Short Abstract

Demonstrated through humanitarian programmes in Sudan and Somalia, this presentation covers MEL Systems Reviews— a document-based methodology that assesses portfolio-level MEL strengths and weaknesses and supports evidence-informed decision-making for more effective programming.

Description

The Sudan Independent Monitoring and Analysis Programme (SIMAP) and Humanitarian and Health Evaluation, Learning and Monitoring in Somalia (HHELMS) are two multi-year, whole country humanitarian portfolios of the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Oxford Policy Management, the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning partner for these two programmes, has supported FCDO through a variety of approaches on these two programmes, including through TPM, learning strategy and events, research support, and strategic programme design. One tool used on both projects is a MEL Systems Review.

A MEL Systems Review is a document-based review of programme material. It uses a series of co-developed definitions of different MEL elements (ie, a theory of change or a reporting strategy) and a rubric to assess the strength and integration of these different elements, as they are reflected in programme material. This process helps to identify what part of a MEL System is strongest in a particular programme, and what parts could benefit from strengthening. The tool is an entry point for identifying and designing, in collaboration with implementing partners and donors, tailored technical tools to strengthen overall MEL systems.

Throughout our work, we have found that both implementing partners and FCDO have used evidence produced by the MEL Systems Reviews for systems strengthening. We have found that the evidence produced has influenced decisions and outcomes at both the partner and funder level. One example of this is around future programme design: using findings from the MEL Systems Review, an iteration of one of the programmes supported by OPM will now include more systematic learning. Another example is around methodological training: FCDO has now adopted an indicator strength testing approach (produced as a biproduct of MEL Systems Reviews) for FCDO internal training.

We have found that MEL Systems Reviews have been highly influential and very positively received by FCDO; so much so that a new technical workstream dedicated exclusively to acting on the findings from the MEL Systems Review has been created for one of the programmes. For partners, this work has also increased collaboration between the IPs and MEL partners, ensuring that MEL support work is co-developed and ultimately owned by implementing partners.

With both SIMAP and HHELMS operating in conflict affected states, the MEL Systems Reviews have been important in taking stock of what systems are in place at the donor and implementing partner level. They have also been important in identifying how targeted tweaks to MEL systems can have the biggest impact across monitoring, evaluation, and learning.

Our proposed session will address the factors that affect the use or non-use of evidence produced from MEL Systems Reviews. It will also speak to some of the complexities of supporting whole country portfolios of humanitarian work in fragile and conflict affected states, and how tailored tools can best support both the donor and the implementing partners.