Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

2 F I N D I N G S
production and quality of evidence and position papers supported by research carried
out by organisations like CIP, IESE , WLSA and others.
Despite weak horizontal linkages within AGIR, most contacted partners are part
of, or in contact with, national and even international networks and they are able to
illustrate how some of these networks/linkages have led to advocacy results.
2.4.4 Monitoring and Reporting Structures within AGIR
The need for a strong monitoring and evaluation structure/framework is important for
a number of reasons. As the AGIR programme moves forward, it will be critical to
make sure that there is an ‘evaluative thinking’ process that evolves in tandem with
implementation activities. At the core of the evaluative thinking process is the need to
develop a regular flow of monitoring information that is useful, and will be used to
manage the programme well. The collection and analysis of this monitoring information
will form the basis for the reflection on experience (learning) that informs
future management decisions and provides data for accountability and reporting requirements.
At each step of the ‘evaluative thinking’ cycle, there is a need to design
monitoring, evaluation and learning processes that respond to organisational needs
concerning information gathering about programme progress. This will mean balancing
accountability needs with the need for processes which support and encourage
learning, while at the same time also providing support for planning and management
processes. These different information ‘needs’ are not in isolation. Monitoring processes
meeting the needs of one area will also function in support of others. This iterative
‘evaluative thinking’ process where initial experiences with the evaluative
thinking processes are used to enhance content and process in ways most beneficial to
ongoing data collection are essential to a well-functioning monitoring, evaluation and
learning system.
Generally intermediaries seek to report on activities and results achieved, but impact
monitoring is still weak (Semi-Annual Report 2012). Some interviewed partner organisationshave
acknowledged the importance of training in results-based management
for the improvement of their planning and reporting processes. The programme
reports on results achieved based on CSO partner’s reporting systems following the
principle to respect the existing planning, management cycles and accountability processes
(such as reporting to the internal governance bodies). Organisational partners
such as ACAMO and even networks like Rede da Criança have a set of procedures
for reporting, comprising the process of the collection of information from local
branches and local partners and regular reporting to governing bodies.
The AGIR programme produces two reports per annum, but this workload is not
transferred to partners. Intermediaries take the necessary information from the partner
organisation’s reports and feed this into the programme’s report. In this regard, it has
been considered by most of the CSO interviewees to represent a good process for
reporting because it does not impose an additional burden to the partners. However,
apart from well-established CSOs, assessing results has been problematic for most
partners with reporting focusing on activities. Reporting has also been more relevant
51