Hello Everyone,
Please find following some new resources, job opportunities, training opportunities and details on participating in NYU’s capstone program – all below. I have also included a humorous note for program managers on responding to evaluation findings. Hopefully, evaluation professionals can use this list to avoid attack & help ensure their data is used!!
As usual, please let us know if you have any new M&E tools, trainings or job opportunities to share.
Best wishes,
Anna Schurmann
New resources
See details on FSG’s new publication “Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact”, as well as a webinar discussion at:
2. Job Opportunities
Positions at MEASURE Evaluation:
Resident Technical Advisor for HIV/AIDS M&E
The person in this position will be responsible for coordinating regional efforts to strengthen M&E systems for most-at-risk populations, design measurement tools/methodologies for most-at-risk populations...
Resident Technical Advisor for Infectious Disease M&E
The person in this position will draft M&E frameworks, provide M&E training, coordinate regional efforts to harmonize M&E standards and support the use of data for decision-making.
Program Associate, Data Demand and Use
The person in this position will implement the MEASURE Evaluation data demand and use framework including application of MEASURE Evaluation core data use tools and methods, and other data use approaches and tools as deemed appropriate.
Research Associate: Public Health Economist
This Research Associate will analyze survey data, assist with development of tools and methods to be used in monitoring and evaluation of population and health programs in developing countries.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Senior Program Officer, MLE
The Senior Program Officer will join a core functional unit that co-owns and co-manages the measurement and evaluation of Global Health priorities and program-wide initiatives, facilitates teams to review and apply lessons learned from results measurement and evaluation. MLE enables the program to achieve three main objectives: tracking and reporting on progress against our strategic goals; using results measurement and evaluation to improve implementation and increased the collective impact of our grants; and informing and influencing the field with credible evidence and analysis based on solid evaluation. The main focus of MLE is on planning and managing the implementation of MLE for initiatives and portfolios to produce major change in outcomes and impact for the populations our grantees served in our priority areas. MLE ensures that foundation resources are used as efficiently as possible; and that independent evaluations of the outcomes & impact of our portfolios of work are well chosen, designed, resourced, and implemented. The unit collaborates with and facilitates internal strategy teams to establish, review, and revise results frameworks primarily at the strategy and initiative level. This often requires support for certain high priority or high value grants.
The SPO reports to the Deputy Director, MLE in Global Health and will have primary responsibility for MLE support to 3-4 strategy teams, supporting internal teams to measure and use results and evaluation.
3. Training Opportunities
Post-Graduate Diploma Program in Health Economics, Health Care Financing and Health Policy
In collaboration with MEASURE Evaluation, the Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI) has developed a monitoring and evaluation course in their Post Graduate Diploma Program in Health Economics, Health Care Financing and Health Policy, designed to increase the number of monitoring and evaluation specialists in the Asia region. Instruction is in English.
MEASURE Evaluation will offer a limited number of fellowships for the 2010-2011 Diploma program. Applicants interested in this fellowship must be from the USAID-assisted developing countries in the Asia region and be involved in monitoring and/or evaluation of population, health and nutrition programs of governmental or non-governmental organizations.
Applications must be received by June 30, 2010.
Visit http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/training/masters/phf-inda
International Development Evaluation: Foundations and practices
5 – 9 July 2010 (5 days)
King’s College London
This course explores core concepts and emerging issues within the rapidly expanding field of development evaluation and lays solid foundations for the professional growth of development evaluators, managers and commissioners.
It addresses:
•The analytical and policy implications of development trends for evaluation policies, programmes and projects
•The available tool kits of evaluation methods and techniques
•The emerging guidelines and standards for shaping development evaluation policies and practice
•The governance and management arrangements for development evaluation and their implications.
By the end of the seminar you will:
•Have a thorough understanding of the contemporary economic, social, political and cultural context of development and the consequences for evaluation
•Be able to explore the potential and limitations of performance measurement systems
•Identify good practices in planning, design, implementation and utilization of evaluations in international development
•Have an overview of the diverse approaches and methods of international development evaluation.
CONTACT To learn more please contact Dr Cordula Janowski, Programme Manager Executive
International development evaluation is increasingly called upon to support evidence based policy making in the management of development programmes. Growing public pressure to secure better results from poverty reduction initiatives have generated a high demand for quality and independent assessments aimed at improved decision making in different countries, contexts and cultures. Consequently, expectations regarding evaluators’ capabilities are rising.
Evaluating Social Programs: Poverty Lab
12-16 Jul-2010
Bogota, Colombia
This five-day program on evaluating social programs will provide a thorough understanding of randomized evaluations and pragmatic step-by-step training for conducting one’s own evaluation. While the course focuses on randomized evaluations, many of the topics, such as measuring outcomes and dealing with threats to the validity of an evaluation, are relevant for other methodologies.
Additional Information: The Colombia course will be taught in Spanish.
- Tuition: Price includes working breakfasts, lunches, and all program materials. Participants are responsible for travel-related expenses (including airfare and lodging).
- Developing Country Non-Governmental Organizations: 500 USD
- Developing Country Government Organizations: 1000 USD
- Developing Country Companies / Multinational Non-Governmental Organizations / Governmental Organizations: 2000 USD
4. Other opportunities
Capstone - Invitation for Applications
NYU Master's Program in Global Public Health
Does your organization have a great idea but lacks the human resources to study or implement it? Do you have multiple projects on the “back burner”? Are you interested in working with an interdisciplinary team of advanced-level MPH students? Submit a proposal to the NYU Master's Program in Global Public Health Capstone Program
Deadline for applications is June 1, 2010.
What is Capstone?Capstone is the culminating experience of the NYU Master's Program in Global Public Health. It provides an important resource to organizations – a team of committed students dedicated to addressing its needs – while allowing students to demonstrate the acquisition of fundamental public health competencies. Students undertake projects from September to April and deliver a final product to organizations at the end of the academic year.
What are some examples of projects a team of students might do for my organization?
§ Conduct a community needs assessment
§ Create advocacy materials
§ Design an epidemiologic study
§ Design systems of data collection
§ Field guide for monitoring health inequalities
§ Handbook for organization-wide M&E system
§ Mixed-method study on adolescent mortality
§Training of trainers manual
Don’t forget: Celebrate with the students of the NYU Master’s Program in Global Public Health as they present their final Capstone projects from the 2009-2010 academic year. The presentations will be held on Friday, May 7 from 5:30-7:30pm - RSVP here!
RESPONDING TO EVALUATION FINDINGS
Handy Hints for Program Managers
Feeling threatened by the results of an evaluation study? Consider responding with one of the following strategies:
1. attack the evaluation’s methodology;
2. attack the data's interpretation and resulting conclusions;
3. attack the evaluation’s assumptions;
4. attack the recommendations;
5. substitute previously unstated goals for the official program goals;
6. attack the evaluators personally, claim they are biased or unfamiliar with the program;
7. attack the evaluation’s key issues and research questions;
8. do not participate in the evaluation, but argue that the findings lack an adequate contextual background;
9. rally together those who are threatened by the findings;
10. indicate the findings are reasonable, but unable to be implemented due to a lack of resources, political opposition, the staff need training etc;
11. complain about a lack of consultation;
12. argue that the evaluators did not appreciate the subtleties of the program;
13. simply pretend that the evaluation never occurred, ignore it;
14. state that the program’s environment has changed, and the findings are no longer relevant;
15. stall for time until the evaluation is forgotten about;
16. argue that the union and staff will not accept the recommendations;
17. argue that while the program has not achieve its goals, it does achieve other important things that are too subtle to be easily measured;
18. say that the evaluation leaves important questions unanswered, it's significance is questionable;
19. argue that the data is open to alternative interpretations, the evaluation’s conclusions have been questions by others;
20. attack the steering committee;
21. claim that the results contradict commonsense experience, and testimonials from clients;
22. claim that the findings are contradicted by other research conducted by various experts in the field;
23. agree with the findings and indicate that you have known about this for some time, and you started making changes months ago;
24. argue that the findings contradict the spirit and philosophy of the dept/program;
25. make up quotations that support your case and attribute them to knowledgeable sources; and
26. argue about definitions and interpretations.
