Data collection methods

How do we Evaluate Programmes?

Standard Evaluation methods

The approach and methods used in an data collection method  will be determined by the reasons for which it is being undertaken, who is taking responsibility and who needs to be involved. 

For an efficient management of evaluation action it is important to avoid collecting data for purely reporting purposes: it is important to focus those elements on the bases of which one can make managerial decisions and/or learn if the previous decisions were appropriate.

It is very important to link evaluation of managerial processes with the evaluation of the programme/project outcomes. For a manager to learn means to understand the relationship between processes and outcomes since s/he can achieve outcomes only by improving the management of processes.  Although there are different indicators and different information sources for monitoring and evaluating processes  (efficiency, accountability and transparency , etc.) and outcomes  (effectiveness, sustainability, impact), real understanding can be done only integrating the two dimension in a unitary vision of necessary relationship amongst resources, activities, results, objectives and impacts.  The central element is always the empowerment of the human resources to do actions in a better way so as to achieve better results and obtain better outcomes. 

Whatever be the budget for data collection one should never go into a data collection exercise that cannot lead to improved learning and improved decision making. So it is wrong to collect more information than the capacity or the scope to analyse, organise and utilize.

In all the method of data collection one should consider the principles of sampling.

Standard collecting methods include:

• surveys -

• questioning -  through questionnaires; interviews,

• community meetings

• key Informant Interviews

• direct observation

• focus groups.

• collection of stories according the MSC method

• semi-structured dialogue

In general, the overall approach and methods selected for an evaluation should involve beneficiaries and the other relevant stakeholders in the design and implementation of the evaluation.  (see Stakeholders Identification  -   Involving Stakeholders ; Participation Methods and Tools)

The use of secondary data, such as official statistics and data from the monitoring system to support more qualitative data also needs to be considered.

What information should you collect?    Besides classifying the date in this way one should say what different usages are these cathegiories for ... less shoulds and more can or will

• Collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data is information that can be expressed in numerical terms. It answers questions such as ‘how many’ or ‘how often’ and can be collected through methods such as household surveys, ranking or pocket voting. Qualitative data is information that cannot be expressed in numerical terms and is therefore expressed in a narrative form. It answers questions such as ‘how’, ‘why’ and ‘who’ and can be collected using methods such as focus group discussions and key informant interviews.
• Collect data that is disaggregated by relevant criteria such as gender, social group and age.
• Collect data using a mix of methods where possible as this gives a better picture of the overall situation and allows for triangulation (cross-checking) of data.

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods

Here there is a problem to be discussed: Qualitative can be done only on quantitative ...  like evaluation can be done only on monitoring.  Indicators are always "quantitative" parameters that "indirectly" and "within a constellation" give clues upon which to have qualitative judgments.  Like for instance asking opinions can be defined as "qualitative" ... but in fact we group opinions as "percentages" of people and characterize them into groups (so we have quantitative figures about opinions). Another issue instead is to ask people to join the evaluation process by expressing their judgments ... still we need to be sure that these judgments are well ground on monitoring and indicators ....  So we can never have a "purely qualitative" judgments.  Nor a purely "quantitative" since the very choice of what quantitative indicators to select is not a qualitative-based choice.

Here below the "common sense" classifications commonly used according to which :There are two basic types of research you might conduct with intended audiences: qualitative and quantitative. You will use methods from one of these two types depending upon what you want to learn. See the sidebar below, Qualitative Versus Quantitative Methods, for common distinctions between qualitative and quantitative research.

Other resources: IPDET - data collection methods

-------------

 EU resources

• Methodology
• Evaluation Guidelines
• Methodological bases
• Evaluation tools
• Examples
• Glossary

See aslo

What is participation  -   Partecipazione come concertazione allargata

The Six Steps in the partnership process

Identify project stakeholders

Involving Stakeholders

Introduction

Building Trust

Involving Directly Affected Stakeholders

Seeking Feedback

Involving the Voiceless

Involving the Opposition

Participatory Planning and Decisionmaking

What Do Participatory Techniques Achieve?

Creating a Learning Mood

Building Community Capacity

Understanding Community Organizations

Building the Capacity of Community Organizations

Partecipation Methods and Tools

Introduction Methods and Tools

Appreciation-Influence-Control (AIC)

Objectives-Oriented Project Planning (ZOPP)

TeamUP

Beneficiary Assessment

Glossary of tool

-----------------------

See also: The Strategy Challenges

Communication and Evaluation

Communication and Knowledge Management

-------------

 EU resources

• Methodology
• Evaluation Guidelines
• Methodological bases
• Evaluation tools
• Examples
• Glossary