Impact assessment by beneficiaries: In practice Case Study from monitoring rural access interventions in Rathnapura, Sri Lanka Mansi Kumarasiri Centre.

Impact assessment by beneficiaries: In practice

Case Study from monitoring rural access interventions in Rathnapura, Sri Lanka

Mansi Kumarasiri

Centre for Poverty Analysis

www.cepa.lk

Outline

The theory and rationale for use Background to the use of the methodology Learnings to take forward

Selection of tool Selection of Monitoring Team Community participation Role of external monitor

Conclusion

The Theory

“…is an approach of information gathering which assesses the value of an activity as it is perceived by its principal users.” Lawrence F. Salmen in Beneficiary Assessment and

approach described

Assessment of impact by its beneficiaries.

Tools: Observations, Discussions Mostly Qualitative

Background - The intervention

Rural Access Pilot Interventions

Objective – to reduce poverty in communities where development is constrained by access bottlenecks

Participatory implementation

Collaboration of SIDA, Practical Action and CEPA

CEPA role

Community identification

Monitoring & Evaluation

Background – The communities Implemented in 3 communities in Rathnapura

District. Agriculture-based economies

Tea/Rubber small holding Paddy Vegetable cultivation

Each village has between 30 - 70 households Already exposed to development projects and working

through CBOs Economic potential constrained by lack of access

Background – The monitoring Why assessment by Beneficiaries?

Complement the participatory implementation

Immediate identification of problems and solutions

Cost effectiveness – greater proportion of the budget to be spent on intervention.

How In each site, three groups used three

different tools Methodology support by CEPA

Lessons Learnt

Selection of tool Selection of Monitoring

Team Community participation Role of external monitor

Selection of Tool

Tools: Impact tables – Structured

Group Diary - Free flow writing

Spider Web - Visual Matching tool to need

In addition, Use community profile and characteristics as basis

for tool identification Use multiple tools of different nature.

Selection Of tools: Example of impact tables

Table - Process

Table -Impact

Field Of Impact

Expected Impacts

Unexpected Impacts

Convenience to day to day activities Vehicles can now easily

come to the village because the road condition is better.

More tea collector lorries are coming.

Benefits the tea cultivators in the village

Clearing the road

Completed

Activity

StatusWho was involved

Every 100m was given to each household.

•Most people participated in the activity.

•Some people were conventional and believed that this road is going to be failure. They didn’t participate

It was easy to travel on the road once it was cleared.

The culvert upper end of the road has been broken due to the movement of the heavy vehicles in the construction period.

During rainy days it is difficult to use the culvert.

This has divided two blocks in the village, and reduced the harmony in the village.

Selection of Tools: Example of Group Diary

Convenience for day to day transport related activities:

Now the three wheelers can go to the end of the village, the number of three wheelers that come to the village has increased.

Earlier they used to stop at the beginning of the road. This is very helpful when there are functions and emergency situations like funerals or illness.

Convenience for Economic activities:

Earlier people used to wait till late for the leaf lorry. If it doesn’t come that day they have to wait till the next day to give leaf sacks. By which the leaves are crushed and not in a condition to sell.

Now the leave lorries come during 3-4 because the road is easy to take and the people get good rates for their tea because the leaves go to the factory fresh.

Selection of tools: Example of Spider Web

Education Infrastructure

Unexpected Negative Impacts

Employment opportunities

Unexpected Positive Impacts

Less expenses Heath

Increase income

Selection of Monitoring Team

In addition to being volunteers: should be complemented by commitment and

ability to respond to a given tool Eg: literate, articulate for group diary

Community participation

Beneficiary Assessment is more conducive where beneficiaries take part in implementation

(+) More opportunities to share monitoring findings, thus project steering.

(-) Less priority for monitoring, due to pressure of completing the implementation

Trade off between implementers and monitors Informal feedback for the implementation

Role of External Monitor

Facilitate channels to ensure the flow of monitoring information for project steering

Regular observation, backstopping support, feed back and facilitation on monitoring process.

The larger picture

When is it appropriate – what is apprppriate?

Monitoring backstopped by an external evaluator – where do you draw the line?

Information for project steering can be informal/invisible. Does it matter?

Thank You