M&E FUNCTIONS

Monitoring and evaluation are different functions which are related to each other. They are widely known
under the acronym of M&E. However, they are not the same, and they sometimes have different purposes
and practices. There are many other functions related to M&E. Some come under the broad heading of
M&E, whilst others interact with M&E to varying degrees, depending on circumstances.

There are many different functions related to monitoring

and evaluation (M&E). Some come under the broad
heading of M&E, whilst others interact with M&E to varying
degrees, depending on circumstances. Close /
Identify
re-designn
The different functions described in this paper, and in other
M&E Universe papers, are carried out at different stages of
the project / programme cycle. These stages are
Implement Design
summarised in the diagram opposite. A project or
programme is first identified and/or conceived. Then there
is a design phase, following which a plan is developed.
Next, the project or programme is implemented. After this Plan
it may be closed, extended, expanded or re-designed.

Not all projects or programmes follow the same cycle, and

sometimes the different stages overlap or are carried out in
a different order. For example, information acquired during The section below describes different functions related to
planning or implementation may lead to a re-design of the M&E. The diagrams show when they are most commonly
project or programme. However, the diagram represents a used. The darker the shading, the more likely the function
simple model that can be used to show when different is to be used at that stage of the project / programme
functions are usually carried out. cycle. However, there are often exceptions to these rules.

Different functions and their place within the project / programme cycle
A situation analysis is an analysis of a situation within a geographic location or sector. It normally
involves an assessment of the challenges in the location or sector, and an analysis of who is
currently working on those challenges, what they are doing and what capacities they have. It also
involves an assessment of the external socio-economic environment. A situational analysis is
usually carried out during the design phase of a project or programme, and contributes to the
planning phase. In some circumstances it may be used to help identify projects or programmes.

A plan is produced after a project or programme has been designed. A plan usually includes a
written description of working approaches, goals, objectives, activities, indicators, budgets, etc. In
straightforward projects plans often include pre-defined activities that are intended to achieve
the desired objectives. In more complex situations plans are developed that recognise the need
for flexibility throughout the period of the project or programme. M&E is often heavily based on
planning, and may later lead to the adjustment of plans during implementation.

A formal appraisal is often done at the end of the design and planning phases, before permission
is given for a project or programme to proceed. An appraisal critically reviews all aspects of a
project or programme. It checks that the working approaches designed to achieve the goals and
objectives are realistic, and that the project or programme is likely to be good value for money.
An appraisal might also assess the relevance and/or feasibility of the project or programme.
Sometimes appraisals can lead to further design or planning work being carried out.

© INTRAC 2017
To understand the changes brought about by a project or programme, it is necessary to
understand what the original situation was. This is known as the baseline. Baselines can range
from simple, informal exercises to large, expensive surveys. They are an important part of many
M&E systems. Baselines usually collect information on project or programme objectives and/or
indicators. They are normally carried out at or near to the start of a project or programme, either
at the end of the planning phase or at the beginning of the implementation phase.

Monitoring is the systematic and continuous collection and analysis of information about the
progress of a development intervention. Monitoring is done to ensure that the people who need
to know about a development intervention are properly informed so that management decisions
can be taken in a timely manner. Monitoring is conducted throughout the implementation of a
project or programme. It often feeds into evaluations, and may also contribute to alterations in
plans and budgets. Sometimes it can lead to the re-design of projects or programmes.

A review can take place at any time throughout a project or programme, and can focus on any
aspect of the work. It is a very imprecise term that has different meanings in different
circumstances. Most people use the term to refer to an exercise that is a bit less than an
evaluation. A review can be regular or ad hoc, formal or informal, broad or narrow, internal or
external, or any combination of these. Reviews are an integral part of many M&E systems. Some
projects and programmes have a formal review at the end instead of an evaluation.

An audit is carried out to check that projects or programmes are complying with rules,
regulations and procedures. Audits are often carried out on financial policies and practices. But
they can also be carried out to review other processes such as risk management or compliance
with government regulations. Audits are different from evaluations because they are concerned
with compliance rather than performance. They are usually carried out during implementation,
but can also be carried out at the end of a project or programme.

An evaluation is normally carried out at a significant time during a project or programme. This
might be at the mid-point, at the end, or sometime afterwards. Evaluations may also be carried
out when a project or programme is about to move into a new phase, or in response to a critical
issue. Most CSO evaluations are carried out at the level of projects and programmes, although
evaluations can also be carried out at country, region or sector level. The purpose of an
evaluation is often to assess the performance of a project or programme against its objectives.

Impact assessment involves the systematic assessment of long-term and / or significant changes
– positive or negative, planned or unplanned – brought about by a development intervention or
series of interventions. Impact assessment is always focused on the impact of interventions,
rather than on activities or outputs. Impact assessment may be carried out during the
implementation of a project or programme, but it is most often carried out at the end, or even
some time afterwards.

There are many occasions when research can be used within the project or programme cycle.
Research is often conducted as part of the identification or design stage. Research may also be
carried out alongside projects or programmes to better understand evolving contexts. In complex
programmes, research may be commissioned to look more in-depth at an issue or generate
findings that can then be used to improve the programme. Increasingly, large-scale or major
evaluations and impact assessment studies are becoming indistinguishable from research.

A Theory of Change (ToC) approach to planning and evaluation is now considered an essential
practice for many large organisations, programmes and projects. Most ToCs include a description
of how change happens in a particular context, a description of the role an organisation and its
partners play in contributing to change, and critical assumptions. A ToC may be developed before
a project or programme starts, to feed into the design and planning phases. Theories of Change
are also commonly used as frameworks for evaluation and impact assessment.

© INTRAC 2017
The difference between monitoring spectrum, with a large amount of overlap. For example,
and evaluation project staff might decide to conduct a series of case
studies on beneficiaries at regular intervals throughout the
Monitoring and evaluation are different functions that are project’s lifetime, in order to assess changes in their lives.
related to each other, and are widely known under the This meets the criteria for monitoring as it is a continuous,
acronym of M&E. However, they are not the same, and on-going exercise, carried out by internal staff. On the
they sometimes have different purposes and practices. The other hand the exercise also seeks to assess the changes
key differences, as outlined in the table below, are as brought about by the project, and could therefore be
follows: (see Bakewell et. al. 2003). understood as evaluation. In this case there is no clear
distinction.
 Monitoring is normally carried out throughout a project
or programme. Evaluations are carried out at certain Although there are always exceptions, the differences
times, for example at the end of a project or between monitoring and evaluation outlined above
programme, or at the mid-point. All projects and nonetheless provide a useful summary that holds true in
programmes are monitored, but some are never many straightforward projects and programmes.
formally evaluated.
 Monitoring tends to focus more on day-to-day activities,
and is more concerned with the process of an Monitoring and evaluation in
intervention. Evaluation tends to focus more on complex programmes and
progress towards objectives and goals. organisations
 Monitoring is usually carried out by in-house project In large, complex programmes, and across whole
staff, and sometimes by beneficiaries as well. Evaluation organisations, the distinctions between monitoring and
may also involve these stakeholders, but is normally led evaluation may begin to break down completely, and the
by external evaluators or facilitators. categorisations above become unhelpful. For example,
 Monitoring is conducted through the systematic Oxfam GB carries out evaluations on a sample of its policy
collection, analysis, storage, sharing, reporting, influencing projects every year, using a methodology
communication and use of information on a regular and adapted from process tracing. These evaluations clearly aim
ongoing basis. Evaluation, on the other hand, often to uncover the changes brought about through Oxfam’s
includes additional data collection exercises, such as work, and are often carried out by external evaluators. Yet
large surveys. they form part of an ongoing, systematic, organisational
process. In these cases it is probably more helpful to
categorise the work as part of an organisational M&E
system, rather than worrying too much about whether it
Monitoring Evaluation counts as monitoring or evaluation.
Timing Continuous Periodic review at Equally, in complex programmes and organisations the
throughout a project significant point – end, clear distinctions between M&E and other functions such
mid-point, end of
as impact assessment, research and review also begin to
phase etc.
become blurred. For example:
Scope Day to day activities; Progress towards
outputs; indicators objectives and goals; • the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique is a
of process and indicators of outcome
methodology designed to uncover stories of
output and impact
change through an ongoing systematic process
Participants Management, External evaluators / that can be used for monitoring, review,
project staff, facilitators, donors, evaluation or impact assessment;
beneficiaries management, project
staff, beneficiaries
• impact assessment is often conducted as part of
an impact evaluation, but may also be carried out
Process Regular meetings, Extraordinary
through ongoing impact monitoring; and
interviews, monthly meetings, additional
/ quarterly reviews data collecting
• many large evaluations and impact assessment
exercises studies use research methods and standards, and
are often indistinguishable from large research
Written Regular reports and Written report with
studies.
outputs updates to donors, recommendations for
management and change, presented in
beneficiaries workshops for
In summary, it is helpful to understand the key differences
different stakeholders between monitoring and evaluation in simple projects and
programmes, and important to understand the different
purposes and practices of each. But in complex
programmes, and at organisational levels, the distinctions
These rules are not universal, and there are often are not always as clear. In these cases a rigid adherence to
exceptions. It is sometimes more helpful to view traditional the formal definitions may become unhelpful.
monitoring and evaluation as two opposite ends of a

© INTRAC 2017
Further reading and resources
Many of the functions mentioned within this paper are described more fully in other papers in the M&E Universe. These can be
accessed by clicking on the links below.

Monitoring Reviews

Evaluation Impact assessment

Theory of change Research

Developing a plan Baselines

References
 Bakewell, O; Adams, J and Pratt, B (2003). Sharpening the Development Process; A practical guide to monitoring and
evaluation. INTRAC, UK.

Author(s): INTRAC is a not-for-profit organisation that builds the skills and knowledge of civil society
Nigel Simister organisations to be more effective in addressing poverty and inequality. Since 1992 INTRAC has
provided specialist support in monitoring and evaluation, working with people to develop their own
Contributor(s): M&E approaches and tools, based on their needs. We encourage appropriate and practical M&E,
Alison Napier based on understanding what works in different contexts.

INTRAC Training M&E Universe

M&E Training & Consultancy M&E Universe
We support skills development and learning on a range of For more papers in
INTRAC’s team ofhigh
themes through M&E specialists
quality offer consultancy
and engaging and
face-to-face, For
themore
M&Epapers in
Universe
training in all aspects of M&E, from core
online and tailor-made training and coaching.skills development the series
M&E Universe
click the
through to the design of complex M&E systems. series
homeclick the
button
Email: [email protected] Tel: +44 (0)1865 201851 home button
Email: [email protected] Tel: +44 (0)1865 201851

© INTRAC 2017