Paper short abstract:

Our paper will examine avenues to overcome common obstacles encountered in evaluation research in conflict-affected settings and describe how our remote approach to evaluation has enabled access to conflict-affected communities in Syria often rendered invisible by mainstream evaluators

Paper long abstract:

Evaluating health systems in conflict-affected settings is challenging, yet also critical to capture the consequences of violence and service disruptions on communities. The practical and ethical challenges involved in implementing research in these settings can discourage robust research efforts. While evaluation to inform rebuilding of health systems in conflict-affected settings has gained academic traction, less attention has been brought to developing conflict-sensitive and contextually-appropriate evaluation frameworks to assess systems and programmes in conflict-damaged countries. Qualitative research is particularly helpful to account for lived experiences of conflict, humanitarian response, and services delivery, and to inform health interventions.

Syria has experienced nine years of war and is divided into several fragmented areas of military-controlled governance, making it a very challenging security landscape for researchers to evaluate health system components across governance areas. Drawing on our experience assessing health system governance across the country using remote qualitative methods, our paper will (i) examine avenues to overcome common obstacles encountered in evaluation research in conflict-affected settings; (ii) describe how our remote approach to evaluation has enable access to conflict-affected communities in Syria often rendered invisible by mainstream evaluators; and (iii) propose ways to involve and engage Syrian ‘communities of experience’ and ‘communities of practice’ in health system evaluations while safeguarding research participants. Across these themes, we will reflect on our efforts to frame the logistics, ethics, and politics of remote evaluation through a decolonial lens, with a particular focus on the roles and positionalities of diaspora and international researchers involved in such evaluations.

Paper short abstract:

Contributing to debates on MEAL, development and faith, this paper discusses how two faith-based organisations operating in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean approach MEAL in their work with local faith actors, the role faith plays in their MEAL work, and how it has been affected by the Covid pandemic.

Paper long abstract:

Faith actors have long been involved in development and humanitarian initiatives aimed at improving the wellbeing and health of communities. While much of the international system continues to be characterised by secular approaches, there is an increasing awareness of the contribution of faith communities to development and humanitarian aid, which goes hand in hand with a recognition that international secular approaches are not always suited for engagements with local faith actors. While some areas related to faith and development/humanitarian aid are relatively well-researched, we have limited knowledge about Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) and faith.

This paper focuses on MEAL in partnerships between international actors and local faith actors during the Covid pandemic in the Global South. Drawing on interviews with over 30 research participants, it hones in on the experiences of two faith-based development organisations - one operating in the Philippines and the other in Burundi, Haiti, Malawi, Rwanda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. The paper looks at how the organisations approach MEAL as international faith-based organisations in their work with local faith actors, the role that faith plays in their MEAL work, and how the Covid pandemic has affected their MEAL approaches. It finds that the pandemic created both challenges and opportunities for the organisations and their local partners, and highlights the creative ways in which MEAL methodologies were adapted in response to the crisis.

Paper short abstract:

The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic has caused varying degrees of crises among populations across the world. An evaluation of the effect on vulnerable populations is important. This paper found that evaluating the pandemic effect on IDPs in Borno State, Nigeria, is limited by the pandemic.

Paper long abstract:

There is no gainsaying the fact that the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has had adverse effects on the health and socio-economic lives of people the world over. These effect could be disproportionately felt by vulnerable populations of which conflict induced internally displaced persons (IDPs) are part. While attention is often being focused on the evaluation of the effect of the pandemic on other populations, vulnerable populations like the IDPs are often neglected. This paper fills this gap by attempting to evaluate the state of these IDPs in the face of the pandemic, coupled with the restrictions occasioned by the pandemic. The article adopts an exploratory research design and the qualitative method, using primary data sourced from semi-structured interviews, and analyses the data using discourse analysis. Findings show that given the living conditions in the IDP camps, social/physical distancing is difficult to practice; that special measures are being put in place to protect IDPs from contracting the virus; that the lockdown occasioned by Covid-19 has adverse impact on the welfare of IDPs; and that the pandemic has brought new health and safety challenges in the IDP camps, but not security challenges. Albeit, these evaluations could not be done in-person, given the restrictions of COVID-19. The article concludes that this evaluation was limited by travel restrictions to the IDP camps, hence, the pandemic constituted a challenge to this evaluation.

Paper short abstract:

The chapter will draw on the experience of Dawlaty and its partners during the COVID-19 in developing a set of indicators to effectively report on women organizing and political participation during conflict using nontraditional methods.

Paper long abstract:

While the Women, Peace and Security has developed indicators to measure women participation, these indicators are only viable to measure a rather narrow and specific perspective of justice for women. For many Syrian grass-root groups working in a challenging environment, they tend to follow more complex ways to ensure participation and deliver change which make presenting their impact a complex task. As a result, their ability to reflect the actual progress they achieve on the ground, and in turn solicit support, funding, and ensure the sustainability of their operations is limited.

The proposed chapter will focus on the methodology used by Dawlaty and its partners in developing a set of indicators which can be used by grass-root groups to effectively report on their work on women organizing and political participation in conflict-affected countries using nontraditional methods.

The chapter will draw on our experience and that of our partners during the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting on what it means to work on the field and virtually in a conflict setting. Drawing on literature on feminist evaluation and participatory methods to measure impact, indicators and focus areas will be derived from the discussions and filtered out to produce a drafting of the indicators. These indicators are later shared with experts and partners organizations for face value validation.

The list of indicators will reflect our development and face value validation of the proposed indicators. Furthermore, it will guide future work on operationalizing them in the field to test it for usability and further validation.