment of Development (PADEV)

    1. 1. PADEV PARTICIPATORY ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPMENT African partners: University of Development Studies (Tamale, Ghana) Expertise pour le Développement du Sahel (Burkina Faso)
    2. 2. Usual perspective backdonor INGO NGO Project a in community x September 15, 2010 <ul><li>Activities </li></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Outputs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outcomes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Impact </li></ul></ul><ul><li>PM&E </li></ul>
    3. 3. Community x Very poor – poor – average – rich – very rich Project c Project b backdonor INGO NGO 1 Project a Local initiatives Community x Individual initiatives WHILE IN PRACTICE …… Local influences National influences Global influences Natural Physical Economic Human Social Political Cultural Project c Project b NGO 2 Project a Project c Project b NGO 3 Project a Private initiatives <ul><li>Government </li></ul><ul><li>Local </li></ul><ul><li>State </li></ul><ul><li>National </li></ul>Companies (e.g. telecom) Other INGO’s Other backdonors
    4. 4. Methodology History History History Community x Very poor – poor – average – rich – very rich Projects Actors Changes in context September 15, 2010
    5. 5. 3 day workshops <ul><li>50-60 people from area of 20,000-50,000 </li></ul><ul><li>Subgroups: men, women, old, young, centre-hamlets (officials and project staff separate group) </li></ul><ul><li>4 rounds of 3 workshops each (3 x 3 workshops concluded) </li></ul>September 15, 2010
    6. 6. September 15 2010 1 st round 2008: Langbinsi Sandema Tô
    7. 7. September 15, 2010 2d round 2009 Lasia Toulo Nandom Silly
    8. 8. September 15, 2010 3d round 2010 Wulensi Daboya Niaburi
    9. 9. 9 6 3 2 1 7 8 5 4 1 Langbinsi 2 Sandema 3 Tô 4 Lasia Toulo 5 Nandom 6 Silly 7 Wulensi 8 Daboya 9 Niaburi
    10. 10. September 15, 2010 And with eight student thesis projects
    11. 11. September 15, 2010 And three special assignments 1.Islamic NGOs 2. PADEV with the Poor 3 Internal Criticism
    12. 12. Contents of workshop <ul><li>Toolbox of 10 modules with exercises: </li></ul><ul><li>Context: shocks, trends (6 “capitals & capabilities”), wealth classes </li></ul><ul><li>Interventions: inventory (by actor, sector, years) + valuation + attribution </li></ul><ul><li>5 best / worst interventions: in depth exercises: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Shift in perception over time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Effects on wealth classes and capitals </li></ul></ul>September 15, 2010
    13. 13. Module 1 <ul><li>Historical profile using different sets of memories: specific groups! </li></ul><ul><li>On historical literacy and oral cultures </li></ul><ul><li>Sharing information or not: cultures of silence </li></ul>
    14. 14. Module 2: Changes in capitals and capabilities <ul><li>Six domains of “capitals”: the importance of concepts and hence language </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing Past and Present </li></ul><ul><li>Prompting or not </li></ul><ul><li>Positive changes and negative changes (or both) and selecting the ‘major trends’ </li></ul><ul><li>Time Keeping of the exercise </li></ul>
    15. 15. Module 3: Wealth Classification <ul><li>Local words for wealth/poverty classes </li></ul><ul><li>Number of classes </li></ul><ul><li>Local attributes per wealth category </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Visibles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Invisibles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rituals </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Free and then prompted </li></ul><ul><li>Distribution (‘twenty stone method’) </li></ul><ul><li>Compilation </li></ul>
    16. 16. Example: Wealth categories and bottom-up criteria
    17. 17. Module 4 <ul><li>List of development initiatives, and labels for ‘sectors’ and for ‘types of agencies’ </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Mapping’ </li></ul><ul><li>Avoiding tensions </li></ul><ul><li>Officials separate!!! </li></ul><ul><li>Checking the lists! Generic-specific </li></ul><ul><li>First m+f; then m / f </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived usefulness/effectiveness: categories!!!! -- - 0 # +/- + ++ </li></ul><ul><li>Intentions: scale and reach! </li></ul><ul><li>Not: efficiency assessment! </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived impact on capabilities 1-6 </li></ul><ul><li>Accuracy…. </li></ul>
    18. 18. Example of Numbers of Projects
    19. 19. Module 5 <ul><li>Relating trends and interventions </li></ul><ul><li>Perceived attribution </li></ul><ul><li>Based on dominant trends (+ and -) </li></ul><ul><li>Which initiatives stimulated the most important positive trends and which mitigated the most important negative trends </li></ul><ul><li>Take care: people also tend to link negative trends to disliked projects/agencies </li></ul><ul><li>Probing for specificity of causes/initiatives </li></ul>
    20. 20. Module 6 <ul><li>Selection of best and worst initiatives </li></ul><ul><li>5+ and 5- per subgroup </li></ul><ul><li>In case of 6 groups (e.g. officials, market place, NSWE villages): some overlap, but also widely different choices, and sometimes contradictions. </li></ul><ul><li>Take care: ‘worst initiatives’ can be emotional and sensitive; dealing with shame…. takes time. </li></ul><ul><li>Accuracy!!! </li></ul><ul><li>And what to do with ‘new facts’… </li></ul>
    21. 21. Example of findings
    22. 22. Module 7 <ul><li>Historical assessment of best and worst initiatives: </li></ul><ul><li>Ideas about the initiative in its early stages </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment about the impact at present </li></ul><ul><li>Details of reporting! Stories…How to report on struggle and emotions… </li></ul><ul><li>Why do people see initiatives as ‘worst’: not only bad results; often: gap between expectations (raised) and promises not fulfilled. In some cases: really stimulated a trend that is locally now being regarded as (very) negative. </li></ul>
    23. 23. Module 8 <ul><li>Impact of best and worst initiatives on wealth classes </li></ul><ul><li>Based on summary wealth class profile </li></ul><ul><li>Five circles and ten stones </li></ul><ul><li>Then and now </li></ul><ul><li>Who benefitted most </li></ul><ul><li>Who suffered most </li></ul><ul><li>Emotional encounters </li></ul><ul><li>Role of facilitator assisting negotiated outcomes without influencing… </li></ul><ul><li>Report: also about the process </li></ul>
    24. 24. Example of impact on wealth classes
    25. 25. Module 9 <ul><li>Evaluation of judgment criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Take one best and one worst project </li></ul><ul><li>First free: what made an initiative so good/so bad? </li></ul><ul><li>Then checklist of pre-determined possible reasons </li></ul><ul><li>Stones again for priorities. </li></ul>
    26. 26. Module 10 <ul><li>Personal files and information about family members: </li></ul><ul><li>Parents </li></ul><ul><li>Children </li></ul><ul><li>Siblings </li></ul><ul><li>50 interviews: information about 500+ relatives </li></ul>
    27. 27. Methodological hitches <ul><li>Goal: holistic, long-term; research or evaluation? </li></ul><ul><li>Scale </li></ul><ul><li>Organization/logistics </li></ul><ul><li>Venue </li></ul><ul><li>Timing </li></ul><ul><li>Who participates: representation/voice </li></ul><ul><li>The religious factor </li></ul><ul><li>The language factor </li></ul>
    28. 28. Next: <ul><li>Comments on the pros and cons of the approach by an insider: Roger Bymolt (MSc student IDS UvA) </li></ul><ul><li>Findings of a special research assignment: focussing on the (very)poor: by Agnieszka Kazimierczuk (former MSc student IDS UvA) </li></ul>

    ×