This document discusses measuring and evaluating communication for social change (CFSC) interventions. It provides definitions of key terms like CFSC, social change, and behavior change communication. It also outlines shifts in focus for CFSC away from expert-led campaigns and toward community-driven dialogue and partnerships. The document notes challenges in evaluating long-term social change and proposes using short-term measurable indicators that can predict long-term impacts. Examples of potential indicators are provided like expanded public debate, increased leadership roles, and linking of interested groups.

1. Measuring and Evaluating CFSC
The Rockefeller Foundation
2001
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

2. Definitions
•Communication for social change is a process of public and private dialogueand linkagesthrough which people definewho they are, what they want and how they can get it
•Social changeis positive change in people’s lives –as they themselves define such change
•Behavior change communicationis a process of understandingpeople’s situations and influences, developing messages that respond to the concerns within those situations and using communication processes and media to persuadepeople to increase their knowledge and change the behaviors and practices which place them at risk.
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

3. The shifting emphasis
Away from people as the objects for change….
.... and on to people and communities as the essential components of their own change
Away from designing, testing and delivering messages….
.… and on to supporting dialogue and debateon the key issues of concern
Away from didactic conveying of information from technical experts….
.… and on to sensitively placing that information into the dialogue and debate
Away from a focus on individual behaviors….
.… and on tosocial norms, policies, culture and a supportive environment
Away from persuading people to do something….
…. And on to negotiating the best way forward in a partnershipprocess
Away from technical experts in ‘outside’ agencies dominating and guiding the process….
…. And on to the people most affected by the issues of concern playing a central role
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

4. Evaluation challenge
•Social change is long time
•Practitioners need more immediate data to show results
•Need indicators that:
•Are measurable in short term
•Are able to predict long term change
•Are applicable across issues
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

5. Exercise
a.Choose an issue and a context for CFSC intervention
b.Identify key indicators to evaluate the intervention
c.How will these indicators be measured?
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

6. Some Indicators
Indicators
Key measurement questions
Expanded public and privatedialogue and debate
Eg: Approach to HIV/AIDS in Uganda
Increased accuracy of the informationthat people share in the dialogue / debate
Eg: on tobacco use and strategies of tobacco companies
Supported the people centrally affected by an issue[s] voicing their perspective in the debate and dialogue
•Familydiscussion
•Discussion among friends
•Discussion in community gatherings
•Coverage and discussion in news media
•Problem solving dialogue
•Focus and discussion in entertainment media
•Debate and dialogue in the political process
•5 pieces of data over which there is general consensus
•4different perspectives on the issue
•How were the most disadvantaged groups in relation to the issue of concernsupported to give voice to their perspective
•What happened
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014

7. Some Indicators contd.
Indicator
Key measurement questions
Increased leadership role by people disadvantaged by the issues of concern
Eg: Role of HIV/AIDS infected people
Resonates with the major issues of interest to people’s everyday interests
Eg: civil rights movement in USA – buses and education
Linked peopleand groups with similar interests who might otherwise not be in contact
Eg: child survival and development revolution of 1980s, bringing disparate partners together
•Who makes the major decisions concerning the priorities and activitiesof the communication intervention
•How are the people centrally affected by those issues engaged in the decision making process
•What are some specific examples where the involvement of that group has influenced strategic or fine tuning decisions
•Which were the issues that providedthe focus
•To what extent were people energized by these issues
•What actions followed
•Whichgroups are involved
•What are their interests
•Have they been linked together
•How does that linking take place
•Is there an alliance
•How does the alliance work
prepared by Sheeva Dubey, for classroom discussion, 2014